Safari needs to be debulked. I often surf in chrome in WinXP because then, I know Sadfari and Flash won't take 800mb of ram and slow my machine to a crawl, as I surf mainly text-based websites and YouTube. Sadfari is not able to keep itself under 1GB with any degree of robustness.
Works fine for me. I've got youtube open right now, playing a video and it's using 268 MB. I'm using Click2Flash. No idea how much it takes under standard Flash.
I can't find any browser I like these days. IE is insecure. Safari likes to start a daemon process that downloads sites in the background, even though my Internet connection has a download limit. Gee, thanks Safari.
Google apps all seem to install a software updater these days. It's almost surreptitious, it does not appear in your startup items but it's there. And was not mentioned anywhere on the Google QSB site which is what installed it for me.
Firefox is a real resource hog.
Opera? Haven't tried that in a while. Maybe will take a look.
Try Konqueror. Still in alpha stage for Windows and Mac, but it is pretty good, fast,doesn't do anything before consulting you first and very tweakable.
There's also Shiira and Stainless for OS X, which are nice.
Does not play well on YouTube pages with HD content
Seems about as fast as Safari
Tabs on top are nice, they seem to stand out more
Will stick with Safari, but if I had to use any other browser it would be Chrome.
Use chrome for a few weeks and it WILL grow in you and like an Apple update, isn't someone supposed to say it feels snappier. Ha ha ha.
Peace. Been using chrome on the mac sine the blue and grey icon. What is it now. I hope they dumped the 4 color one. It's just faster. Tons of apps you can do and gmail tv mobile rocks. Would love to work for them.
I decided to try the Mac version of Chrome. About literally 2 seconds later, I decided that I have no use for it.
Why? Ads! Tons of obnoxious ads on AppleInsider that I wasn't even aware existed because Firefox blocks pretty much all of them (with the help of AdBlock Plus and FlashBlock). What's worse is that the Mac version of Chrome doesn't yet support extensions.
Even Safari does a better job of blocking ads, mostly due to ClickToFlash.
.
Exactly! And I suspect that, being made by Google, Chrome will never fully support ad-blocks.
Only advantage I see for Chrome - tabs on top.
By the way, does anybody know if Safariblock has been updated to work with Snow Leopard yet?
How much does http://speedtest.net have to do with testing browser speed, when it's claimed to test Internet connection speed? Even for its stated purpose, I get far more accurate readings (and more than 4X higher in some cases) when using Speakeasy's speed test (http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/). Furthermore, the "significant" difference you saw is certainly well within the variability seen for Internet connections -- i.e., I see no reason to consider that difference significant.
As I indicated, we just ran SpeedTest and it is only 1 of 16 connection/browser tests of varying criteria that we do.
The issue that concerned us re this test, is why the difference? The number was significantly higher at the first few runs. Since then they have closed up. Needless to say we have reset our browsers continuously during the test runs. We have since run 4 other connection testers and we are getting virtual no difference between each subset using Safari or Chrome.
Note, we did include SpeakEasy and there was no difference in the numbers vs those from SpeedTest. Also, note that SpeedTest is just one of many. No real preference, as long as the protocols are similar from test to test.
Overall, we are not getting a significant difference between the two browsers using various broswer speed tests. What we are observing as we go is the lack of functionality between the two. As such, Safari remains our preferred application. Although, we do prefer the tabs on top. I guess that is because our work is intended for researching large data libraries and nowhere in any library system have we observed 'tabs' other than at the top of the folders.
Note however, our preference for everything Mac does jaundice our direction. But then again, our experience dictates that we are better in the long run by sticking with Apple and its endeavours.
Well for one thing, it lets you change the rendering engine to display the raw M4V instead of a flash video. I display my youtube using QuickTime X, not flash.
Well for one thing, it lets you change the rendering engine to display the raw M4V instead of a flash video. I display my youtube using QuickTime X, not flash.
right, sorry, didn't quite get what you were referring to, thought about memory management AND flash..
btw, I switched back to flash on youtube, as on my PowerBook 1,67 it unbelievably jerks less
right, sorry, didn't quite get what you were referring to, thought about memory management AND flash..
btw, I switched back to flash on youtube, as on my PowerBook 1,67 it unbelievably jerks less
I never noticed any playback issues, even with flash, but my macs are all less than 2 years old, which may be a factor. They all also have 4 GB of ram or greater which I'm sure also helps.
Those ear plugs and blinders that Mr. Jobs has given you buy his genius marketing must be working pretty good.
I doubt it's that complicated. Browsers are like clothing. It all comes down to personal preference. There are things I like and dislike about Safari. I like it's speed. I dislike it's speed when doing a find on a large web page. I like it's Find GUI however. I dislike the fact that it lacks adblock+ on the 64 bit version. Etc Etc ad-nauseum.
Same goes for Firefox. I tend to waffle between the two from time to time.
I am pleasantly surprised with Google Chrome. It is now my default browser, Mac and Windows. Sadly, Shockwave does not work with Chrome for Mac, but it does with Windows. I'm becoming a Windows FanBoy, especially when Mac OS doesn't and Windows does.
Note, we did include SpeakEasy and there was no difference in the numbers vs those from SpeedTest. Also, note that SpeedTest is just one of many. No real preference, as long as the protocols are similar from test to test.
I'd suggest your broadband connection is too slow to detect any meaningful speed difference between browsers in a bandwidth test--at least on contemporary hardware--and I'll reiterate that typical temporal variability in broadband connection speed is quite possibly too high to provide meaningful results over the course of a practical number of trials.
Comments
Safari needs to be debulked. I often surf in chrome in WinXP because then, I know Sadfari and Flash won't take 800mb of ram and slow my machine to a crawl, as I surf mainly text-based websites and YouTube. Sadfari is not able to keep itself under 1GB with any degree of robustness.
Works fine for me. I've got youtube open right now, playing a video and it's using 268 MB. I'm using Click2Flash. No idea how much it takes under standard Flash.
I can't find any browser I like these days. IE is insecure. Safari likes to start a daemon process that downloads sites in the background, even though my Internet connection has a download limit. Gee, thanks Safari.
Google apps all seem to install a software updater these days. It's almost surreptitious, it does not appear in your startup items but it's there. And was not mentioned anywhere on the Google QSB site which is what installed it for me.
Firefox is a real resource hog.
Opera? Haven't tried that in a while. Maybe will take a look.
Try Konqueror. Still in alpha stage for Windows and Mac, but it is pretty good, fast,doesn't do anything before consulting you first and very tweakable.
There's also Shiira and Stainless for OS X, which are nice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers
Clean look, but not as elegant as Safari
Favicons on Bookmarks bar are
Does not play well on YouTube pages with HD content
Seems about as fast as Safari
Tabs on top are nice, they seem to stand out more
Will stick with Safari, but if I had to use any other browser it would be Chrome.
Use chrome for a few weeks and it WILL grow in you and like an Apple update, isn't someone supposed to say it feels snappier. Ha ha ha.
Peace. Been using chrome on the mac sine the blue and grey icon. What is it now. I hope they dumped the 4 color one. It's just faster. Tons of apps you can do and gmail tv mobile rocks. Would love to work for them.
I decided to try the Mac version of Chrome. About literally 2 seconds later, I decided that I have no use for it.
Why? Ads! Tons of obnoxious ads on AppleInsider that I wasn't even aware existed because Firefox blocks pretty much all of them (with the help of AdBlock Plus and FlashBlock). What's worse is that the Mac version of Chrome doesn't yet support extensions.
Even Safari does a better job of blocking ads, mostly due to ClickToFlash.
.
Exactly! And I suspect that, being made by Google, Chrome will never fully support ad-blocks.
Only advantage I see for Chrome - tabs on top.
By the way, does anybody know if Safariblock has been updated to work with Snow Leopard yet?
Would love to work for them.
You want to work for the people that sell your privacy for their profitability to the highest bidder?
I'm using Click2Flash. No idea how much it takes under standard Flash.
What do you exactly believe click2flash does?
How much does http://speedtest.net have to do with testing browser speed, when it's claimed to test Internet connection speed? Even for its stated purpose, I get far more accurate readings (and more than 4X higher in some cases) when using Speakeasy's speed test (http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/). Furthermore, the "significant" difference you saw is certainly well within the variability seen for Internet connections -- i.e., I see no reason to consider that difference significant.
As I indicated, we just ran SpeedTest and it is only 1 of 16 connection/browser tests of varying criteria that we do.
The issue that concerned us re this test, is why the difference? The number was significantly higher at the first few runs. Since then they have closed up. Needless to say we have reset our browsers continuously during the test runs. We have since run 4 other connection testers and we are getting virtual no difference between each subset using Safari or Chrome.
Note, we did include SpeakEasy and there was no difference in the numbers vs those from SpeedTest. Also, note that SpeedTest is just one of many. No real preference, as long as the protocols are similar from test to test.
Overall, we are not getting a significant difference between the two browsers using various broswer speed tests. What we are observing as we go is the lack of functionality between the two. As such, Safari remains our preferred application. Although, we do prefer the tabs on top. I guess that is because our work is intended for researching large data libraries and nowhere in any library system have we observed 'tabs' other than at the top of the folders.
Note however, our preference for everything Mac does jaundice our direction. But then again, our experience dictates that we are better in the long run by sticking with Apple and its endeavours.
What do you exactly believe click2flash does?
Well for one thing, it lets you change the rendering engine to display the raw M4V instead of a flash video. I display my youtube using QuickTime X, not flash.
Well for one thing, it lets you change the rendering engine to display the raw M4V instead of a flash video. I display my youtube using QuickTime X, not flash.
right, sorry, didn't quite get what you were referring to, thought about memory management AND flash..
btw, I switched back to flash on youtube, as on my PowerBook 1,67 it unbelievably jerks less
right, sorry, didn't quite get what you were referring to, thought about memory management AND flash..
btw, I switched back to flash on youtube, as on my PowerBook 1,67 it unbelievably jerks less
I never noticed any playback issues, even with flash, but my macs are all less than 2 years old, which may be a factor. They all also have 4 GB of ram or greater which I'm sure also helps.
The main thing I like about Chrome is the Inspect Element feature. Very useful in web development IMO.
You do know that that feature is in Safari too?
All smokes and no fire. Just stick with your Safari, unless you want to be another point of statistics and marketing for Google.
Nothing beats Safari on a Mac!
Those ear plugs and blinders that Mr. Jobs has given you buy his genius marketing must be working pretty good.
Those ear plugs and blinders that Mr. Jobs has given you buy his genius marketing must be working pretty good.
I doubt it's that complicated. Browsers are like clothing. It all comes down to personal preference. There are things I like and dislike about Safari. I like it's speed. I dislike it's speed when doing a find on a large web page. I like it's Find GUI however. I dislike the fact that it lacks adblock+ on the 64 bit version. Etc Etc ad-nauseum.
Same goes for Firefox. I tend to waffle between the two from time to time.
It's just a matter of preference.
Lighten up. You sound like a Windows fanboy...
Sadly, Shockwave does not work with Chrome for Mac [...]
Oh, that is just so sad.
Note, we did include SpeakEasy and there was no difference in the numbers vs those from SpeedTest. Also, note that SpeedTest is just one of many. No real preference, as long as the protocols are similar from test to test.
I'd suggest your broadband connection is too slow to detect any meaningful speed difference between browsers in a bandwidth test--at least on contemporary hardware--and I'll reiterate that typical temporal variability in broadband connection speed is quite possibly too high to provide meaningful results over the course of a practical number of trials.
the "home" icon is 1 click more than in others browsers...right?
where does one "Google" on Chrome?
Are you asking where the search bar is? If so, it?s the same as the path bar just like in Firefox 3?s user named ?Awesome Bar?.