Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
I wouldn't pin an argument on x amount of features since Chrome is only in its Beta stage, and once it is fully released and then people start to develop add-ins, then I suspect that there will be numerous more than FFphishman420 wrote:
Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
I tried it and like it, but the layout is kind of weird, it looks like something on a Mac which doesn't appeal to me. It is fast but I'm just used to the custom shortcuts and speed dial of Opera, put that together with the fact that you couldn't import Opera bookmarks into it at the time of release (last time I tried it), I haven't used it since and have stuck with Opera.
Negative.theDude5B wrote:
I wouldn't pin an argument on x amount of features since Chrome is only in its Beta stage, and once it is fully released and then people start to develop add-ins, then I suspect that there will be numerous more than FFphishman420 wrote:
Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
It can have over 9000. Google still won't allow AdBlock.theDude5B wrote:
I wouldn't pin an argument on x amount of features since Chrome is only in its Beta stage, and once it is fully released and then people start to develop add-ins, then I suspect that there will be numerous more than FFphishman420 wrote:
Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
Google chrome will never have more add-ons, because firefox is so heavily supported by the open source community who are constantly releasing add-ons, fixes, patches and updates because the source code is available freely to modify.theDude5B wrote:
I wouldn't pin an argument on x amount of features since Chrome is only in its Beta stage, and once it is fully released and then people start to develop add-ins, then I suspect that there will be numerous more than FFphishman420 wrote:
Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
Google chrome even if it does release the source code won't be ported with Ubuntu systems or be able to catch up to the thousands of plugins and add-ons firefox already has to offer.
Google is a few seconds faster. It opens instantly, whereas I have to wait for almost 5 seconds for Firefox to open! And you can get adblock for Google Chrome - just google that. Oh, and Google Chrome has already been ported (and is still being ported) to various linux distros.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Google chrome will never have more add-ons, because firefox is so heavily supported by the open source community who are constantly releasing add-ons, fixes, patches and updates because the source code is available freely to modify.theDude5B wrote:
I wouldn't pin an argument on x amount of features since Chrome is only in its Beta stage, and once it is fully released and then people start to develop add-ins, then I suspect that there will be numerous more than FFphishman420 wrote:
Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
Google chrome even if it does release the source code won't be ported with Ubuntu systems or be able to catch up to the thousands of plugins and add-ons firefox already has to offer.
Firefox may have a lead, but Google is rapidly catching up. From the moment it was released, it had more market share than Opera does. Firefox will always be the hummer of browsers: slow, massive, but fully extensible - whereas Google Chrome is like the Tesla car that runs on electricity and has a huge acceleration
-kon
ChromiumTheAussieReaper wrote:
Google chrome will never have more add-ons, because firefox is so heavily supported by the open source community who are constantly releasing add-ons, fixes, patches and updates because the source code is available freely to modify.theDude5B wrote:
I wouldn't pin an argument on x amount of features since Chrome is only in its Beta stage, and once it is fully released and then people start to develop add-ins, then I suspect that there will be numerous more than FFphishman420 wrote:
Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
Google chrome even if it does release the source code won't be ported with Ubuntu systems or be able to catch up to the thousands of plugins and add-ons firefox already has to offer.
And the Linux version of the browser is in development. So I would think that in the future, due to the way Chrome is aimed at web applications, it will have a LOT of add-ons.
It still won't have the edge because FF has had such a head start already. Think of it like the Apache web service.
Only time will tellTheAussieReaper wrote:
It still won't have the edge because FF has had such a head start already. Think of it like the Apache web service.
The Google browser was made so they can record everything you do and sell it to advertising companies.
Thing is though, Chrome looks like human excrement, which is why I feel it will never catch on.
The old Firefox looked like human excrement sent through a blender and mixed with plaster, but they still got users, didn't they?ghettoperson wrote:
Thing is though, Chrome looks like human excrement, which is why I feel it will never catch on.
-kon
What is your problem with it? You come out with such stupid statements and then have nothing at all to back the shit up.ghettoperson wrote:
Thing is though, Chrome looks like human excrement, which is why I feel it will never catch on.
Chrome is a good browser that is fast and reliable and will catch on in a few years. If Chrome looks like human excrement, then FF is blindingly awful.
Why are ALL of your posts condescending in some way?Zimmer wrote:
What is your problem with it? You come out with such stupid statements and then have nothing at all to back the shit up.ghettoperson wrote:
Thing is though, Chrome looks like human excrement, which is why I feel it will never catch on.
Chrome is a good browser that is fast and reliable and will catch on in a few years. If Chrome looks like human excrement, then FF is blindingly awful.
By the way, FF has hundreds of different themes to choose from, so for you to say it looks blindingly awful is pretty dumb.
FF is blindingly awful when you first get it!phishman420 wrote:
Why are ALL of your posts condescending in some way?Zimmer wrote:
What is your problem with it? You come out with such stupid statements and then have nothing at all to back the shit up.ghettoperson wrote:
Thing is though, Chrome looks like human excrement, which is why I feel it will never catch on.
Chrome is a good browser that is fast and reliable and will catch on in a few years. If Chrome looks like human excrement, then FF is blindingly awful.
By the way, FF has hundreds of different themes to choose from, so for you to say it looks blindingly awful is pretty dumb.
And you can NOT say that Chrome looks like human excrement when you look at it non-maximised in Vista. It looks sexy as fuck!
QFT, I downloaded Chrome, thought "hey, this shit is pretty cool" then I saw the adverts and I was like "oh yeah, this is why IE also sucks"Cheez wrote:
It can have over 9000. Google still won't allow AdBlock.theDude5B wrote:
I wouldn't pin an argument on x amount of features since Chrome is only in its Beta stage, and once it is fully released and then people start to develop add-ins, then I suspect that there will be numerous more than FFphishman420 wrote:
Chrome may be .2 seconds faster, but Firefox has 1000x as many features.
Back to FF3 I went.
any Chrome users?
I have to say I reinstalled Chrome today and instantly found several quite fascinating addons. You gotta try Smooth Scroll
I have to say I reinstalled Chrome today and instantly found several quite fascinating addons. You gotta try Smooth Scroll
i stopped using chrome a while ago after it started raping my cpu. usage went up to 80%-90% at times..Sup wrote:
any Chrome users?
I have to say I reinstalled Chrome today and instantly found several quite fascinating addons. You gotta try Smooth Scroll
I use.
Get a few problems every now and again with media playing, but I'm not sure if it's a system problem or what. Goes away when I restart, but I'm going to reinstall within the next month anyway.
Get a few problems every now and again with media playing, but I'm not sure if it's a system problem or what. Goes away when I restart, but I'm going to reinstall within the next month anyway.
Chrome uses wayyyyy too much memory.
Try the beta 6 if the current 5 build is giving you issues V. I will try FF again, this time on Windows platformPrivateVendetta wrote:
I use.
Get a few problems every now and again with media playing, but I'm not sure if it's a system problem or what. Goes away when I restart, but I'm going to reinstall within the next month anyway.
ok seriously this scroll shit is amazing, its better than Solitaire!1
Last edited by .Sup (2010-08-16 09:45:40)
Getting this scroll shit.
what does smooth scroll do
Makes scrolling a bit less clunky when using the mouse wheel
As far as I can tell
As far as I can tell
Last edited by PrivateVendetta (2010-08-16 09:53:21)