Google Chrome - might be switching...

[strawman]

Until recently I've held out on Google Chrome because there wasn't an equivalent to flashblock and adblock.

Well, now I have to put my surfing where my mouth is, and see if the two following google extensions give me what I want:

http://lifehacker.com/5366760/selectively-block-flash-animations-in-google-chrome

http://lifehacker.com/5140947/adsweep-blocks-ads-in-google-chrome-and-opera

We'll see...

-Adam

 

[Shegokigo]

Call me when it adds No-Script.

 

[Hylian]

It would be nice if they would just let people make add-ons like FF does.

 

[strawman]

Call me when it adds No-Script.

Give me your phone number and I will.

-Adam

---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 PM ----------

It would be nice if they would just let people make add-ons like FF does.

They do:

http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/getstarted.html

There aren't many right now because they really only started supporting extensions this summer. By this time next year all the major Firefox extensions will probably have been duplicated or ported.

-Adam

 

[Shegokigo]

Call me when it adds No-Script.

Give me your phone number and I will.

-Adam[/quote]

As long as you call from a "listed" number. :sevil:

 

[strawman]

Call me when it adds No-Script.

Give me your phone number and I will.

-Adam[/quote]

As long as you call from a "listed" number. :sevil:[/QUOTE]

Ok.

-Adam

 

[Icarus]

I'm not convinced by Google Chrome. Yesterday, I did some testing and it took 3 times more memory than Firefox for the same webpages. Wasn't it supposed to use LESS memory?

 

[strawman]

I'm not convinced by Google Chrome. Yesterday, I did some testing and it took 3 times more memory than Firefox for the same webpages. Wasn't it supposed to use LESS memory?

When it first came out it was being compared with Firefox 2, which ate memory like nobody's business.

Mozilla worked hard to improve firefox's footprint, but at the end of the day, for both Chrome and Firefox users, when it comes to the tradeoff between speed and memory usage most ask for speed.

I don't know why people complain about memory usage though. 4GB of memory (maxes out 32 bit systems) is under $50 these days.

If you insist on a small memory footprint, modify your browsing habits and keep only one or two websites open at a time.

-Adam

 

[Dave]

I downloaded and am trying out Chrome again. But I can't get any of these addons to work.

 

[Hylian]

I have Chrome already installed on my system for times when I want get an urge to. I usually just prefer to use FF mainly because of the add-ons. When I get home I will try installing several of the Chrome add-ons and see how I like it.

 

[figmentPez]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I won't be switching to Chrome until it can match Firefox's "Type Ahead Find" / "Find As You Type" / "We Still Need a Catchy Name For This Feature That Lets You Find Stuff With Fewer Keystrokes".

That said, I've started using Chrome on my netbook for watching Flash video. Watching Hulu fullscreen on Firefox is choppy, and on Chrome it's almost smooth, and video on That Guy With the Glasses is all around better.

 

[strawman]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I won't be switching to Chrome until it can match Firefox's "Type Ahead Find" / "Find As You Type" / "We Still Need a Catchy Name For This Feature That Lets You Find Stuff With Fewer Keystrokes".

Hrm. I use that feature quite a bit. We'll see- for the most part I type in part of the web address anyway, but there are a few sites I start typing in words from the title.

That said, I've started using Chrome on my netbook for watching Flash video. Watching Hulu fullscreen on Firefox is choppy, and on Chrome it's almost smooth, and video on That Guy With the Glasses is all around better.

I haven't tried it for that recently! I may have to do that, because watching castle the other night on hulu was annoying. I still have to see heroes...

-Adam

 

[figmentPez]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I won't be switching to Chrome until it can match Firefox's "Type Ahead Find" / "Find As You Type" / "We Still Need a Catchy Name For This Feature That Lets You Find Stuff With Fewer Keystrokes".

Hrm. I use that feature quite a bit. We'll see- for the most part I type in part of the web address anyway, but there are a few sites I start typing in words from the title.[/QUOTE]

You're thinking of the AwesomeBar, I'm talking about something different. Right now it's under Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> General -> Search for Text When I Start Typing. It's not enabled by default. It allows you to search for text on a webpage without hitting Ctrl-F. It's a really small thing, but it allows for faster keyboard navigation of websites, and I'm just used to it.

 

[strawman]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I won't be switching to Chrome until it can match Firefox's "Type Ahead Find" / "Find As You Type" / "We Still Need a Catchy Name For This Feature That Lets You Find Stuff With Fewer Keystrokes".

Hrm. I use that feature quite a bit. We'll see- for the most part I type in part of the web address anyway, but there are a few sites I start typing in words from the title.[/quote]

You're thinking of the AwesomeBar, I'm talking about something different. Right now it's under Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> General -> Search for Text When I Start Typing. It's not enabled by default. It allows you to search for text on a webpage without hitting Ctrl-F. It's a really small thing, but it allows for faster keyboard navigation of websites, and I'm just used to it.[/QUOTE]

Ah, ok. I tried it before, but it didn't add enough utility for me, so I don't use it. ctrl-f is fine when I actually want to search...

-Adam

 

[Covar]

*waits for GoogleOS beta*

http://www.ubuntu.com/

there you go.

In all seriousness Picassa was awesome last time I tried it.

 

[figmentPez]

Ah, ok. I tried it before, but it didn't add enough utility for me, so I don't use it. ctrl-f is fine when I actually want to search...

Yeah, if searching is all you want to do with it, Ctrl+F ain't bad. However, if you want to follow links I find it a pain. Typing "linkname" and hitting Enter is a lot faster and has less finger travel than Ctrl+F "linkname" Esc Enter. If you do a lot of navigating that way it can be a pain reaching up for Esc all the time.

 

[Icarus]

I'm not convinced by Google Chrome. Yesterday, I did some testing and it took 3 times more memory than Firefox for the same webpages. Wasn't it supposed to use LESS memory?

When it first came out it was being compared with Firefox 2, which ate memory like nobody's business.

Mozilla worked hard to improve firefox's footprint, but at the end of the day, for both Chrome and Firefox users, when it comes to the tradeoff between speed and memory usage most ask for speed.

I don't know why people complain about memory usage though. 4GB of memory (maxes out 32 bit systems) is under $50 these days.

If you insist on a small memory footprint, modify your browsing habits and keep only one or two websites open at a time.

-Adam[/QUOTE]

It's not the memory usage itself - any program that uses more memory, will put more stress on your system on the whole since the memory constantly needs to be processed (especially if pages contain a lot of flash anims or adverts, even if they're unanimated). You notice a slow down, with the program being slower to respond. Chrome really slows down a lot more for me, when I'm downloading for example.

But unless Chrome can add all the important aspects of Firefox (auto-completion, plugin support for spell checking, adblocking, etc.) it's going to be a lite experience and I'm not looking for that. I have always preferred options and flexibility over style and stability (although Firefox is a lot more stable than it used to be).

 

[Chazwozel]

I used Chrome briefly when the shitty ass 3.5.2 FF came out. Since 3.5.3, FF works great. I really didn't like Chrome. It didn't give me enough control over the settings.

 

[elph]

I was using FF 3 pretty exclusively for a while. Then I started noticing a lot of memory loss with Flash. Worst of all, you don't get that memory back until you completely close out FF. Since I watch a great deal of my TV on Hulu and the like, it was very annoying to do a lot of surfing to just have to close things down when FF took up over 1GB of memory.

So I started using Chrome to watch movies and slowly moved over to it exclusively now. With the new 3.0 Chrome it's a bit faster then 2 was, and now it's got the only feature I really missed when leaving FF, a spell checker. I've also gotten used to it's minimalist view and 'lighter' features and FF just feels even more bloated now when I have to start it up.