Dilemma of the century 28 replies

Please wait...

D3matt

I take what n0e says way too seriously

27,515 XP

20th November 2007

0 Uploads

2,554 Posts

1 Threads

#21 8 years ago

Caelum;5360783I said I'd rather use Chrome/Opera than Firefox... :rolleyes:

In any case, think I'll definitely give Iron a try :)

The original post doesn't even mention firefox, as if Chrome and Opera were the only good browsers in the world.




Sgt. D. Pilla

Uber Geek

50 XP

23rd October 2007

0 Uploads

3,473 Posts

0 Threads

#22 8 years ago

Since when do research and studying fall into chatting on a gaming forum? Since you said "at the moment", I have to assume at least some of what you have open is totally unnecessary. One can also fairly easily bookmark certain pages rather than have them ALL open simultaneously. Seriously, I think in your excessive want of convenience, you're being unrealistic and asking for too much in a browser.

No, I'm not saying that at all about Chrome, I'm saying Iron as a browser itself is likely overall more streamlined and efficient, ASIDE from the addons or features of Chrome. Then again, with what you expect from a browser, you'd probably load it up with tons of addons, a leisure chat page or two, a music streaming service, God knows what else, and just slow it back down and bloat it.

Bottom line, if you want speed and performance you maximize efficiency in how you use a browser, rather than loading it up with addons and pages out of sheer laziness. That's daft IMO.

For once I find myself agreeing with Omen...

Wtf!!

as if Chrome and Opera were the only good browsers in the world.

They are lol. I hate Firefox. I never understood why people say it's fast and lightweight. It's the slowest browser and the heaviest browser I've ever used, and the GUI is massive and unorganized.

I used Firefox 2 years ago, 1 year ago, then again 2 months ago...for about 2 days each time, each time went back to either IE7/8 and/or Chrome, never looked back since. IE8 is just so lightning fast and simple, it's great!

@Mr. P. I've Chrome open with 10 tabs and it's using 192MB. By any chance did you have high flash content tabs open?

My tabs consist of Facebook, Internode, These Forums, LogMeIn, Wiki, News.com.au, NeoWin, Remote Web Workplace, Our Ticketing System and KLOTH.




Bubbleteatroopa

I got them crazies.

50 XP

31st December 2008

0 Uploads

821 Posts

0 Threads

#23 8 years ago

I used Crome, then I switched back to firefox. :P




Caelum

Spoons & llamas guy

50 XP

24th October 2008

0 Uploads

501 Posts

0 Threads

#24 8 years ago
The original post doesn't even mention firefox, as if Chrome and Opera were the only good browsers in the world.

Nor does it in fact mention Safari, IE9, Iron or the plethora of other browsers. Point of the topic is I'm torn between Opera and a Chromium-based browser ;)




>Omen<

Modern Warfare

50 XP

1st January 2005

0 Uploads

7,395 Posts

0 Threads

#25 8 years ago

Interesting FAQ about Iron vs Chrome btw:

I read about tools, which try to anonymize Chrome. Why not use these?

Right, there are tools, which try to do the same than Iron. But these don't work with the sourcecode and so they only provide a limited control. E.g. they can't disbale functions like th URL-Tracker.

Can i really check that Iron doesn't submit any private data, how you say?

Yes, you can. There are tools like Wireshark, which scan the whole network-traffic. We could not recognize any obvious activity. But you can proof this by yourself. PS: We also disabled the DNS-Precaching by default, because this could perhaps used by spammers (see this Link)

Can't i just use an precompiled unchanged Chromium-Build from the Google Server?

This is not useful because the original Chromium-Builds have nearly the same functions inside than the original Chrome. We can only provide Iron because we massively modified the source.

Source: http://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron_faq.php

Hope this clears up any questions about Iron's differences to Chrome in the default security, and what you can and can't do by merely disabling certain features in Chrome. It also explains that the code itself is "massively modified", so like I said, it could be less of a memory hog than Chrome aside from what features are used.




Junk angel

Huh, sound?

166,880 XP

29th January 2007

0 Uploads

15,678 Posts

0 Threads

#26 8 years ago
Mr. Pedantic;5360248How about with 15+ tabs open? I just did a little test of my own with 17 identical tabs open in either browser, albeit rather unscientifically (I had both open at the same time, no clearing of cache or history, etc), and Chrome was at 554MB vs Firefox's at 236MB.

If I remember correctly, what you see in the tasklist is not actually accurate, as a lot of the memory that the chrome processes use is duplicated and is in fact the same memory, so just adding it doesn't work correctly.

Also I've been using Iron portable for a while now, thinking of just switching to the mainline version.




Zedo Mann

I believe in magic

50 XP

30th May 2007

0 Uploads

2,260 Posts

0 Threads

#27 8 years ago

I tried to use Chrome, but got annoyed by it's simplified-ness. I think I'd prefer Opera, but that's just me. I'm currently using the Firefox 4 beta and it's pretty nice too.




*The.Doctor

Trust me, I'm a Doctor

102,440 XP

25th November 2003

0 Uploads

9,964 Posts

0 Threads

#28 8 years ago

I installed the FF 4 beta the other day. Its much better than 3.6, but, it still feels slightly laggy and slow compared to Iron or Opera. At least it looks much nicer now.




general_kerr

(Couldn't find a title)

50 XP

14th February 2007

0 Uploads

2,089 Posts

0 Threads

#29 8 years ago

I prefer firefox, but have been using chrome firefox and IE (gasp) all at once lately - because i want to jump between projects and can recover tabs individually. lol.

oh, but Chrome does runescape much better on F2P - the fullscreen doesn't had the grey bar at top XD