Export thread
Google Chrome - might be switching...
#1
strawman
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
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
#2
Shegokigo
Shegokigo
Call me when it adds No-Script.
#3
Hylian
Hylian
It would be nice if they would just let people make add-ons like FF does.
#4
strawman
-Adam
---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 PM ----------
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
strawman
Give me your phone number and I will.Call me when it adds No-Script.
-Adam
---------- Post added at 12:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 PM ----------
They do:It would be nice if they would just let people make add-ons like FF does.
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
#5
Shegokigo
-Adam[/quote]
As long as you call from a "listed" number. :sevil:
Shegokigo
Give me your phone number and I will.Call me when it adds No-Script.
-Adam[/quote]
As long as you call from a "listed" number. :sevil:
#6
strawman
-Adam[/quote]
As long as you call from a "listed" number. :sevil:[/QUOTE]
Ok.
-Adam
strawman
Give me your phone number and I will.Call me when it adds No-Script.
-Adam[/quote]
As long as you call from a "listed" number. :sevil:[/QUOTE]
Ok.
-Adam
#7
I
Icarus
I
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?
#8
strawman
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
strawman
When it first came out it was being compared with Firefox 2, which ate memory like nobody's business.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?
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
#9
Dave
Dave
I downloaded and am trying out Chrome again. But I can't get any of these addons to work.
#10
Hylian
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.
#11
figmentPez
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.
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.
#12
strawman
-Adam
strawman
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.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".
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...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.
-Adam
#13
figmentPez
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.
figmentPez
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]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".
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.
#14
strawman
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
strawman
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]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".
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
#15
Covar
there you go.
In all seriousness Picassa was awesome last time I tried it.
Covar
http://www.ubuntu.com/*waits for GoogleOS beta*
there you go.
In all seriousness Picassa was awesome last time I tried it.
#16
figmentPez
figmentPez
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.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...
#17
I
Icarus
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).
I
Icarus
When it first came out it was being compared with Firefox 2, which ate memory like nobody's business.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?
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).
#18
Chazwozel
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.
#19
elph
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.
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.