Board
Created by Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev on Sep 30, 2010 in  Computers ->  Software

Firefox vs Chrome

Firefox
Google Chrome
44.0% 56.0%

Log in to debate or

@ronlaw
ronlaw
0

I'm not going to discuss whether Google Chrome is better for everyone but one thing is right: it works and faster than any other. Unlike Firefox, it won't consume large chunks of RAM Memory after only a few minutes. I just love how fast it starts, how I'm never going to lose any of my preferences since they can be easily cloud-stored, not to mention the growing number of apps that make my life a hundred times easier.

on Dec 11, 2011
@z_free
z_free
0

I even voted for my own point. That's how much I like it :)

on Dec 9, 2010
@z_free
z_free
1

Yeah yeah yeah .. chrome runs javascript like 70 times faster[citation needed] and it starts faster runs faster and that helps me avoid gettin nervous. It's like an electronic cigarette.

on Dec 9, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
-1

Turns out FF has the lowest memory consumption when working with many tabs at the same time. It makes some sense since Chrome handles every new tab as a separate thread which although benefits for improves responsiveness, has its memory overhead for certain.
http://media.bestofmicro.com/O/L/254901/original/wbgp2lin40tabs.jpg

on Oct 28, 2010
@mipmip
mipmip
0

@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev: Did it crash while googling? :)

on Oct 27, 2010
@Dudi
Dudi
0

Chrome is the best

on Oct 18, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

Just had a terrible FF crash. Needed to restart windows. Becoming chrome fan more and more.

on Oct 17, 2010
@mipmip
mipmip
0

@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev: Nope, neither can I :D

on Oct 8, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

@mipmip, Can the blockers be configured to click on the ads (of course only once in a while in order not to be too suspicious) thus reward also the hosts of the pay per click ads?

on Oct 7, 2010
@Terminator
Terminator
0

@Petar_Dimov, I have seen a situation where Chrome behaves different from all other browsers, namely the order of the accepted document types Chrome sends in the HTTP request is different, which may cause different response type from the server and unexpected behaviour in the browser. This was hard to notice and debug. And has nothing to do with how correct you build the HTML/CSS/javascript

on Oct 5, 2010
@mipmip
mipmip
0

@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev Naah, I'm not sharing Murdoch's view on the future, I am sharing my view on the present. And my crystal ball says that in the future both models will continue to thrive. And yep, in this case I might give Chrome another shot. By the way adblockers give you the option to download the ads, thus rewarding the content provider, without rendering the ads themselves on page. Seems like a good compromise, thou again it won't work if everyone's doing it ;)

on Oct 4, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

@mipmip, You seem to be sharing Rupert Murdoch's view on the future of Internet. He foresees paid content taking over the free content + ads mode and even plans to introduce this in News Corp editions. I am a little skeptical on this but the free market is to decide who is right.
http://www.editorsweblog.org/newsrooms_and_journalism/2009/05/murdoch_on_paid_content_the_current_days.php

BTW there are ad blockers for chrome, although I have not tested them and don't know how efficient they are
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/gighmmpiobklfepjocnamgkkbiglidom

on Oct 4, 2010
@mipmip
mipmip
0

@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev, I'd rather pay for useful, well put together content than being constantly nagged by useless advertising. And let's not forget the system resource overhead, generated by the oh-so-cool flash banners. Even if FF is slower, not playing all the adnoyance for sure makes things better. Last but not least 99% of advertisements are not suited to the content and visual style of a particular site, thus creating interrupts and aesthetic dissonance, further reducing readability and overall experience.

on Oct 4, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

@mipmip, Blocking ads is a good thing as long as not everybody do it. No ads views and clicks => no ads income for the web publishers. If this happens the web publishers are going to have choices - either stop publishing content at all or making the content access paid.
Currently we all enjoy the majority of the Internet content for free thanks to the ads. Nobody works for free even the web content publishers.

on Oct 4, 2010
@mipmip
mipmip
0

FF for me .. no adblock - no game

on Oct 4, 2010
@Petar_Dimov
Petar_Dimov
0

@Terminator - being a web developer you should know that Chrome is the easiest to work with when it comes to cross browser compatibility. If you css/js is done correctly all you might need to worry are a few hacks for IE6.

I agree that firefox may be slow because of extensions but they should be controlling this somehow if they want to have a competitive product.

on Oct 3, 2010
@pichurka
pichurka
0

When I started using Firefox, Chrome was not offering the same functionality. So, I'm a kind of biased.

on Oct 3, 2010
@Terminator
Terminator
0

Being a web developer I hate Chrome. As if there were not enough browsers already that you should support when building websites. There are situations in which chrome behaves different from FF, IE and Opera and now I need to pull my hair for these special cases too.
Just read that google are intending to introduce new image standard WebP to replace JPEG, which again is going to cause troubles for web developers.
@Google, please stick to searching!

on Oct 3, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

Here is a fun video showing off how fast chrome is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCgQDjiotG0

on Oct 2, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

I didn't know of Firebug lite for Chrome existence. Thank you for this, @Petar_Dimov. I wonder why it's not called ChromeBug :)
I read that Mozilla guys are blaming the third party extensions for Firefox being slow, not the core of the browser. Let's see how Chrome is going to behave when I load it with a bunch of extensions.

on Oct 2, 2010
@Petar_Dimov
Petar_Dimov
0

Chrome has now the necessary extensions you need as a developer and a marketer to do your job. Firebug lite is available, Google Global and SEO quake.
Chrome is faster and performs better than the newer versions of Firefox. I work with both loaded at the same time and also all the newbies I recommend chrome to switch from firefox.
So it looks like Chrome is actually better

on Sep 30, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

I was surprised to find out how quickly Chrome is spreading round. According this post it has overtaken FF among the "power user" (whatever power users means):
http://lifehacker.com/5645038/how-and-why-chrome-is-overtaking-firefox-among-power-users

on Sep 30, 2010
@Valentin_Ivanov
Valentin_Ivanov
0

Firefox does the job for me and I've never felt the need to look elsewhere.

on Sep 30, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

Firefox has lots of extensions and plug-ins. I cannot go without the Fire Bug plug in. It is the most useful ultimate tool for web development.
Firefox is pretty heavy though and crashes too often. "Well, this is embarrassing..." It is quite embarrassing indeed. Some sites especially with complex javascripts just don't work udner FireFox. I never open TechCrunch with FF, I switch to Chrome to open it.

on Sep 30, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

Google chrome is definitely faster and very light-weight.

on Sep 30, 2010
@Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
Steliyan_Petkov_Georgiev
0

I don't even bother to include IE in the game. It still just sucks.

on Sep 30, 2010
1 - 26 out of 26
All rights reserved © 2010-2012 PointDebate. User-posted content is licensed under a Creative Commons Public Domain License