Just switched from Firefox to Chrome!

opethdisciple · 19 Nov 2014 at 21:38

Been a massive Firefox fan for years since version 1.

It's been great over the years. But I found that some versions where good, then they would update it and it would be lagging and slow again.

(OMG - and the spell check works in the browser! (Chrome))

For example some websites that have flash content or ad banners on the sides would be really slow in Firefox, but Chrome definitely seems a lot more nimble.

Example of website laggy in Firefox.

I'ts gonna take some getting used to tho as Im one of those people that just likes to stick to one thing as thats what I know!

I think also all the recent buzz around Android Lollipop 5 has got me all Googled up! :eek:

Rroff · 19 Nov 2014 at 21:44

That website loads pretty much instantly for me on my desktops using Firefox and Windows 7 and scrolls up and down with no performance issues. For some reason not so good on my system with Windows 8 so I'm going to blame Windows 8 rather than Firefox - I've found flash especially tends to perform really badly on 8.

My biggest issues Chrome v Firefox (though its become less of a distinction of late) with Firefox they typically tend to be more proactive towards security, preventing vulnerabilities existing in the first place whereas while Chrome gets regular security updates it tends to be reactive closing of exploits, etc.

bledd · 19 Nov 2014 at 21:48

Ad banners? Jesus man, install Adblock Plus

opethdisciple · 19 Nov 2014 at 21:52

Rroff said:
That website loads pretty much instantly for me on my desktops using Firefox and Windows 7 and scrolls up and down with no performance issues. For some reason not so good on my system with Windows 8 so I'm going to blame Windows 8 rather than Firefox - I've found flash especially tends to perform really badly on 8.

My biggest issues Chrome v Firefox (though its become less of a distinction of late) with Firefox they typically tend to be more proactive towards security, preventing vulnerabilities existing in the first place whereas while Chrome gets regular security updates it tends to be reactive closing of exploits, etc.

This was on a Win 7 pc.

opethdisciple · 19 Nov 2014 at 23:37

Hmm Chrome doesn't seem to be so good on You tube.

Watching 1080p videos is causing glitches. Was no problem with Firefox.

---

Ah well. Chrome is faster, but I just feel at home using Firefox for better or worse.

Things I found better in Chrome:

1. It's quicker and scrolling up and down did not lag.
2. Spell check works. No need to install dictionary.
3. The little audio icon is handy to know where sound is coming from which tab.

Not so good:

1. Some You tube corruption. Not present in Firefox.
2. Firefox is definetly better for fonts on Websites and is clearer.

Orcvader · 20 Nov 2014 at 00:40

opethdisciple said:
Hmm Chrome doesn't seem to be so good on You tube.

Watching 1080p videos is causing glitches. Was no problem with Firefox.

Try switching back to the Flash player or vice versa if you're already on that: https://www.youtube.com/html5?gl=GB

Been playing around with Chrome lately as well, it seems more responsive with sites with Flash content but I still can't get use to the way it renders certain fonts compared to Firefox (disabling DirectWrite has helped but still not as clear). The themes collection doesn't seem to be as good either

.

Cromulent · 20 Nov 2014 at 01:09

As someone who basically spends most of their computer time in a browser either browsing or developing websites I have to say I'm a Chrome fan and for one reason only.

The Chrome sync feature kicks the crap out of the Firefox sync feature. In Chrome it actually works well and I have it synced between my desktop, laptop, tablet and phone. On Firefox setting up syncing is a royal pain in the arse. Never had any problems with YouTube either on any platform using Chrome (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux and Android).

The speed helps as well but frankly I just use Firefox for looking at developer documentation on my second monitor. I use Chrome for all my real browsing habits.

trentlad · 20 Nov 2014 at 01:45

Why not get the best of both worlds.... and use both?

Excellent example website OP. On Opera V12 it took almost one minute to load, however I'm intentionally using an older version for all the features. Newer version would be a lot faster.

Firefox and Chrome took around 6 seconds and neither have any extensions installed.

Zefan · 20 Nov 2014 at 01:54

In Windows 8.1 I can't get chrome to stop smoothing my fonts, whereas Firefox is completely clear type free. Sold!

Frozennova · 20 Nov 2014 at 09:55

trentlad said:
Why not get the best of both worlds.... and use both?

Excellent example website OP. On Opera V12 it took almost one minute to load, however I'm intentionally using an older version for all the features. Newer version would be a lot faster.

Firefox and Chrome took around 6 seconds and neither have any extensions installed.

Christ it does load slow on Opera 12.

Not that its my main browser, I only use it for a web based RTS as Operas Customiseable key board shortcuts are extremely helpful

opethdisciple · 20 Nov 2014 at 11:35

The only extension I use in Firefox is flash. I tend to find that flash heavy websites are laggy in Firefox. Particularly scrolling, it can even hang for a few seconds too and this is running on an SSD as well.. I could find many examples of websites which are laggy in Firefox. But Firefox is my home I don’t feel comfortable using any other browser, even if, chrome did seem to be better for the few hours I trialled it.

From looking at the processes running, chrome seems to spawn a lot more processes as opposed to Firefox, which might be the reason why it feels smoother.

Maybe as time goes by and flash gets replaced by HTML5, Firefox will start performing better.

jsmoke · 20 Nov 2014 at 12:26

Ad block, flash block, script blocker, image block.

wesimmo · 20 Nov 2014 at 12:54

Orcvader said:
Try switching back to the Flash player or vice versa if you're already on that: https://www.youtube.com/html5?gl=GB

Been playing around with Chrome lately as well, it seems more responsive with sites with Flash content but I still can't get use to the way it renders certain fonts compared to Firefox (disabling DirectWrite has helped but still not as clear). The themes collection doesn't seem to be as good either .

I had all sorts of problems with Flash based things in Chrome, ITV player just wouldn't work for example.

Disabling the inbuilt Chrome Flash Player (about

lugins, expand the Flash section) seems to have resolved them, obviously only do this if you have Flash installed outside of Chrome and need to have it for other apps.

troops · 20 Nov 2014 at 13:35

Strange, i had zero problems. The font problem i do have tho.

opethdisciple · 20 Nov 2014 at 17:03

jsmoke said:
Ad block, flash block, script blocker, image block.

This is besides the point tho isnt it. If chrome is fine with out the need for all these addons then Firefox too shouldnt need it.

Might as well take away internet access for an even smother experience.

Rroff · 20 Nov 2014 at 17:06

Depends how you look at it Chrome tends to try and push you into a specific style of using the internet more than Firefox does which leaves you more to setup your own environment.

KIA · 20 Nov 2014 at 17:07

Rroff said:
My biggest issues Chrome v Firefox (though its become less of a distinction of late) with Firefox they typically tend to be more proactive towards security, preventing vulnerabilities existing in the first place whereas while Chrome gets regular security updates it tends to be reactive closing of exploits, etc.

Google has its own team dedicated to finding vulnerabilities in Chrome. I'd love to see evidence of Mozilla being more proactive.

Rroff · 20 Nov 2014 at 17:19

KIA said:
Google has its own team dedicated to finding vulnerabilities in Chrome. I'd love to see evidence of Mozilla being more proactive.

Meh from my experience while they likely have a sizeable team dedicated to security as the prompt fixes to vulnerabilities attest to that but they've definitely been more chasing the problems than preventing them in the first place (despite all the sand boxing stuff) - in the earlier days the legacy vulnerabilities from webkit and their handling of them alone showed that.

I'm not sure that Mozilla is exactly more proactive as such just that their coding tends to leave less to chance/anticipate possible vulnerabilities better again strictly from my experience.

EDIT: Might be being a little unfair on Chrome as they've changed a lot since moving away from webkit, but its definitely been a bigger source of malware related issues over the years for me than firefox in supporting friends and family.

KIA · 21 Nov 2014 at 13:05

Rroff said:
EDIT: Might be being a little unfair on Chrome as they've changed a lot since moving away from webkit, but its definitely been a bigger source of malware related issues over the years for me than firefox in supporting friends and family.

Chrome won't be the issue. The issue will be user behaviour and running vulnerable plug-ins, although most of the popular plug-ins should be blocked as soon as new versions are announced.

Chrome introduced click-to-play plug-ins and blocking way before Firefox.

Sighn · 21 Nov 2014 at 19:44

Strange. I just tested the independent.co.uk site in Firefox 33.1 Windows 8.1 x64 and it's lightning fast in loading and scrolling. This is with Bluhell Firewall rather than Adblock+.