What internet browser do you prefer?

Discussion in 'Technology' started by YankBastard, Sep 13, 2010.

  1. 96Squig

    96Squig Member

    Feb 4, 2004
    Hanover
    Club:
    Hannover 96
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    I have a n900, can't use safari.
    Never tried firefox link, so yeah, possibly.
     
  2. ferryawan

    ferryawan New Member

    Oct 8, 2011
    England
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    I used Firefox and IE
     
  3. StiltonFC

    StiltonFC He said to only look up -- Guster

    Mar 18, 2007
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    why wasn't there a choice for cans and string or stone and chisels? :mad:
     
  4. Bonnie Lass

    Bonnie Lass Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 20, 2000
    Up top
    Club:
    Olympique Lyonnais
    Nat'l Team:
    Norway
    You mean Netscape Navigator?
     
  5. StiltonFC

    StiltonFC He said to only look up -- Guster

    Mar 18, 2007
    SoCal
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    when i got engaged 9 years ago, my dear wife had an e-machine and was using Juno for email and Netscape Navigator. now she uses Firefox.

    we evolve...
     
  6. KungMa0

    KungMa0 New Member

    Jan 29, 2012
    Club:
    --other--
    Google chrome is where its at, I like it because it looks sleek.
     
  7. laasan

    laasan Member

    Apr 12, 2010
    I normally like stuff to look sleep as well, but I think google have overdone it with chrome. I find it cold, not appealing to my senses at all. the new firefox look sleek if you choose the right theme, but still have a certain warmth in their design. but that's of course very subjective.
    plus, in terms of plugins and themes chrome is still nowhere near firefox.
     
  8. benztown

    benztown Member+

    Jun 24, 2005
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    I like a sleek, minimalistic look, but while Chrome is minimalistic, the cartoonish design is anything but sleek. I generally feel that the Google designs look horrible TBH.

    So I'm still sticking to Safari both because of looks and usability. The browser history with the cover-flow design is simply the killer feature for me. It makes it very easy to search for sites you have been visiting before.
    But also stuff like native support for the multitouch trackpad with its gestures is very nice (though Chrome does have that as well by now I think).
    Also nice is the native "Reader" function that allows you with a single click to get a well formatted document from a web article with the ability for PDF export. I guess other browsers can do that as well with the help of plug ins, but it won't be as smooth if it's not implemented into the core of the program.

    Occasionally I also use Firefox, whenever I need a specific plugin that's either exclusive to firefox or simply works best there. Though that's happening less and less. The only Firefox plugin I regularly use is "Modify Headers" which I need to watch South Park episodes from the American website without actually being in the US. Unfortunately, most other American video sites have closed that hole and I need a Proxy/VPN to watch them, so the plugin is not as useful as it used to be.

    What I don't like about Safari as opposed to Chrome or Firefox is its slow update cycle, though I guess that's the price you pay for a more integrated product. Also, I guess technically Chrome is still the fastest, but in this day and age, you hardly feel any difference, as they're all fast enough. That used to be a big thing when Chrome was first released and it was also the reason why I switched to Chrome for a short time.
     
  9. Kryptonite

    Kryptonite Fancy Title Here

    Apr 10, 1999
    Columbus
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I like Firefox's customizability. Even though I'm on Firefox 9.0.1, my tabs are still on the bottom. I still have my buttons in the "back, forward, home, refresh/stop" configuration with the combined stop/refresh button. I just don't like the new format of having some of those over on the right.

    Why they took the control buttons and split them into two separate places, I'll never know.
     
  10. laasan

    laasan Member

    Apr 12, 2010
    I often find FF faster than Chrome these days. I think Google lost a bit of focus on this front.

    btw, can you please answer me a very simple and stupid question. how do you get Safari into fullscreen mode on a mac?
     
  11. benztown

    benztown Member+

    Jun 24, 2005
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    Well, I stopped comparing, but whenever you see speed tests, then Chrome tends to win...although these tests are often limited and usually don't reflect everyday usage, so the personal perception might be different.

    But for me, the only place where I really notice the difference is startup time.

    For that you need OSX Lion and Safari 5.

    Then it's pretty simple, either press ctrl+cmd+F or click on the little arrows in the upper right corner of the Safari window or you can access it via the "View" menu.

    Though if you haven't upgraded to Lion yet (which I would recommend anyway, given the cheap price), then this particular feature doesn't exist. The "full screen" implementation in Lion is pretty neat though, as it allots an individual virtual desktop to each app in full screen mode, so you can easily switch between them with a swipe on your trackpad or magic mouse. For example, I like to always have iTunes and Mail open in full screen mode in the background. Though when it comes to browsing, I prefer the regular window mode, so that I can look at my Twitter feed at the same time.
     
  12. laasan

    laasan Member

    Apr 12, 2010
    I've got Safari 5, but it's a work machine (I'm a Ubuntu user in private), so system updates are out of my hand. but given that this computer is only a little older than a year, I find it pretty appalling that Apple can't be bothered to provide such a basic and standard UI feature. I can max FF and Chrome on the same machine, but not Safari. given the rather small monitor its pretty important to me.
     
  13. benztown

    benztown Member+

    Jun 24, 2005
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    Ok, I see. The thing is that in the past, Apple didn't offer full screen modes because the workflow they had in mind worked better with lots of windows.

    I mean that is one of the age old Windows vs. Mac controversies. Windows was always designed for having your programs occupy the entire screen, while Apple always had a multiple window approach.

    Only with the success of iOS did Apple change its mind on this a bit. But instead of offering full screen modes on the level of their apps, they did so on the level of the OS, starting with Lion, which means however that users of older versions are out in the cold. But then I guess Apple has a history of cutting ties with older versions quickly.
    The advantage is of course that the integration is much smoother, because it's the same for every program you use and each app getting its own virtual desktop also makes it possible to multi task while always being in full screen mode.
     
  14. laasan

    laasan Member

    Apr 12, 2010
    that's fair enough, but if you design the interface for multiple windows, why do these windows have their menu bar all in the same place at the top, separated from the actual window?
    in fact the window management in Snow is truly appaling. switching between virtual desktops drives you nuts because you hardly ever return to the same window you had on top before. sometimes it even gets confused between dialogue windows from one and the same application. Apple did a really poor job there.
     
  15. benztown

    benztown Member+

    Jun 24, 2005
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    My guess is that the multiple window approach is exactly the reason for it. For example, if you have a couple of small finder windows open, then not only would a menu bar in each of them take up more space on your screen and therefore make it more difficult to work with, but since the windows are small, they couldn't accommodate the entire menu bar, so for full access you'd have to resize the windows which would be a pain in the butt.

    With the universal menu bar, the menu is always in the same place and always full size.

    Another factor might be that it leads to smoother design. Having the menu bar in every window kinda sticks out in a negative way as it goes against the minimalistic concept and increases the frame size of every window. That's probably the reason why Windows seems to get rid of the individual menu bars as well, only that there it's not replaced by a universal menu bar as in OSX (or Ubuntu) but it's hidden behind a button.

    Personally, I never fully utilized the virtual desktops in (Snow) Leopard because the way it was implemented kinda sucked. It was a gimmick with little actual value, at least for me.
    And when I did use more than one virtual desktop, then I switched between them by clicking on the respective program symbols in the dock, which means that the program I clicked on was always on top.

    This whole thing has really been improved in Lion. It's much more intuitive to use multiple virtual desktops now. Occasionally it still gets confused by dialogue windows (or maybe it's intentional to have windows that have popped up up appear on top when you return to the virtual desktop they're on, which also means that the app they belong to is on top).

    Other than that, I don't really have encountered window management problems, not in Lion and not before. Though there is certainly some valid criticism regarding the implementation of the finder, which should remember how you prefer to look at individual folders so that you don't have to fiddle around as much.
     
  16. laasan

    laasan Member

    Apr 12, 2010
    maybe I spend too much time programming object-orientated.. ;)
     
  17. benztown

    benztown Member+

    Jun 24, 2005
    Club:
    VfB Stuttgart
    Probably...and the scary part is, I know exactly what you mean :eek:;)
     
  18. BimmerBenz95

    BimmerBenz95 Member+

    Feb 24, 2012
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Google Chrome
     
  19. LeetOwnage522

    LeetOwnage522 Member

    Mar 26, 2008
    Doodlestan
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Mostly use Chrome, but lately, it has been crashing a lot (Flash plug in crashes like crazy). I've always had Firefox installed and may switch due to the new upgrade on Firefox being awesome.
     
  20. Nacional Tijuana

    Nacional Tijuana BigSoccer Supporter

    May 6, 2003
    San Diego, Calif.
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm a chrome fan, but I know plenty of folks that aren't. It just seems to load easier and look better than IE or Firefox or Safari, my other browsers.
     
  21. Bazi

    Bazi Member+

    Jan 15, 2009
    Wuerzburg (Germany)
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    Germany
    I actually prefer the Opera browser though Google tries to convince me otherwise. It's a fast loading, goodlooking and independently developed browser. Try it! :)
     
  22. old timer45

    old timer45 Member

    Aug 19, 2012
    Firefox, more stable!
     
  23. beckham22

    beckham22 New Member

    Oct 4, 2012
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    I use both together Firefox and Chrome ..great software
     
    BimmerBenz95 repped this.
  24. Toinan

    Toinan Member

    Nov 22, 2012
    Club:
    Grenoble Foot 38
  25. CookmySock

    CookmySock Red Card

    Feb 15, 2012
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Chrome all the way.
     

Share This Page