Google Chrome Surges Past 10% Market Share

[executor2]

Google Chrome - is the best , low memory use , fast browsing and minimalist interface

Firefox - is the worse , horrible memory use ( 2 tabs after 30 min have 500 mb ram occupied ) , very very very slow JavaScript ( i have a jQuery Carousel at work , it moves 2 times slower then on Chrome ) , the interface is full of items , i hate that.

Opera - was a good browser , but i had problems with it about 2-3 years ago , when browser games would display the text wrong , while selecting it , it pissed me off and had to dumb it

IE - well ppl complain about it but , it runs smooth , has good JavaScript and horrible interface. Overall a good browser.

 

[executor2]

Google Chrome - is the best , low memory use , fast browsing and minimalist interface

Firefox - is the worse , horrible memory use ( 2 tabs after 30 min have 500 mb ram occupied ) , very very very slow JavaScript ( i have a jQuery Carousel at work , it moves 2 times slower then on Chrome ) , the interface is full of items , i hate that.

Opera - was a good browser , but i had problems with it about 2-3 years ago , when browser games would display the text wrong , while selecting it , it pissed me off and had to dumb it

IE - well ppl complain about it but , it runs smooth , has good JavaScript and horrible interface. Overall a good browser.

 

[Griffolion]

Tried FF & IE personally, had a go on Safari on a friends computer, but then I tried Chrome and haven't looked back since.

 

[Guest]

"The latest Opera is the by far the best all-around browser that does everything well".

 

[Mark Heath]

FF as my standard browser. I use Chrome if I just want to quickly view a few pages or a page doesn't load properly in FF. I don't find FF using up loads of memory (~100MB unless I've used it for ages) so I'm not sure where some of you are getting your 500MB figure from...

For most things I prefer if things load 0.25 seconds slower but free of almost all ads etc. Happy so far with both Chrome and FF

 

[c0oim4n]

[citation][nom]johnsmithhatesvlc[/nom]You realize Chrome extensions API does not allow ads to be 'blocked' but only 'hidden' right? Also, Chrome can not block ads within videos.[/citation]

Actually, yes, it can. I've got an extension that block ads from YouTube videos, and it works superb.

Come back once you actually USE Chrome for more than 5 minutes

 

[Guest]

Firefox is getting old in the tooth. It really has several issues that seem to go on forever without being addressed. But I realize their are many user who are Extension addicts. I prefer a fast browser with less bells and whistles. But their are certainly good choices out there for everyone!

 

[southernshark]

I stay away from anything Google. Google just reeks of spyware and adds. No thanks, I'll stick with FireFox.

 

[g00fysmiley]

where do us opera users fall in? >_

 

[randomhero1]

[citation][nom]johnsmithhatesvlc[/nom]You realize Chrome extensions API does not allow ads to be 'blocked' but only 'hidden' right? Also, Chrome can not block ads within videos.[/citation]
Chrome can certainly block ads within videos.

The only places I see ads in videos is on "Livestream". Youtube ads are gone and Every other ad in videos.

 

[volks1470]

yep, ever since Adblock+ came out on chrome...I was hooked. So much better than firefox.

 

[eddieroolz]

W3Scool numbers seem awfully skewed. There's no way IE has only 27% market share.

As for IE9, I still think it's superior to both Firefox 4.0 beta (launch speed, browsing speed) and Chrome (industry-standard behavior, GPU accleration). Though I think an update Microsoft performed made it slightly unstable.

P.S. Industry-standard behavior as in asking whether you'd like to save a file or not, instead of just blindly downloading it. Also asking if I want to overwrite a file with same name instead of just blindly downloading it. I hate Chrome for doing that.

 

[johnsmithhatesVLC]

[citation][nom]randomhero1[/nom]Chrome can certainly block ads within videos. The only places I see ads in videos is on "Livestream". Youtube ads are gone and Every other ad in videos.[/citation]
Livestream was the particular example I was talking about. Firefox can block ads in Livestream but why can't Chrome? Take a guess.

 

[reprotected]

[citation][nom]executor2[/nom]Firefox - is the worse , horrible memory use ( 2 tabs after 30 min have 500 mb ram occupied ) , very very very slow JavaScript ( i have a jQuery Carousel at work , it moves 2 times slower then on Chrome ) , the interface is full of items , i hate that.[/citation]
Install Adblock Plus and the new Beta 10. You get maximum adblocking, unlike Chrome where you still have to watch 30 seconds of advertisements in YouTube. Memory usage means nothing, especially if you have a lot of RAM, and their Javascript is not slow. Oh, and don't get me started on how you can modify the Interface.

 

[oneblackened]

[citation][nom]Mark Heath[/nom]FF as my standard browser. I use Chrome if I just want to quickly view a few pages or a page doesn't load properly in FF. I don't find FF using up loads of memory (~100MB unless I've used it for ages) so I'm not sure where some of you are getting your 500MB figure from...For most things I prefer if things load 0.25 seconds slower but free of almost all ads etc. Happy so far with both Chrome and FF[/citation]
I only use 500MB if I have 40-50+ tabs open with a few active plugins (ie, Flash or Java). Not sure where he's getting that figure from.

 

[soundefx]

Firefox is my choice.

I can't stand the IE interface and not having full control over chrome.

 

[beayn]

Wait.. when did they release IE9? (not beta). That one blew right past me. Maybe I just didn't care enough?

 

[beayn]

[citation][nom]oneblackened[/nom]I only use 500MB if I have 40-50+ tabs open with a few active plugins (ie, Flash or Java). Not sure where he's getting that figure from.[/citation]

My firefox uses 275mb just idle with 4 tabs open for days on end. It doesn't generally grow much bigger anymore, but it used to approach 1gb with just the same 4 tabs before the plugin-container thing was separated. The plugin container usually takes 25-100mb depending on what I'm viewing. So, for me, the memory bug has been fixed. I'm not sure if it was a flash fix, firefox fix or website fix.

 

[dingo_d]

[citation][nom]JE_D[/nom]Well Firefox just wasn't doing it for me anymore.Then Adblockplus for Chrome came out and BAM! I was a Chrome User[/citation]


Me too

 

[masterasia]

Chrome is really nice. I love the Google Apps that can launch within Chrome. It's great for Web Developers. I don't think IE has a chance, but I still need IE to access OWA and a few other sites like Dell to download drivers. I've been using it ever since it came out and have never looked back.

Chrome runs fast because it caches everything. After a couple hours of browsing the net, expect to rack up gigs of cache on your local hard drive. I use CCleaner to clear it out once a day. One other thing I like about it is "Incognito window" which lets you open another instance of Chrome with it's own separate cache and cookies and no browsing history is saved.

Google is going to take over the world so everyone should be scared. Let's hope they don't turn to the dark side once they do take over and start monopolizing the Internet.