Ironman273 Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Chrome's About to Knock Firefox to Third Place Internet Explorer, the old, fat, mad king of the online kingdom still reigns uncontested. But beneath him, a power struggle between Chrome and Firefox, the latter of which has clung to the number two spot. But that's about to change. According to internet stats firm StatCounter, Chrome's grown in use by 50%—and is on track to take the silver medal by December. StatCounter is just one company among many that do the exact same thing, so these figures aren't ironclad. But the trend definitely is—IE languishes, and Firefox hasn't done much to excite us in a while. Chrome, on the other hand, at least has Google beating its drum; a luxury afforded by, you know, being owned by megarich Google. The long term trend here—emphasis on long—is the gradual decline of IE. Eventually, I'd expect Firefox and Chrome to take the number one and two spots. It's just a matter of when, and who'll be the new king. Source: Gizmodo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neufuse Veteran Posted September 30, 2011 Veteran Share Posted September 30, 2011 chrome to me always felt better then FF, but then I use IE9 as my default browser, and Chrome as secondary... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironman273 Posted September 30, 2011 Author Share Posted September 30, 2011 I've switched to Chrome on the PC a while ago, but I've been using Chrome on OSX and it doesn't seem to play well. I just downloaded the newest Firefox to see how it goes on OSX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gary7 Subscriber² Posted September 30, 2011 Subscriber² Share Posted September 30, 2011 I don't care if Google takes over the world, I won't live in it. :mobile: Oz. 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motoko. Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 FF7 is a very nice improvement. I keep hearing how chrome is a botnet but I keep thinking to myself whoever is gonna know about me already has, I'm not gonna be paranoid but I still want to make a better choice to protect my privacy. Oz. 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyLarry Veteran Posted September 30, 2011 Veteran Share Posted September 30, 2011 I tried Chrome, just never felt different enough than Safari on OS X, so I gave up using it. I am a Firefox man personally. With that said, I truly always see IE on top as far as user base. Perhaps that is just a result of me working in Corporate America, where every single place I have worked, their entire infrastructure is tied in heavily with IE. So much so, we are still on, wait for it, IE 6 where I currently work, which is one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the nation. Wish I was kidding, but I am not. Rumor has it we will be upgrading to IE by June 2012. Also not kidding. So yeah, the world I work in, it is IE as the officially supported browser, and all other browsers are install at your own risk (for those users lucky enough to have admin rights). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bjoswald Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 As to be expected; the best can only get better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGHammer Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 FF7 is a very nice improvement. I keep hearing how chrome is a botnet but I keep thinking to myself whoever is gonna know about me already has, I'm not gonna be paranoid but I still want to make a better choice to protect my privacy. And if you want an x64 version of Firefox designed from the jump for Windows, strongly consider *Waterfox*. (Normally I'm not a fan of Windows browsers not named Internet Explorer; however, some sites *still* don't play nice with IE, which is why I keep Firefox around, however, Waterfox going to render it moot.) Why Waterfox, as opposed to Pale Moon (still at 6.0.2)? First off, Waterfox is the same at the core as the final Firefox 7.x trunk - but recompiled and optimized as a true x64 Windows application. (The Firefox trunk is designed to be OS-neutral, which makes sense - however, the fact that it's alos free/open-source means that other developers, such as Team Waterfox, can make platform-specific optimizations to that code (more like a twig, as opposed to a true fork in that code).) The bigger surprise is that Waterfox is *faster* than Firefox 7 x32 - on the same version of Windows. So could Chrome find itself knocked to third place (x64 division) by Waterfox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajputwarrior Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I've switched to Chrome on the PC a while ago, but I've been using Chrome on OSX and it doesn't seem to play well. I just downloaded the newest Firefox to see how it goes on OSX. download the dev build of chrome or chromium. it's integration with lion is brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironman273 Posted September 30, 2011 Author Share Posted September 30, 2011 download the dev build of chrome or chromium. it's integration with lion is brilliant. It's not the integration per se... I leave the browser running at work with about 10 tabs open. I don't reboot at night, the computer is always on. After a couple days the whole system starts bogging down and tabs start becoming unresponsive more and more. Eventually I will force quit the browser, reboot and start over again. I guess since I'm trying Firefox I'll try the dev build also. I used to use the beta branch until it started crashing on me so I went to stable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sub_Zero_Alchemist Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I tried chrome, didn't like it not my cup of tea. Sticking with FF as my main followed by Opera. very impressed with FF7 improvements. Oz. 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmeunit Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I tried Chrome also, but until they "fix" how the address bar interacts with TAB key and URLs, I'll stick to Firefox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfbane Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I'm using FF10, I haven't tried Chrome in awhile (probably a couple of versions), but I think most (if not all) of the addons I use are available for Chrome, so I guess I'll download it and give it a try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motoko. Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 And if you want an x64 version of Firefox designed from the jump for Windows, strongly consider *Waterfox*. (Normally I'm not a fan of Windows browsers not named Internet Explorer; however, some sites *still* don't play nice with IE, which is why I keep Firefox around, however, Waterfox going to render it moot.) Why Waterfox, as opposed to Pale Moon (still at 6.0.2)? First off, Waterfox is the same at the core as the final Firefox 7.x trunk - but recompiled and optimized as a true x64 Windows application. (The Firefox trunk is designed to be OS-neutral, which makes sense - however, the fact that it's alos free/open-source means that other developers, such as Team Waterfox, can make platform-specific optimizations to that code (more like a twig, as opposed to a true fork in that code).) The bigger surprise is that Waterfox is *faster* than Firefox 7 x32 - on the same version of Windows. So could Chrome find itself knocked to third place (x64 division) by Waterfox? interesting, I'll have to try this out, It might have me switch completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xilo Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Chrome is a toy browser. All they care about is speed which is largely negligible on today's PCs and completely avoid actually making it usable. Oz. and Sub_Zero_Alchemist 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Warwagon MVC Posted September 30, 2011 MVC Share Posted September 30, 2011 I'm sure it helps chrome to be an OPT OUT install in a lot of free software. farmeunit, Chasethebase and Oz. 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfbane Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 And if you want an x64 version of Firefox designed from the jump for Windows, strongly consider *Waterfox*. (Normally I'm not a fan of Windows browsers not named Internet Explorer; however, some sites *still* don't play nice with IE, which is why I keep Firefox around, however, Waterfox going to render it moot.) Why Waterfox, as opposed to Pale Moon (still at 6.0.2)? First off, Waterfox is the same at the core as the final Firefox 7.x trunk - but recompiled and optimized as a true x64 Windows application. (The Firefox trunk is designed to be OS-neutral, which makes sense - however, the fact that it's alos free/open-source means that other developers, such as Team Waterfox, can make platform-specific optimizations to that code (more like a twig, as opposed to a true fork in that code).) The bigger surprise is that Waterfox is *faster* than Firefox 7 x32 - on the same version of Windows. So could Chrome find itself knocked to third place (x64 division) by Waterfox? Firefox has been available in 64 bit for quite awhile, you just need to use the nightly. I'm using Firefox 10 x64 right now. Also, according to the Waterfox site, all they did was compile the Firefox source code for 64 bit systems and rename it, so you'd be better off using the Firefox nightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reacon Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 And if you want an x64 version of Firefox designed from the jump for Windows, strongly consider *Waterfox*. (Normally I'm not a fan of Windows browsers not named Internet Explorer; however, some sites *still* don't play nice with IE, which is why I keep Firefox around, however, Waterfox going to render it moot.) Why Waterfox, as opposed to Pale Moon (still at 6.0.2)? First off, Waterfox is the same at the core as the final Firefox 7.x trunk - but recompiled and optimized as a true x64 Windows application. (The Firefox trunk is designed to be OS-neutral, which makes sense - however, the fact that it's alos free/open-source means that other developers, such as Team Waterfox, can make platform-specific optimizations to that code (more like a twig, as opposed to a true fork in that code).) The bigger surprise is that Waterfox is *faster* than Firefox 7 x32 - on the same version of Windows. So could Chrome find itself knocked to third place (x64 division) by Waterfox? Thanks. The performance difference is noticeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Udedenkz Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Here is my 0.02 Speed (scrolling and loading): Firefox Nightly < Chrome < IE9 < Opera Opera is the only browser that gets scrolling performance, IE9 scrolls too fast. Responsiveness: Firefox Nighly < IE9/Chrome < Opera Opera is the only browser in which I can open massive amount of BG tabs to load without compromising the performance of the foreground tab. Memory: Chrome < Firefox / Opera < IE9 I don't get the multiprocess crud, Opera doesn't have that and it is faster than Chrome. Multiprocess is memory hog feel good design which Firefox seems to think is a good idea to copy. Interface: IE9 < Chrome < Opera < Firefox IE9 hides the ugly and looks pretty unless you want to configure it and it turns ugly pretty fast. Chrome is aimed at lowest denominator. Opera is balanced, but no right click menu on back button. Firefox is winrar. Addons: IE9 < Chrome < Opera < Firefox If IE9 has a good interface and adblock plus type addon, it would be awesome. Popularity: Opera < IE9 < Firefox < Chrome Chrome is like a well used prostitute as it is advertised heavily by Google (essentially ruining the browser by making it mainstream valueless trash). Firefox has prestige which is fading away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEX4S Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Xilo - I agree to some extent - With a good connection - and a modern computer - I dont think a browser is a real factor on speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azusa Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 For addons alone firefox is just better and it just does what i want it to do. Mekun 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Audioboxer Subscriber² Posted October 1, 2011 Subscriber² Share Posted October 1, 2011 I enjoy Google pushing Mozilla to where they are now with Firefox development, but until Google launch their new web/content blocking API (dragging their feet with it for ages), I'll be sticking with Firefox. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chasethebase Reporter Posted October 1, 2011 Reporter Share Posted October 1, 2011 I have noticed a trend with a lot of popular software having Chrome bundled in the installer, and you have to uncheck it rather than check it when installing. This has probably artificially inflated the numbers. Sub_Zero_Alchemist, Oz. and lamminium 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Heartripper Subscriber¹ Posted October 1, 2011 Subscriber¹ Share Posted October 1, 2011 I have noticed a trend with a lot of popular software having Chrome bundled in the installer, and you have to uncheck it rather than check it when installing. This has probably artificially inflated the numbers. Yes, Chrome has behind him google, which has the power to make chrome known also to average joes (ads, bundles in other softwares), while mozilla and opera software cannot do this. This obviously has helped the spread of chrome. Oz. 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+virtorio MVC Posted October 1, 2011 MVC Share Posted October 1, 2011 Chrome is a toy browser. All they care about is speed which is largely negligible on today's PCs and completely avoid actually making it usable. What's your definition of useable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.d0ebccb494f4680a0aee8f8a4c46d4de.png)
Recommended Posts