Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Feb 2010 15:16 UTC
Google "Google updated its Chrome browser's developer's builds to version 5 for Windows and Mac today, the first time any version of Chrome has reached that milestone. Google was expected to push version 5 out to the public before the end of the month. Unlike the more recent versions of developer's build 4.x, the developer's builds of Chrome 5.x seems to be starting off to a rough start."
Order by: Score:
Running out of version numbers soon ?
by OSNevvs on Mon 1st Feb 2010 16:08 UTC
OSNevvs
Member since:
2009-08-20

I yet have to find a good reason to leave Opera or Firefox for Chrome... Speed and extensions are certainly not compelling reasons anymore.

Reply Score: 2

FreakyT Member since:
2005-07-17

It depends on what OS you're on. On Windows and Linux, Chrome is noticeably faster and has a more responsive UI than Firefox/Opera. (Also I just dislike the Opera UI in general, but that's just me.) On the Mac performance isn't really good enough to justify switching, IMO.

Edited 2010-02-01 16:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2

danieldk Member since:
2005-11-18

For me, Chrome on OS X is a lot more snappier than Firefox, especially on Javascript-heavy sites. And since recent development builds support extensions (and thus adblocking), I have switched to Chrome as my primary browser.

Reply Score: 2

FreakyT Member since:
2005-07-17

True, javascript is definitely faster. My main problem is Flash; it seems to require about twice as much CPU power on Chrome than on any other browser, which doesn't seem to make sense. Also, I'm still waiting for PDF viewing support with the Preview plugin.

Reply Score: 2

CaptainN- Member since:
2005-07-07

On my older Mac Mini, Chrome is actually noticeably faster than Safari.

Reply Score: 1

dukes Member since:
2005-07-06

On the Mac, it's an OK browser. It's just not enough [yet] to pry me away from OmniWeb. Yes, you will have to pry me away from that browser. ;)

Reply Score: 2

darkstego Member since:
2007-10-26

The omnibox address bar and better handling of screen real estates are two major reasons to switch.

I personally find it handles large volume of tabs betters (read: doesn't slow my computer as much). This comparison is based on linux, I switched over from firefox (iceweasel).

Reply Score: 1

ahmetaa Member since:
2005-07-06

Speed and simplicity "are" compelling reasons to switch.

Reply Score: 2

panzi Member since:
2006-01-22

Well, I still use Firefox but Chromes scalability (no change in performance when opening a lot of tabs) is a very compelling reason for me. Firefox gets VERY slow when I open a lot of tabs. Oh and still no JavaScript JIT for x86_64 in Firefox! WTF?

Reply Score: 2

Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

Speed and extensions were great reasons for me. I can think of no reasons more compelling. Speed almost did it on it's own, but it took the extensions.

I've been using Firefox since the beginning, but about two weeks ago Firefox lost it's place on my taskbar, and was replaced by Chrome. I haven't looked back since.

Reply Score: 3

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

I yet have to find a good reason to leave Opera or Firefox for Chrome... Speed and extensions are certainly not compelling reasons anymore.


It makes a good second browser, and the light resource usage makes it nice for laptops (and netbooks, I would presume). In a pinch, it's very handy to have a browser that is usable almost immediately after clicking the icon.

Reply Score: 2

Erunno Member since:
2007-06-22

It makes a good second browser, and the light resource usage makes it nice for laptops (and netbooks, I would presume).


"Light" as long as you don't include the abyssal memory usage: http://lifehacker.com/5457242/browser-speed-tests-firefox-36-chrome...

Reply Score: 2

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

by default, chrome isolates each tab and extension in its own process, which has a lot of overhead when it comes to memory (in windows anyways) it is a tradeoff in ram vs security. Security wise, chrome blows the competition out of the water. Since they aren't testing that feature, they should have turned it off for the tests, by launching chrome with --single-process

Reply Score: 2

Erunno Member since:
2007-06-22

Since they aren't testing that feature, they should have turned it off for the tests, by launching chrome with --single-process


I disagree as this would create a false impression of Chrome's memory requirements. The trade-off memory for stability and security may be well worth it, but it doesn't change the fact that with a lot of tabs open Chrome is very heavy RAM-wise.

Edited 2010-02-02 22:21 UTC

Reply Score: 2

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

Well, its a requirement of those features (which themselves were untested). If you turn it off, you will level the playing field. I don't doubt firefox would still win that benchmark, but the way it was done is comparing apples to oranges.

Reply Score: 2

StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

"Light" as long as you don't include the abyssal memory usage: http://lifehacker.com/5457242/browser-speed-tests-firefox-36-chrome...


"Abyssal" or "abysmal"? Based on the link, I guess either would apply.

But yeah, "light" in terms of resource usage that effects battery life (with Firefox, I frequently see CPU usage jumping for no apparent reason, random churning of the hard drive, etc).

Reply Score: 3

Erunno Member since:
2007-06-22

"Abyssal" or "abysmal"? Based on the link, I guess either would apply.


Abysmal, of course. Us non-native speakers tend to mix up similar sounding words like this. ;-)

with Firefox, I frequently see CPU usage jumping for no apparent reason, random churning of the hard drive, etc.


That's probably Firefox crash/session recovery which saves all session related content every 10 seconds to disk (including everything you've written into forms which is quite useful if the browser crashes or you accidentally close the browser).

Edited 2010-02-02 22:22 UTC

Reply Score: 2

not gonna switch over yet
by google_ninja on Mon 1st Feb 2010 19:19 UTC
google_ninja
Member since:
2006-02-05

4.0.x brought extensions, dont see anything in 5 yet that is a compelling reason to switch channels

Reply Score: 2

html5
by zegenie on Mon 1st Feb 2010 19:44 UTC
zegenie
Member since:
2005-12-31

Yes, it's speedy, good-looking (opinions, not necessarily facts) and has a good extensions framework, but Google choosing the non-open and non-free side of the html 5 video-tag discussion is reason enough for me to stick with Firefox instead. While not perfect, at least they don't push for a non-free and non-open web.

Edited 2010-02-01 19:45 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: html5
by Kroc on Mon 1st Feb 2010 23:18 UTC in reply to "html5"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Chrome has OGG built in.

The HTML5 video thing is a publisher issue. Google have not transcoded YouTube content into OGG. They are sitting on On2 at the moment as well. Don’t think that Google have chosen their side yet, I believe they still have a trick up their sleeve yet.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by bobi
by bobi on Mon 1st Feb 2010 20:11 UTC
bobi
Member since:
2005-11-14

and next week, chrome 6.0 !

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by bobi
by Laurence on Mon 1st Feb 2010 20:44 UTC in reply to "Comment by bobi"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

and next week, chrome 6.0 !

Meanwhile Linux is still on version 1 BETA.

Edited 2010-02-01 20:44 UTC

Reply Score: 1

Check out this HTML ray tracer
by siimo on Mon 1st Feb 2010 21:42 UTC
siimo
Member since:
2006-06-22

http://gimme.badsectoracula.com/htray.html

Firefox 3.6 2min 35sec
Opera 10.5 1min 4sec
Chrome 5 8sec

Now that is impressive!

Reply Score: 2

Chrome gaining marketshare
by Erunno on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 09:19 UTC
Erunno
Member since:
2007-06-22

NetApplications have released their browser usage numbers for January 2010. Chrome now has achieved its goal of 5 percent market share until before its second "birthday" prematurely. What should be disconcerting to Mozilla is that it is no longer solely at the expense of Internet Explorer but of Firefox as well which indicates a migration of users.

Reply Score: 2