Both Firefox and Chrome are far better than IE. If you are low on bandwidth then Opera with Turbo On feature can be a good choice. It all depends upon user like I never liked IE, started with Netscape Navigator and ended at Chrome. I like few goodies in Chrome like default Google integration, sandbox and simple interface etc but I don't like its cache i.e. no user control over it.
Agree. What I didn't like about Chrome when I tried one of its very first releases, was the fact that I wasn't given the option to chance the installation path Other than that, I liked its interface, 'lightness' and the fact that it would inevitably bite another chunk out of IE's domination (just like FF did over the last few years). More competition - like in any other area - means better end product FF is by far my weapon of choice here for many reasons - and I don't see that changing anytime soon As for IE, due to past experiences, I am just too (negatively) biased towards it. Still, I have to admit that there has been dramatic improvement - so maybe - one day it becomes an option for me as well
I do a lot of things on Facebook and have found that Google Chrome is the fastest of all the browsers. Depending on what windows version you are using you should select the right version of chrome to enable audio for video's of all kinds. If your running vista,win 7 or server 2008 R2 use chrome V14 If ur running any win 8 version use chrome V6
Dont they do votes here ???? I think this would be a fine subject to have a vote and gauge what folk think.
Happpy didn't create a poll for this one I believe. He can still do so if he feels like it i.e. Thread Tools > Add a Poll to this Thread That's a good suggestion, but it's up to him to decide
i highly doubt this. my dsl internet speed stays the same from day to day, never any noticeable load times, or really load times at all (click, boom there) with FF. Google Chrome has never loaded any page, even the few, rare problem pages, any faster, ever... most of the time it's slower and it has a useless high commit charge for how desperately minimal it is in ability, functionality, and tweaking... google chrome sucks, and is not any faster than any other browser, not even IE, period. browser very, very little to do with speed in my honest opinion--it depends on bandwith, service provider, individual sites' servers, and what all one has running with browsing the internet. but i can say with complete confidence that i can have all the same processes running using FF or Chrome and chrome is never faster than anything else, and never ever any faster than FF has or will ever be. Google's products are garbage, and chrome is no different. chrome is nothing more than a bandwagon like apple--nothing more nothing less
Yep i´m using Google Chrome and there are many add-ons and they work perfectly for me. But mozilla aint bad too,just have to see for your self what you like better
for one i think google gets portions of other revenues from softwarez they support and push with their browser. not to mention they have the incentive to get you to try out and possibly buy their OS, or their many sponsored purchasable phone apps. or pay for any of the other services they offer such as phone directories, business directories and ad promotion, advanced search and background checks (a ton say sponsored by Google) they aren't doing it for kicks and giggles mind you, there is money involved... their approach is just like apple's, hopefully you will see the name so much and hear of all the "in" people and businesses using it and just go with flow of sheep, which will increase their stocks and their CEO's paychecks and keep more and more half developed garbage coming out and inundating the rest of us... sadly though, it will never catch on to me, their browser sucks, and their OS isn't any better. in fact the OS works just like the browser, no user control for the things that matter, and cheapish "copying" of what others have already done==LAME i see google and apple as equals really. pay (or use) for the name not for functionality or practicality since they are no better than any of the alternatives...
Thats pretty much what I was thinking! having browser choice isn't a bad thing, but then again choice isn't necessarily good if it means having lots of bad options! Having IE and Firefox isn't a bad thing either, regardless of whether you prefer IE or Firefox, you can use the other one as a backup if ever you face an issue with a website. What I do see as unfortunate though is the fact Mozilla are forced to push the numbering on Firefox, due to the number pushing of Chrome and the much lower number than IE. Firefox 5,6,7,8, and 9 (what the nightly is currently at) is nothing more than Firefox 4.3 - 4.7 (or therabouts) in traditional terms, and even that is probably stretching it. Firefox 6 traditionally is probably nothing more than what would be Firefox 4.35 normally. That probably has confused some people, as the version numbering is really up to the software developers, by 'traditional' I mean by using the conventional numbering system. In the conventional system, it means there are 5 very much significantly different Firefox versions out there, 4,5,6,7,8 & 9. Fact is, they're all very similar and shouldn't really be designated as 'major' versions just to copy Chrome's poor numbering.