Browser recommendation
- DaMadFiddler
- Team Screamcast
- Posts: 7953
- https://www.artistsworkshop.eu/meble-kuchenne-na-wymiar-warszawa-gdzie-zamowic/
- Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 7:17 am
- Location: San Francisco, CA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Browser recommendation
I've spent the last month or so evaluating different web browsers, trying to determine which one loads the fastest, seems the most stable, and operates best with different websites and such.
A lot of people have very specific favorites around here...most commonly, Firefox, Opera, and Camino. I've been a longtime Mozilla/Firefox user, but it has gotten somewhat bloated over the years, and I wanted to see if there was anything faster or with more to offer. Camino (for OSX only) seemed a likely choice at first, but it is very buggy in how it handles some websites. I just didn't like the feel of Opera. IE is a mess, and Safari is out of date in terms of features.
Well, after using it exclusively for about a week and a half, I think I have a winner: Flock.
http://www.flock.com
It's Firefox-derived, so you can still use plugins (such as the ever-vital Adblock). It's also cross-platform. It handles tabs better than Firefox, it has a deeper bookmarking system, and it does some incredibly useful and extensive things with the search bar. It's got a bunch of little time-saving caveats, like batch integration with various social networking sites, a built-in RSS manager, and little integration things like shortcuts. For example, if I'm in a text edit field on a website, and I drag a picture and drop it into the text box, it'll automatically insert the appropriate HTML tag.
Plus, my preliminary tests seem to show it loading faster and using slightly less resources than vanilla Firefox...and the interface is a lot sleeker.
The way it's promoted is kind of annoying, with this sort of me-too chic (even the name reflects this), but the browser itself is a really solid piece of software.
I'd never seen it mentioned here before, so I thought I might suggest it and see what other people thought.
A lot of people have very specific favorites around here...most commonly, Firefox, Opera, and Camino. I've been a longtime Mozilla/Firefox user, but it has gotten somewhat bloated over the years, and I wanted to see if there was anything faster or with more to offer. Camino (for OSX only) seemed a likely choice at first, but it is very buggy in how it handles some websites. I just didn't like the feel of Opera. IE is a mess, and Safari is out of date in terms of features.
Well, after using it exclusively for about a week and a half, I think I have a winner: Flock.
http://www.flock.com
It's Firefox-derived, so you can still use plugins (such as the ever-vital Adblock). It's also cross-platform. It handles tabs better than Firefox, it has a deeper bookmarking system, and it does some incredibly useful and extensive things with the search bar. It's got a bunch of little time-saving caveats, like batch integration with various social networking sites, a built-in RSS manager, and little integration things like shortcuts. For example, if I'm in a text edit field on a website, and I drag a picture and drop it into the text box, it'll automatically insert the appropriate HTML tag.
Plus, my preliminary tests seem to show it loading faster and using slightly less resources than vanilla Firefox...and the interface is a lot sleeker.
The way it's promoted is kind of annoying, with this sort of me-too chic (even the name reflects this), but the browser itself is a really solid piece of software.
I'd never seen it mentioned here before, so I thought I might suggest it and see what other people thought.
-
- Somewhat Dumb Knight
- Posts: 3653
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- JellyWarrior
- General Jelly
- Posts: 1203
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2002 1:17 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Yea Flock is a great version of Firefox, but I switched back to regular Firefox just for personal reasons till Flock progresses a little more.
For the adventurous of you out there, perhaps you could consider trying "Swift". It's a Windows browser that uses Apple's WebKit rendering engine, the same engine that runs Apple's internet stuff like Safari.
Get it from this link - http://www.getswift.org/
Currently it is at version 0.1, it is very very alpha, in fact it is so alpha that you can't even click drop down boxes yet.
It's well worth checking out if you just want to see how Apple's WebKit engine runs on a PC, I've suffered no bad effects from installing it and trying it. Just don't expect to make it your primary browser for a little while.
For the adventurous of you out there, perhaps you could consider trying "Swift". It's a Windows browser that uses Apple's WebKit rendering engine, the same engine that runs Apple's internet stuff like Safari.
Get it from this link - http://www.getswift.org/
Currently it is at version 0.1, it is very very alpha, in fact it is so alpha that you can't even click drop down boxes yet.
It's well worth checking out if you just want to see how Apple's WebKit engine runs on a PC, I've suffered no bad effects from installing it and trying it. Just don't expect to make it your primary browser for a little while.
- JellyWarrior
- General Jelly
- Posts: 1203
- Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2002 1:17 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Extensions need to have their install files altered, so there are Flock versions of most extensions.Sir Savant wrote:I will try it with the extensions I have installed in Firefox. I wonder if the profiles are backwards compatible...
Profiles are not backwards compatable but you can import profiles from Firefox, so it's a non issue really.
-
- Somewhat Dumb Knight
- Posts: 3653
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Specially Cork
- Moderator
- Posts: 11632
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 10:01 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 8 times
-
- DCEmu Super Fan
- Posts: 2498
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 12:11 am
- Location: United States
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
How is Firefox "bloated"? That's ridiculous to call Firefox bloated. The only problem I have with it is that sometimes it doesn't work correctly with websites. Otherwise, it does everything I need. And it only takes up like 70 MB RAM or something like that, which isn't that much when you should probably be rocking at least 1 GB or more.
Very sexy hero, omg
-
- Somewhat Dumb Knight
- Posts: 3653
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:26 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Fiddler just likes to complain.Nick wrote:How is Firefox "bloated"? That's ridiculous to call Firefox bloated. The only problem I have with it is that sometimes it doesn't work correctly with websites. Otherwise, it does everything I need. And it only takes up like 70 MB RAM or something like that, which isn't that much when you should probably be rocking at least 1 GB or more.
-
- DCEmu User with No Life
- Posts: 3641
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 1:55 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
It's definitely bloated compared to browsers that avoid bloat as a major project goal, such as Dillo.Nick wrote:How is Firefox "bloated"? That's ridiculous to call Firefox bloated.
Not everybody replaces their computer every year, and even low-end systems sold today still have 256MB or 512MB. Web browsing is not Doom 3 or Oblivion, FFS. Outside of things like Flash and Java it's not really justifiable for the requirements to keep going up, and even with those it's questionable.Nick wrote:And it only takes up like 70 MB RAM or something like that, which isn't that much when you should probably be rocking at least 1 GB or more.
Last edited by Ex-Cyber on Sun Aug 13, 2006 6:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"You know, I have a great, wonderful, really original method of teaching antitrust law, and it kept 80 percent of the students awake. They learned things. It was fabulous." -- Justice Stephen Breyer
- MulletMan13
- DCEmu Ex-Mod
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 7:44 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
- GratefulDead
- Insane DCEmu
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:36 pm
- Location: Canada
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
- MulletMan13
- DCEmu Ex-Mod
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2001 7:44 pm
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
To be fair to the OP, FireFox on OSX isn't as great as it is on Windows... comparatively its one of the slower browsers. Modified versions of it running the Gekko engine are quicker, whereas Webkit based browsers are the quickest... its like a whole different world.
I use FF on Windows and Camino on OSX.
I use FF on Windows and Camino on OSX.
- AuroEdge
- DCEmu Mega Poster
- Posts: 1667
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: Anywhere
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
70MB for a browser is ridiculous. If I go to a flash intensive site such as Newgrounds, the RAM usage skyrockets. Not to mention the flash plugin for Firefox runs flash much slower than on IE. This is very noticeable on slower machines. I don't know if this can be avoided, but once you leave newgrounds no matter what sort of site you go to the RAM usage still stays high. On older machines you may as well just disable flash unless you absolutely need it for a specific site.