]]> http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/30/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-53 Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:38:55 +0000 http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/29/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-53 Brant: I see, so it’s rather pointed towards Mozilla. 🙂

Kronos: Yeah, but the titles were very similar which made me think so… 🙁

I would consider start-up times a good thing given that the experience of the browsing itself improves, optimization flags optimize the performance at the cost of file size. And Chrome is kind of a static light-weight browser by itself, Firefox loads more dynamic customization abilities (as mentioned by Lifehacker) which allows the UI to be greatly customized (even to the extent of changing it’s CSS code).

If you look further, Internet Explorer 9 is by far the fastest as it works more native and thus needs less to load, but it doesn’t allow for much configuration…

Perhaps I should do write an article that compares a lot of performance-related things between non-optimized and optimized versions of various browsers. Or write a whole browser comparison altogether, but I wonder if I have time for that…

http://superuser.com/questions/262293/how-to-build-firefox-from-4-0-source-and-optimize-it

What’s with “You love a new tab page that only shows 8 sites, while there is a higher chance your next tab is an app or a bookmark?” For a lot of users, their top 8 sites will be more frequently visited than all other sites combined. And how are bookmarks relevant? Chrome has a bookmarks bar too (which you can choose to have shown only on the new tab page, if you want).

However you want to turn the statement around, going to the new tab page is an extra click and you are limited in your choices. Frequently visited sites shouldn’t take an extra click (aiming for that + symbol or trying to reach CTRL+T), instead a better option is that you can easily perform that click straight on app tabs or on easy to reach bookmarks (just one CTRL+CLICK, awesome; or perhaps click on the + first and then the easier to reach bookmark?). We’re no longer in the age were you only visit 8 sites frequently, multiply that number by 5 and we’re in 2011. For those two reasons the new tab page is poorly designed…

]]> http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/30/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-51 Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:00:26 +0000 http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/29/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-51 Couple of things: First my tweet wasn’t an intention to say “we’re better than you” but rather was to throw a bone at Lifehacker for a bit more attention. Second, although some of these things may be “nitpicky” they are meaningful to others.

]]> http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/30/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-50 Wed, 30 Mar 2011 13:53:52 +0000 http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/29/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-50 Chrome doesn’t need NoScript, you can shut off scripts in the settings. You can even set up exceptions. There’s also an extension to sync tabs between computers.

@Tom Wijsman: What’s with “You love a new tab page that only shows 8 sites, while there is a higher chance your next tab is an app or a bookmark?” For a lot of users, their top 8 sites will be more frequently visited than all other sites combined. And how are bookmarks relevant? Chrome has a bookmarks bar too (which you can choose to have shown only on the new tab page, if you want).

I also agree that most of these nitpicks can be resolved using extensions or code changes, but as of today I couldn’t find any extensions that did so. If someone read this article, agreed with me, and decided to improve Firefox…well, that would be the best outcome I could hope for. 🙂

]]> http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/30/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-47 Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:35:53 +0000 http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/29/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-47 So… You’re making the assumption there are only minor complaints and differences? You’re complaining about extension support in a non-RTM version? You love a small difference in visual effects but you haven’t checked out grouping tabs? You love a new tab page that only shows 8 sites, while there is a higher chance your next tab is an app or a bookmark? You hate a small difference in an OS (which does have inconsistencies by itself) which can’t be fixed because the right size in most cases doesn’t fit your screen?

Only to then say “Hold on, it’s not all bad! Firefox 4 has some nice perks that really surprised me.” and “As I said in the beginning, I think both of these browsers are great.”, it leaves me clueless why you really switched or what this article really is about?

The only thing that matches your title is the extension sync, the other are trivial and small and can either be done by extensions (as you mention yourself) or small code changes.

Can we please write better articles instead of trying to do a silly attempt to match an article on Lifehacker?

http://twitter.com/SuperKronos/status/52917695867387904

In comparison with this article, they do come up with major differences so I don’t really see a point in comparing ourselves with them or even trying to write an article in the reverse direction…

http://lifehacker.com/#!5786804/why-ive-switched-from-chrome-to-firefox-4

]]> http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/30/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-45 Wed, 30 Mar 2011 10:54:26 +0000 http://blog.superuser.com/2011/03/29/why-i-switched-from-firefox-4-back-to-google-chrome/#comment-45 If you still download the ads, how would the ad network know you’re blocking them? 🙂

]]>