>2016 >Freetards still use this slow pile of shit called

>>56689603
thunderbird is a piece of shit too. I just sent an email and it send the damn thing twice for some reason.

>>56689603
holy fuck do you have parkinsons?

>>56689725
I was constantly moving my mouse because freetards claimed chrome would freeze your PC.

>>56689725

No he's not your mom's twin

invalid, didn't clear caches before starting each test

>>56689796
he did

>>56689796
low quality bait

>>56689603
W H O R E S
H
O
R
E
S

>aka dubai porta potties

>>56689826
>>56689829
those don't clear DNS cache

speed is the only point towards chrom(e|ium)
it sucks in every other way, which is a shame

and why bring up freetards? chromium is FOSS

>>56689603
>implying some of us don't use chromium

>>56689894
>speed is the only point towards chrom(e|ium)
You act like it's not a huge point. Firefox is probably one of the least optimized pieces of software around. It runs like straight garbage.

>>56689915
it'd probably a bigger concern if my internet connection wasn't shit

>>56689603

>there are people opening shit loads of tabs without using tree-style tabs

That's all I took away from that webm. If you're going to be a tab whore you should at least do it right.

>>56689865
does that matter when comparing two browsers on the same computer?

Chrome is shit... couldn't download a simple iso file properly. Worked fine with Internet Explorer

>>56689940
firefox at least has its own DNS cache, separate from the system

>>56689941
>Has an issue nobody else has
>bhurdur chrome is shit

>>56689603
You could try setting increasing some connections options for firefox in about:config

network.http.max-connections = 512
network.http.max-connections-per-server = 256
network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server = 32

>>56689941
>wget
>curl -O

>>56689960
shut the fuck up you retard. firefox isn't optimized for multiprocessing. stop annoying us with your excuses you turbofaggot.

>>56689982

you seemed triggered. Is it because you're a wincuck fag or because other people think chrome is shit

>>56689982
>oh, i didn't know that, lets just attack him with something unrelated to shift the subject
are you a woman?

File: bandicam 2016-04-22 14-54-32-9952.webm (657KB, 726x420px) Image search: [Google]

657KB, 726x420px

>fast chrome
nice meme

>>56689937
tree view is shitty in firefox, much better in chrome.

File: sjwpepe.png (128KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 550x550px

>>56689603
>been using Firefox since 2005-2006
>been avid user
>put up with Mozilla's bullshit
>gets worse as updates roll-on
>tried Pale Moon, meh
>tried Waterfox, yuck
>Wouldn't mind so much if there was a decent adblocker
>switched to chrome
>only plus is speed
>part of botnet and hate what google stand for

Kill me, /g/

;_;

>>56690023
I don't know what's worse, if you are russian, using Opera, Pale Moon or shit bandicam to make a fucking webm.
It's like those car crashes where the car stars tumbling around and hitting shit and after taking out three pedestrians it hits a petshop full of puppies. Well you know what I'm talking about don't you? Every one drives like a retard in Russia.

>>56689603
Midori is faster

>>56690045
Make your own browser.
Fork an old client of Firefox and merge only changes you like.

>>56690097
if it doesn't kill the computer or hang. Also it's barebones.

Firefox Nightly 64bits works just fine for me

>>56690090
>Every one drives like a retard in Russia.
What's that have to do with slow chrome based browser?

>>56689603
>middle age role playing

Middle age guy here, and all the other middle age people I know are chrome users. None of us like Firefox at all and most middle age people get a little excited when we Google something and that little pop up appears telling us that Google has a browser of its own for browsing the web faster.

>>56690097
Midori is shit and slow as well.

>>56690045
try opera, it's basically chrome anyway

>>56689658
Thunderbird is one of the better usenet clients out there.

>>56690158
Objectively faster than any browser I ever tried

Works On My Machine™

>>56690237
Its slower than Chrome to me.

>>56690245
Probably a windows problem

>>56689603

Runs fine on a mac - miles better than safari.

Chrome is a botnet - no other options really.

>>56690269
I don't use Window or Mac.

>>56690223
Other than the 'get email address' pop-up offer thing [which you can disable in about:config.] Thunderbird has only gotten better. I think Mozilla's main objective should be not reinventing the internet or lead 'innovations', but to make a power-user browser -- like Firefox once was. Just my 0.02 cents, since Thunderbird is pretty gud. If they can make a good email/news client, then why the Hell can't they make an internet browser -- worthy of the glory days?

>>56690045
Chromium

File: a2043666294_10.jpg (183KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 1000x1000px

>>56689725
It's this same Germcuck faggot who is happy to surrender his soul to a warped society-wrecking megacorp that makes the dystopian nightmares of the 80s look like a Care Bears marathon. Grinning like a pig in shit because his Intel Inside™ app-ready mobile gaming desktop kumpyooter can go super duper fast like a hot wheels with racing stripes

No one is warning you against Chrome because of its performance you submental faggot

If he was beaten with a tire iron I wouldn't piss to put the fire out. Everything that's wrong with this rotten world.

>>56690316
>If they can make a good email/news client, then why the Hell can't they make an internet browser -- worthy of the glory days?
Because the Mozilla admins hate Thunderbird and want it to not be a part of Mozilla anymore. If you got Thunderbird and SeaMonkey developers working on Firefox, it'd be good again.

>>56690293
You run Chrome on Linux?

>>56690045

brave anon. brave

Im using Firefox because Google Chrome eats my RAM alive on my poor laptop
(stream x360 if anyone actually was wondering)

>>56690045
ungoogled-chromium

>>56690223
>>56689658
>>56690316
Thunderbird works just fine for me as well. Been using it for ages. also as RSS-Reader

>>56690367
Yes, only 2-3 tabs. I mainly use Chromium.

I know a couple of things that might help!

1. Stop being a weird German loser piece of shit that stalks instagram sluts
2. Install an OS that isn't a Fisher-Price toy
3. Use that
4. Run with your browser profile in memory

File: krusty.jpg (15KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 480x360px

Where the fucking windows binaries/builds for chromium... i search on jewgle and came up with a randy site

>http://chromium.woolyss.com/

seems like pajeet scam is this legit?

>>56690445
That IS the site. What says "pajeet scam" about it?

>>56690455
i dunno you'd expect

>https://www.chromium.org/

to have win dl links... but they go to chrome -- what the fuck man they should have actual win builds on their official site not shill to google w/e

>>56690445
a lot of people use woolyss, but here's the "official" site to download the latest build

https://download-chromium.appspot.com/

chromium.org link's to it here

https://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/download-chromium

>>56690491
Chromium was never meant for normal use.

>>56690355
And here I was thinking most Germans were slightly more privacy conscious and more wary of Google than the rest of us.

>>56690445
you can also get it here

https://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/chromium-browser-continuous/index.html

does chromium include all that google bloat as well? will it spy on you make the join the botnet?

How can browsers even have varying speeds downloading a page?

>>56690562
Yes.
Chromium is only missing pdf and flash.

It can't even play 1080p 60fps youtube videos, no reason using Firefox.

>>56690580
Chromium comes with both of those actually

>>56690584
>playing videos in your browser

>>56690580
>>56690602

wut? wait so it DOES include the spying and botnet features that come with chrome? are you trolling? what is the point then?

fuck man

>>56690564
time = download + render
>download
parallel connections
>render
measure of shit software

>>56690608
>what is the point
open source code, so you can audit before install

you can't make chrome pretty, therefore it is a shit browser i will not use.

>>56689923
Lol this pretty much me. If you don't have top tier internet Firefox is better in almost every way.

>>56690634
Also my ocd doesnt let me open more than 10 or so tabs.

>>56689603
S E R V O
E
R
V
O

>>56690645
i usually have well over 100 open, which is an even bigger issue i have with chrome
its tab bar is useless with tons of tabs, as they just bunch together, after a certain point they just stop updating altogether and go offscreen, the bar never scrolls, so they're only accessible via ctrl[+shift]+tab
url bar doesn't suggest open tabs
tabs can't be set to load upon view

basically, poor tabs are the primary reason why i don't consider using chromium, then there's the poorer choices in addons, the far poorer customizability (technically, not sure about visually, though others suggest it's poor there as well)

>>56690744
-- oh yea, then there's the stability
while it doesn't crash often, it has a few times on me, and sometimes when it does, it may nuke my profile, or load some of the tabs back in twice, making a huge mess

i have chromium installed, but due to its limiations, i only use it for things that really benefit from the speed advantage, such as locally-run programs with web frontends

>install chromium in openSUSE
>every single webpage, even offline and setting pages, is "oops! Something went wrong!"
>can't even send the error because "oops something went wrong"
Lincucks WILL defend this.

>>56690854
Run from terminal.

>>56690907
Lol I tried that.

>>56690606
>>>56690584
>>playing videos in your browser
Not that anon, but enlighten me please

>>56690992
i have a context menu item that launches mpv with the selected page or link
mpv + youtube-dl can play videos from most websites, and i get all the benefits that come from using a desktop player (higher quality, faster playback, my preferred defaults and input controls, display-sync and automatic refresh rate switching, etc, etc)

>>56691035
Interesting. Does the video need to be entirely downloaded to be played in mpv ?

If I was solely interested in speed, I would have no issues using Chromium. It's a relatively comfy browser. I use Firefox primarly because of Tree Style Tabs, which has no proper equivalent on Chromium. It has nothing to do with freedom either, because Chromium is also free

>>56690491
Use chocolatey to install it.

>>56691097
no, it will stream
(another advantage is that you can control the cache/buffering parameters as well)

>>56689603
>benutzt Mikroweich Windaugen
>hat sein Betriebssystem auf deutsch eingestellt
>benutzt Windaugen Notizblock / Befehlseingabeaufforderung
>beschwert sich über freie Weichware, obwohl er Donnervogel, Kauderwelsch, OffenesRundfunkStudio und WahreGruft benutzt
>zittert vor Begeisterung über diesen Scheiße Beitrag
>benutzt Instagram
>benutzt krebserregende Gefühlssymbolgesichter
>stellt Aufmerksamkeitshuren im weltweiten Netz nach
>ist wahrscheinlich ein kantiges, pubertäres Kind

>>56690097
Epiphany is even faster, I shit you not. I wish it had userscripts, then it would be perfect.

firecucks btfo

>>56690045
>Implying there's no decent adblocker for firefox
kys

>>56689603
we all know Chrome is 100x faster. so?

>>56690043
I highly doubt that. What addon does what TreeStyleTabs can do on chrome, and how is it better?

>>56689603
Who cares? All current browsers are shit anyway.

File: Untitled.png (10KB, 672x71px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 672x71px

>>56690608
not if you download this one:
http://chromium.woolyss.com/

>>56689603
They're both shit. As is your retarded test. Simultaneously opening 30 pages is something I do once every decade, and the speed of it has no bearing on the speed of loading a single page.

File: ffaddons2016.png (328KB, 1188x1864px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 1188x1864px

>>56689603
because of pic related

>>56695024
looks like your browser has cancer

nice OP. can you do Brave browser next?

>>56689741
>freetard

>>56691109
This, tree style tabs is GOAT and the only reason I still put up with firefox. Vivaldi has vertical tabs which is almost just as good, but I get this annoying bug where I'm scrolling down a page and sometimes it randomly decides to scroll to the bottom by itself.

I use both, one for personal use and another one for work.

File: FF so bad.webm (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

Shit gets even better. Firefox runs slower under Linux. Bahahahahahahahaha, Firefucks btfo.

>>56696647
DO BRAVE vs. FF vs CHROME next on windows, faggot

in fact you should be adding brave to all of these, since everyone says its the fastest of all

>>56689603
>that autistic mouse movement
what the fuck is wrong with you

>>56696725
I've explained it here you moron >>56689741

>>56696790
>implying I will read through your 13 hours old thread
moron

>>56696666
Do it yourself.

>>56696797
>Implying you havent wasted 2/3 of your life because you have been using Firefox.

>>56689603
Who needs 47 tabs at once? Like holy shit, I'm supposed to care that Chrome performs better under some unrealistic stress test? Firefox works just fine in actual day to day usage.

>>56696819
>my browser doesn't start with about:blank and I only open one link at a time
What do I need to open 50 links for at the same time again?

File: CskuOQFWEAA1QtI.jpg large.jpg (166KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1080x1080px

>>56690387
can you spoonfeed me on this ?

>>56696647
Can you do this with edge and opera ?

>>56696804
how?

First of all you're a retard for testing 30 tabs of the same bloody website, so far you've proven than 30 tabs of Instagram open faster, not 30 tabs in general.

Have you ever tried to save and load sessions in Chrome? Firefox will open tabs based on which ones are in focus rather than trying to load it all at once when the browser starts, I often leave open hundreds of tabs and reopen the browser after shutting down and I'd rather not have everything loaded at once.

But the main reason I use Firefox is for the extensions, there are few that have no replacement on Chrome, to list a few: Context menu image saver and New Private Tab (impossible to do in Chrome). Having private tabs is really useful for dev work that requires several profiles and the image saver is te only way I can organise my memes effectively. There are great extensions in FF that simply do not exist in Chrome.

>>56689603
Your webm literally proves why I still use Firefox over Chrome, because Chrome just clumps up all the tabs which makes them impossible to read and navigate.

File: FFvsCh.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>muh this is not a real world test, nobody opens 40 insta tabs
ok here 11 news sites.. FF still twice as slow as Chrome. FF is worse than I expected. Shittiest software ever

File: firefox-1.5.png (59KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 640x480px

>not leaving ff after it went crap even before the whole SJW shit was a thing.
>pic related, last good (looking) version
>inb4 someone mentions window decorations

On Android I use firefox because I can enable an option that automatically clears all browsing data when quitting

>>56690045

USE SERVO!

File: lol.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>56697090
>First of all you're a retard for testing 30 tabs of the same bloody website, so far you've proven than 30 tabs of Instagram open faster, not 30 tabs in general.
Thank you. You just helped me proving that Firefox is even worse than I've already proven. This happens when you open 30 random Tabs with Firefox. Firefox isn't even shit anymore, it's utter garbage.

>>56697429
If speed is the one defining factor you use to benchmark browsers and validate their worth as software why are you not using Edge with no extensions?

Why would you want FEATURES when Edge is FASTER? Oh right yeah, because speed is not the only thing that matters you fucking retard.

>>56697938
Uhm.. I would rather use Edge than Firefox because Firefox is slow garbage. But why would I use Edge over Chromium? It's one thing if a browser is 10 or 20% slower but Firefox is like 400% slower HAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

Stop bumping this shitty thread

>>56696882
https://github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium/releases/tag/53.0.2785.116-1.1

>>56698028
no. your shit furry browser and compromised organization need to go extinct.

>>56698028
>mad Firecuck realizes he wasted 2/3 of his life by using Firefox.

Only people too deep in to the freetard meme actually use Firefox and that is only to kill time because nothing else on their machines works right.

Chrome doesn't fully support color management. Firefox also renders fonts better.
https://dev.chromium.org/developers/linux-technical-faq

Wouldn't you prefer color/gamma accurate rendering and the best font rendering your system can provide over minor speed differences? Not to mention the privacy implications of a web browser made by Google.

>>56698134
The funny thing is how they've been trying to find excuses. First they claimed my machine would be shit even though I have a quite powerful rig (even if it was a bad rig, Chrome would still faster). Then they claimed it would be Windows, so I ran FF on Arch which made FF look even worse. Then they claimed only opening insta & 40 tabs is too far from reality, so I opened 11 random news pages which made FF look even worse again (thanks for that).

>>56698231
Look at this moron.
>Chrome doesn't fully support color management.
lel >>>/wg/
>Firefox also renders fonts better.
That's an opinion, not a fact.
>Not to mention the privacy implications of a web browser made by Google.
Ungoogled Chromium

Even if both things were true, only a complete idiot who has suffered from dementia for 10 years would still use Firefox even though it's 3-4x slower than Chromium

I can't deny it. This thread has proven that Chrome is considerably faster at opening multiple tabs at once.

Shame it's something I never do.

Faggots have always been on about how fast chrome was vs. firefox.
Any benchmarks they ever saw was without adblock plus. The chrome extension slowed chrome to a shitstain. If you ever used a slow computer it became noticably slower than firefox. But the suggestible little retards always just let that benchmark they saw convince them it was faster.
Admittedly, ublock doesn't hit chrome like adblock plus did.
Still goes to show you how stupid fanbois are.

>>56698308
>Any benchmarks they ever saw was without adblock plus.
hahahahahahahaha and here comes the next excuse.. you weall want me to do the same shit with adblock? I can guarantee you it will produce the same, if not even worse result.

>Still goes to show you how stupid fanbois are.
this is literally bait

>>56690584
What the fuck are you on about? I play 4k 60 fps 360 degrees videos just fine. Without Flash.

>>56698308
>Any benchmarks they ever saw was without adblock plus.
>If you ever used a slow computer it became noticably slower than firefox.
I will prove you wrong in both points

>>56692740

name a single one

>>56698411
Our lord and saviour, uBlock Origin.

>>56698422

ublock origin keeps playing dishonored ads for me

>>56698269

So you're arguing there's no difference in rendering, and that rendering web pages doesn't matter in a web browser?

Great post desu senpai.

DELETE THIS!!!

Is this a fresh install? Also, does your ISP support IPv6?

File: FFvsChr with uBlock.webm (3MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x720px

>>56698308
>Any benchmarks they ever saw was without adblock plus. The chrome extension slowed chrome to a shitstain.
Here with uBlock.. same shit. FF still slow as fuck.
>>56698626
Yes and yes. Even tested on a fresh Arch setup >>56696647

>>56698672
Then it is just Firefox being slow. You can tweak around about:config probably but it is retarded that they are not defaults.

>>56698672
And since you're on it and you have embraced the botnet test other browsers as Opera and Vivaldi.

>>56698672
test brave browser faggot or export your tab list so i can do it

File: FFvsChr on bad machine.webm (3MB, 852x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 852x480px

>>56698308
>If you ever used a slow computer it became noticably slower than firefox. But the suggestible little retards always just let that benchmark they saw convince them it was faster.
AAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAH.. look here I did the test on a 2core/2thread and 2GB RAM crippled Xubuntu machine. Holy fucking shit this is cracking me up

>Firefox runs better on bad machine
I swear to god this is the biggest meme ever created

*sry for bad quality but Crapfox made this video so long.. compressing this to 3MB is tricky

>>56698756
Can do.. now that I've literally humiliated FF

>>56699146
You humiliated Fx? You couldn't even come up with a coherent rebuttal and stopped replying to me completely.

I don't get why people in this thread are so desperate to deny these webms. Firefox is a bloated browser based on an ancient codebase that's only just starting to dabble with multithreading. The reasons for using FF have never involved speed but instead the ability to configure things exactly how you like with about:config and addons. As well as dislike of Chrome and freetardism.

>>56697935
DELET THIS YOU MOTHERFUCKER!!!

FIREFOX IS SLOWER BEACUSE OF NO BOTNET

>>56699215

Because the webms are hardly conclusive?

http://www.arewefastyet.com/

>>56689603
Why do you have so many tabs open, baka...

>>56699335
Javascript performance is irrelevant.

>>56690181
Opera sucks since they changed it into a chrome clone.

>>56689603
Firefox is fine. It's not like the sluggish, RAM eating chrome wannabe shitfest it used to be. I'd say it's even better than chrome right now.

>>56699409
>RAM eating chrome wannabe shitfest it used to be.ayy lmao >>56699146

>>56699409
IE still the best browser though

>>56699426
Works fine on my machine. Then again, I don't have that many addons except an adblocker and a youtube theme.

>>56689603
What software did you use to add those counters?

>>56689859
kek

it saddens me that most girls these days are or want to be like the ones on OP's vid

fucking basic hoes man

>>56699444
Most girls want to be popular, and the best way to be popular is to act slutty and make the opposite gender crave you.

>>56696647
>Bahahahahahahahaha
what do you normalfags even do on /g/

>>56699434
I used no addons in this test. It was 2 core / 2GB RAM crippled machine. Don't ever tell me about Firefox being better on bad machines. Chrome's positive speed difference is even bigger on bad machines than on strong rigs.

>>56699463
>Most girls want to be popular

whyyyyy

>>56699481
I'm using firefox on a netbook and it's reasonably fast. I'm not gonna claim it's the fastest I've ever used, but it's nowhere near as slow as it shows in your tests. Either you have a really shit PC or you modified the firefox in your tests, because the firefox on my netbook is nowhere near as slow as yours.

>>56689603
Can you put the links to those Instagrams in a pastebin/hastebin?

If not, how do you find out about all these accounts?

>>56699496
Because human beings are social creatures. We become depressed, start to develop issues and can't function very well if we isolate ourselves from society. We need to talk to each other, it's healthy for both your brain and your self esteem.

File: Vivaldi vs Opera vs Chromium.webm (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

Holy shit Vivaldi

>>56699481
Chrome's process model definitely uses more memory though.

>>56699527
>human beings are social creatures

normies, maybe

>>56699527
but why they can't have a couple of real friends and be happy? why they need to show themselves to millions and millions of people they'll never meet?

That's BS, man

>>56689603
You seem to be lost. Also, did someone using Firefox rape you?

>>56699538
>no brave browser test

>>56699620
Why the fuck do you care?

>>56699635
wtf why would I even test this fucking meme

>>56699538
Was this with Opera 40? Could you try Opera beta?

>>56699661
because its supposedly the fastest and made by brendan eich. why would you test vivaldi? that shit isnt even a fucking meme.

>>56699656
i care because that behaviour fucks with their minds, most girls will look at this and do the same thing. And that will generate even more shallow attention whores.

>>56699692
>because its supposedly the fastest
source?!

>>56699711
well that's their problem

>>56690445
idiot took me 5 secs to find chromium and then probably 10min to configure the APIs how long will it take you since you cant even find the fucking website ! hahahahaha

>>56699720
http://www.networkworld.com/article/3030134/microsoft-subnet/benchmark-tests-brave-browser-ad-blocker-chrome-firefox-ie-11.html

And this was more than 6 months ago. Test it faggot.

>>56699728
And yours. And mine. You don't want to meet a nice girl that won't take her phone out every ten fucking seconds to take a picture of herself? or the food she is going to eat? Or whatever bullshit "coffee" she is buying from starbucks?

>>56699720
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=brave+browser+speed+test

>>56699765
nope. man.. this browser doesn't even have extensions.

>>56699769
That's what dates are for

>>56699765
Brave is extremely fast but it's also extremely thin. It's basically just a node wrapper.

>>56699798
>>56699786
It's still in beta, it hasn't even reached version 1.0 yet. It's the only browser that might make me drop Opera.

>>56699538
do midori pls if you're still there

>chrome doesn't have self-destructing cookies addon

I wonder why

>>56699965
>allows cookies
>uses meme cookie cleaner

Must be some kind of conspiracy, big data trying to steal all your personal information so they can make money on you and send the FBI to your house to spy on you and bug your phone line. Definitely not you being a retarded tinfoil autist at all.

>>56699965
because nobody has made one for it yet?

>>56699965
probably because COOKIES ARE USED EVERYWHERE AND BASICALLY NECESSARY TO USE ANY OF GOOGLE'S GREAT FEATURES

>>56699965
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tab-cookies/iahecghojagkcoehfhfknajofkokndjm?utm_source=chrome-app-launcher-info-dialog
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/umatrix/ogfcmafjalglgifnmanfmnieipoejdcf?hl=de

>>56699965
it has:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tab-cookies/iahecghojagkcoehfhfknajofkokndjm

to be honest, only thing stopping me from switching to chrome is missing tree style tab-addon (which is essential for me), some minor tweaks (changing of menu-entries, size/height of tabs) and all the work of porting my bookmarks/tweaks and searching for the equivalent addons for chrome.
have done the research about a year ago or so, when ff announced to have the advertisement tiles, however tree style tabs was a dead end as far as i remember, anyone knows if there is a tree style tab equivalent for chromium now?

all browsers suck

firefox was good 10 years ago, now it's just garbage

>>56700075
oh and also the fact its from google, and i had to rely on a 3rd party provider for a google "clean" version which probably doesnt receive security updates, may have compatibility problems, etc.

File: Brave_2016-09-20_15-41-22.png (14KB, 577x200px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 577x200px

>>56699786
yes it does, just no page to browse for them to install them yet

>>56700111
oh, another thing which sucks @chrome is the keepass addon, keefox just works excellent and both chrome addons for keepass integration were really annoying/didnt work as they should.

Mind showing your task manager so we can see how Chrome processes use so much memory that they are purposefully split into 5-6 variations of the same process to mask that?

>>56700164
yea but what's your fucking point? At this moment, I'd use any browser over Firefox because Firefox is literally 2-4x slower than other browsers.

So in conclusion. I should install Vivaldi because it's the fastest one, correct?

>>56700212
I don't see how that's fucking relevant? On a 2core/2GB machine Chromium still RAPED Firefox >>56699146 .. I wouldn't care if Chromium used 1500 MB.

>>56700225
It's not only the fastest one, it's also the most custonmizable.

>>56700213
integration and convenience is more important for me than having a page loading quicker (even if its 2-4 times).
i dont deny that chrome is alot faster, more stable and responds faster than firefox (im using ff, chromium, opera and tried vivaldi), however i'll keep firefox as my main browser as long as chrome is missing imo essential addons/functionality.

The thing that worries me about Vivaldi is security, same as with other browsers based on other browsers.

Do they have a proper team? Do they keep up with security updates from Chromium? How long does it take security release to trickle down if at all?

At least it cant be as shitty at security as Firefox, Vivaldi hasn't been banned from Pwn2Own yet for being too easy to hack like FF.

>>56700264
oh and dont mind the stability, my firefox hasnt crashed for me for few months now, so they seem to have fixed that. (still faster/responds quicker though)

>>56689603
pls dump instagram links

>>56700237
The shit you show in that webm is so fucking retarded lmao

Firefox works by actually loading all your tabs, while the tabs aren't really loaded in Chrome, and you must click on them to trigger their load. Another thing, Chrome tends to overeat SO MUCH ram that it will quite literally close your idle tabs and revert them to a cached state, where it reloads after your click on it again. Firefox doesn't have a process that kills idle tabs, because it doesn't need one - it doesn't use so much fucking ram to go over such lengths to minimize its usage.

And even when you consider that function of Chrome to reduce ram usage, it STILL uses way too much. It's that bad lmao

>>56700372
>Firefox works by actually loading all your tabs, while the tabs aren't really loaded in Chrome

Actually that's what Firefox does unless you go out of your way to change that default.

>>56689603
>OP is advertising malware (chrome)
Please, stop.

File: 1449549358800.jpg (74KB, 430x653px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 430x653px

>instrangran of dumb whores
>non-ironically emojis
>1920x1080 webm for literally no reason
>webm starts deteriorating after the first half

weird... I feel nothing
not rage... not even cold hatred
nothing

File: Untitled1w.png (13KB, 497x247px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 497x247px

>>56700372
Here's my Opera with 5 tabs open on my 4 year old toaster laptop

>>56700372
That's not how it works you fucking muslim in denial. You're talking about "browser.sessionstore.restore_on_demand".. but that only applies when restoring a session. If you open multiple tabs, firefox loads them whether you opened them or not.

Holy fucking shit, you firecucks are literally like muslims. I've proven multiple times that Chromium is BY FAR superior perormance wise.. and all you niggers have in response is "CHROME HARAM CHROME HARAM".. even though chromium is fucking open source.

>>56700457
>Weebfag
Opinion dropped

>>56700485

>even though chromium is fucking open source.
So who has audited the code then?

You seem to be missing all the points Firefox users are making.
Why do you care if people want to use a more customizable browser? You probably use an OS with a DE so you probably don't care just solely about performance.

>>56689603

i stopped using firefox along time ago. It's fucking bloatware. it uses up all of your computer's ram and shit

>>56700640

mpc is bloatware as well. slow piece of shit media player

>>56700671

i feel sorry for anyone who is not using mpv. vlc might be shit but i would use over bloatware mpc

File: 1473662692709.jpg (55KB, 957x621px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 957x621px

>>56700693
>>56700671
holy shilling

>>56689603
>Instagram
Blocks javascript, stupid normie.

>>56700725
mpv is lit tho senpai

File: 1474402090294.png (9KB, 497x247px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 497x247px

>>56700483
Hi, Tommy!

>>56700372
too bad youre afraid to do brave which is open source with no google botnet

>>56700834
I'm not afraid I'm literally too lazy. Do it by your fucking self you moron. What's so difficult about scraping together 30 links, screencapture and render them to a webm?

>>56700834
Besides .. I've tested it and it's only faster than Opera.. but not faster than Chromium or Vivaldi.. you're some kind of fucking BTC shill or something

>>56700863
>too lazy to do brave
>not too lazy to do vivaldi and opera literal LUL browsers that no one takes seriously

>>56698422
>úhide

the browser that comes with windows 10 is pretty light-weight and fast. unfortunately it might have spy features which is why i don't use it.

>>56700878
I don't see how Opera and Vivaldi are "LUL" browsers. They are both fully functional browers and above all they have left their beta phase. Just open the preferences of Brave and tell me about "LUL" again.. Settings are more limited than any Apple Software I've ever seen. Stop shilling your BTC browser.. gtfo >>>/biz/catalog

File: Capture.png (20KB, 487x332px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 487x332px

what do these google background processes mean? are they using up all my ram(even more than fixfore)?

>>56701030

firefox*

fixfore lol that's some dyslexia shit right there

>>56701030
It's process per tab.. so your browser doesn't end up being as fucking slow as Firefox. Firefox has been working on implementin this for years but still hasn't managed to do this and they probably never will.

>>56689603
can i hab the pussi b055??

give pastebin pls

>>56701069
You can do the same thing right now in Fx.

>>56689603
Can someone compare the RAM usage between FF and Chrome?

>>56701346
Do you people suffer from claustrophobia or something? Let's just say Chrome used twice as much RAM as Firefox, so what? Nobody has less than 4GB of RAM nowadays. People think Chrome uses too much RAM but it's actually the other way round.. FF doesn't use enough RAM and that's why it's so fucking slow. If Firefox was 20-30% slower.. ok.. but it's literally 3-4x slower. It's like throtting down a CPU and saying "Lol my CPU is cooler than yours".. and as soon as Firefox implements process per tab, it's gonna use just much RAM as chrome, if not even more..

>>56701423
What if I told you that a lot of people still use 4GB of RAM.
Also, let's say that you're working on other stuff besides browsing the net, that also require a certain amount of memory.

>>56701423
Dude give FF some credit, for like 10 years it had wicked sick memory leaks and used loads of ram.

>>56701469
Nobody working on anything serious has just 4GB of ram in 2016 unless they are poor as fuck, in which case don't open 40 tabs in any browser.

>>56701423
>Do you people suffer from claustrophobia or something? Let's just say Chrome used twice as much RAM as Firefox, so what?

It doesn't use twice as much. It uses 100% more PER TAB. Each tab of chrome is a separate instance of the Chrome process running in its own memory space. You've got copy after copy of the browser core sitting in your RAM for no reason except to make lookups and context switching *slightly* faster.

>>56701518
This is complete bullshit.

>>56701540
Run firefox. Run chrome. Open 10 tabs in each.

You have ONE firefox process in your task manager.. You have 10 chrome processes.

Evidence, bitch

>>56689603
>RAM
no thanks you fucking faggot
>using half the power resources for one fucking page and twice as much for 2
>firefox using hardly ny extra resources for multiple tabs

>>56701518
>It doesn't use twice as much. It uses 100% more
Are you a math professor by any chance?

>>56701153
Splits things into 2 processes. It's not nearly on the same level.

>>56701604
>Are you a math professor by any chance?
No, just a TA.

Does it really show?

I meant to make the distinction between adding 100% and doubling because it starts to matter after the 2nd item.

>Start with 100GB ram (conservative estimate for chrome)
>Open tab, you're at 200GB (+100%)
>Open tab, you're at 300GB (+100%)

rather than
>Open tab, you're at 200GB (x2)
>Open tab, you're at 400Gb (x2)

O P E R A
P
E
R
A

>>56701423
If you leave Chrome running on a JavaScript heavy site like cryptowat.ch for hours and hours then it's memory usage will grow and grow. If you have multiple tabs at a site like that open then the total memory usage grows rather fast because each tab is it's own process.

Yes, more than 4GB is common these days. That is no excuse for a browser using up 32GB of memory after running with 5 tabs with a JavaScript-intensive site for a few days.

>>56701605
Check dom.ipc.processCount

kek this thread..

Firefucks being in denial

>>56701645
chinese botnet < google botnet

>>56701663
that's not process per tab you fucking moron.

>>56701713
multiple content processes == new process for new tabs

stay mad

>>56695024
this should be the auto reply to all the rampant firefox threads currently

>>56697883
>servo
cannot even use 4chan

File: 123074259437.jpg (112KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1024x576px

>chrome 3x faster
>zero features or addons
Why do we have to pick between a browser that's fast and one that has features?

>>56700213
it's not a problem if you don't rely on addons obviously, but stuff like tree-style tabs, tab seesion managers, a good vim addon, stylish/freasemonkey and configurability in general can be a big deal

>>56689658
Happens to me all the time in tb, very annoying.

Can someone explain to me how can an opensource project (chromium) be considered botnet? Wouldn't it be like a huge controversy if it had some suspicious code?

>>56698435
Update your filters? Block the element? Submit a bug report? Any ads that get through usually are killed by filter updates.

>>56689603
Clearly Instagrams fault. Why are you people using websites that use javascript? Seriously?

I've started using Vivaldi recently and I really like it.
The customizability is really great and it's just nice to use in general.

My only problems with it is that you can't drag tabs out as a new window and webms just don't seem to work at all, though I think that may be on my side because I can't find mention of it anywhere else

>>56696835
This. Plus some really tasty add-ons that no other browsers have, that few people use, but that I have come to use heavily enough to regard as necessary every time I'm working from a desktop.

Just werks on my machine

>>56702811

Because it's an insane amount of code to audit and changes daily

>>56700225
There's more to it than that, but I've been using it for months now and I have no complaints. It's like a Chrome with less Google in it and more customizability.