Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by DRE, May 29, 2013.
Been causing lots of caching issues lately.
I noticed that, too. And I'm on 21.0
There's only one solution to the browser question: Chrome.
No issues here, using 21.0
Except for those who prefer to use Firefox.
I've been very happy with Firefox lately (past year and a half) since they sorted out memory leaks and have zero issues with it whatsoever.
Previous to that I was pulling my hair out using it with it's memory usage/leak issues on a machine (6 years old at the time) with 1 gig of memory and trying to use photoshop at the time. Much much better nowadays though.
It's kind of sad what's happened to Firefox in the last few years (it used to be my browser of choice)... now it's the new IE... always needing to build custom CSS and things for Firefox bugs and just features/CSS that other browsers have but it lacks.
I hve yet to make a return to FF since i had to ditch it back then in favor of Chrome.. Personally glad FF was such a POS otherwise id never have bothered to download chrome.
If there was a full version of firebug for chrome I would switch in a heartbeat. I find Chrome significantly faster and the only reason I don't use it because of it's code inspector, I just can't get on with it whatsoever.
Could you be more specific? I haven't noticed any issues using Firefox 21.0 on my iMac.
I think it's mostly what you are used to. I used to not be able to do without Firebug. But ever since Google hired the lead Firebug developer to work on Chrome a couple years ago, the Chrome debugger has gotten tremendously better (and now it's much better than Firebug in my opinion). But really just comes down to what you are familiar with I think.
Yeah, I probably have to agree with you there and have to confess I tried the chrome inspector very briefly a couple of times and just gave up with it, probably not giving it a chance. Might persevere with it then for a week and force myself to explore further and hopefully I'll embrace it.
I've never needed to add any special code for Firefox.
I have had to add special code for Internet Explorer. Sometimes Chrome will surprise me and I'll need to add 1 or 2 edits for it, but Firefox has always used web standards.
Try Aurora or the Beta
I honestly do not know what happens to the final version. Seriously....
If you follow the development, you'll notice that both the Beta and Aurora seem rock solid, but whoever finalizes things in the final release must do something "odd" to which I and others are always puzzled about.
Chrome is a little bit of the same. Final version seems to eat more resources. And I never understood as to why. It's why I usually tell people to use Chrome beta.
I downloaded the Beta, thanks!
It seems nobody use Opera...
Browsers are like religions. People like what they like.
By a significant amount, or... ?
I run both builds side-by-side, on the same machine, at work, often for weeks on end, and I'd say resource usage has been pretty much the same across both in my experience. So, that's interesting.
Its one of those odd little things that you kind of wonder, why, but ya never exactly figure it out and simply come to just accept it.
I think its more noticeable in Firefox though. The Beta usually is more stable and doesn't have the issues that the final version seems to "mysteriously" adapts. And Aurora feels more like a beta than an alpha.
Chrome does the same thing. They'll push out the final version and people will complain about something (there are a few things on XenForo about general Chrome issue) and the first thing I tell them is switch to the Beta. And usually, the problem suddenly is gone.
I do, but Opera in the past had page rendering issues. It started to remind me of Internet Explorer. Things would load fine in Firefox, Chrome, and Safari, but Chrome would go all crazy.
I think they're past that now, but I'm still a little worry about using it.
This maybe a good read for you....
Yeah, I've seen a few of those posts on here, as well as our tracker and the product forums. Most of the time, it's not anything unique to Chrome, but the person's system (or 9 times out of 10, extensions). What does strike me as odd though, is that people would find Beta more resilient and as having a smaller footprint. Granted fixes and improvements do make it into the Beta channel first, but more often than not the two builds are practically identical. One thing it could be attributed to, I suppose, is if the improvements favor a setup we've been previously weaker in.
I'm curious now, though. I'll have to bug some co-workers tomorrow and see if my experience is more unique than I thought.
Separate names with a comma.