Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Safari vs Chrome?
- Thread starter iMas70
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'll give that a try then. There's no memory leak with Ghostery then?
What's everybody complaining about then, just switch to that!
Ghostery may cause safari to crash, at least that was the case for some several months back. i use it in Chromium.
That explains it. I think I might just leave adblock on then. It seems most memory leak issues are on Lion and not Mountain Lion.
Not your browser stand alone, but having more 32-bit apps (there are still too many today) will make your computer slow as hell. These 32-bit apps will be competing over the 2gb RAM available to them. So my point is, if I can skip any 32bit app in favor of a comparable 64bit app, I will.
Do you know the definition of debate or reason? Observations do not have reasons. Observations are your perceptions and your experiences of a certain event or events in your life. Reason is applying logic to establish or justify a fact. Facts are either right or wrong. Observations have no distinction between right or wrong. Your premise is that Flash is better on Chrome and therefore you conclude that Chrome is a better browser than Safari. This is flawed logic because Adobe makes the Flash plugin. Not Apple or Google. In Chrome, Flash is just already included versus other browsers (Safari, Firefox) requiring a separate install for Flash. Given that the underlying rendering engine of Chrome and Safari is relatively similar (Webkit and forked Webkit respectively) and the Flash plugin too, I highly doubt your observations have any factual merit. Simply put, your reasons for why Chrome is better than Safari is baseless.
There are valid reasons why either is better than the other. Better plugins for one, GUI preferences, OS integration, etc. But performance isn't.
----------
This is correct, although I will clarify that all 32-bit applications share 2GB for the kernel but have 2GB to use themselves. So total, a single 32-bit app has access to a maximum of 4GB of RAM.
I like Chrome's UI, even though it's not very Mac-like. It's fast and supports more HTML5 than Safari or Firefox. The deal breaker for me is it's 32bit and doesn't support Java.
That being said, Right now I always end up back on Safari. Aside from it's obvious hooks into OS X, better gesture support, and better resource management, my own testing has it beating Chrome and Firefox in most actual speed benchmarks, especially Flash and WebGL. Safari pulls a 32Fps on the Flash benchmark '08 Ultra test, while Chrome and Firefox fail the 'Ultra' test at 13Fps. Safari beats them on WebGL Aquarium too... 60fps vs 35fps Chrome and 30 on Firefox. Just by my impression, Safari may take a few milliseconds longer to load and render something, but once loaded it plays better and more reliably, especially full screen video and Flash games. I'll also add that Chrome's Pepper Flash process seems to use more RAM and CPU share than Adobe's plug-ins, either Flash or Shockwave.
I haven't experienced any of the reported CPU or RAM hogging complained about on the Apple discussion boards. I have seem Web Content process hold and hover around the 500Mb range with extended use, even sitting idle with a blank tab. Chrome will run higher and spike up to 800Mb on a heavy page, but always releases memory when I leave the page. Firefox runs higher too but doesn't seem to release resources as quickly as the other two.
Just my observations on my system
13" Macbook Air 1.8 GHz i5, 128Gb SSD, 4Gb Ram, OS X 10.8.3
Plug-in's: Flash, Shockwave, Quicktime, Acrobat, Flip4Mac, Silverlight, and Java
That being said, Right now I always end up back on Safari. Aside from it's obvious hooks into OS X, better gesture support, and better resource management, my own testing has it beating Chrome and Firefox in most actual speed benchmarks, especially Flash and WebGL. Safari pulls a 32Fps on the Flash benchmark '08 Ultra test, while Chrome and Firefox fail the 'Ultra' test at 13Fps. Safari beats them on WebGL Aquarium too... 60fps vs 35fps Chrome and 30 on Firefox. Just by my impression, Safari may take a few milliseconds longer to load and render something, but once loaded it plays better and more reliably, especially full screen video and Flash games. I'll also add that Chrome's Pepper Flash process seems to use more RAM and CPU share than Adobe's plug-ins, either Flash or Shockwave.
I haven't experienced any of the reported CPU or RAM hogging complained about on the Apple discussion boards. I have seem Web Content process hold and hover around the 500Mb range with extended use, even sitting idle with a blank tab. Chrome will run higher and spike up to 800Mb on a heavy page, but always releases memory when I leave the page. Firefox runs higher too but doesn't seem to release resources as quickly as the other two.
Just my observations on my system
13" Macbook Air 1.8 GHz i5, 128Gb SSD, 4Gb Ram, OS X 10.8.3
Plug-in's: Flash, Shockwave, Quicktime, Acrobat, Flip4Mac, Silverlight, and Java
Well, why not try this.... http://www.torchbrowser.com/ Update! Stay away from this browser as it installs junk all over the file system that causes conflicts.
Last edited:
Another bad thing about Safari is it has rendering issues on occasion. Scroll down to endless white for a few seconds before the CPU kicks in to render it after taking a lunch break. Unique to Safari
----------
Ok buddy, try this. Paste a new icon over an application using get info, now press backspace on it for it to return to its default. If that isn't a mask then I don't know what is. If it changed the system default you would not be able to return to the default state, ga-doi..
maybe you should start making youtube videos on how much you want to know about stuff instead of how much you know about stuff
----------
Ok buddy, try this. Paste a new icon over an application using get info, now press backspace on it for it to return to its default. If that isn't a mask then I don't know what is. If it changed the system default you would not be able to return to the default state, ga-doi..
maybe you should start making youtube videos on how much you want to know about stuff instead of how much you know about stuff
Another bad thing about Safari is it has rendering issues on occasion. Scroll down to endless white for a few seconds before the CPU kicks in to render it after taking a lunch break. Unique to Safari
----------
Ok buddy, try this. Paste a new icon over an application using get info, now press backspace on it for it to return to its default. If that isn't a mask then I don't know what is. If it changed the system default you would not be able to return to the default state, ga-doi..
maybe you should start making youtube videos on how much you want to know about stuff instead of how much you know about stuff
For some political reason he's on timeout.
i only use chrome to access youtube on my ipad. it's more comfortable, as chrome logs me in automatically.
I normally use Safari, except when I need to fill out any page with form fields. Safari has a penchant for trying to "save" memory at the wrong time, and usually refreshes the page just as I finish filling in all the form fields and put away my CC. Now, anytime there's a form to fill out, I switch over to Firefox.
Now, anytime there's a form to fill out, I switch over to Firefox.Actually I believe 32 bit applications can use over 2GB. I seem to remember the limit being in the 3GB range for 32 bit applications.
Roughly speaking, when you're running a 64 bit kernel, for a 32 bit application you use 32 bit system libraries that jump in to the 64 bit kernel which is in its own address space.
32 bit apps have a total pool of 2^32 number of memory addresses. That amounts to just under 4GB. But in practice, 2GB is not unique to the app. It's for the kernel which is shared across all applications. The unique memory pool is the remaining amount which is just under 2GB.
But the second part about system libraries is correct.
Safari is faster than Chrome on my Mac. But all browsers on my Mac are fast anyways so it don't worry about it. It isn't like encoding 1080p video or playing Crysis. More like a very fast future version of Microsoft Word that doesn't exist yet.
both are very similar and run on some variation of Webkit, so things are displayed pretty much the same.
I like Chrome because right clicking's first option is open in new tab. In safari its the second option. it may not seem like it but its a big deal!
I like Safari because:
- It's 64bit,
- It's built in Reader function is incredibly useful.
I used to use Chrome, now i'm moving to Safari.
I like Chrome because right clicking's first option is open in new tab. In safari its the second option. it may not seem like it but its a big deal!
I like Safari because:
- It's 64bit,
- It's built in Reader function is incredibly useful.
I used to use Chrome, now i'm moving to Safari.
