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.
chrome or safari?
- Thread starter Afbar1114
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I find chrome faster and have it synced with my iPhone as i have the chrome app so that is always an option.
Barna Biro
macrumors 6502a
Faster and better at what? Both get the job done...
I personally prefer Safari since it is better integrated with the OS.
I personally prefer Safari since it is better integrated with the OS.
Yes. I have my MacBook, iPhone and windows laptop synced so i always have my bookmarks where i want them.
I havent got an ipad (Yet 😀) but i am pretty sure it will work the same as it does on the iPhone.
Barna Biro
macrumors 6502a
... I wouldn't go so far if I were you. Making stuff up isn't cool you know...
PS: For fun, you could make up a few articles ( links to them too ) that prove that your affirmation isn't just mambo-jambo. Some speed / security measurement / test results could also be fun! Of course, it would be nice to hear something on the "better supported" part too... do please, go ahead and amaze us ( me at least )! 🙄
Well i tried both. Both seem to run just as fast as the other at loading sites. Chrome seemed slower at one site i will be using alot. I dont like how chrome on ios doesnt have a bookmark bar. Ill keep both because certain site that my school uses doesnt like safari.
0dev
macrumors 68040
Chrome is updated way more often than Safari; has sandboxing technology which includes running each tab in a separate process, therefore increasing security; and for me at least, Chrome always performs better than both Safari and Firefox.
Some articles:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12/09/chrome_ie_firefox_security_bakeoff/
http://lifehacker.com/5884941/brows...firefox-10-internet-explorer-9-and-opera-1161
Note that Chrome has now been hacked at Pwn2Own but it took Google offering up an extra bounty for anyone to even bother trying. It's not 100% by any stretch but it's very good.
Orlandoech
macrumors 68040
Barna Biro
macrumors 6502a
Sorry... not sure what your field of expertise is, but I'll risk assuming ( based on the quoted reply ) it's not software engineering. Just because something updates more often, doesn't mean it's better... it could actually mean it just needs a lot more fixing ( since it fails more often and new problems are discovered more often... but do please correct me if I'm wrong. Did the guys from Google include "ground-breaking" features in each update or was the change-log loaded with fixes? ).
Also... since when does running multiple processes increase security? So in your opinion, multiple processes can't run malicious stuff simultaneously? Not sure you really understand the features you're referring to... what you should have said instead should have been something like the following: "because each page in Chrome kinda has it's own process, this means that systems that can handle multiple processes decently might make rendering tabs faster" ( since there's not one "monster-process" responsible for managing all tabs and N other tasks ).
Now regarding the link you were kind enough to post: the first link... well, it's a "tiny bit" date ( 2011 December... really? )... So nothing changed since? 🙄 Hmm... The second link: I don't see any Safari in the charts... are we still talking about the same things? ( Safari "vs" Chrome? )
The last part of your reply I will not bother commenting... it's just hilarious 🙂
Don't get me wrong now... I'm not defending Safari ( not a fanboy ), I was actually using Chrome for quite a few years before ( and of course FireFox before that and Opera, etc... I even currently have all these browsers installed and updated ). But the thing is... I just flip a bit when people throw with fancy words all around, like: "is more secure, is faster, is better, is shinier, etc." without many of them really understanding what they are talking about.
As I have previously stated: Both get the job done... I personally use Safari nowadays since it is better integrated with the OS ( of course, I'm talking about Mac OS and gestures ) than the other browsers. Maybe this will change tomorrow or the day after... but until then, Safari fits my needs just fine.
Last edited:
0dev
macrumors 68040
Everything has bugs. My point is that bugs in Chrome are fixed quicker with the faster releases. Apple takes ages to fix Safari problems.
The multiple processes themselves don't improve security (although that does improve reliability and speed), but the sandboxing does because it means that each process is isolated from the wider operating system to a certain extent.
I mentioned that it had changed, but only once Google offered up larger bounties. For comparison, Safari always gets hacked at Pwn2Own.
The comparisons don't tend to include Safari because it's not very notable. The only one I could find was from 2010, make of it what you will: http://lifehacker.com/5575407/browser-speed-tests-safari-5-firefox-36-and-opera-106-beta
Alrighty then.
boto
macrumors 6502
I personally prefer Chrome for having all the necessary plugins integrated into the browser, such as Flash and Java. I would rather avoid downloading Flash for Safari, encountering any vulnerabilities and updating manually is not very convenient. Flash does not auto update in any way unless you navigate to Adobe's website or check for updates in your Flash system preferences icon. Also, the essential add-ons I use are not available in Safari so that is ultimately the reason why I ditched it.
Safari.
If for no reason other than that it properly supports Retina Display right now, whereas Chrome does not.
That and Safari comes default with any Mac, has an interface that wastes less space than Safari (no tab bar, and I prefer to work with separate windows rather than tabs clumped together into one window), and it's the default interface for Webkit, which Chrome is based on.
On a side note, for anyone who thinks Chrome is updated more often, please check your facts again. "Safari", being the interface to Webkit, actually gets access to new Webkit fixes "faster" than Chrome.
Download your Webkit browser here:
http://www.webkit.org
And replace Safari with it if you feel Safari is updated too slow.
If for no reason other than that it properly supports Retina Display right now, whereas Chrome does not.
That and Safari comes default with any Mac, has an interface that wastes less space than Safari (no tab bar, and I prefer to work with separate windows rather than tabs clumped together into one window), and it's the default interface for Webkit, which Chrome is based on.
On a side note, for anyone who thinks Chrome is updated more often, please check your facts again. "Safari", being the interface to Webkit, actually gets access to new Webkit fixes "faster" than Chrome.
Download your Webkit browser here:
http://www.webkit.org
And replace Safari with it if you feel Safari is updated too slow.
Barna Biro
macrumors 6502a
@0dev: Maybe the Safari problems aren't that urgent? Of course nothing is perfect and of course there will be always room for improvement ( and bug fixing )... That being said, I have a slightly different opinion on how well and fast Google fixes issues ( but then again, I don't know what their priorities really are... maybe the issues I was experiencing weren't common enough to be worth fixing in at least a decent amount of time ).
Multiple processes on their own don't improve reliability... the system is more complex than that. If a failed process is not handled correctly, it can still take everything else down. Speed is indeed most likely the main reason why they went with the approach... if your system can handle it, certain things could surely be faster than on competitor browsers using older / other approaches. THEN AGAIN, multiple processes usually need more juice to run too... the coin has two sides. The Chrome multi-process approach usually ( in my experience at least ), can end up eating a crap-load of RAM and CPU power compared to other browsers ( something I'm not really that happy about... I unfortunately don't have any numbers at hand on this ).
I'd rather not discuss too much about the Chrome sandboxing... the idea is cool and "in theory" ( I'll explain shortly why "in theory" ) it is an additional security layer... in reality, it would be cool to know how many people just tick the checkbox in a blink of an eye ( the "I understand the risks, bla, bla bla..." shenanigan ) and proceed to the desired website... you know, the "Ahh, this crap again... next, next, next and show me the bloody thing already" mentality. 🙄 Ehh... discussing this won't bring anything useful to the table... we'll just end up posting a lot and never agreeing to anything or reaching a "real" conclusion... it would mainly be senseless philosophy...
The cracking part I can't take extremely seriously ( sounds funny, I know )... just because something is relatively easy to crack, doesn't necessarily mean everything is lost and you are doomed. That's when the OS and other factors come into play... how many Mac viruses are there again? How many "real security" problems were reported by users in recent times and how many lawsuits did Apple face and lose because of this? Right... you see, that's why they are not really bothering with fixing stuff 😉 ( not that I necessarily agree with their strategy... but from a business point of view, it's a good strategy )
Again... both browsers do a more than decent job at opening tabs and loading websites ( the main tasks they need to fulfil for the vast majority of the users ). Just please don't run around throwing with big words when in reality things aren't as clear or horrific. Everyday ( "simple" ) users have NO REAL benefits out of any of the features we are discussing here... people just need someone else to tell them that they can go to bed and everything will still be fine when they wake up in the morning. 😉 Whichever company can sell this illusion better will usually gain the most out of it ( financially and not only )...
If Chrome is to be favoured over Safari by the everyday users, then it will most likely be because of the ability to extend it with plug-ins ( with a ton more than Safari has )... they can install a crap-load of plug-ins and feel happy about their achievement ( ignoring of course the fact that the browser will slowly end up eating a crap-load of memory and CPU power because of the plug-in overload ). It's the "swiss army knife" style I'm not a huge fan of ( "one browser to do it all"... I'd rather user specific tools, created and optimized for solving specific problems in a more than decent manner, than start using plug-ins for Notepad++ so I can edit my photos in it just like in Photoshop... but yeah, that's just me... "average Joe doesn't really care about 'using the right tool for the job' too much..." ).
Multiple processes on their own don't improve reliability... the system is more complex than that. If a failed process is not handled correctly, it can still take everything else down. Speed is indeed most likely the main reason why they went with the approach... if your system can handle it, certain things could surely be faster than on competitor browsers using older / other approaches. THEN AGAIN, multiple processes usually need more juice to run too... the coin has two sides. The Chrome multi-process approach usually ( in my experience at least ), can end up eating a crap-load of RAM and CPU power compared to other browsers ( something I'm not really that happy about... I unfortunately don't have any numbers at hand on this ).
I'd rather not discuss too much about the Chrome sandboxing... the idea is cool and "in theory" ( I'll explain shortly why "in theory" ) it is an additional security layer... in reality, it would be cool to know how many people just tick the checkbox in a blink of an eye ( the "I understand the risks, bla, bla bla..." shenanigan ) and proceed to the desired website... you know, the "Ahh, this crap again... next, next, next and show me the bloody thing already" mentality. 🙄 Ehh... discussing this won't bring anything useful to the table... we'll just end up posting a lot and never agreeing to anything or reaching a "real" conclusion... it would mainly be senseless philosophy...
The cracking part I can't take extremely seriously ( sounds funny, I know )... just because something is relatively easy to crack, doesn't necessarily mean everything is lost and you are doomed. That's when the OS and other factors come into play... how many Mac viruses are there again? How many "real security" problems were reported by users in recent times and how many lawsuits did Apple face and lose because of this? Right... you see, that's why they are not really bothering with fixing stuff 😉 ( not that I necessarily agree with their strategy... but from a business point of view, it's a good strategy )
Again... both browsers do a more than decent job at opening tabs and loading websites ( the main tasks they need to fulfil for the vast majority of the users ). Just please don't run around throwing with big words when in reality things aren't as clear or horrific. Everyday ( "simple" ) users have NO REAL benefits out of any of the features we are discussing here... people just need someone else to tell them that they can go to bed and everything will still be fine when they wake up in the morning. 😉 Whichever company can sell this illusion better will usually gain the most out of it ( financially and not only )...
If Chrome is to be favoured over Safari by the everyday users, then it will most likely be because of the ability to extend it with plug-ins ( with a ton more than Safari has )... they can install a crap-load of plug-ins and feel happy about their achievement ( ignoring of course the fact that the browser will slowly end up eating a crap-load of memory and CPU power because of the plug-in overload ). It's the "swiss army knife" style I'm not a huge fan of ( "one browser to do it all"... I'd rather user specific tools, created and optimized for solving specific problems in a more than decent manner, than start using plug-ins for Notepad++ so I can edit my photos in it just like in Photoshop... but yeah, that's just me... "average Joe doesn't really care about 'using the right tool for the job' too much..." ).
Last edited:
Still prefer Chrome on my Macs even with Safari recent updates. I can sometimes have like two browsers open with multiple tabs each running and every single time I've done that with Safari it either really slows down or gets the spinning beach ball of death. Even just normal browsing with one tabs I've seen Safari freeze and crash a lot more than the maybe handful of times I've had Chrome crash. I like the way its sync'd to my phones as well.
I still remember how back in the day FF was end all be all of browsers, so fast and clean. Then it became so bloated.
I still remember how back in the day FF was end all be all of browsers, so fast and clean. Then it became so bloated.
Barna Biro
macrumors 6502a
You must be visiting some really dirty websites... 🙂 I can't say I had similar experiences... had other ones though ( like messed up text rendering - even as I'm typing this reply ).
Dolorian
macrumors 65816
Haha, no I've always had safari freeze or beach ball randomly like crazy on both my Macs and the iMac I had. I just have a habit of opening multiple tabs like crazy sometimes, like from various email accounts as I've had glitches with Thunderbird on the Macs. Or something like, I love cars and race, so in some forums again I'll have a bunch of tabs open.
Not on Windows. Chrome still has problem with DPI scaling under Windows.
Safari doesn't.
Dolorian
macrumors 65816
But that is not retina display, which is what your post referred to. I don't use Windows and the OP was clearly asking with the Mac platform in mind.
I'm sure the OP did refer to the Mac platform, but Mac doesn't mean just Mac OS. There are other OSes as well.
In that case, there is still a good chance that the OP may want to run Bootcamp on his Retina MBP for any reason at all.
And Chrome under Windows still doesn't support DPI scaling properly.
Also Chrome still does not support smooth pinch-zooming on either Lion or Mountain Lion. Pinch-zooming in Chrome "jumps" in set steps instead, and it's very clunky (and buggy) on some websites.