Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google Chrome now on OS X...Kinda...

GSMiller

GSMiller

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Dec 2, 2006
1,666
0
Kentucky
So we OS X users haven't been able to get our hands on Google Chrome, yet, but apparently there's this new browser set to fill that void called "Stainless."

I've tried it out and it seems pretty good, but I'm interested in seeing its benchmarks in comparison to Chrome. I'm lovin' the GUI of Stainless!
 
That looks... :eek:... AWESOME!

Unfortunately I don't think I can steer myself away from Safari due to its speed and performance. Unless Stainless is faster then Safari... then..:rolleyes:
 
w00t. looks okay, very similar to chrome.

a question for everyone else, what browser do you use? i use firefox since i find safari is too slow.
 
I'm considering using it just for MySpace. I currently use Opera for that, but with Stainless being much more stripped down and smaller in size (1MB to Opera's 34.1) I think it'll fit the bill perfectly.
 
After about 2 minutes of use I opened a new tab and the whole thing froze, I had to force shut down the iMac, I couldnt do anything.

Not sure whether this was a problem with Stainless or not. This wasn't the only problem. As r.j.s mentioned it doesn't have bookmarks or history, however I do find the tab drag feature (from chrome) quite useful.
 
mathcolo said:
I guess we'll have to wait and see how the project plays out...
Click to expand...

The web site states that:

At this point, Stainless is really just a technology demo and is likely to stay that way (though we might add some novel ideas we have for bookmark, history and download management).

I don't think there planning to release it as a full fledged browser.
 
Since upgrading my eMac to Leopard, Firefox has been incredibly slow (due to 512 MB of RAM, no doubt.) So I needed something else to use until I can max it out.

I just tried this browser, and I love it. (BTW, It has bookmarks now, which is really nice.) It's lightweight and fast. I'd recommend it if you're thinking about trying it.
 
Cassie said:
Since upgrading my eMac to Leopard, Firefox has been incredibly slow (due to 512 MB of RAM, no doubt.)
Click to expand...

firefox is quite memory efficient, actually uses least of the memory, at the same time, multi-process browsers such as stainless will consumes much larger amount of memory. Especially when you open it for longer period of time and multiple tabs.

I would suggest to try a new firefox profile see if that solve the problem, no need to delete the old profile for now, just try a new one. Im guessing upgrade of OSX probably messed something in the profile folder. You upgraded it, not clean install, correct?

BTW, 3.5 beta 4 is out on ftp server, maybe try that one instead of official 3.0.9.
 
I just downloaded Stainless, and I really like the interface. Lets hope Google Chrome comes out soon, and has a similar footprint to this.
 
clevin said:
firefox is quite memory efficient, actually uses least of the memory, at the same time, multi-process browsers such as stainless will consumes much larger amount of memory. Especially when you open it for longer period of time and multiple tabs.

I would suggest to try a new firefox profile see if that solve the problem, no need to delete the old profile for now, just try a new one. Im guessing upgrade of OSX probably messed something in the profile folder. You upgraded it, not clean install, correct?

BTW, 3.5 beta 4 is out on ftp server, maybe try that one instead of official 3.0.9.
Click to expand...
Personally, I've found Firefox to be one of the, if not the most memory hungry browsers there is. Don't get me wrong, it's my favorite, but it just doesn't work well on this amount of RAM. (It works fantasticlly on my iBook with 1.5 GB of RAM.)

And what exactly do you mean by "firefox profile"?
 
Cassie said:
Personally, I've found Firefox to be one of the, if not the most memory hungry browsers there is. Don't get me wrong, it's my favorite, but it just doesn't work well on this amount of RAM. (It works fantasticlly on my iBook with 1.5 GB of RAM.)

And what exactly do you mean by "firefox profile"?
Click to expand...
look here for the information about firefox profile:

http://tpcr-cris.blogspot.com/2008/04/how-to-create-new-firefox-profile-under.html

its not about get you wrong :D, its just that firefox in fact uses far less memory than any other browser out there. There are many tests and screenshots out there, as well as here at MR to prove that.
 
Topher15 said:
The web site states that:

At this point, Stainless is really just a technology demo and is likely to stay that way (though we might add some novel ideas we have for bookmark, history and download management).

I don't think there planning to release it as a full fledged browser.
Click to expand...

If they have got it this far along they may as well release it as a full browser.
 
clevin said:
its just that firefox in fact uses far less memory than any other browser out there. There are many tests and screenshots out there, as well as here at MR to prove that.
Click to expand...

That is a pretty bold statement and one that is subject to a whole lot of conditions and personal use that it is not actually a true statement in real world usage as a blanket statement.
 
xUKHCx said:
That is a pretty bold statement and one that is subject to a whole lot of conditions and personal use that it is not actually a true statement in real world usage as a blanket statement.
Click to expand...

i felt quite comfortable saying that as a general statement. I can not rule out special cases while individual experiences otherwise, but I do believe most users will find firefox to be using far less memory than other browsers, and for those special individuals, I do believe their firefox might be behaving in a manner that is not normal and should be fixed.

The memory usage of firefox 3, including comparison to other browsers, has been done from all kinds of sources, zdnet, lifehacker, cnet, ajaxan, computerworld, etc, etc.

Here at MR, in the photo board, there is a thread about browser memory usage, albeit not very precise, does illustrate the same conclusion.
 
Oh I know Safari is horrible with memory management. I used it for maybe three months, then went back to FF. :p

If there is indeed proof that FF is better at memory mangment then most other browsers, I won't dispute that. The thing is, it loads pages quite quickly, but while scrolling through them, it lags horribly. Opera loads them slower, but no lag. So I don't know what to tell you. (On another note, Stainless has been crashing way too much for me to use as my primary browser. I've been forced to use iCab, which actually isn't as terrible as I remember.)
 
at this stage, I have two suggestions

1. try a new profile, you dont need to delete the old one, just back it up, and see if a new profile solve the problem

2. do try out 3.5 beta 4, which specially improved in the scrolling department.
 
Cassie said:
Oh I know Safari is horrible with memory management. I used it for maybe three months, then went back to FF. :p

If there is indeed proof that FF is better at memory mangment then most other browsers, I won't dispute that. The thing is, it loads pages quite quickly, but while scrolling through them, it lags horribly. Opera loads them slower, but no lag. So I don't know what to tell you. (On another note, Stainless has been crashing way too much for me to use as my primary browser. I've been forced to use iCab, which actually isn't as terrible as I remember.)
Click to expand...

Do you have a lot of other applications running? I do not notice any lag while scrolling.
 
clevin said:
at this stage, I have two suggestions

1. try a new profile, you dont need to delete the old one, just back it up, and see if a new profile solve the problem

2. do try out 3.5 beta 4, which specially improved in the scrolling department.
Click to expand...
I'll try out the beta, since I don't feel comfortable messing around with my profiles.
cjm3113 said:
Do you have a lot of other applications running? I do not notice any lag while scrolling.
Click to expand...
I have iChat, iTunes and sometimes MSN Messenger and Conversation open. Usually just the first two, though.
Aronnax said:
Safari Beta 4 is there much much better now ;-)
Click to expand...
Probably, but it messes with MSN Messenger too much, unfortunately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back