![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
About that new Google browser everyone's talking about...
So I just tested Chrome. Big thumbs down.
Not only is the browser really, really fugly - why do they all feel the need to design their stuff with blue task bars? That's not pretty! I like the classic gray windows design, thank you very much. At least give me an option to have my browser fit in with the rest of my computer theme. - but it lacks a proper menu. I hate browsers that don't have a proper menu. IE7 started that trend, and now all the browsers are copying it. I would like to have a menu item that says Bookmarks, please, not some little star symbol that I have to hover my cursor over before I know what it does.
Then, there's the custom formatted history. Firefox 3 has that, too. I really don't like it. I like my history to be a list of simple URLs in black font, size 10. I don't want any formatting in there, and I don't want to use my address bar as a search interface. Call me old-fashioned, but I like it when the address bar is used as just that. Oh, and the disappearing and reappearing status bar. Can you say annoying much?
Worst thing about Chrome, though, is the warning page it gives you when you visit 'non-secure' sites. I wanted to test the pop-up blocker, so I went to a crack site. It wouldn't let me in. It told me that - *gasp* - the site I'm trying to visit could contain malware! (Well, duh, honey. It's a crack site.) It felt the need to tell me so by presenting me with a huge red site that made my eyes want to fall out and die, too. I think I still have the impressions on my retinas. Anyway, I checked the little check box that was supposed to tell Chrome to 'stfu, I know what I'm doing' - and it redirected me back to the warning site. Now, I'm quite sure that's a bug, since what I downloaded was obviously the beta version, but still, wtf? I know how to navigate the internet. I don't need my browser to mommy me.
At least Chrome seems to read standard CSS. That's a plus. I wouldn't want to have to learn another long list of hacks. I guess I'm gonna take another look once they've figured out the worst of the bugs and release the first stable version, but from what I've seen so far, I think I'm sticking with Firefox.
Not only is the browser really, really fugly - why do they all feel the need to design their stuff with blue task bars? That's not pretty! I like the classic gray windows design, thank you very much. At least give me an option to have my browser fit in with the rest of my computer theme. - but it lacks a proper menu. I hate browsers that don't have a proper menu. IE7 started that trend, and now all the browsers are copying it. I would like to have a menu item that says Bookmarks, please, not some little star symbol that I have to hover my cursor over before I know what it does.
Then, there's the custom formatted history. Firefox 3 has that, too. I really don't like it. I like my history to be a list of simple URLs in black font, size 10. I don't want any formatting in there, and I don't want to use my address bar as a search interface. Call me old-fashioned, but I like it when the address bar is used as just that. Oh, and the disappearing and reappearing status bar. Can you say annoying much?
Worst thing about Chrome, though, is the warning page it gives you when you visit 'non-secure' sites. I wanted to test the pop-up blocker, so I went to a crack site. It wouldn't let me in. It told me that - *gasp* - the site I'm trying to visit could contain malware! (Well, duh, honey. It's a crack site.) It felt the need to tell me so by presenting me with a huge red site that made my eyes want to fall out and die, too. I think I still have the impressions on my retinas. Anyway, I checked the little check box that was supposed to tell Chrome to 'stfu, I know what I'm doing' - and it redirected me back to the warning site. Now, I'm quite sure that's a bug, since what I downloaded was obviously the beta version, but still, wtf? I know how to navigate the internet. I don't need my browser to mommy me.
At least Chrome seems to read standard CSS. That's a plus. I wouldn't want to have to learn another long list of hacks. I guess I'm gonna take another look once they've figured out the worst of the bugs and release the first stable version, but from what I've seen so far, I think I'm sticking with Firefox.
no subject
Have I pimped Opera to you yet? *dimples* It's not the smartest of browsers, but compared to what I hear about FF, it's the same thing - only, you know, without the need to download a truckload of add-ons and widgets and *stuff* to make it work. Love the 'user view' feature, which puts every page imaginable into black on white background with Times New Roman font (though I think this can be toggled in the preferences, just like other stuff). Also, the newest one has a shite ugly look *ugh* but once I dl-ed the old Classic Opera layout/skin and customized the bars (and there's a lot of toolbars and stuff available - certainly more than I need) it looked it's usual charming self. Also, love being able to turn cookies on and off at will, as well as the referer-disabling option, and let me not wax poetic about turning images off to cached so paged load the text much, much faster.
Anyways, yeah. If you get tired of FF give Opera a try - it's small to dl, and can be removed just as easily if it doesn't work out.
no subject
You haven't pimped Opera to me yet, but I know Opera. I do a lot of web-design, and so I'm familiar with all the most-used browsers. Opera's okay, but I have to say, I really like that Firefox comes with only the most basic features. You can add what you need and leave out the stuff you don't need. The second-worst thing about IE, after the lack of CSS compatibility, is that it's such a huge program. I hate that. And while Opera isn't quite as huge, it's still pretty heavy compared to the basic Firefox version.
I guess in the end, there's no huge difference between downloading and installing plug-ins for Firefox or customizing the many and, as you said, mostly useless toolbars in Opera, but I was already using Mozilla browsers back when they were still called Mozilla, so it's also a habit thing for me. ;)
no subject
no subject
no subject
As for the IE lack of proper menus, as you call it, it can be changed so both the cons and the menus' names show up (but I think you're using FF?). There's a new verion for IE, but that one is in beta too.
no subject
I guess it actually is a good alternative to IE, but then, pretty much anything would be. I don't think it's a good alternative to Firefox, because you can't customize it as well as FF to fit your individual needs, and because, yeah, the menu and the looks.
But then, these are all pretty much my personal opinions. Chrome certainly isn't a bad program, although I am a little concerned at the news that it practically sends an IP-specific log of your internet activities to Google. That's a little too snoopy even for my tastes. But other than that, I guess it's, well, you know. Just another browser :).
no subject
I ask because at school, all the computers are loaded with both IE and Firefox. When I noticed that, I figured I'd try Firefox out.
And I went, "Ohhhh, thiiis one, I hate this one." It's TOO basic. An address bar, a search bar and a content window? Huh? Where is everything?! Right-clicking cluelessly around got me nowhere. Safari the first time was much easier.
I'm sure I look like a moron for admitting this, but I'm pretty sure Firefox is the browser I've gotten, "stuck," in before, unable to navigate anywhere or close it down.
no subject
But I think it's probably a taste thing. I've always been a fan of programs and operating systems that let me configure most things myself. On the other hand, IE really is a bad browser, even if you dislike Firefox, because it's huge and slow and unable to read standard CSS. You could give Opera a try! :)