Read the hype on every new web browser released or due out this year, and you'll see claims that every one of them is "faster" than all the others. You could compare super-specific tests and decipher all the code-brain terminology, and you'd still be left wondering which browser starts quicker, uses less memory, and slides through dynamic interfaces like Gmail the fastest. Since our squadron of independent analysts had the week off, we ran the latest editions of Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera 9.5, and Safari for Windows through some unscientific but highly geeky tests ourselves on a plain old Windows computer. Take a look at the full (and somewhat unexpected) results after the jump.
The testing system
For the sake of rating all four of the latest new-and-improved browsers in the same environment, I tested the most current releases of Internet Explorer 7, Opera 9.5, Safari for Windows 3.1.1, and the third Release Candidate of Firefox 3 (which is pretty darned close to the final version dropping Tuesday) on my Windows Vista laptop. Each browser was installed completely fresh, and, in the case of Internet Explorer 7, re-set to its new-install settings.
Here are the specs of my test system, for comparisons and curiosity:
- OS: Windows Vista Home Premium (32-bit)
- Processor: 2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor
- Memory: 2 GB
Scientific and precise? Heck no. Easy to understand and free from selective prejudice? Very much so. I did use two tests assembled by inquisitive programmers for the more technical stuff, and noted that below. Now, onto the results!
Test 1: Startup time—Winner: Opera!
Taking a page from Mark Wilton-Jones' oft-linked tests, I timed each browser loading "cold" (straight off a re-start, not having run already) and "warm" (having run at least once that session). Vista can be very fickle at boot-up (at least on my system) and slow things down considerably, so I used each browsers' best times from launching to loading a locally-saved Google home page (which both cuts out network variations and explains the speedier boot times):
A pleasant surprise that Firefox 3 boots faster than 2 (from deep-seated memory, at least), as well as how quick Opera moves in general, at least compared to Safari in this test.
Next, I opened each browser two times and headed to a random bookmark to jog it a little. Here's their speeds at their next "warm" boot-up:
Surprisingly consistent—note that Firefox's seeming lapse is less than 0.2 seconds, which could certainly fall under margin of error.
Now for the real test. I placed a folder of eight links—from the super-clean Google homepage to the image and Flash-heavy Gizmodo and YouTube sites, and a few familiar stops in-between—in each browser, ran to the Lifehacker page and back to "warm" it up, then timed each browser's version of "open all in tabs" from first click until the last little circle stopped spinning. Opera, unfortunately, uses a more subtle coloration change to indicate load speed, so I had to rely on the status bar as well. The results:
You probably won't cry over a two-second delay when loading eight tabs, but Safari and Opera were surprisingly swift at multi-tasking in general (and we'll see why later).
Test 2: JavaScript & CSS—Winner: Safari!
JavaScript loading times get a lot of attention from folks like, say, Steve Jobs these days. That's because with the increasing prominence of AJAX interfaces on sites like Gmail, Twitter, and other webapps, a browser's ability to perform multiple quick computations can be far more important than a nanosecond advantage at text and table rendering.
You'll never get every browser team agreeing on what's a fair JavaScript test, as each platform has its own quirks and rules of working with it. Sean Patrick Kane's JavaScript speed tests has pulled attention from all over, however, not least because he's worked to make it more fair to all comers.
Here's the stats from Sean's test (in miliseconds):
I also tested each browser's ability to render Cascading Style Sheets, the design templates of a page, using nontropp's downloadable form:
I'm thinking Safari's big lead in CSS rendering is how it creates that everything-snaps-at-once feel when loading pages. And, for a browser that somewhat auto-loads with my OS, Internet Explorer has yet to bring a worthwhile statistic to the table.
At this point, you might certainly wondering just where Firefox 3's vaunted speed/performance/stability improvements might actually, you know, matter. Follow along, then, to the other side of speed.
Test 3: Memory use—Winner: Firefox 3!
Unless you're rocking a workstation with more memory than you can spare, browsers shouldn't be using all your RAM and slowing other apps to a trickle. Firefox 2 was notorious for bloating far beyond its fighting weight after steady use, but developers' hard work seems to have paid off, at least by my tests:
The blue portion is each browsers' memory use when first started, and the red extensions their size (according to Windows Task Manager) with those same eight tabs above opened. Again, few people will have eight tabs open, but I scaled it to see where the differences lie. I wanted to double-check Firefox's night-and-day improvement, so I closed and launched it again. This time, it was using 117MB—not a slim amount, but a still marked improvement over its peers. Of course, if you do have memory to spare, both Safari and Opera, as seen higher up, can put it to quick-footed use.
Conclusions
Let's re-emphasize that this was far from a scientific study, and your mileage will certainly vary on different systems. With Opera and Firefox especially, running a like-new version is somewhat of a cheat—almost any enthusiast is going to have a must-have extensions, features, and add-ons running, which throw off the speed and memory scales. Still, it was gratifying to actually sit down and measure all the major browser options on a human level, just a timer, a spreadsheet, and a few cups of nerve-boosting coffee. Thanks to x40sw0n for inspiring this post!
What's your take on the battle for browser speed? What essential tricks and tips have you used to whip your web software into shape? Let's hear your takes on all this data in the comments.
Kevin Purdy, associate editor at Lifehacker, feels like he just got home from a seriously nerdy five-way date. His weekly feature, Open Sourcery, appears every Friday on Lifehacker.
Comments
The tests are bit unfair since Firefox 3, Safari 3, and Opera 9.5 are all new but we are still testing year old IE7 when IE8 Beta is out etc..
@LJKelley: True that the IE8 beta is out, but we didn't feel including beta software in the test was fair either. All of these are releases or release candidates.
I would like to see these tests re run with the actual release of Firefox 3, not the release candidate.
This pretty much answers my questions...
+ Watch video
Love the article, but I'd like to see results from other OS's as well.
I love Opera but it's freaking slow at switching tabs on my Ubuntu box.
How about Gmail load time?
And if he tested them against IE 8 Beta then people would cry foul that it's unfair to pit a Beta version against all the others... besides - isn't FF3 still beta until next week? etc.
@azwillnj: I agree, just 'cause it's the release candidate doesn't mean it can necessarily hold its own with other browsers.
At any rate, I'll continue using Firefox, through hell and high water. Though we're unlikely to get the latter where I live....
First, this is Scientific. It may not be as precise as others, or as rigorous in the design, but your methodology and implementation are well executed. No one, except programmers and designers, cares about how these do on discrete, esoteric tests. We want to know how it works when we want to watch a por-- uh, YouTube video.
Being a quasi-FanBoy, I was ready to say, "Yeah, but what about on OS X?" But now the FanBoy is telling me to shut up while things look good - but I'd still like to know, since platform choice is more prevalent than ever. I've tried all these on my Mac (what? no Camino?), and settled on Safari. Everything I experience tells me just what your data are saying. It's faster to use except when it starts hammering memory - and I'm on a puny 512MB.
Good info. And since your methods are easily replicated, the doubters - and users who think their chosen websites are different from your test's, can try it for themselves.
i dunno about you, but i often have 8+ tabs open, so that test was perfectly valid :D.
wow, go safari and opera. i can't forsake the ff tho - thanks to the vimperator extension more than anything else.
@CJF: no its a release candidate which is the step after beta in the software release life cycle.......
I would like to see Firefox's memory footprint with all the extensions loaded that make it like Opera. ie, Ad-block Plus, Speed Dial, Mouse Gestures, Greasemonkey, built-in bittorrent, built in email, some kind of notes addon, a download manager or two...
Ya, didn't think so. That's the problem with firefox, it is useless without its precious extensions.
It's really all a matter of opinion. You get used to a particular browser and have it tweaked out exactly as you like it. Just like everything in computing it will always be a careful balance between features, UI design, and raw speed. I for one will gladly sacrifice some load time to continue using Firefox as it's the only browser with a UI, features, and add-ons that agree with my personal tastes.
Do any of these use multiple cores when rendering?
Thanks, I consider this test to be quite practical. But when it is all said and done, the extensibility of Firefox is what wins me over every time. I love browsing on Safari and Opera, but I just can't use them on a daily basis without my extensions.
@Kaiser-Machead's got LindsayJoy's cookies on the SuperDrive: Ahahaha. That one never gets old.
What no K-Meleon love? Sorry - it had to be said. Seriously Opera is always in the top of who ever is testing browsers. You have to give them props for that. I don't even use Opera and I can see that.
@marksman7328:
Firefox's problem is that it's useless without extensions?
The fact that Firefox has extensions, and those extensions can be created by ordinary people is what gives Firefox its appeal. With the community alone, Firefox has what Opera has, and then some, and then can continually match and surpass any other browser feature that surfaces.
Firefox 3 looks, feels, and performs much better than Firefox 2 and has become a real champion in the memory department.
Companies do not listen to the people enough, but when the product is created by the people, that is no longer an issue.
Long live Firefox!
Firefox also operates with the idea that you add what you want, somewhat like nLite, you only keep what you want in Windows XP. With that said, what would be more lightweight, a feature that is not used, or a feature that does not exist in your installation?
"Again, few people will have eight tabs open, but I scaled it to see where the differences lie."
True, I'm usually running at least 20 (I'm working on it, really!). Firefox 3 really has worked on its memory management, and am I the only one who feels the tab UI is a lot smoother? That's something I can't stand in IE7 and Safari, the slight clunkiness of switching tabs.
I will always prefer FF over any other even if its a little slower. which is not in this case.
see a Browser its like your car or motorcycle you get used and comfortable using it, then when you use anther everything gets slower because you don't know where everything is.
@tap52384: Guess what? Firefox's most popular extensions come standard in Opera. So naked Opera = Heavily clothed Firefox. Guess what else? Opera supports community-made widgets for all those obscure features that the average person doesn't need or want.
Here's how it is: Opera is basically a Firefox prepackaged with all of the addons needed for basic internet survival, the difference being Opera is waaaaay faster than Firefox at doing that.
@ankeet: That's another great thing about Opera that I just started really taking advantage of recently. Instead of having 50 tabs open, I only open the 5 or so that I am really using. The rest I close and leave in the trash bin. If I need to go back to a tab that I closed it's super simple to just go to the trash bin and reopen it. You need a memory-increasing addon to do that in Firefox. ;)
I think the most important piece to take away from this test is that the differences are negligible. The difference between 200ms or 400ms or a 5 second load time versus a 6 second load time isn't a big deal. With that in mind, I think it really comes down to personal preference. I'm loving Firefox and can't wait to start using the new release once all of my favorite extensions are supported.
BTW, any chance Maxthon could be tested in future tests? I think Maxthon has a decent user base too.
Sorry for the triple post, I'm just on a really intense rant right now. @tap52384: "Firefox also operates with the idea that you add what you want, somewhat like nLite, you only keep what you want in Windows XP. With that said, what would be more lightweight, a feature that is not used, or a feature that does not exist in your installation?"
Well, that depends on what browser you are talking about. With Firefox, it is certainly faster to just not include a feature that isn't used than to have a bunch of addons that you may or may not need. According to the tests, however, Opera is just as fast as Firefox even with all these extra features, so it really doesn't make a difference. If you could have all the features for the same speed, wouldn't you?
Why don't we all just agree that anyone who doesn't use the browser we think they should use is an idiot?
Very cool. I did the same thing, except filmed it with four browsers, one in each quadrant:
+ Watch video
Firefox lugs like a bitch on my Macs. It's awful and I try to avoid using it. It's a godsend on my work computer that has Windows, but I try to steer clear of it when I'm on my Macs. I actually prefer Camino over both Firefox and Safari when I'm on my Mac. Since it is made by Mozilla, I get all the benefits of Firefox, but streamlined for Macs. Win-win!
@ComputerZen: Nice!!
Saying that these tests are unscientific is being extremely kind. You're not taking into account DNS caching, network caching... your timing methodology is amazingly error prone.. and your sample size is so small as to be meaningless.
Then again, your "conclusions" of "hey, it all seems to be about the same to me so use whatever you want" seem fair -- if absolutely pointless.
Quick! Convert me to Safari or Opera:
First though: I need the following functionality on them:
Gmail Notifier, Webmail Compose, AdSense Notifier, Foxmarks, Linkification, Image Zoom, Roboform, Web Developer Toolbar, eBay Negs, NextPlease!, Flippin' favicons in the address bar forchrissake!@!, custom UI through userChrome.css-type thingamagig.
Was I the only one who did a double-take when reading "Safari for Windows 3.1.1"?
Unless you're too extension-dependant, Opera is an interesting alternative to Firefox, especially for what it can offer out-of-the-box.
As I outlined in a blog post today (see [www.h3rald.com]), the latest releases of these two browsers are both awesome, in their own ways!
just goes to show that speed isn't everything.
I agree with many here though that there isn't a lot of practical difference between 'RC' and 'beta' so this probably could have waited a week or two to use actual ff release, and should have used ie8 beta - if for nothing else than as a comparison; include it as it's own separate speed test anyways for heaven's sake.
I know it's all cool and crunchy to be anti-ms, but at least play fair.
@cisengineer: If those are your requirements in a browser, then every test shown here was pointless to you. You've already made a decision in what you expect a browser to do, and to come in here and stomp and whine about "oh it must do 'x' to be a worthwhile browser" is completely disingenuous, not to mention silly game-playing.
In my experience, Firefox doesn't handle long, tab-heavy sessions very well--it slows down considerably. Safari may be better on osx, but I can't stand the apple font rendering (and talk about bloatware). Internet explorer...is like a virus. 'nuff said.
That's why I've used the Opera browser. It has so many built in features, yet in a small, tight, secure package. Everyone is going to have a browser that works better on their system, and that's the one they will ultimately use. In that respect, a speed test is really irrelevant except for the fact that it gets people to try other browsers.
@Sushiwriter: My comment was mostly aimed at the ones who keep saying that all the great FF addons are automatically built in to Opera. They're not and you can't get them. Opera is faster and it loads cleanly--I must say I even like many of it's features but it can't be my daily browser without these extensions.
This is a great comparison, but there are a couple of things missing IMHO:
1. I'd love to see browser comparisons include how much CPU the browser uses when idle, particularly with a number of tabs open. On my Mac, Safari kicks Firefox 3's rear end in this regard, with Firefox eating up 2 to 3 times as much CPU cycles as Safari with the same tabs open (including when no extensions are enabled -- when they are, it's worse). This should be an important statistic for mobile users, and for anyone wanting to eke the highest level of performance out of their system.
2. Browser add-ons significantly change the landscape of performance tests. I don't think Firefox is particularly compelling if it didn't have amazing add-on support. But those add-ons have a very significant performance impact.
Just a couple of thoughts.
@jczarni: GOO TIGERS!! And also, Go FireFox!! On my machine [even more unscientific than MythBusters] FF3 > Safari for Gmail.
@cisengineer:
nice list of addons, are you done masturbating to them yet? nobody is leaning on you to convert...
I would like to see the same tests done on a Apple.
I use FF3RC3 at home on my PC and Safari 3 on my work laptop (MacBook Pro). I like both browsers, but on Mac I find Safari 3 to be far superior. I had all kinds of problems with FF2 crashing on the mac.
What bugs me about Firefox all together is the slow start-up time, Opera starts like 3 times quicker on my computer.
All though I will remain using Firefox because I love it's other features.
But one problem I have encountered is when I start it up I am always signed out of iGoogle. Which is really annoying seeing as I have to click a few times just to see mail, etc. on iGoogle. Anyone know why this happens and how I can get round it?
I do use the sign in automatically button or whatever it is called, but that doesn't seem to wanna work.
@cisengineer:
I hope this is quick enough.
@Everyone else -- sorry for the long comment!
1. Gmail Notifier and Webmail Compose: Opera has a full, built-in mail client that can notify you of messages and that allows you to compose and send messages. It works with Gmail. No need for an extension.
2. AdSense Notifier: I don't know what this is. (I know what AdSense is, of course, but I'm not familiar with this extension for FF.)
3. Foxmarks: Opera 9.5 has this function built-in. It will allow you to synchronize your bookmarks, Quick Dial settings, toolbars, etc. through its online service, My Opera. You can also access all this through a computer without even having Opera installed. No need for an extension.
4. Linkification: you can highlight any link in Opera, right-click, and hit Go to URL. This is built-in. Also, there are several scripts on UserJS.org that will accomplish this function with more customization. You can also highlight any link, copy it, and right click in the address bar and hit "Paste and Go" to go to the link without having to hit enter. There is a keyboard shortcut for this as well so you don't even have to go to the address bar.
5. Image Zoom: Cntrl+scroll up or down will zoom images, text, videos, etc. All elements of a page. You can also right-click on any image, choose "Open Image" to view the image on a page by itself, and zoom with the same method. You can also download any number of image zooming tools from UserJS.org, which will allow you to do several things like zoom images without zooming text, etc.
6. Roboform: Opera has the Wand, a built-in password manager. No extension needed. Also, Roboform makes a plug-in for Opera (I'm pretty sure about this) if you prefer it to the Wand.
7. Web Developer Toolbar: UserJS.org contains toolbars that serve this purpose.
8. eBay Negs: not sure what this is.
9. NextPlease!: This feature is built into Opera already. It's called Fast Forward and Rewind. You can place buttons in the toolbar to do this, or you can enable mouse gestures or keyboard shortcuts to do it as well. Highly customizable scripts are available from UserJS.org.
10. Flippin' favicons in the address bar forchrissake!@!: If this is what I think it is, Opera does indeed show favicons in the address bar. I don't know why you think it doesn't; have you had issues with it? Opera also includes favicons in your bookmarks and in any links you add to the toolbar.
11. custom UI through userChrome.css-type thingamagig.: Opera has built-in style switching. You can click the little "glasses" icon to select from a number of preinstalled styles, or you can download more from UserJS.org, or create your own for specific sites.
So, as you can see, Opera already has the majority of your features included. You have just not done enough research to find them. The remaining few features that aren't built-in are a simple download away if you search UserJS.org for them. I can't believe no one has mentioned this site yet! It is pretty much the Opera equivalent of Greasemonkey. It's not as popular, though, since Opera doesn't really need too many extensions. The only functions you requested that I could not provide were ones with which I am unfamiliar (two of them), but I'm nearly positive you can get their functionality in Opera from scripts off UserJS.org or somewhere similar.
Keep in mind that Opera, with all these features built-in, is faster in a lot of things than the bare version of FF. I'm not trying to start any flame wars, but I want that to be known. There isn't really any denying it.
@h3raLd: Hey you're blog post was amazing. nice work!
different browsers for different occasions
perfectly put!
Running the CSS test myself in FF3 RC3, I never got higher than 37 ms... and I don't think I'm running a particularly optimized version in any way
The one thing that this test should also consider with respect to Opera 9.5 is that most functionalities that require an extension in FF3 are kind of built in already into Opera 9.5. Alas its not an open source product but i guess it is a worthy product nevertheless.
Opera does change your browsing habits. You use it once and you start expecting so much more from other browsers.
I don't get some of the results. For the warm test, it looks like opera opened faster, but safari was the winner?
I need an explanation pleasy. lol, sorry. And for Javascript, aren't opera and safari tied? Kinda blows for firefox though - it's my favorite browser, and I was hoping for better results. I guess when I get my mac, I don't have to download anything, seeing that safari looks to be superior.
i tried the new opera last night and i was impressed by it. soon it will be almost useful, the new features and looks really made a big difference. but, (and we all have big butts) it still hung on most of the pages i went to. i've never found a use for internet explorer yet, i don't even keep the icon visible. firefox rc so far has my use 100% of the time, i do miss the lag feature though. i was getting use to it...
I wish someone would test Maxthon to see if it makes any improvements over IE7.
@cisengineer:
"Quick! Convert me to Safari or Opera:"
My pleasure!
"First though: I need the following functionality on them:"
Gmail Notifier - Like this?
Webmail Compose - See above, killed 2 birds with 1 stone.
AdSense Notifier - dude, seriously?
Foxmarks - Ya, comes built in. Hey! syncs to mobile phones too!
Linkification - right click and do 'Go to Web Address'. Built-in
Image Zoom - View>Zoom
Roboform - Built-in and also better.
Web Developer Toolbar - Ya, I use that every day too. Couldn't live without it.
eBay Negs - That's just a script. Opera can run any greasemonkey or other javascript without a fancy addon. Next.
NextPlease! - Fastforward/Rewind kthanks.
Flippin' favicons in the address bar forchrissake!@! - Ya, what modern browser doesn't have that? Firefox isn't that innovative...
custom UI through userChrome.css-type thingamagig. - Opera has an excellent UI customization that makes it easy for the non-tech savvy to get new themes and powerful for those who wish to turn the UI upside down and inside out.
Dang, Slick beat me to it.
lets open up 40 tabs and see who wins (yes I'am an Opera fanboy)
@tap52384: for not listening to costumers: my.opera.com/desktopteam, i think not even firefox is so open in its development process.
But since getting a mac, I mostly use safari, it's so pretty and so fast, although opera is still better.
@Avdude15: Oh, believe me, I did. Watching Vista shut down and restart for every single cold boot was kind of, uh, tiring.
@zakharm: That's a good point, and wish I'd taken it into account. I would suspect not, though.
@LifesSweetDrug: This is caused by cleaning your cookies.
You can prevent cleaning the specific cookies from Tools -> Options and under the Privacy tab in the Cookies section click the Exceptions button. Then type in www.google.com/ig and click Allow. Then click Close and OK and you're done.
Or you can just not clean your cookies, your choice.
=)
150+ most popular Firefox extensions and their Opera equiva...
As an earlier poster mentioned, why was K-meleon ignored? It uses nearly all modern web technologies and unlike any of the others, is fully functional as a portable application on a Flash RAM device. People claim that Firefox can do that well, but my experience says it does it poorly.
[kmeleon.sourceforge.net]
As for the four mentioned, the one thing that puts Opera head and shoulders above the rest (actually, none of the others have it, period) is keyboard navigation. Every function in all the other browsers is dependent on the mouse; Opera allows the user to browse with both hands, greatly speeding up the desired action. Even if Opera lags behind on one or more tests, the time saved in actual use more than makes up for it.
The test may be accurate for a stripped-down Firefox, but most Firefox users will use (many) extensions. I just use Zotero, but even with just that one extension, my firefox takes up about 120 MB of memory with just three tabs open. I wonder if the memory stats for Firefox on Linux are different...
I'm still using FF 2, I know, I should be shot in the head for using the browser that I want to use, and not the browser everyone else thinks I should use. Oh well, shoot me then. The truth of the matter is, yes FF may take 2 extra seconds to start because it has to load my extensions, boo hoo I'm so sad, 2 seconds are going to totally destroy me. FF takes more memory to have a bunch of tabs open for a long time? My computer doesn't seem to think so, I can leave 32 tabs open for hours and the only difference I see in my memory usage is around 20 megs. 20 megs you say, boo hoo I'm so sad, 20 megs are going to totally destroy me. I have also never had any version of firefox I have used crash on me at all, period, end of discussion. I also noticed when I was looking something up in Safari on my friends Mac...
I was looking for something and I opened a different tab to look at something else, about 5 seconds later all kinds of music and BS started playing, I asked him, where is that coming from. I switched back to the other tab and there were all kinds of videos and ads playing, all by themselves. Totally didn't know what was happening, especially since I had been to that exact same page on my FF browser at home, just a few hours earlier. Then I figured it out, my two little extensions that didn't require anything more than clicking install now, had blocked everything, without any input from me. They are called Adblock Plus and NoScript. I'm sure someone will come along and tell me that Safari and/or Opera do those without installing an extension, but then here's the question, why did my friend's Safari show me all that crap? If you are going to give me detailed instructions on how to start Safari's "built-in" Adblock and NoScript alternative, then you can just stop before you begin. Because as I have already said, for AdBlock and Noscript on FF all I did was click install now and go on about my business, no "configuring" anything, no nothing. I install and it blocks all the nasty crap I don't want. I will wait 2 extra seconds on start up for that anyday.
So, my point is, love whatever browser you may love, but don't try to convince me to switch to something I certainly don't want, because it is 45 milliseconds faster when I switch a tab or something.
Get a grip on reality.
@marksman7328: Have you tried out the Opera Dragonfly beta for web development? Or is it too different a thing than web dev toolbar?
@slick and marksman. Thanks for the details! At issue still is the webmail compose--I don't want to use Opera's mail interface (I just tried it and it's awful...also, I just received 3156 new messages by enabling imap so Opera could fetch my mail...) I just want mailto: links to open gmail and populate the to: field in.
Image Zoom allows you to right click an image and scroll up/down to zoom. Is that possible in Opera? Your solutions don't really fit.
The magic wand is not better than Roboform. I have hundreds of passwords as well as secure notes and form info saved from my years of happy use of Roboform. Maybe if I were startig from scratch. BTW Opera is officially NOT supported by Roboform.
You're right I don't really NEED woot watcher or adsense notifier...
Gmail notifier for firefox is critical for these reasons:
It will monitor more than one account. It will not ONLY check the inbox like the official google version does (I filter my incoming mail so that's useless) and I always see at a glance how many messages await me if I'm not looking at the screen when they come in. Also I can make it chime a pretty chime for when I'm not in the room :)
Ebay negs as a script I'll have to check out. How can anyone ebay without it?
Very good post.
Thanks a lot for the effort!
@scerwup: I don't think anyone is trying to convert anyone. I think we can all agree that you should be knowledgeable on a browser before you bash it or say a different one is better.
"Because as I have already said, for AdBlock and Noscript on FF all I did was click install now and go on about my business, no "configuring" anything, no nothing." -- My experience has been that No-Script took quite a bit of tweaking.
ahh, too much letters in comments. didn't read. and got confused as well. winners on the pics and the post are different....
@cisengineer:
"I just want mailto: links to open gmail and populate the to: field in."
-In Opera, you can go to Tools > Preferences > Advanced > Programs. Under "Protocol," you should see the mailto: protocol. Click on it, select "Edit," and you can make it do whatever you want. You can point it to open up your e-mail application or the Gmail notifier or whatever.
"Image Zoom allows you to right click an image and scroll up/down to zoom. Is that possible in Opera?"
-What's the big difference between right-clicking and sliding (FF) versus holding Control and scrolling (Opera)? If you are so picky that you won't accept a different shortcut, you may as well stick with the same browser for your whole life, never upgrade your OS, never get different hardware, never install new programs, etc.
My mistake on Opera being supported by Roboform. I've just really never needed to use it thanks to the Wand. Perhaps there will one day be a Roboform plug-in for Opera for those who want it.
Gmail notifier: if you don't want to use the built-in mail client, you can use the "multiGmail" widget for Opera: [widgets.opera.com] This will check multiple accounts, labels, etc. Click on the account name and it will open in Opera.
Ebay negs: I've been eBaying for several years without this… what does it do? If it's something to allow you to view negative feedback, can't you do this within the normal eBay interface? Just click on a person's feedback rating, change the number of shown feedback to 200 or so, and scroll through the list really quickly looking for the red symbols.
My point in all this is not that you have to convert to Opera. I have never tried to make someone convert. What I have done is to defend Opera against those who claim that it can't do this or that feature that Firefox does, usually only thanks to extensions that have to be installed separately and that take up memory and CPU cycles. I get the impression that many people who try Opera never even attempt to customize it as they do with Firefox, which frustrates me. Most of the stuff you've asked for was only a simple Google search away. Or, you could have gone to opera.com and searched for what you wanted. It's not that difficult, I promise!
I've personally just always felt more comfortable in Firefox, especially the new FF3 release.
Has anyone tried FasterFox, or any other add-ons that increase the speed of Firefox further? It's pretty amazing what the expandability has allowed.
Here's an opinion from the not tech savvy. All of the browsers (not IE) were clunky and slow on our iMacs. Once I upgraded the ranch to an 8 core Mac Pro and two of the latest Mac Book Pros, with increased front end, guess what? Those clunky slow browsers were speedy enough.
Most of the bells and whistles and add ons and extensions sought after aren't much use to part of the market. Damn glad they're available, but we're not power users where seconds and minutes and efficiency count.
It's Safari around here. Except for video product. Then its Firefox. Safari still doesn't do embedded video worth a damn. (like news videos on Breitbart, for example ... Safari = stuttering shitty delivery and mismatched sound track to video track ... Firefox is closer to true video delivery)
I don't know what happened but my firefox 3 memory usage went up with the RC releases. It stayed around 100-150mb with beta 3 and 4. Right now it's idling at 300mb with RC2.
@gpzbc: What did you have to tweak in NoScript? The only problems I have had with it are figuring out which script on certain pages is causing me to be able to login. That is usually fixed by just clicking the nice little NoScript button in my toolbar. However, when a site uses a bunch of different scripts, (I've seen some with 60+), it can be slightly annoying to figure out which I need to allow. However, this seems like a small price to pay to keep nasty stuff from running without my knowledge.
As for people saying a different one is better, yes you are correct, people should be knowledgeable about it first. However, trying to turn someone off to a browser because it is milliseconds slower, or the fact that you install extensions for it, is just plain rude. I love my extensions, I have the exact ones that are right for me, because I choose them. I don't have any crap I don't want "built-in". Therefore, I don't have the same browser as everyone else. My browser does what I want it to and nothing more. It also looks how I want it to. That is of course going to change when FF3 is released, because I think 1 or 2 of my extensions is not supported, and I know my awesome theme isn't. But, it's a small price to pay to be able to use a good browser that is configurable to my needs, and not preprogrammed to the needs the makers say you should want.
However, for those that like Opera or Safari, more power to you, I will agree, I tried Opera before, and it was pretty fast compared to FF. However, it was just too plain for my taste, I couldn't even stand to look at it after about 5 minutes. Everybody likes different things, that's what makes people individuals. But bashing something that someone else uses, for no reason other than maliciousness is rude. And I have seen it on every topic here on LH. It's always about, "My browser is better", or "Oh, you have a problem with something in Windows... Get a Mac, or use Linux".
@Metkis: I added the BetterCache extension yesterday. It's supposed to ignore code on webpages that forces a reload every time and to load more from the cache when using the back/forward buttons kind of like Opera does. It does do what it says. I unplugged the internet altogether and the Back button does indeed go back in history without having an active connection (during a session).
The writer also recommends installing the Full Reload button for if you really want the whole page refreshed.
I'm going to try it for a while and see how it goes.
Thanks for the nod on that LH (Kevin)!
It answers my relevant questions. I can understand that most people run wildly variable set ups (particularly with FF) but I actually run pretty close to the test environment (usually between 4-8 tabs, 3 or 4 plugins etc.) so this is an excellent benchmark for me.
It does mean that as we get closer to final release and my main core add-ons become compatible I will switch to FF3 pretty quickly, on all my day to day computers.
Worth noting that Vista preloads a lot of things it thinks you'll use, based on previous usage. So your startup times (especially the cold ones) could end up quite biased.
@Ugly Joe: I also chuckled a bit at seeing "Windows 3.1.1"
I think it would also be interesting to test these new browsers against the current/previous release to see if there really is a performance increase between the versions.
For those opera-haters... you have to admit it's the best performer in most tests.
"few people will have eight tabs open"
I have 37 open right now...
I started using FF3 as soon as it went beta, and the memory use was the best thing about it. They've now made some more UI tweaks, and it's a great browser. Very surprised at how poorly IE did, and how well Safari did! However, as a Linux user, I'm more than happy with how FF doesn't take all your memory hostage anymore.
FF3-FTW!
@scerwup: They don't call it 'browser wars' for nothing ;) Seriously though, I and several others just get tired of Firefox fanboys trying Opera for 2 minutes without even bothering to take advantage of its extremely customizable features or speed improvements like Mouse Gestures or Speed Dial or that nifty easy to use search engine in address bar feature. It's little things like that that really make Opera a better browser to me. Ultimately though, you are right. If somebody places more value on their tetris extension then the more power to them. Whatever makes the user happy is what counts. Just don't discount Opera's amazing speed and solid features.
@MttFrog13: I also had my folks and non-tech friends install Opera instead of Firefox, and they love it! I think it's the winning combination of speed, simplicity, and tons of features right out of the box that make it so appealing to people who just want to surf the net without a hassle.
Deep inside of me i knew that Opera, Safari and FF are the best ones ;) I have all four of them installed in my laptop, right now i am using Opera 9.5 just for testing and until FF 3 comes, then I will use it as a back-up browser the same with Safari and at the end IE. I must admit that opera is pretty good, but it has it's little problems with some pages, but in general i like it.
If you use Vista and keep the super fetch turned on, Firefox (and just about anything you use on a daily basis), will take next to no time at all to start up cold each day. It's interesting.
if i have have more than 8 tabs open, more than likely i'm looking at the derdy sites...
@slick and marksman and toblakai.
Thanks for all the tips. You people are awesome :)
Good testing, but no analysis of the results. No conclusion. ???? >_<
So at work (..big web app company and at home I've done a lot (a lot!) of work FF2/3 (on OSX, Ubuntu, Vista), Safari (on OSX, Vista), IE7(Vista) and Opera(Ubuntu)...and Camino.
My conclusion: Safari is damn fast. Much faster than FF on all platforms, and by far the fastest on OSX. If you want the speediest; it's Safari.
Opera is darn fast too, but there are so many sites that will not render properly under it, that I find it almost unusable. Admittedly, I've only used the Ubuntu version, but I've encountered a lot of sites that will not render correctly.
Having said that, I use FF the most because of all the cool add-ins and consistency of site rendering.
Also, I think another browser war is coming.
Its 2008, speed testing is so passe - who the hell cares about which browser is faster on charts measures in milliseconds?
Will we still be doing this in 2180, measureing rendering times and javascript execution in nanoseconds?
@brundlefly76: Hey, if you're still alive in 2180, I'll congratulate you. The point is to figure out which browser can save you the most time and frustration in 2008, a time when all of us are currently alive.
IE? Who cares?
Safari? no tabs, who cares?
Opera? Current version less buggy than FF 2 and less memory, faster, etc. Don't like the fact that they don't use standard Windows short cuts though.
FF? Thank god the memory foot print is much lower. Hoping they fix my daily crashes with FF 2 that I send in. You open over 20 tabs and things can get real hairy, real fast.
@Michael @ Paperweight Blog: passé was the word of the day, though he forgot the accent. he felt compelled to use it.
@pyxzer: Thanks a lot :)
I couldn't say it better than brundlefly76.
Now browser start-up times, much faster on my EEE pc900 than on my mac. Mmm...solid state.
What about Maxthon 2? It seems to be way faster than Firefox 2 (for what it's worth).
One more thought, for those inept enough to still be using the browser that doesn't have internal pop-up blocking (i.e. IE), here's a decade old freeware blocker that still works, called KillAd.
[www.fsc-soft.com]
I still use it when I'm forced to endure Infernal Exploder, such as on PCs where I can't install software or use my Flash RAM device.
I love me some Opera. Been with them for quite some time. I know you hear this argument from Firefox users a lot, but I just can't seem to switch to FF. It doesn't have all the features that I want. ;-) Not to mention how SLOW it is. Ugh. Opera FTW!
I can't believe you are saying Opera wouldn't typically be used in like-new condition! It doesn't *have* addons, and I would argue doesn't need them, since common Firefox functionality - Greasemonkey/userscripts, adblock/block content, mouse gestures, many more - are *part* of that clean install!
Overall not a bad article, but I'm disappointed in your last little dig at Opera.
Your favorite browser sucks.
I've been using Opera since version 3 and it just keeps getting better. I've tried other browsers in an attempt to "upgrade" and have yet to find a better choice.
I'm an A+ Technician and part of my job is to make recommendations. IE is trash, so I always point people towards Opera or Firefox. Both are great, but IMO Opera is built with convenience in mind and the speed is just a big bonus.
I just started using GNewSense, which is Ubuntu Linux with all the non-free digital blobs removed.
It uses Epiphany, which is the default browser for Gnome.
At first I was disappointed that it wasn't Firefox, but it's actually much faster, and it does what I need it to do. There aren't hundreds of thousands of extensions to choose from, but I'm doing fine without them anyway.
Another thing that it doesn't have as compared to Firefox 3 is the frequent freeze-ups that Firefox performed under Ubuntu. Won't be missing that part.
I wish this speed test was a little more scientific to say the least. There's too much potential for human error or inconsistencies to make many conclusions. Also, it would've been nice to see browsers compared on different browers as well (Safari is bound to perform better on a Mac). I would also like to see comparisons with previous versions of each browser-- which has made the greatest improvements over time?
"Again, few people will have eight tabs open"
hahahahahahahaha roflmao. 8 tabs - is that all you expect us to have open?!?!
Right now, I have 22 tabs open across 6 windows. That's the use I put my browser to at *home* - which is nothing compared to the royal beating I give it at work. I think you need to update your expectations a bit!
@tap52384: Amen! I also don't want to use a built in BT client for example.
I've given all browsers thorough workouts and Firefox is what I use 99.9% of the time. It just works.
Start a discussion:
Login with your username and password below. Or comment on this post via email.
Forgot your username or password? New User?