# [Browsers] Safari / Firefox / Chrome / Opera - which is best?



## JoeyDee (Aug 15, 2008)

Hey guys.

I've tried them all...








*Safari*: seems best for my mac I guess - but it isn't as fast as "Chrome beta 4.0.201.1"

*Chrome*: super fast but the only problem is with the Chrome is that i can hear my fans go nutsss if I use it for more than 5 minutes or so.. (not sure why!)

*Firefox*: it's good, but I got bored of the interface

*Opera*: seems pretty good but not as fast as Chrome

So what browser do you guys like best & suggest, please vote and leave a comment.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

my experience is Safari first then Firefox for everything Safari can not do.
You will never be able to live with one browser that is fact..
Safari can not handle my login to a Government Tax system for filing online, also programing of routers.
so therefore i use firefox.

but everything else is safari.. annoying but it is life.

i have not voted in your poll because it does not have an option of combos...
i can not vote for one browser, when life is not that easy.


----------



## gwillikers (Jun 19, 2003)

What, no iCab choice? Recently shown to be the quickest of the bunch.

But then again iCab isn't free. But Omniweb is.


----------



## JoeyDee (Aug 15, 2008)

gwillikers said:


> What, no iCab choice? Recently shown to be the quickest of the bunch.
> 
> But then again iCab isn't free. But Omniweb is.


Is iCab the browser that I guess specialized in optimizing speed and like have a bunch of tabs? I'll research it, and I've never heard of Omniweb... I'll check that out as well..

Thanks fellas


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Still like Camino especially with slo-pitch cable connection.


----------



## Orion (Apr 16, 2004)

For making the web look good: Safari. Speed-wise Safari has come a long way (4.0 is quite nice).

I used to prefer Camino, but I change enough things in bookmarks regularly (iPhone syncing and all that) that I want the changes to be there without having to do a whole export/import procedure. If Safari could handle cookies the way Camino or Firefox do then it would be no contest. Alternatively, if Camino used the Webkit rendering engine it would be my choice.

So much for a decision -_-;;


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

I've tried them all, and in the end I kept three.

1. Safari. I use it for everything.
2. I keep Firefox around to test web pages, to troubleshoot Safari, and because a number of my clients use it.
3. Flock is an interesting project with a unique "social/photo networking" angle so I keep it around to follow its development.

I used to also keep iCab and Camino around for the same reasons as Flock but after years of keeping an eye on them they really don't seem to be going anywhere fast so I finally decided to stop wasting my time with them. It's kind of like waiting for Windows to fix the bugs, you know?


----------



## Chealion (Jan 16, 2001)

FWIW, if you want the speed you find with Chrome but use Safari check out the WebKit nightlies. Chrome 4.0 betas have a newer version of WebKit than what you have in Safari 4.0.3. The WebKit nightlies tend to stay a day or two ahead of the Chrome betas but that really shouldn't matter to anyone.

Firefox is worth keeping around - I prefer the WebKit based browsers (Safari and Chrome) for the speed but some sites still don't like WebKit based browsers and Firefox will work just fine on them.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

JoeyDee said:


> Hey guys.
> 
> I've tried them all...
> 
> *Firefox*: it's good, but I got bored of the interface


Then I guess you didn't customize it to your liking. 

That is why I stay a Firefox devotee. It is open source and there are hundreds of addons to customize it in almost every way imaginable. I have been using FireFox almost since it first came out and I have now customized it to the point that it is almost an extension of the way I think and work.

Consequently every time I try and give Safari a whirl I find it to be a frustrating experience. It doesn't "fit" me. I have to adjust and accommodate it.

Until I can "tailor" Safari to fit me the way I can with Firefox, a Firefox devotee I will be...


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

I like Safari, but like it less since it went 64 bit. I'm not willing to give up 64 bit, but Adblock no longer works. I feel like I went from TIVO to bunny ears, although I'm better informed about what websites want to sell me...

I use Firefox for company sites that haven't been authored for Safari.


----------



## garf1108 (May 30, 2006)

Firefox and Safari from a non IT individual


----------



## xNate (Oct 1, 2009)

I personally use Safari for almost everything but keep firefox around because there are some things that it handles better then safari.


----------



## Benito (Nov 17, 2007)

I'm using Safari now, but like many, occasionally when I have to fill out forms, it doesn't work so I keep firefox around for those times.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

Camino for nearly everything, Safari for whatever Camino renders useless.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

Safari, mostly because of MobileMe bookmark syncing, but also because it's fast, lightweight, and just gets the hell outta my way.

I keep Firefox around for what few things still don't work 100% with it (which these days is pretty much just my work's internal employee site).


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

The best browser was Mosaic - without Flash, Java, and other bits of bloat that slow everything down.

But for modern browsers, I think FireFox is the best simply because of the add-ins that make web browsing bearable, like AdBlock. FlashBlock, and AutoStopPlay. This despite the lagging rendering speed and general slowness of FireFox. Camino might be a good alternative, but I could never get Camino add-ins to work.

Safari is a good browser, but without add-ins, it is relegated to select sites that are not heavy on adding useless animated crud. Safari remains broken on many sites, so even if someone likes Safari, they end up needing FireFox or Interglitch Exploder anyways. One of the advantages of Safari is that it has a far more efficient interface that conserves screen space for the web page - something that can be done with FireFox but only with a great deal of effort and lots of noodling with various files. The other advantages include: the Activity Window, which FireFox lacks; as well as being able to do bulk downloads from a text file listing, another thing FireFox can't do.

And that is the best thing about OSX, one can have a number of browsers and use them at will; unlike Windoze where one is always stuck with IE, and any other browsers can not take advantage of any advanced features because Windoze allows IE only. I have and use a number of browsers for various tasks, and all cooperate with no problems under OSX.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

On a Mac, which sites don't work for you in Safari?

I haven't used Internet Explorer on my work PC for years, except to test stuff. I've used Safari since the day it came out, and it works fine for every purpose.

What makes you think Windows *requires* IE??




EvanPitts said:


> The best browser was Mosaic - without Flash, Java, and other bits of bloat that slow everything down.
> 
> But for modern browsers, I think FireFox is the best simply because of the add-ins that make web browsing bearable, like AdBlock. FlashBlock, and AutoStopPlay. This despite the lagging rendering speed and general slowness of FireFox. Camino might be a good alternative, but I could never get Camino add-ins to work.
> 
> ...


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> ...where one is always stuck with IE, and any other browsers can not take advantage of any advanced features because Windoze allows IE only.


Say what???!!!! You can run any browser on Windows including a Windows version of Safari.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> One of the advantages of Safari is that it has a far more efficient interface that conserves screen space for the web page - something that can be done with FireFox but only with a great deal of effort and lots of noodling with various files.


What???!!! Two clicks to remove the navigation bar and the bookmarks bar and you have the maximum amount of screen space possible in Firefox.  You are way off the mark today EP.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> ...Safari remains broken on many sites, so even if someone likes Safari, they end up needing FireFox or Interglitch Exploder anyways.


Wow! No Safari isn't broken on many sites, many sites continue to use code that is non-standards compliant. The sites are broken not Safari. Jeessh!


----------



## bundy (Mar 5, 2009)

safari needs unlinker.....do they have unlinker for safari? lol


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

HowEver said:


> On a Mac, which sites don't work for you in Safari?


Most Government sites, as well as Monster.ca, FaceBook and a range of other sites. FireFox handles most of them, so my bases are covered.



> What makes you think Windows *requires* IE??


Try getting rid of it, then watch the system go up in flames...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

screature said:


> Say what???!!!! You can run any browser on Windows including a Windows version of Safari.


Sure, you can run other browsers, but you can not take advantage of internal OS features that one gets with Windoze if you choose not to use IE.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

screature said:


> What???!!! Two clicks to remove the navigation bar and the bookmarks bar and you have the maximum amount of screen space possible in Firefox.  You are way off the mark today EP.


Not quite. One has to go in and edit a bunch of things to get rid of useless, screen gobbling "features", download a more efficient theme pack, and a number of other items - and it still is not as efficient as Safari. The biggest hurdle is the fact that one is stuck with far too much space around various icons, which wastes space, as well as being stuck with separate icons for the Stop and Reload functions, which is handled by a single icon in Safari. The back and forward icon is huge and ungainly, and the tabs are far too high (they could be shaved down at least 6 pixels).

Some of the drop down menus are useless, and for instance, I would like to be able to get rid of useless screen robbing garbage like the Bookmarks menu - but that is trivial when compared to the lack of an Activity Monitor.

The main strength of Safari is the minimalist approach they took in designing the interface - while the default FireFox interface looks goofy, as if it was designed by a kindergarten kid with those giant crayons...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

screature said:


> Wow! No Safari isn't broken on many sites, many sites continue to use code that is non-standards compliant. The sites are broken not Safari. Jeessh!


So maybe I should have stated it differently - that Safari is rendered useless on many sites because the sites are broken, so while waiting for those sites to be redesigned and rewritten with an eye to compliance with accepted standards, one is forced to use another browser that can handle the brokenness of such sites. beejacon


----------



## Guest (Oct 6, 2009)

Evan: I wouldn't have pegged you for a Mosaic user ... too new. I would have thought you'd be more into Lynx and Chimera 

P.S. Facebook, Monster.ca and most gov't sites I've been to work fine with Safari for me, as long as you're using a _recent_ version and not 2.0.


----------



## HowEver (Jan 11, 2005)

Evan, what is your current computer?


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

EvanPitts said:


> __________________
> The scotsburn.ftn is Panther powered! - iMac G3 - 600 / iBook G3 - 500 - And much more...


EP's Safari issues are entirely related to the fact that he is running Panther.... XX)

I used to keep Camino around for stuff that didn't work well in Safari but since version 4 of Safari arrived I have not one single time required the use of anything else. After clean installing Snow Leopard I have never bothered even to reinstall Camino - just not required. I just never liked the 'feel' of Firefox. Removing browser add-ons makes me a nice little pile of money because that is all it usually takes to fix browser issues for my clients.... :lmao:

EDIT: At the gallery where I work occasionally they only have Whineblow$, I still use Safari!!! It is palpably faster than FireF*cks on the same machine and digests any page with aplomb. No PC user I know uses IE at all.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

Using a much more complete browser list MacOSXHints comes up with these results:







Note that the Safari/FireF*cks split is roughly similar to this current ehMac poll.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

mguertin said:


> Evan: I wouldn't have pegged you for a Mosaic user ... too new. I would have thought you'd be more into Lynx and Chimera


Actually, I preferred uucp straight up on a VAX - but Mosaic was fine enough. I think they just add too much garbage these days to many sites, while getting rid of actual content. I preferred pine as a mail reader as well...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

HowEver said:


> Evan, what is your current computer?


I have a number of machines. Currently I am on some kind of Windoze box because I am not at home.

I run Panther because Tiger is bloated, and one can not get rid of garbage like Spotlight, Dashboard and the Widgets.

Long term is to migrate my systems to Linux, but I need to complete a few projects on my Macs before I take that step.

I do not see what this has to do with web browsers anyways...


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

EvanPitts said:


> Try getting rid of [IE], then watch the system go up in flames...


I've done it a number of times with no ill effects. Been the case every since the XP service pack where they separated the app from the engine so you could uninstall it.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> I do not see what this has to do with web browsers anyways...


Duh!? Because you are not able to evaluate recent software versions thus acurately commenting on the same versions of commonly used software as the general masses due to "stuck" in Panther.


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

What's with the desperate nicknames used en masse
in this (and other) threads for non-Apple products... It's really sad, and pathetic!


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

PosterBoy said:


> I've done it a number of times with no ill effects. Been the case every since the XP service pack where they separated the app from the engine so you could uninstall it.


+1

EvanPitts is living in his own world again!!


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Of interest below... 

Percentage of visits to ehMac.ca over the past 30 days.


----------



## WestWeb (Jul 11, 2009)

For me the only two options are Safari and Firefox. Safari is clearly a much faster browser with a clean slick interface: but, I just couldn't live without Firefox it's open source, and it has add ons that are almost a necessity for me as a web developer.
As such, my vote definitely goes to Firefox.


----------



## Corvillus (Nov 15, 2007)

Right now I'm saying Safari, because it's the browser that I generally use and has a good balance between speed and attractive UI. That said, Chrome looks interesting, especially with the speed of Google's JavaScript engine. It currently beats all browsers in JavaScript execution speed, and there's a lot you can do with it (this NES emulator is an interesting example JSNES: A Javascript NES emulator ).

Given though that there's not too many apps that are that JavaScript intensive, I'm still sticking with Safari, which is more visually appealing.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

To HowEver: I choose to run Safari in 32-bit mode so I gain the Adblock back, but it's LIGHTNING fast for me, as in so quick I often DON'T SEE the change from the "topics" page to the "thread" page! I'm not sure that I'm giving up much here on my BlackBook w/2GB of RAM. Maybe on a Mac Pro w/8GB I'd notice.

Someone else claimed that Safari does not have "plug-ins." I'm here to tell you that is incorrect. I have Adblock (and there are other such adblockers for Safari), ClicktoFlash (and there are other flashblockers for Safari) and SafariCookie (and there are other cookie managers for Safari). There's a whole website devoted to these and many other add-ons for Safari.

Firefox is still way ahead when it comes to things you can plug into it, of course, but Safari does have a plug-in "market" as well.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

^^^
Where do they plug-in? I see no menu option for it - is it something that one needs the PithHelmet hack for?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

PosterBoy said:


> I've done it a number of times with no ill effects. Been the case every since the XP service pack where they separated the app from the engine so you could uninstall it.


I am talking about regular Windoze - not some special add on service pack that may or may not accomplish the task.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

EvanPitts said:


> ^^^
> Where do they plug-in? I see no menu option for it - is it something that one needs the PithHelmet hack for?


Essentially, yes.

From PimpMySafari (link in *chas_m*'s post above:


> Due to the lack of a proper plug-in architecture, most enhancements for Safari are “haxies”. That is, SIMBL modules or InputManagers that inject code into Safari in places where it was never intended by Apple. Though this approach has produced many useful plugins for Safari, they can often lead to instability in the browser.


As I wrote above, I get calls every day from clients who have installed these things..... 'plug-ins' make me $$...


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> ^^^
> Where do they plug-in? I see no menu option for it - is it something that one needs the PithHelmet hack for?


Help -> Installed Plug-ins


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> I am talking about regular Windoze - not some special add on service pack that may or may not accomplish the task.


XP SP1 (and above) is regular Windows.


----------



## Darien Red Sox (Oct 24, 2006)

Firefox, it is cross platform and can make a windows box look more like a mac with plugins. I also enjoy the fact that I am not forced to use google when using the built in surch box.


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

ehMax said:


> Of interest below...
> 
> Percentage of visits to ehMac.ca over the past 30 days.


20% of visitors on Internet Exploder? 

Buncha frickin' wannabes...


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

FeXL said:


> 20% of visitors on Internet Exploder?
> 
> Buncha frickin' wannabes...


Or people at work who have no control over their office IT policy... ??


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

No, it's a Service Pack - I am talking about Windoze that one can go to the store, purchase and install...


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

EvanPitts said:


> No, it's a Service Pack - I am talking about Windoze that one can go to the store, purchase and install...


Windows XP has been sold (off the shelf) with the Service Pack built in since 2004. It has been impossible to buy XP without the mentioned changes for over 5 years (unless you explicitly go out of your way to buy an old XP install and license).

Subsequent Windows releases (Vista and Windows 7) already have the aforementioned changes integrated into their initial releases.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

chas_m said:


> Firefox is still way ahead when it comes to things you can plug into it, of course, but Safari does have a plug-in "market" as well.


Sorry chas_m, I know the point you are making and you do concede that FireFox is way ahead in the plugin or addon department, but I couldn't resist showing just how far ahead they are.... like light years. :lmao:


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

FeXL said:


> 20% of visitors on Internet Exploder?
> 
> Buncha frickin' wannabes...


Or people that are checking out things from school, or from the girlfriend's place...


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

G-Mo said:


> Windows XP has been sold (off the shelf) with the Service Pack built in since 2004. It has been impossible to buy XP without the mentioned changes for over 5 years (unless you explicitly go out of your way to buy an old XP install and license).
> 
> Subsequent Windows releases (Vista and Windows 7) already have the aforementioned changes integrated into their initial releases.


Evan should really get with the program.


----------



## Bjornbro (Feb 19, 2000)

screature said:


> ... including a Windows version of Safari.


Yes, include me as a Windows Safari surfer. I just wish Apple would be consistent with their Safari releases. Here's my pet peeve, in tabs, the close "x" button is on the right for Windows, but left for OS X. :baby:


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

Bjornbro said:


> Yes, include me as a Windows Safari surfer. I just wish Apple would be consistent with their Safari releases. Here's my pet peeve, in tabs, the close "x" button is on the right for Windows, but left for OS X. :baby:


That drives me nuts too, as I often toggle between Safari on my MacBook and Safari for Windows either in virtualization or through RDC/CoRD!


----------



## FeXL (Jan 2, 2004)

G-Mo said:


> Or people at work who have no control over their office IT policy... ??


People at work fritter time away on ehMac? 

(Chill, dude, there was a great big fat grin at the end of the post...)


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

FeXL said:


> People at work fritter time away on ehMac?
> 
> (Chill, dude, there was a great big fat grin at the end of the post...)


I know, I know...

I'd like to see the usage broken down hourly over a day to see if IE use peaks during 9-5 M-F...


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

Playing with Google Chrome beta right now. So far, feels quite snappy.


----------



## JoeyDee (Aug 15, 2008)

Hey Guys...

Glad to see this thread had made some noise on the forum... and I read all the comments!

Good stuff guys!

Im one of the 2 people who voted for Chrome... Im totally digging this browser but still needs some major improvements.

Like the rest of the people on the forum; I have more than 1 browser and switch between browsers depending what I'm doing...


----------



## G-Mo (Sep 26, 2007)

Is Chrome native yet?

I really like the Windows version...


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

Evan, Based on your responses thus far I just have one question:

Which _current_ browser are you actually running? That is, most current version in a supported OS? Because it seems that most of your information is out of date.


----------

