Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Chrome Firefox Google Safari

WSJ: 'Quit Chrome. Safari and Edge Are Just Better Browsers' (wsj.com) 253

Posted by EditorDavid from the battling-browsers dept.
The Wall Street Journal's senior personal tech columnist just published an article urging readers to "quit Chrome. Safari and Edge are just better browsers." It begins with the reporter pretending to break up with Chrome, adding "I'd say I'll remember the good times — your speed, your superb handling of Gmail — but your RAM hoovering, battery draining and privacy disregarding make it easy to not look back.

"This is the year, people. It's the year I challenge you to pack up your bookmarks and wave bye-bye to Google's browser..."

And the article is even accompanied by a video titled "Four ways to stop Chrome from slowing down your computer," where tip #1 is just: "Stop using Chrome..." "Sure, Chrome has far more browser market share [than Firefox, Safari, and Edge]. But all of them have actually gotten quite good over the last number of years. Heck, the new Microsoft Edge browser even uses Chromium, the same underlying technology as Chrome, and the performance is much improved, across Windows PCs, and Macs. Yes, Microsoft's browser is available for Mac, and it's good.

"In my weeks of testing, Edge used 5% less resources than Chrome on Windows. Safari used up to 10% less in some of my tests on my Mac. That meant up to 2 extra hours of battery life in their respective operating systems. Firefox, unfortunately, took up just as much power as Chrome. Google says it's working on some resource-saving improvements that will come in the next few months.

If you can switch to just one of those, go for it, even if just for their better privacy tools."
The video opens with a cartoon depiction of "Chrome-y," who lives inside your computer and eats your RAM and other resouces. "But don't worry. You can put him on a diet and take back your computer with some of these tips." The other tips including uninstalling extensions, and using Chrome's Task Manager to "spot and kill the RAM gobblers."

But throughout the video, "Chrome-y" continues chomping on your RAM...
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WSJ: 'Quit Chrome. Safari and Edge Are Just Better Browsers' More

WSJ: 'Quit Chrome. Safari and Edge Are Just Better Browsers'

Comments Filter:

  • Firefox (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tsa ( 15680 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @05:46PM (#60291050) Homepage

    Firefox has done its job admirably for me ever since it was still called Netscape.

    • Re:Firefox (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Jetstream ( 911042 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @05:51PM (#60291068)
      Yes, they left out the best browser - Firefox. Using Chrome here (work), WHY does Chrome need **17** processes for a mere FOUR active tabs? This is insane.

      • Re:Firefox (Score:5, Informative)

        by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @06:09PM (#60291140)

        WHY does Chrome need **17** processes for a mere FOUR active tabs? This is insane.

        Part of the reason is the security model. If each task is in a separate process, they can't peek at each other's data.

        % ps auxw | wc
                534 7052 115968

        My laptop has 534 processes running. What difference does 17 more make?

        • Re:Firefox (Score:5, Insightful)

          by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @06:13PM (#60291156)

          Also means that if one tab crashes, it won't take the whole browser with it.

          • Also means that if one tab crashes, it won't take the whole browser with it.

            ITYM "if one tab crashes it won't take all your porn in the other tabs with it". Which is certainly a feature.

          • One process per tab would suffice for that quite adequately.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by Rewind ( 138843 )
          Well, we are talking about Chrome here. Why would the processes even need to peak at each otherâ(TM)s data? I imagine Google finds it much more efficient to work with the data once itâ(TM)s all gathered together on their end.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Sleeping Kirby ( 919817 )
            The poster's comment is "Part of the reason is the security model. If each task is in a separate process, they can't peek at each other's data" He or She is saying this is the case so that they *don't* peek into each other's data for *security* reasons. Imagine for a second that you're on facebook. Facebook is grabbing content in the background so it can do continuous scroll. Obviously it's grabbing personalized content so it needs to identify as you to grab your content. You have another table that's runni
          • Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            It's not just per-tab, Chrome now separates out network, rendering, Javascript and more into processes. Makes sense to take advantage of multiple cores and to separate those things for security reasons.

            Obviously they don't gather this data together on their end, it would be insane and dumb to try to render pages in the cloud and then stream them as video to the browser.

        • 17 per 4 tabs. When I'm actively researching something my tab count often exceeds 60. So if it's 4 per tab + 1 'central', that's 241 extra processes. That does make a difference

      • I know it's common for people to not read the article, but not even reading the summary is a bit sad.

        Firefox, unfortunately, took up just as much power as Chrome. Google says it's working on some resource-saving improvements that will come in the next few months.

      • Well, I've got just one Firefox tab open right now that is using 6 processes and 451MB of RAM, while Chrome, for it's 17 tabs is using 14 process and 334 MB, so...ummm, YMMV?

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • I quit using Firefox as more and more of the systems I manage at work stopped working with it, due to FF deprecating various features in the name of Security. Over time I used Chrome for more and more stuff until eventually I just didn't bother with FF. Safari isn't an option and Edge has toomuch weirdness with older platforms. So it's Chrome for me for the foreseeable future.

  • The irony (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 12, 2020 @05:49PM (#60291064)

    This chump recommends using a Microsoft browser because of privacy concerns... How much do you want to bet he runs Spyware 10?

    • This chump recommends using a Microsoft browser because of privacy concerns...

      Relative to Google.. Is a company that makes the majority of their income from selling advertisements going to be that much better? Microsoft will have improved privacy because they are attempting to build market share and do not currently derive their profits from ads. But this is temporary. I would not trust either in the long run.

      • Is a company that makes the majority of their income from selling advertisements going to be that much better?

        Well quite possibly. Who do you trust more not to share your recipe? A book publisher who among other things publishes recipe books, or coca-cola who has spent years monetising a recipe while keeping it secret.

        Google collect a fuckton more data on users than Microsoft could ever hope to acquire, but somehow I have higher trust that this data will not just be handed over to 3rd parties wholesale in a way that links it to me, after-all that would be the equivalent of Coca-Cola suddenly deciding their new busi

  • Lol. Quit Cancer. Ebola and Aids are just better d (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BAReFO0t ( 6240524 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @05:56PM (#60291088)

    How about, you know, Firefox?
    Or Vivaldi?

    Or anything that isn't what literally everyone considers to be cancer.

    • No mention of Brave either.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bobby ( 109046 )

      I've been using Vivaldi a lot for several years. Has lots of great features. I don't really use straight chrome so I can't compare things very well. Vivaldi is once in a great while unstable, but it could be one of, or combination of my many extensions.

  • Don't ignore the most important factors. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kevin108 ( 760520 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @05:58PM (#60291096) Homepage

    Performance is nice, but there are other primary considerations: which browser is the best at blocking tracking and ads?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      None of them. But they all support pretty much the same plugins, some of which can do those jobs competently.

      • If only there was some way to block that sort of stuff. Possibly using the HOSTS file or something...

      • I have been in Firefox for so long, I know little about what is offered by other browsers. Typically Firefox just works. Other than a brief period with some IE front-end when tabs were a new thing and recently Opera for its pop-out video feature, I have been on Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox ever since I first got broadband at home around 20 years ago.

        The best selection of plug-ins also increases a given browser's "score" for me.

    • Re:Don't ignore the most important factors. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by KiloByte ( 825081 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @06:31PM (#60291224)

      And the browser that kills most tracking+ads will perform the best. Base performance being roughly similar, with benchmarks differing usually by single percentage digits, dropping the vast majority of work to do means the winner is decided by killing ads. Not to mention the benefit of no ads for the human on the other side of the screen.

      • You bring up a good point. Killing anything that is making demands of the browser before it loads can only speed things up, assuming the blocker plug-in isn't too top heavy.

    • which browser is the best at blocking tracking and ads?

      No difference between Chrome and Edge, they use the same plugins.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      They are all about the same. While different browsers have some different privacy options none of them really matter when you have uBlock and Privacy Badger installed. Like Firefox's container for Facebook, well it's better to just block Facebook.

      I also recommend Cookie Autodelete. Even better than containers, just run every site in something close to private browsing mode.

  • use browsers that are tied into the OS. I.E. Safari and Edge.

    Your browser should be a completely independent application with no special privileges, that is kept up to date regardless of the OS. Both Apple and M$ are quick to abandon the browser when they upgrade to a new version of the OS.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by UnresolvedExternal ( 665288 )
      Can we please stop saying M$? It doesn't help our argument

    • Friends don't let friends use browsers that are tied into the OS.

      So, Microsoft Edge on a Mac or Linux is Ok then? ;-) ;-P

    • Re:Friends don't let friends... (Score:5, Informative)

      by bloodhawk ( 813939 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @06:30PM (#60291222)
      Edge isn't tied into the OS.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by edis ( 266347 )

        Edge isn't tied into the OS.

        While it installs itself as an OS update. Don't get fooled by even this not being enough.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tero ( 39203 )

      IE is tied to the OS.
      Edge is Chromium (so essentially same browser as Chrome)

  • Consume 4K Videos (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jvp ( 27996 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @06:12PM (#60291146)

    I want to like Safari as a Mac user, but until I can consume 4K (or higher!) YouTube videos with it, it's a non-starter. As for Firefox, its handling of media keys on the keyboard is very bad, and doesn't allow proper plugins to fix that. So, that's out as well.

    Chrome does what I need it to do so I'm going to keep on using it.

    • How do you consume your 4K video? I find it tastes best when doused liberally with Real Butter and lots of Salt. It is especially good when consumed in a sandwich with lots of bacon! The polycarbonate substrate is a little hard to digest though, and you have to make sure you chew REALLY REALLY well or the sharp edges will poke holes in your stomach and intestines (same reason you shouldn't let dogs eat cooked bird bones).

  • Google's Chrome bad?
    but Apple's Safari & Microsoft's Edge good?
    all three are the same browser under the hood
    i will stick with Firefox on Linux for now, until something better comes along

  • 2004 called... (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by Known Nutter ( 988758 )
    2004 called. It wants its browser war back. Seriously. Who really gives a shit anymore? Short of any glaring security issues, use what works for you.

    Fuckin' article sucks.

  • Dual-Browser User (Score:5, Insightful)

    by seoras ( 147590 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @06:32PM (#60291230)

    I find Safari works for most things but somethings just won't work on it.
    Examples: PayPal, every so often PayPal does a reCAPTCHA check if I'm doing multiple payments.
    On Safari reCAPTCHA goes into a weird infinite loop reloading that locks it up. Just for PayPal, reCAPTCHA works everywhere else ok.
    I was on a website a few days ago that had an interactive map (another Google plugin) that I had to use in a form I was filling in.
    Just wouldn't load or work on Safari.
    Being in the Apple eco-system I find keychain very useful which is what keeps me on Safari. Passwords are shared amongst devices securely.
    I always have Firefox open and if a website plays up I switch to Firefox. If Firefox could get full access to keychain I'd drop Safari entirely.
    I find that Firefox has better debugging for web page development work which is what I use it for primarily.
    I trust Firefox and Safari for my privacy which I value.
    I have Chrome but only to test a web page will load, and looks ok, but use it very rarely.
    Google fixing power and memory usage makes no difference to my view of Chrome.
    Google, by their very nature, isn't in this game to prevent tracking me and putting my privacy first.

    • Re:Dual-Browser User (Score:4, Interesting)

      by seoras ( 147590 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @09:30PM (#60291796)

      One other thing I love on Safari (& I'm sure there will be similar plugins for other browsers) is Dynamo [apple.com] which lets me kill any video advert just by pressing E on the keyboard when the Ad starts.
      Works great on YouTube, Facebook etc.
      Top 3 things a browser must have to be my default 1) privacy max 2) keychain support 3) Video Ad Skipper.

  • It's about the benjamins.

  • tech editors of any major news outlet have mostly been funny to say the least, but this type of rant is to set the level of "a senior personal tech columnist" (whatever this should mean) of the almighty wall street journal? and people even pay to read that crap? lol.

  • Portable Firefox From Portableapps.com (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zenlessyank ( 748553 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @07:15PM (#60291422)

    Is the best browser, period.

    It just runs from the executable, no installation needed.

    Wall Street Journal making tech suggestions is just like Byte magazine making stock recommendations.

    Also check out their other portable apps if you don't like your software having hooks into the operating system.

    PS. I'm not a paid shill, just a knowledged user.

  • "WSJ: 'Quit Chrome. Safari and Edge Are Just Better Browsers'"

    Sure, I'll get right on that...

    Too bad that Safari for windows was discontinued by Apple in 2012, (version 5.1.7 was the last one released) so it is missing 8 years of security patches and standards compliance.
    An the current version of Microsoft Edge is just a graphic shell slapped on top of the Chrome rendering engine, so pretty much all of the "downsides" of Chrome apply equally to Edge, with some bonus Microsoft-big-brother stuff thrown in on top of that.

  • Killer feature (Score:3)

    by Cyrano de Maniac ( 60961 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @07:34PM (#60291476)

    Chrome's killer feature for me is built-in (not add-on) bookmark and settings synchronization across devices. If I'm sitting at work and run across something I want to look at later on my own time, I can bookmark it there and have the bookmark waiting for me at home. I can pull up any bookmark I've created on my phone. That's the reason I stick with Chrome.

    Before I used Chrome I used Xmarks to accomplish this on Firefox. Then Xmarks turned to crap and became Foxmarks, and at the time Firefox was a total pig, and Chrome was svelte and snappy, so I switched. From some reading it looks like maybe Foxmarks has gotten better again, but, meh, it's about a horse apiece, without much to argue for one or the other either way, so inertia wins.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by qzzpjs ( 1224510 )

      Chrome's killer feature for me is built-in (not add-on) bookmark and settings synchronization across devices

      The new Microsoft Edge can do this too. Just use your MS account when enabling sync. And it doesn't seem to create 40,000 copies of some bookmarks like Chrome did to me. Chrome literally hangs on my iPad for 5 minutes while it loads them up.

      Another benefit is that Mobile Edge comes with built-in Adblock Plus so reading web pages is sane again. That and tracking prevention and third party cookie bl

    • Re:Killer feature (Score:5, Informative)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Sunday July 12, 2020 @11:46PM (#60292066) Homepage Journal

      Firefox has this built in now. And you can run your own server [readthedocs.io].

    • Works since a long time on Mac and IOS using Safari. It is normal, I think, that Chrome should support similar.

    • Chrome's killer feature for me is built-in (not add-on) bookmark and settings synchronization across devices.

      This "killer" feature is now a standard feature in every browser, including Edge, Firefox, and Safari. All without any plugins.

  • Chrome Edge seems ... okay (Score:3)

    by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @07:58PM (#60291556)

    I mean it looks identical to Chrome. I can't see it as any faster or slower. It seems to do the job on my work machine just fine. From a corporate point of view it's good since it can be managed centrally. Otherwise it's Chrome with a different icon.

    To be clear that's not actually a criticism. It's the first time in a long time that Microsoft has released a browser that hasn't made me cringe trying to use it. Stands to reason since it was mostly written by someone else.

  • They'd have me believe 10% less power usage nets 2 extra hours of battery life while actively using the internet?

    Not only does that assume a 20 hour native battery life, but no real world web usage is going to let the system last that long.

    • it isn't 10% less power usage, it doesn't mention power usage (at least in the summary, can't see the paywalled article), it is 10% less resource usage. potentially that can have a lot more (or less) than 10% power usage impact, they are not a direct 1:1 relationship.

  • This is America, Jack. We're all about resources and we gottem up the yingyang. We can run 20 instances of Chrome at once without missing a beat. Have you been testing browsers on your Walmart computer?

    Look, I understand you are writing for the WSJ masses who don't grok power, speed and resources; but this is Slashdot. We have other concerns, like that spyware at your web site. We use browsers that nip that shit in the bud, and they ain't Chrome or whatever you're selling.

    As far as battery life. When was th

  • the poo (Score:5, Funny)

    by awwshit ( 6214476 ) on Sunday July 12, 2020 @10:20PM (#60291898)

    Look, I hate Chrome. But Microsoft doesn't touch anything without the poo rubbing off on it. And I don't want to work with the poo.

  • If he's using Edge it's quite possible someone else wrote and submitted this article unbeknownst to him.

  • Cute (Score:3)

    by gTsiros ( 205624 ) on Monday July 13, 2020 @01:04AM (#60292186)

    How can one expect a browser to be lightweight when it is essentially an entire OS minus hardware drivers?

  • Chrome is the new IE (Score:5, Interesting)

    by PhunkySchtuff ( 208108 ) <kai@automatic[ ]om.au ['a.c' in gap]> on Monday July 13, 2020 @03:32AM (#60292430) Homepage

    Chrome is the new IE. it's a bloated, resource hog that tries to get web developers to make sites that lack significant functionality when viewed in any browser that's not Chrome, through using proprietary extensions to published standards. Plus, Google will never do anything meaningful to block advertising and trackers as their revenue depends on letting this all go through.

  • Edge is not a browser. (Score:3)

    by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak@ y a hoo.com> on Monday July 13, 2020 @07:36AM (#60292896) Homepage Journal

    It is the sort of software AC/DC's DT should be paying in the background for whilst the headless corpses of web pages lie savaged in their HTTP vehicles.

    Opera used to be brilliant. If it is back in shape, good. But convince me.

    Chrome has lost its way.

    Mozilla's sound track is Gimmie Shelter.

    The last really good browser out there was Netscape 0.95. It has been downhill since.

Slashdot Top Deals

The use of money is all the advantage there is to having money. -- B. Franklin

Close