Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I’m done with Chrome

blog.cryptographyengineering.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 876 posts

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#471

Post by fernly »

colanderman wrote: post #130
uglycoyote wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find that I cannot watch a YouTube video on my MacBook in Firefox for more than 10 seconds without the fans coming on at full throttle. This is one of the few reasons that I start up chrome, as strangely I can watch the same video in chrome without performance issues. I haven't had this issue on Firefox on PC

Disable "Automatic graphics switching" in "Energy Saver" in OS X settings. This fixed this problem for me (which started about 4 months ago). (I'm on Yosemite.)

I'm on Yosemite and I don't see anything like that in the energy saver preference pane.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#472

Post by atombender »

wtetzner wrote: post #468
atombender wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish Firefox was as sleek, fast and no-nonsense as Safari on the Mac, which is my everyday browser. I vastly prefer the idea of an open browser that is not tightly coupled to a particular industry giant. And I wish Firefox actually had a viable Safari competitor on iOS, so that I can sync my state around. Unfortunately, while Firefox has made significant leaps the last couple of years, it's still not a viable alter…

I'm not sure I completely understand what you dislike about container tabs. For me, I find them very useful. It's convenient, for example, to be able to have two side-by-side Gmail tabs open. e.g. one for work email, and one for personal email.

As I commented elsewhere, they don't pass the "grandma test". They're a techie's solution to a problem that shouldn't really exist in the first place, if we'd got "logins" and privacy and so on right.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#473

Post by briandear »

mgkimsal wrote: post #402
EpicEng wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you think the coverage of him is bad now He could solve that problem by simply ceasing to say and do dumb things. I'm not convinced the media is out to get him, he just shoots himself in the foot about 20 times / day. I wish the news were focused more on policy than politics (though not sure that would help him), but people like drama and news orgs like money.

> he just shoots himself in the foot about 20 times / day as much as I dislike trump, i do think some of the negative media coverage of him is over the top, and does its part in destroying credibility of real issues. my own gut would be on those '20 times/day' things, probably 5-10 of them are overblown or taken out of context (the 'fist bump' on 9/11 was overblown, imo, when you look at the complete footage and cont…

Trump and Musk would be well served by giving up Twitter.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#474

Post by acct1771 »

partiallypro wrote: post #457
brandonjm wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Search for "gun rights" in Google, and the Wikipedia feature box on the top-right of the results page is the Gun Control article. That could have a very simple explanation: There is no Wikipedia page for "Gun Rights". There is however a Wikipedia page for "Right to Keep and Bear Arms" which is exactly what appears in the Wikipedia box on the right or as the first Wikipedia article when you search for "right to bear…

There is a "Gun Rights" page on Wikipedia (at least that's the slug,) Bing pulls it to the top of the results for that same query (along with advocacy groups.) While Google puts "Gun Control" at the top right. So, I see OP's point. I do have a hard time believing that is purely algorithmic.

Or, it's a well-trained algo. Either way.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#475

Post by briandear »

wyclif wrote: post #439
jwr wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are on MacOS, why don't you use Safari? I'm puzzled as to why people seem to dismiss the "built-in" browser. It's the fastest, smoothest, best integrated, and least power-hungry browser on the platform. I regularly use all three major browsers (for testing, I write web applications) and I consistently switch back to Safari for all my non-special browsing.

This past weekend I tried Safari again when I saw it updated to version 12. I was surprised to see that Apple deactivated my uBlock Origin plugin, saying it would slow the browser down. So now Safari is unusable and filled with ads, and there's nothing Apple provides to replace uBlock Origin. This is a total show-stopper for me.

Don’t use uBlock, but content blockers on Safari work really well for me. There is also quite a lot of built in privacy protection already.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#476

Post by confounded »

larkeith wrote: post #113
brian-armstrong wrote: post #10

Firefox is a truly fantastic browser now. I've been using it again for about 2 years and haven't regretted it at all. There have been a couple of weird feature hiccups but generally Mozilla seems to get things right.

While I switched back to Firefox a while ago due to loss of trust in Google, it should not be forgotten that they support DRM on the web.

Google’s, no less! (Widevine.)

At least for me, on Linux, it’s always been opt-in, and plenty of the versions of Firefox packaged by distro maintainers get rid of it all together.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#477

Post by [deleted] »

wyclif wrote: post #439
jwr wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are on MacOS, why don't you use Safari? I'm puzzled as to why people seem to dismiss the "built-in" browser. It's the fastest, smoothest, best integrated, and least power-hungry browser on the platform. I regularly use all three major browsers (for testing, I write web applications) and I consistently switch back to Safari for all my non-special browsing.

This past weekend I tried Safari again when I saw it updated to version 12. I was surprised to see that Apple deactivated my uBlock Origin plugin, saying it would slow the browser down. So now Safari is unusable and filled with ads, and there's nothing Apple provides to replace uBlock Origin. This is a total show-stopper for me.

[deleted]

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#478

Post by saagarjha »

wyclif wrote: post #439
jwr wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are on MacOS, why don't you use Safari? I'm puzzled as to why people seem to dismiss the "built-in" browser. It's the fastest, smoothest, best integrated, and least power-hungry browser on the platform. I regularly use all three major browsers (for testing, I write web applications) and I consistently switch back to Safari for all my non-special browsing.

This past weekend I tried Safari again when I saw it updated to version 12. I was surprised to see that Apple deactivated my uBlock Origin plugin, saying it would slow the browser down. So now Safari is unusable and filled with ads, and there's nothing Apple provides to replace uBlock Origin. This is a total show-stopper for me.

Apple doesn't provide a replacement extension, but they do vend a replacement API, the content blocking API. There are many extensions that use this.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#479

Post by saagarjha »

metafunctor wrote: post #459
wyclif wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This past weekend I tried Safari again when I saw it updated to version 12. I was surprised to see that Apple deactivated my uBlock Origin plugin, saying it would slow the browser down. So now Safari is unusable and filled with ads, and there's nothing Apple provides to replace uBlock Origin. This is a total show-stopper for me.

It’s really just a suggestion to turn off some extensions. Haven’t bothered to figure out what triggers Safari to do that, but you can still run uBlock Origin on Safari 12 and it seems to work fine.

> Haven’t bothered to figure out what triggers Safari to do that

Safari has a new extensions model and will be deprecating the legacy one in a year. Hence the push to migrate to newer extensions.

Re: Why I’m done with Chrome

#480

Post by Lazare »

brandonjm wrote: post #449
clarkmoody wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Search for "gun rights" in Google, and the Wikipedia feature box on the top-right of the results page is the Gun Control article. I've noticed the straight search results making a marked decline in quality over the past few months. If one of the keywords within your search is anything remotely profitable, it will drown out all other terms. Then the search results ended after ~4 pages. Definitely changed from the Goog…

> Search for "gun rights" in Google, and the Wikipedia feature box on the top-right of the results page is the Gun Control article. That could have a very simple explanation: There is no Wikipedia page for "Gun Rights". There is however a Wikipedia page for "Right to Keep and Bear Arms" which is exactly what appears in the Wikipedia box on the right or as the first Wikipedia article when you search for "right to bear…

> That could have a very simple explanation: There is no Wikipedia page for "Gun Rights".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_rights is a valid link, and seems like the obvious wikipedia page to deem relevant for that phrase. And Bing gets it right.

I have no reason to think it's some dark conspiracy, but it's certainly a pretty silly failure of their vaunted algorithms. Are there a lot of searches for common phrases where a Wikipedia page exists and Google returns a different Wikipedia page as the top item?

It's a bit like searching for "USA" and getting a result for "Canada"; just because the canonical wikipedia URL is "United_states" doesn't mean that a page about a different country is more relevant. :)

Post reply on HN