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

Arc Browser 1.0

arc.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 263 posts

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#241

Post by gcanyon »

lrae wrote: post #223
gcanyon wrote: post #161

I've used Arc probably 90% of the time for the past two months. One thing that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere (even in their literature): it's very lightweight on memory usage. I've noticed recently that Safari uses 1/3 to 2/3 of a gigabyte for each youtube tab, or gmail, or . Arc uses roughly 25% of that. Also, Arc's efficiency as tabs build up seems to grow faster than Safari's although that's harder to quantify…

Interesting, I made the opposite observations on two different Macs. Safari, Edge, Chrome & Brave are all less resource hungry for me than Arc, including way worse energy impact / battery drain, unfortunately. And I'm not alone either, looking at Reddit & Discord in the past. Made me also switch away again recently. Would love to see them focus more on that instead of all those gimmicks. (Actually expected that befor…

Okay, that’s weird. M1 macs?

It’s not like I was very methodical about it, but the results were as plain as day. I mean, yellow vs. green isn’t hard to see. I’ll try the exact same sites/tabs from a fresh boot for safari, chrome and arc and report back.

I haven’t been in reddit since June — Apollo user, and old.reddit.com just sucks so hard.

What about extensions? I only installed a couple, but I had no problem. That

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#242

Post by pndy »

awill wrote: post #94

I dislike when companies gives themselves names like this "The Browser company" Just like the hotel in Las Vegas called "The Hotel". Is it arrogance, or ignorance?

I'd say it's arrogance with genuine belief that they have this breakthrough idea about web browser UI/UX - hard to say technology because as others spotted, this thing is based on Chromium. And this belief perhaps justify enough naming themselves in some "we're the ones, the truly original" somewhat hipster fashion.

I don't see anywhere mentioned this browser having access to Chrome extensions so for me, even if I'd be slightly interested in testing this (and it would be still possible on my Intel Macbook) it's a hard miss. Not being able to block ads and tracking elements in 20s is out of the question and no fancy annotation or vertical tabs feature with grouping compensates this. Guess this thing aims at those who don't mind their privacy being violated - perhaps all sorts of influencers.

The only thing they got are Boosts which seem to be kind of user scripts feature

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#243

Post by pndy »

tsuujin wrote: post #202
fragmede wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's value on the wrapper around the rendering engine. Presumably you don't use the raw engine, and use many of the UX features provided by your chosen wrapper (of which there are many). Things like tabs and extensions, hell even having history, settings, cookies, and a back button are UX niceties a raw engine doesn't necessarily provide. So the wrapper is important; making a better wrapper is thus a worthwhile en…

TIL that Opera was rewritten to be based on chromium. That makes me kind of sad. Not super sad, because I haven’t used Opera in a decade, but still a little sad.

You can head to Wikipedia to quickly check what happen to the company beside browser abandoning Presto and moving to Chromium: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_(company)

Personally, I consider this switch to Chromium solidified Chrome and derivatives dominance - with Presto-based Opera there was always a choice. It's also a shame they didn't released the code of this engine.

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#244

Post by DavideNL »

bloopernova wrote: post #151
thiht wrote: post #114

I’ve used Arc as my main browser on my work laptop for the last few months and I love it! It solves pain points I’ve actively tried to solve with Firefox, but couldn’t. It’s no surprise HN is skeptical about « yet another browser », so here’s what I like specifically about Arc: - it supports tab tiling. I can see 2 tabs next to one another easily. This is NOT solved with window tiling, it’s clunky and clutters the sp…

I disagree that Tree Style Tabs are awful. I use it every day and it's rock solid. Firefox forever, yo! Whitest guy ever tries to make an F gang sign with his fingers

> I disagree that Tree Style Tabs are awful.

Curious, what display/screen size are you mostly using?

I find TST quite hard to use on a Macbook / Laptop screen... it's much better on a bigger screen though, and best when using a second/separate display/window for it.

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#245

Post by bloopernova »

DavideNL wrote: post #244
bloopernova wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that Tree Style Tabs are awful. I use it every day and it's rock solid. Firefox forever, yo! Whitest guy ever tries to make an F gang sign with his fingers

> I disagree that Tree Style Tabs are awful. Curious, what display/screen size are you mostly using? I find TST quite hard to use on a Macbook / Laptop screen... it's much better on a bigger screen though, and best when using a second/separate display/window for it.

4k screen, but run at the standard hidpi on macOS. I also use it on an m1 MacBook pro screen.

My standard setup is 3 screens: portrait, landscape, landscape. I run the browser on either of the landscape screens depending on what I'm working on.

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#246

Post by DavideNL »

bloopernova wrote: post #245
DavideNL wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I disagree that Tree Style Tabs are awful. Curious, what display/screen size are you mostly using? I find TST quite hard to use on a Macbook / Laptop screen... it's much better on a bigger screen though, and best when using a second/separate display/window for it.

4k screen, but run at the standard hidpi on macOS. I also use it on an m1 MacBook pro screen. My standard setup is 3 screens: portrait, landscape, landscape. I run the browser on either of the landscape screens depending on what I'm working on.

Thanks, so when you use it on the Macbook, do you use a second screen for it also?

I often use my iPad as a secondary screen to show the TST window when using my Macbook... but find it hard to use with only the Macbook screen.

So curious how you'd do that / set it up when only using the Macbook screen.

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#247

Post by bloopernova »

DavideNL wrote: post #246
bloopernova wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4k screen, but run at the standard hidpi on macOS. I also use it on an m1 MacBook pro screen. My standard setup is 3 screens: portrait, landscape, landscape. I run the browser on either of the landscape screens depending on what I'm working on.

Thanks, so when you use it on the Macbook, do you use a second screen for it also? I often use my iPad as a secondary screen to show the TST window when using my Macbook... but find it hard to use with only the Macbook screen. So curious how you'd do that / set it up when only using the Macbook screen.

When only using the MacBook, I make use of ctrl-uparrow to switch between browser and VSCode. I have tree style tabs in the Firefox sidebar, not a separate window.

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#248

Post by MahyadGhassemi »

esafak wrote: post #119

I got both Arc and SigmaOS and ended up splitting my time between the status quo, Firefox, and SigmaOS. SigmaOS is fast and has an interesting concept but I have two decades of muscle memory with Firefox and SigmaOS uses a completely different set of shortcuts, which are admittedly reasonable on paper.

SigmaOS now supports traditional Shortcuts, and also let’s you remap each Shortcut to whatever key you prefer :)

Re: Arc Browser 1.0

#249

Post by the_third_wave »

halJordan wrote: post #227
bob778 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve worked on projects that logged locally and only transmitted every ~60 days when they detected the right network (eg public wifi). So unless you monitor it continuously and permanently this isn’t true.

I know open source projects that update their code every 30 days. Unless you're continuously and permanently monitoring every patch of every library then this isn't true.

Run the Debian Stable version and you're spared such churn. The version you're running may lag the current one by a few points but that is a small price to pay for relative stability (as in 'know your daemons'). Security fixes are backported but new functionality is not. While not a perfect guarantee - remember the weak key debacle - this strategy does provide a stable baseline which, in contrast to proprietary software [1], can be audited for telemetry/data leaks/etc.

[12] yes, yes, yes, it is possible to run that proprietary tool through Ghidra (et al) to look for nasties as well but this is far harder, you don't just run a diff between two binaries.

Post reply on HN