Recent reports indicate that Google Chrome now absorbs nearly 30% of the web browser market share worldwide (source). Its main competitors are Internet Explorer with a little over 52% all versions included, and Firefox with now less than 12%.

In fact, if you exclude Chinese web users (who are usually stuck with old pirated versions of Windows and awful IE-based browsers) the numbers are even more impressive:
1. Google Chrome: > 52%
2. Internet Explorer: > 15%
3. Firefox: > 15%
4. Safari: > 9%
(source)

Things have changed a lot over the past 10 years and it's impressive to realize how much Chrome has changed our browsing habits. What is your opinion on the subject? Do you use Google Chrome yourself? What is the best web browser?

 

[KSP]

I.E for life or the new MS Edge.
I'll never use Chrome, or anything Google for my PC.
Google is the worst at collecting private data. Their search engine doesn't even have an option of turning off search suggestions that's how invasive they are.
I switched to Bing years ago, since Bing is one of the last search engines to allow you to turn off search suggestions without being logged in.

Its sad that you need to subtract the entire Chinese population to have chrome even come close to I.E's market share. The day Google stops trying to rule the world is the day I'll use them, which is never.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

I've got two tabs open in Chrome right now, one with my gmail, one with this thread, and Chrome's using 50MB of RAM. I'd say that's not a huge amount.

Using 2 windows opened with 10 active tabs at work, along with 3 extensions, I usually hit about 1.2GB of RAM used, out of the 6GB in the PCs. While it's certainly "a lot" sort of, compared to other apps I run 24/7 (Skype, notepad, MS Outlook, MS word) I cannot honestly say that it's bad to the point where I can complain about it or where it affects performance. http://puu.sh/jZQVC/ad6eaf57f2.png < Screenie of resource monitor, with all the values of each process.

Though I would love to see a screenshot of the resource monitor with Chrome and 50MB, cuz I call horse shit on it using that little. Chrome on it's own, with no addons and almost all extra services disabled itself uses around 40-50MB, I dunno if you're using some magical version of Chrome that gets rid of virtually everything that isn't an integral part of the webkit or something but there's no way Chrome is sitting at 50MB.

 

[Foxi4]

Using 2 windows opened with 10 active tabs at work, along with 3 extensions, I usually hit about 1.2GB of RAM used, out of the 6GB in the PCs. While it's certainly "a lot" sort of, compared to other apps I run 24/7 (Skype, notepad, MS Outlook, MS word) I cannot honestly say that it's bad to the point where I can complain about it or where it affects performance. http://puu.sh/jZQVC/ad6eaf57f2.png < Screenie of resource monitor, with all the values of each process.

Though I would love to see a screenshot of the resource monitor with Chrome and 50MB, cuz I call horse shit on it using that little. Chrome on it's own, with no addons and almost all extra services disabled itself uses around 40-50MB, I dunno if you're using some magical version of Chrome that gets rid of virtually everything that isn't an integral part of the webkit or something but there's no way Chrome is sitting at 50MB.

It's actually my bad, I didn't count the background processes, just the main process. It also jumped to 62MB, possibly due to me uploading attachments:

Counting all the background processes it's actually around 464MB:


Which still isn't bad considering the sheer amount of RAM the average PC or laptop has. Even low-end laptops are equipped with at least 4GB these days, and the memory use doesn't grow expotentially - the background processes need to run just once, only the subsequent tabs increase memory usage.

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

It's actually my bad, I didn't count the background processes, just the main process. It also jumped to 62MB, possibly due to me uploading attachments:
Counting all the background processes it's actually around 464MB:
Which still isn't bad considering the sheer amount of RAM the average PC or laptop has. Even low-end laptops are equipped with at least 4GB these days, and the memory use doesn't grow expotentially - the background processes need to run just once, only the subsequent tabs increase memory usage.

Yeah, that seems a lot more "correct" lol. But even then it's not that bad, there are very few circumstances where that 500MB, or even the 1.2GB I use at work, could even remotely cause some kind of slow down problem or issues if you're not using a potato PC, or doing a billion things at once.

 

[Clydefrosch]

would you stop assuming what the average specs of the machines in use are currently?
because, yes, low end machines come with 4gb now, but its not like everyone in the world just bought their pc yesterday. the majority of people still never ever even open up their pc, or god forbid, ever exchange a single component in it.

and even if it was like that, it still doesnt change the fact that chrome is just as big a memory slut as firefox is, often even more so, without the number of add ons to customize it. at the same time, they're both pretty much identically stable (only installing faulty add ons might cause a crash on firefox these days. and there's shitty add ons even among chromes limited options).
and as far as speed is concerned, again, when i open both browsers at the same time, chrome is always 'open' more quickly, but when its about starting the browser AND opening a webpage (which is the important thing to compare) it always lags behind firefox.

and if your argument is 'oh well i have all the ram and specs in the world' then it doesn't even matter. no browser works significantly better or quicker at that point, making any preference pretty much nonsense.
which is why I'm assuming you're trying to compare chrome v44 to firefox 1.5 for some stupid reason. why not bring in netscape navigator while you're at it? or midasWWW

 

[VMM]

You also can't guarantee that with Windows, yet it continues to be the no.1 OS for PC users because of one simple reason - it's well-adopted. I don't have to switch because ABP is working and has been working for years, that's all I need to verify. I don't understand the compulsion to assume that code is malicious if you can't read the source code - the great majority of the open source circle jerk army can't even read source code in whatever language, they just want to have the veneer of open source warriors. Closed source isn't bad nor is it untrustworthy - what's trustworthy is an extension that keeps working year after year after year with zero issues.

I'm not saying that the fact they are closed source is untrustworthy for me, but the fact that it has a whitelist is,
while I can guarantee that there are no second intentions with uBlock Origin since it's open source.
Beside, I think it's great if you're open-minded, trying things can be really good.
I have always been trying different browsers, different games, listening to different bands.
I discovered really nice things for trying them out, but I wouldn't discover if I was close minded.
My suggestion is simple, try uBlock Origin, if you like it, great, if not you can always go back to adBlock Plus.

 

[Monado_III]

I.E for life or the new MS Edge.
I'll never use Chrome, or anything Google for my PC.
Google is the worst at collecting private data. Their search engine doesn't even have an option of turning off search suggestions that's how invasive they are.
I switched to Bing years ago, since Bing is one of the last search engines to allow you to turn off search suggestions without being logged in.

Its sad that you need to subtract the entire Chinese population to have chrome even come close to I.E's market share. The day Google stops trying to rule the world is the day I'll use them, which is never.

Don't see how that's "invasive", I rarely hear people complain about search suggestions, it's not like auto-correct which actively changes what you type, it just suggestions which often makes browsing faster.

You read the reason for that... right?

 

[Foxi4]

I'm not saying that the fact they are closed source is untrustworthy for me, but the fact that it has a whitelist is,
while I can guarantee that there are no second intentions with uBlock Origin since it's open source.
Beside, I think it's great if you're open-minded, trying things can be really good.
I have always been trying different browsers, different games, listening to different bands.
I discovered really nice things for trying them out, but I wouldn't discover if I was close minded.
My suggestion is simple, try uBlock Origin, if you like it, great, if not you can always go back to adBlock Plus.

The reason why ABP started whitelisting certain ads is two-fold - the company behind it needs money too and the very reason why ads became blocked in the first place was not advertising in and out of itself but its format - huge Flash banners bogging down internet connections, or worse, scripts that install often times malicious "toolbars". ABP has steep restrictions regarding what kind of ads are whitelisted - they're from trusted sponsors, contain up to one non-malicious script and are mostly text-based. That, and you can opt out of the whitelist if you so deem fit, so it's a non-problem.

 

[sporkonomix]

You also can't guarantee that with Windows, yet it continues to be the no.1 OS for PC users because of one simple reason - it's well-adopted. I don't have to switch because ABP is working and has been working for years, that's all I need to verify. I don't understand the compulsion to assume that code is malicious if you can't read the source code - the great majority of the open source circle jerk army can't even read source code in whatever language, they just want to have the veneer of open source warriors. Closed source isn't bad nor is it untrustworthy - what's trustworthy is an extension that keeps working year after year after year with zero issues.
That's the stupidest thing I've heard today. If you're confusing voice commands for spying, you need anxiety medication. Same goes for data collection which has nothing to do with spying and everything to do with targeted search results - when I search for Pizza Hut, I want the one next door to my present location pop up at the top of the list because I value convenience.

As for browser dominance, I have no problems with one leading the pack - it motivates others to improve. This isn't the first time Google steamrolls over the competition, Android did the same with iOS and Windows Mobile, the latter of which doesn't even exist anymore.

First, what evidence do you have to believe proprietary software is trustworthy? Have you personally verified that it hasn't sent sensitive information to a server? Have you verified it's not logging your keystrokes and sharing them? We live in an age where information can give you great power over someone, and many are lazy and/or ignorant when it comes to protecting their information. It's a fact that various companies use "beacons" to track your movement across the Web (Facebook's Like button is such a beacon; it tracks you even when you don't have a Facebook account!). It's a fact that each piece of information you store with Google is stored and shared with advertisers. Said advertisers are not held under any usage guidelines and are free to do whatever they want with that information. Do you honestly think any corporate entity would protect its users *after* advertisers have given them money? The voice module for "OK Google" could indeed be benign, but because it's proprietary, we the public have no way to verify it and confirm it's not invading our privacy.

And if Chrome is the only browser, do you know what happens? The same thing that happens in a monopoly: nobody else can compete and the "leader" forces their will on everyone. Thankfully, a decent portion of Chrome (Chromium) is libre software, and so is Firefox, so *eventually* some sort of competitor could arise. But the question is: how much damage and abuse of trust would have to happen before competition is restored? Are you willing to chance your entire Web presence and experience on a single company? If so, I believe you need to adopt at least a marginally critical outlook. Not because I think Google is horrible or whatever other non-sequitur, but because you don't want to be a target. Ask yourself "What has Google done to earn my trust?" Or replace "Google" with anything else; I've certainly done that for Firefox given Pocket, Hello, and their upcoming extension change; all of which I personally think will kill Firefox. The idea is to be vigilant and protect yourself. And the desire to protect yourself using technology doesn't make one paranoid or a candidate for anxiety meds. It makes them aware of the environment and acting in response to it. The environment is hostile, with the intent to endlessly gather data and get you to look at ads and spend money.

If you want to be a corporate apologist and use mental gymnastics to justify wholesale gathering and selling of people's information for a minimal amount of convenience, be my guest. It won't be my life being spied on or screwed with when this information is weaponized against people for blackmail or illegally acquired by crackers and used as ransom or something else. Your information and personal habits have value, and IMO should be protected just as much as you would your physical possessions.

That said, you're right that a lot of libre software users can't actually read code. That's not necessary, since some other people can; myself included. As long as a considerable percentage of people are keeping a close eye on things, there's not much to worry about. When in doubt, bust out some tools to inspect things!

As for ABP, I used it for a while with the whitelist deactivated and also didn't have issues. I switched to uBlock Origin mainly because I noticed it used less CPU. One could argue it doesn't matter when we have multiple cores and tons of RAM, but I care about the performance of my computer so I try to make it run lean. I think we can all agree that it doesn't matter as long as ads are blocked, though.

 

[Foxi4]

You can actually verify what you're computer's sending out very easily, @sporkonomix - all you need is a basic grasp of the command line or your router's software. If the latter lacks the functionality to provide you with such logs, basic telnet commands can show you everything that's going on.

As for proprietary software, I am more inclined to believe in a job-well-done performed by programmers who get paid for it than those with unknown identities, unknown motives and unknown sources of income - you get to hear about bitcoin miners being planted in all sorts of software these days, mostly homebrewed, freeware software, because programmers can't feed themselves and their families on internet cred, I'm afraid. With a company like Microsoft, billions of dollars are at stake when it comes to losing face, anonymous programmer X doesn't have that kind of pressure, therefor I am more willing to trust Microsoft than I am willing to trust Mr.X, which is not to say that open source software is not trustworthy, rather that it requires more accolades in order to gain trust. This all is of course provided we forget about the fact that collecting any data without the user's consent is illegal and the details on data collection in any software are always in the EULA and plain to see.

I'm not one to succumb to paranoidal delusion and think that I'm an important persona all of a sudden - I'm not. Google is not stealing my "keystrokes" or my credit card information - they're a multi-billion dollar business with nothing to gain and everything to lose by exposing me, an end-user, to possible threats of fraud. What they are collecting are my browsing habits and my location data (both of which you can easily opt out of) in order to offer me a better search engine service - I've been informed about it in the End-User Agreement that I've agreed to when I signed up for an account, it's as simple as that. Even if they were collecting my data however (which they aren't), I think it would be hard for them to exact any form of damage to Gallus Anonymus or one of the other hexadrillion aliases I use online - I'm afraid that the data collected by Google, as much as they're not willing to admit it, is not really verifiable and only has value to advertisers, whom I don't mind since I block their adverts either way, with the exception of a few selected websites that I wish to support.

 

[KSP]

Don't see how that's "invasive", I rarely hear people complain about search suggestions, it's not like auto-correct which actively changes what you type, it just suggestions which often makes browsing faster.

You read the reason for that... right?

Its invasive because a) not everyone wants a bunch of random suggestions popping up every time they type something and b) in order for search suggestion to work it pools your search behavior in order to predict what you are searching for, it collects data of every search on the internet, including yours to understand what people like you are searching, hence it can predict what you want to type before you type it. It is nothing like spelling correction. What's even worse is that Google doesn't even allow you to turn this feature off. This shows Google's arrogance as a company to presume to know what you want better than you, this type of corporate mentally is very dangerous and cannot be supported, its one thing to collect search behavior data its another to not allow users to disable this feature.

Google is a very dangerous company with little to no respect for user privacy, they seem bent on global domination.

In this respect I support MS over Google any day of the week. MS is the lesser evil, don't let Google fool you with their Oreo cookie happy go lucky corporate façade. they are more invasive then MS ever was.

Thank god MS is around to keep them in check, if not for MS BING the world would not have a search engine without search suggestion. Google managed to convince everyone that spying on people was ok. But luckily MS is around to play devil's advocate.
It's an odd world we live in when the big M is setting positive standards for user privacy.

 

[Deleted User]

Its invasive because in order for search suggestion to work it pools your search behavior in order to predict what you are searching, it collects data of every search on the internet, including yours to understand what people like you are searching, hence it can predict what you want to type before you type it. It is nothing like spelling correction. What's even worse is that Google doesn't even allow you to turn this feature off. This shows Google's arrogance as a company to presume to know what you want better than you, this type of corporate mentally is very dangerous and cannot be supported, its one thing to collect search behavior data its another to not allow users to disable this feature.

Google is a very dangerous company with little to no respect for user privacy, they seem bent on global domination.

In this respect I support MS over Google any day of the week. MS is the lesser evil, don't let Google fool you with their Oreo cookie happy go lucky corporate façade. they are more invasive then MS ever was.

Oh no, Google is watching me search for 3DS homebrew?
Dude, this isn't even that invasive.

 

[KSP]

Oh no, Google is watching me search for 3DS homebrew?
Dude, this isn't even that invasive.

Doesn't matter how you feel about invasion of privacy, to each their own, but not giving you the option to turn it off is what really bothers me. A company that invades on your privacy without giving you an opt out should be stopped. This is why I don't use any google search products, MS got it right, in that they always give you a choice. I don't mind data mining, but I mind it when a company is so arrogant as to not even give you a choice on the matter, and the fact that other search engines follow by Google's example is what's even scarier.

After google removed the option of opting out on search suggestions, yahoo quickly followed, being the sheep that they are. Microsoft was the only major search engine that did not follow Google's move. For this reason alone, I stand by MS and will probably never use Google again, with a single move MS made me a Bing fan for life.

 

[VMM]

The reason why ABP started whitelisting certain ads is two-fold - the company behind it needs money too and the very reason why ads became blocked in the first place was not advertising in and out of itself but its format - huge Flash banners bogging down internet connections, or worse, scripts that install often times malicious "toolbars". ADP has steep restrictions regarding what kind of ads are whitelisted - they're from trusted sponsors, contain up to one non-malicious script and are mostly text-based. That, and you can opt out of the whitelist if you so deem fit, so it's a non-problem.

Ok, I get it, Adblock isn't as insecure as i tought,
but there is one thing uBlock outperforms and consumes less resources than ABP,
take a look at this:
https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-vs.-ABP:-efficiency-compared

Before you go saying "Oh we all have multiple cores CPUs and enough RAM" and all that,
remember that the less resources it uses, the less batery it uses.

I simply see no reason to use ABP when uBlock is simply better.

 

[Foxi4]

I will not contest the fact that ABP uses more resources - it does. So does Chrome in comparison to Firefox, apparently, but neither Chrome nor ABP disappointed me with the way they work, so I'm not switching. As for resources, I'm nowhere near draining mine and battery life is not an issue for me since my battery is broken either way and my laptop is tethered to a wall 24/7 anyways.

Its invasive because a) not everyone wants a bunch of random suggestions popping up every time they type something and b) in order for search suggestion to work it pools your search behavior in order to predict what you are searching for, it collects data of every search on the internet, including yours to understand what people like you are searching, hence it can predict what you want to type before you type it. It is nothing like spelling correction. What's even worse is that Google doesn't even allow you to turn this feature off. This shows Google's arrogance as a company to presume to know what you want better than you, this type of corporate mentally is very dangerous and cannot be supported, its one thing to collect search behavior data its another to not allow users to disable this feature.

Google is a very dangerous company with little to no respect for user privacy, they seem bent on global domination.

In this respect I support MS over Google any day of the week. MS is the lesser evil, don't let Google fool you with their Oreo cookie happy go lucky corporate façade. they are more invasive then MS ever was.

Thank god MS is around to keep them in check, if not for MS BING the world would not have a search engine without search suggestion. Google managed to convince everyone that spying on people was ok. But luckily MS is around to play devil's advocate.
It's an odd world we live in when the big M is setting positive standards for user privacy.

Bing? Oh god. Switch to DuckDuckGo if you're a privacy nut, but don't use Bing lol.

 

[KSP]

I will not contest the fact that ABP uses more resources - it does. So does Chrome in comparison to Firefox, apparently, but neither Chrome nor ABP disappointed me with the way they work, so I'm not switching. As for resources, I'm nowhere near draining mine and battery life is not an issue for me since my battery is broken either way and my laptop is tethered to a wall 24/7 anyways.
Bing? Oh god. Switch to DuckDuckGo if you're a privacy nut, but don't use Bing lol.

Love the beautiful photos that Bing shows in the background. You get to see something nice and learn a little about the world at the same time. Its a nice little feature.

My switch to Bing is not really about my privacy perse, I really couldn't care less, I just cannot in good faith support a company like Google. It's a personal protest of sorts.

 

[Joe88]

So you place it with microsoft instead?
They are just as bad

 

[MrJason005]

Great, great. From now on I'll use tor with duckduckgo, never watch a video, never visit social media and also block all ads.

 

[Flame]

Great, great. From now on I'll use tor with duckduckgo, never watch a video, never visit social media and also block all ads.

replace tor with VPN. dont use cookies too, and dont remember history. use https. use an encrypted harddrive. use a password manager.

you telling me people dont do that already.

 

[MrJason005]

replace tor with VPN. dont use cookies too, and dont remember history. use https. use an encrypted harddrive. use a password manager.

you telling me people dont do that already.

Only thing I take that seriously are my passwords. For that, I have entire procedures.