Chromefags sure got told, and then they still whine...

[Hyak]

google chrome fails gourab is right

[Dead Bones Brook]

And hyak sucks.


Wtf gourav... Who uses 150 tabs? >.>

[Gourav2122]

who actually read this?
Chrome and Firefox 3.5 Memory Usage

[GG2GG]

chrome is a opera rip

[Dead Bones Brook]

Chrome owns you.

[darky dark]

*Chrome* is better than the others

[DoubleDutch]

Im still using IE

[Juan]

/QUOTED FOR WIN. GOOGLE CHROME 4 LIFE

youre black
you have no voice

[[MPGH]arunforce]

The article doesn't prove anything. All it says, is that if a user chooses to open 150 tabs, Firefox is the ideal method.

No surprise, Chrome uses each tab as a processes, and things like javascript, elements, and stuff aren't recycled between pages, so the javascript engine has to be reloaded into each process hence the high memory footprint. Also, if someone decides to browse 150 pages simultaneously, good luck with Firefox, when it crashes, BAM, all gone (maybe you get lucky and it can be restored, well, most of it at least).

In the real world, the average user wont go past 10 tabs, making Chrome ideal. I admit, I'm a FireFox user, because Chrome doesn't have "real" support for extensions yet. When it does, bam, I'm gone. Good riddance memory leaking mother fucker.

Also, why would a Firefox fan post an anti-Chrome page, unless you are scared of Chrome's potential. Firefox re-ignited the browser wars, but Chrome ignited the efficiency wars. Can we see a standards war, next, PLEAAAAAASE?

Also LOL @ DBB, what a fag, he's all pissy at me because I think hes a cock sucking ****** for talking shit behind my back.

[Hispiforce]

The article doesn't prove anything. All it says, is that if a user chooses to open 150 tabs, Firefox is the ideal method.

No surprise, Chrome uses each tab as a processes, and things like javascript, elements, and stuff aren't recycled between pages, so the javascript engine has to be reloaded into each process hence the high memory footprint. Also, if someone decides to browse 150 pages simultaneously, good luck with Firefox, when it crashes, BAM, all gone (maybe you get lucky and it can be restored, well, most of it at least).

In the real world, the average user wont go past 10 tabs, making Chrome ideal. I admit, I'm a FireFox user, because Chrome doesn't have "real" support for extensions yet. When it does, bam, I'm gone. Good riddance memory leaking mother fucker.

Also, why would a Firefox fan post an anti-Chrome page, unless you are scared of Chrome's potential. Firefox re-ignited the browser wars, but Chrome ignited the efficiency wars. Can we see a standards war, next, PLEAAAAAASE?

Also LOL @ DBB, what a fag, he's all pissy at me because I think hes a cock sucking ****** for talking shit behind my back.

/thread lol

[[MPGH]Dave84311]

HI IM HISPI AND I SUCK CHROMES DICK

[Hyak]

rofl @ kids editing posts ******s :O

[Hispiforce]

HI IM DAVE AND I NEED TO TAKE A DOUCHE AWAY SHOWER /shower

[hbk]

lawlzzzz///////

[Gourav2122]

But the whole concept and the setup for chrome is fucking ugly and annoying, not to mention a pain in the ass getting use to it.

Half the shit didn't appear when i was using the chrome browser, such as certain images that didn't load at all, like mpgh polls. it was ass if they where broken
but then switched over to firefox it was all fixed.

no matter how many different options chrome has, Firefox has an add on for all those.
If you are thinking about speed and efficiency Firefox is on par with chrome. IF YOU KNOW HOW TO FIREFOX

O BTW ,Firefox set the standards for everything in this so called "browsers wars"