[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Browser Battle: Firefox 3.1 vs. Chrome vs. IE 8 here

[harry674]

Few things wrong with this article....
IE 8 B2 being tied to OS is security issue and should be under Bad.
There have been reports of IE 8 B2 using least CPU with Flash Compared to Chrome and Firefox(CNN)and should have been mentioned under good.

IS there really need for fourth major browser? Google should have helped Firefox rather than making their own open source browser....less headache for Devlopers.

[neoviky]

chrome, google, apple, the works...

http://neoviky.blogspot.com

Vicki

[techie4fun]

Chrome hasn't got near the features FF3 has , done . IE8 outbeats Chrome and I haven't even used the beta . What's left to battle? Chrome is now left in the dust.

[madams2008]

Great summary.
With the release of Chrome, there has been a stimulation of competition in the browser market. At least there are article being written about the topic.
During their press conference, Google mentioned that a healthy eco-system with competition helps them. Seems like they are on track for that.
Additionally, with the introduction of Chrome, a new item has been added to the comparison checklist "independent processes for each tab".
In terms of competition, Google just put in a new "must have feature" that others will now have to duplicate in some form or another.
Given that Google does things in unconventional ways, perhaps Chrome version 0.2 is more than an early beta...perhaps it's the grain of sand that stimulates the oyster to create a pearl.
Michael Adams
www.chromevoice.com

[explosivedeath7]

I haven't used Chrome yet, but I've not heard a lot of great things on it. I just recently switched to FF 3.0, and if 3.1 is anything like it, I am definitely siding for it. Haven't had any experience with IE 8, but I've used IE 6 and 7. Can't say I've had a great experience with either, but they've gotten what I need done, done.

[browserpro]

How weird that PCWorld's article omits coverage of the best browser of all. We have been using Opera as our primary browser of choice (2nd choice Firefox) for more than ten years and have consistently found its performance superior to all the others, so far.

[junkfiend]

Raphael reports one of the Good bullets for IE8 is "Privacy. IE 8 was the first to offer a no-record browsing mode, branded here as InPrivate Browsing." The notion that being the first to beta-ship (by a week? two?) a feature somehow equivocates to good privacy isn't entirely helpful. Thanks for the blog Raphael.

[1101doc]

And Opera?

The best browser out there never gets a mention. Folks say that the Opera market share is just too small. Sure- from the way the net media talks- it doesn't even exist.

With all the hoopla over FF3, I installed it, but I keep returning to Opera for the features I like: One button log-in, easy cookie whitelist control, fit-to-width, built-in download manager including torrents, fully customizible tabs, toggle between user and author mode, voice contol, mouse gestures, panels... the list goes on.

And faster and more secure than FF3 in testing.

C'mon PCWorld. (and the rest of the net media) Let's have a full discussion about browsers.

[techie4fun]

I've been pleading for months to have PC World evaulate Opera, but I must be talking to the wrong business.

[seanbickford]

I concur with the above posters: Give Opera a chance in these browser battles. I've been an Opera user for years now. It's had its up and downs, but in my opinion it hasn't been topped. PC World should at least consider the blatant copying of its features by the other "Big 3".

[dewittdale]

Agreed but opera doesn't preload pdfs which is a drag.

[eMJay]

Anything that advances browser speed and stability is great for everyone. That said, there's more to a browser than just speed and stability. The reason FF3 is my default is mostly due to the fact that it allows me to customize my browsing experience in increasingly diverse ways through add-on extensions. For another browser to take it's place it must have the equivalent capacity to be expanded, while retalining speed and usability. Only Opera comes close...very close in fact. And any browser that i use as default must have the ability to syncbookmarks across multiple installations. I'm done with manually transfer of bookmarks. FF3 and Opera again fit that requirement.



Google's browser will likely inspire more creativity - it has some nifty features that i like. But it's built for the crowd that likes simple browsers, while i like browsers that i can configure based on what i'm using it for. IE8 beta sounds like a great improvement over version 7, but i no longer need IE at all. I'll update to IE8 when the final version is released just so that i don't have to use IE7 again. If Chrome gets as stable as Safari, then I'll delete Safari from all my machines. There's no point in my using both webkit based browsers as backups.

[drrexx]

I too am a happy Opera user, and I have to agree with all of the previous posters. Opera is not perfect, but it's lightening-fast and great for tabbed browsing. The number of add-ons for Opera is also growing. The "big 3" browsers have ripped a lot of features off Opera. Not long ago PC World gave Opera 9.5 a glowing review but, most of the times, it blatantly ignores it. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: don't ever talk about a great product, and that product will fall by wayside. Waste a lot of ink on mediocre software, and people will adopt it in droves.

[drabyss78]

Like other posters here, Opera (currently running 9.52) is far and away my favorite browser. Where are the mentions of it, and Safari as well, for that matter???

Opera is loaded with great features (which others have tried to clone) and still lightning fast.

I do use Firefox and Safari from time to time, but I am an Opera user for LIFE.

[Ed34222]

IE has always had a large number of security flaws.
A vast number of viruses and malware infect PCs through IE and Outlook.
The security features they have added to 7 turned out to by largely window dressing; and, did little if anything to stop the flood - is 8 any better? I doubt it.
Very few things have ever come out that exploit Firefox; and, I don't currently know of any that impact current versions.
Also, in Firefox, if the browser crashes, when you bring it back up it will ask you if you want to reload the tabs it had open when it crashed (or if you exited with save). Not perfect granted; but, until they solve the occasional misbehaving site crashing Firefox 3, it's better than nothing. Also; a long running java-script will trigger a dialog asking if you want it to continue; effectively allowing you to continue working with the page by halting the misbehaving script.
Have tried Opera and Safari; but, not Chrome yet. Firefox's addons make it #1 for features; and, it's themes make it #1 for appearance. It's track record (and the adblock+ addons) make it #1 for safety. It's built-in java-script debugger and web development addons make it indispensable for testing new web pages. Diagnostic time can be cut in half when compared to testing only on IE. Most things that test well in IE and Firefox will run ok in Opera and Safari as well.

[kostasan]

I totally disagree with the security part. IE has the worst security record, firefox is the most secure at this moment and Chrome is two weeks old (and in beta)!!

So cut some slack to Chrome...It will be better in every single way to IE within one year.

I hope that Chrome and Firefox take ideas from each other, this is the whole open source idea!

As for Chrome doing damage to firefox, Yahoo responded to Google by promoting firefox on their main page! I believe that the losers of Chrome is IE and in the next years ms office!! This may sound far fetched, but as javascript has gotten very very fast on Chrome and firefox, Google docs and similar services are much better to use and give a better user experience with every speed improvement.

[satanssixthson]

Firefox 3.01 wins hands down compared to IE8 & Chrome, they are just not quick enough, also when it comes to mod's & addons, they fail miserably.
Opera is a good solid browser, but ther is just something about it i dont like (not to sure what it is though?? lol)
However when i need undisputibly rock solid browsing, searching for info during repairs etc. i run seamonkey in DamnSmallLinux 50MB live CD
NOW THATS FAST!

[VHMP01]

I do not get it; people fall too easily for it. Chrome's (as Google) EULA do not care about privacy; they quickly changed it in Chrome's EULA, which was no mistake. Updates are not optional; there is no way to unselect them by choice, only through tweaking the OS. Worst is that by just clicking the "About", Chrome automatically runs the "Update" without asking, it will even update programs that you did not ask for by just wanting a look at its Version. Why would it install or update anything I did not ask for? Changing their EULA was no mistake, simply was avoiding sues all over.

[eMJay]

Actually, you're right.


I read about the 0.2.149.29 update to Chrome that was distributed from friday and decided to do the update. To my horror i found that it was already done, without even a warning or dialog box. Apparently Chrome (or an updater for Chrome) runs in the background, even when Chrome is closed. Google's website makes the following statement -



{font:Arial}{size:13px}"Google Chrome automatically updates to a newer version when one is released. The update process happens silently, whether or not you're using the browser at the time. If Google Chrome is open at the time of the update, you must close the browser and restart for the new version to launch."{size}{font}



Furthermore, this invisible update broke flash media on some websites, including CNN videos. I don't like the fact that it can do this without my control. This is now making me wonder if it's at all wise to keep this browser. I always review the effects of updates to software before applying them. I can't afford to have problems forced on me by Google's updates.