I have geek friends who tweet things along the lines of "my life is so much better since I switched from Firefox to Chrome. Chrome is so much faster, I don't know how anyone can still stand Firefox".
This puzzles me a lot since I really can't tell the difference in speed, and Firefox has the ad-ins that I rely on. Adblock, etc. There may be the equivalent for chrome, but can I be bothered to take the time to find them.
Firefox has my saved passwords. It's just easier to stay there.
I found Chrome slower and went back to Firefox. I also tried lots of other browsers, some very obscure.... Firefox still best performer (except for some aspx based websites where IE can be quicker as we have found in testing our own web app at work. Dunno why, some optimisations, no doubt).
But a residual concern remains who is using the scheme: overwhelmingly white men aged between 25 and 44, many of whom earn more than £50,000 a year
As a former transport researcher I'd say this is pretty much exactly who you'd want to get using it. These are among the people most likely to be using cars. If these people are using bikes to commute that is brilliant.
If you get people out of cars onto bikes that is a huge win for environmental reasons and transport network efficiency reasons.
If they'd said that the majority of people who used it were 20-25 and not earning much I'd think the scheme a failure as it was merely making people use those bikes instead of different bikes, walking or public transport. In those scenarios it's a pricey way to not achieve much.
Have jumped from Firefox 5 (release) to Firefox 7 (Aurora) today and it feels noticeably slicker, even just in switching tabs, etc. Even LiveJournal has gone from slow to merely sluggish to load!
Application load time is vastly improved too and the memory footprint has dropped dramatically. That was the one thing that was really getting bad with Firefox. Aurora with my current tab set (around 20 tabs) is approx 220MB. Firefox 5 was around 630MB.
That TV downloading article is a few years out of date in many ways since the point of downloading TV illegally becoming commonplace is well past, and would be better if it replaced references to TV with references to books because then it would be about something where there was still a point in shouting at the industry :-)
I still love Opera. Sure, it's only recently joined the extensions game, but the core features of the browser are wide, and work well together — I can get a mouse gestures extension for Chrome or Firefox, but Opera has it built in at the base level, and in a very good way.
Also, there's the fun of new features built into the base program, which then generally get nicked by other browsers a bit later; stuff like tabbed browsing and speed dial, stuff that's yet to be nicked is tab stacking and actually seeing tiny previews of all the pages in the tab bar.
First time I've seen TV offered via social networking (I can see that some would count YouTube as a social networking site but I don't). Novelty or the new way forward?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
This puzzles me a lot since I really can't tell the difference in speed, and
Firefox has the ad-ins that I rely on. Adblock, etc. There may be the equivalent for chrome, but can I be bothered to take the time to find them.
Firefox has my saved passwords. It's just easier to stay there.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
I switched to Chrome
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
As a former transport researcher I'd say this is pretty much exactly who you'd want to get using it. These are among the people most likely to be using cars. If these people are using bikes to commute that is brilliant.
If you get people out of cars onto bikes that is a huge win for environmental reasons and transport network efficiency reasons.
If they'd said that the majority of people who used it were 20-25 and not earning much I'd think the scheme a failure as it was merely making people use those bikes instead of different bikes, walking or public transport. In those scenarios it's a pricey way to not achieve much.
(no subject)
(no subject)
gripes+
no subject
Application load time is vastly improved too and the memory footprint has dropped dramatically. That was the one thing that was really getting bad with Firefox. Aurora with my current tab set (around 20 tabs) is approx 220MB. Firefox 5 was around 630MB.
Me like!
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
Also, there's the fun of new features built into the base program, which then generally get nicked by other browsers a bit later; stuff like tabbed browsing and speed dial, stuff that's yet to be nicked is tab stacking and actually seeing tiny previews of all the pages in the tab bar.
(no subject)
no subject
First time I've seen TV offered via social networking (I can see that some would count YouTube as a social networking site but I don't). Novelty or the new way forward?
(no subject)