[n1guy]

I used chrome since it launched on my PC, But this past couple of months I've found it getting slow and clunky, still no where near as bad as IE though, but I moved to Safari, and wow its a hell of a lot faster, I did try Safari for PC a couple of years back and it was slow on PC, so either Safari has improved or Chrome has got worse, which is it?

[anniebrion]

I've recently switched to Chrome Dev from Firefox and the speed is fine to me.

Maybe an Extension is causing a problem

[n1guy]

Originally Posted by anniebrion

I've recently switched to Chrome Dev from Firefox and the speed is fine to me.

Maybe an Extension is causing a problem

Maybe, I have adblock, lastpass and xmarks installed. None on Safari.

[John259]

I haven't put a stopwatch on it but I haven't noticed any change in speed with Chrome.

It might be worth uninstalling and then reinstalling it, if only out of curiosity to see if that improves the speed.

[mac2708]

Clearing the cache help may help along with the other options available in Tools>Clear browsing data

[Batwing]

The only significant differences I see between the main browsers is start up times. I have Safari, Chrome and Firefox on my Mac and Chrome and Firefox on my Windows laptop and they are all fast.

I prefer Safari for the Reader function and Firefox for using the NoScript addon. Chrome is simple but i think too simple.

[Daveoc64]

If you sync your Chrome settings with Google, virtually everything important will be backed up.

That means that if you delete the following folder:

C:\Users\YourName\AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\User Data

(Assuming you have Windows Vista/7/8)

... and then resync your computer, you should end up with a faster, less glitchy Chrome install.

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by Daveoc64

If you sync your Chrome settings with Google, virtually everything important will be backed up.

That means that if you delete the following folder:

C:\Users\YourName\AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\User Data

(Assuming you have Windows Vista/7/8)

... and then resync your computer, you should end up with a faster, less glitchy Chrome install.

Or better yet, don't sync anything and simply use the browser just for the browser.

[drw1963]

Just like I figured.

Why bother introducing a browser that has problems?

[zx50]

Originally Posted by n1guy

I used chrome since it launched on my PC, But this past couple of months I've found it getting slow and clunky, still no where near as bad as IE though, but I moved to Safari, and wow its a hell of a lot faster, I did try Safari for PC a couple of years back and it was slow on PC, so either Safari has improved or Chrome has got worse, which is it?

Have you tried emptying its cache?

[fenlander]

On the subject of Chrome, is anyone else having problems using it to view The Guardian? If you zoom the page to fill the screen, the Facebook share, Tweet this and other assorted nuisance buttons cause all sorts of havoc. Sometimes they sit on top of the text, sometimes they animate themselves across two screen lines, causing the article you're reading to jump up and down. The same buttons on other sites cause no problems and the same Guardian pages on Firefox are fine. I'm presuming Chrome and The Guardian just don't get on. As a result I'm gradually migrating back to FF.

Oh, and I can't do away with the wretched buttons using Adblock Element Hiding Helper - I have tried.

[call100]

No problems with the buttons on the Guardian site..............All performing normally....and quick!

[Daveoc64]

Originally Posted by drw1963

Why bother introducing a browser that has problems?

It's impossible to create problem-free software.

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by Daveoc64

It's impossible to create problem-free software.

If you are talking about bugs then I have to say of course it is possible. It is actually very easy. It only becomes harder when the complexity of the program increases, not to mention the race to get software out there before your competitor.

What is impossible to do is to write software in a way that will please all of its users.

[alan1302]

Originally Posted by Batwing

If you are talking about bugs then I have to say of course it is possible. It is actually very easy. It only becomes harder when the complexity of the program increases, not to mention the race to get software out there before your competitor.

What is impossible to do is to write software in a way that will please all of its users.

Ok - it's impossible to create bug free complex software like a browser then

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by alan1302

Ok - it's impossible to create bug free complex software like a browser then

No, as I said, just harder.

[Daveoc64]

Originally Posted by Batwing

No, as I said, just harder.

Maybe if you live in la la land, but the reality is that Google pushes several updates out to the Chrome browser family ever week. There's just no way that they could continue development as rapidly as they do whilst making the product as reliable as you're talking about.

Can you refer to any piece of software that's perfect in the way that you describe? To me, the absence of such software suggests that it isn't possible.

Web Browsers have to deal with some "impossibilities" - a web site that's written incorrectly should render incorrectly. Most users won't put up with that, so they will bend the rules. Some say that's a bug in itself.

[NewWorldMan]

Originally Posted by Batwing

No, as I said, just harder.

Theoretically, it is possible to produce bug-free software for products such as web browsers but for practical purposes we should regard it as impossible. Can you point to any browser that is bug-free?

Incidentally, even if you can theoretically produce bug-free software you cannot in general prove the absence of defects.

[NewWorldMan]

Originally Posted by Daveoc64

Web Browsers have to deal with some "impossibilities" - a web site that's written incorrectly should render incorrectly. Most users won't put up with that, so they will bend the rules. Some say that's a bug in itself.

I understand that MS Windows in the early days deliberately allowed some badly written applications to run precisely because they wanted to establish a stable ecosystem of applications. They then tightened things up over time and started to sacrifice backward compatibility bit by bit.

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by Daveoc64

Can you refer to any piece of software that's perfect in the way that you describe? To me, the absence of such software suggests that it isn't possible.

Yes, I can write a simple program that will do exactly what I want it to do every time, hence my remarks about increased difficulty as complexity increases.

I already addressed your Google update comments in another post.

[Batwing]

Originally Posted by NewWorldMan

Theoretically, it is possible to produce bug-free software for products such as web browsers but for practical purposes we should regard it as impossible. Can you point to any browser that is bug-free?

Please read my posts again. I never said that there are bug free browsers.

Originally Posted by NewWorldMan

Incidentally, even if you can theoretically produce bug-free software you cannot in general prove the absence of defects.

Of course you can. The simpler the program the easier it is to do.

[whoever,hey]

What has theoretically got to do with anything?

We dont use theoretical software, we use real software written by humans. Browsers are NOT proven bug free like critical systems must be.

No software on any OS is ever bug free.

[DotNetWill]

Originally Posted by whoever,hey

What has theoretically got to do with anything?

We dont use theoretical software, we use real software written by humans. Browsers are NOT proven bug free like critical systems must be.

No software on any OS is ever bug free.

If you tried to write a browser in the same way you'd write safety critical systems it would take you 20+ years. And I'd love to see the spec for it :P

[chappie]

try "pale moon" seems better than firefox

[radioanorak]

www.palemoon.org
Been using it for ages with out problems
You can use Firefox addons & themes etc with this browser