Hi, I see people here always talk about the performance of MacBook Pro with large number of Chrome tabs open. I think other browsers also have tabs. What so special about using Chrome besides helping that company to collect user data? Is the popularity of Chrome only within the Mac community or also in the Windows community?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why people like to use Chrome browser?
- Thread starter hajime
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
From what I have seen here at MR most use it for work as from a web site or web app prospective it is the most compatible vs safari or firefox.
Thankfully I am not forced to use that heaping mass of Google spy/bloatware.
Thankfully I am not forced to use that heaping mass of Google spy/bloatware.
Last edited:
As far as I know Chrome is used by many people, over Edge (Windows) and Safari (Mac). For me using Chrome is the fact that it is cross-platform with the same interface, every setting can be synchronized on both Mac and Windows PC (and other OS'es).
Google _does_ collect user information indeed, but beware, Apple does so too!!.
Now that Microsoft finally is retiring Internet Explorer there might be a chance that Edge (based on Chrome btw) on Microsoft Windows will be more dominant.
For me Safari would have been interesting for use on a Mac if a Windows based version would have been available also. With of course the advantage of cross-platform synchronisation etc.
Just my few cents ...
Google _does_ collect user information indeed, but beware, Apple does so too!!.
Now that Microsoft finally is retiring Internet Explorer there might be a chance that Edge (based on Chrome btw) on Microsoft Windows will be more dominant.
For me Safari would have been interesting for use on a Mac if a Windows based version would have been available also. With of course the advantage of cross-platform synchronisation etc.
Just my few cents ...
Thanks for mentioning Edge is based on Chrome. No more Edge for me.
It’s Chrome with Google’s stuff replaced with Microsoft. I prefer Brave which is also Chrome-based but with all the big tech junk removed. 90% of the internet uses Chrome or a Chrome-based browser, so pretty much every every website is coded to work the best with it.
Firefox completely changed the way the way extensions work, giving them less access to the browser, I think. However, since they did that, it seems that most developers haven't bothered to update their add-ons, which would take the same amount of work for less resulting functionality. So I switched to Chrome. I worry about giving up my data in most cases, and I take the time to select bare minimum cookies when I can, but I literally no longer register ads that are on a page, so I'll live with less privacy here.
Honestly, I mainly use Chrome for its simplicity with favourites.
Example, I can log into the browser from any computer, and have my favourites. I do not save passwords in the browser, I used 1Password for that, plus I have MFA on my Google account, too.
If it wasn't for the above, I probably would be using the newer edition of Edge. Having the option of multiple Profiles with Edge, is appealing. Even more so, if you use Microsoft 365 for personal use, and work use, it makes it that much easier to log into a specific Microsoft 365 account directly...
Example, I can log into the browser from any computer, and have my favourites. I do not save passwords in the browser, I used 1Password for that, plus I have MFA on my Google account, too.
If it wasn't for the above, I probably would be using the newer edition of Edge. Having the option of multiple Profiles with Edge, is appealing. Even more so, if you use Microsoft 365 for personal use, and work use, it makes it that much easier to log into a specific Microsoft 365 account directly...
Blame it on Internet Explorer. IE6 was the ruler of the internet, and it was so bad, that Google came to the rescue with Chrome. And Google Chrome was a great browser back then. It followed internet standards and performed better than IE6. Macs have had Safari, but for Windows users, Chrome was the only widely recognized IE alternative (the geeks had Firefox, but general users are more familiar with the Google brand).
Fast forward today, and Google Chrome practically took over as the majority browser on Windows, and Chrome has become the "kleenex" for internet browser. Android pushed it further into the collective knowledge that everyone knows they use Chrome to go to the internet. As Macs get more switchers, they look for Chrome instead of Safari.
The majority marketshare also pushed web developers to test compatibility with Chrome instead of the internet standards. Chrome practically has become the villain it was fighting, it has become the new IE.
I use chrome because of the path of least resistance. Signing in with my google account, my chrome browser will behave exactly as I want it too with bookmarks and extensions regardless of what computer i'm using.
At one point, I was considering Brave, which is built on the Chrome engine but id more privacy minded, yet given that I use google services/products, like youtube and gmail and whatnot, that attempt is rather pointless.
At one point, I was considering Brave, which is built on the Chrome engine but id more privacy minded, yet given that I use google services/products, like youtube and gmail and whatnot, that attempt is rather pointless.
Just how long have you not been paying attention?
Netscape died over 19 years ago in 2003. That's three years before the introduction of the first Intel Mac.
Netscape - Wikipedia
I use Vivaldi on my Macs and PC. It's Chrome based but functions more like Opera used to do. Which is expected, because Vivaldi is designed by one of the creators of Opera.
Just how long have you not been paying attention?
Netscape died over 19 years ago in 2003. That's three years before the introduction of the first Intel Mac.
Netscape - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I was using Netscape and a modem. It was good!
What is mean by Google's stuff replaced with Microsoft? When we use Edge, can Google take advantage of us and collect our data?
Google can still take advantage of you if you are signed into Google and using Google search and Google products. I'd advise using Brave instead of Chrome or Edge.
I don't think that's quite right. Firefox was the browser that 'came to the rescue' of IE6 users, long before Chrome was even a twinkle in Larry and Sergei's eyes. Firefox was a great browser back then, and still is now, in fact I use it across all my devices.
Chrome now is the new IE6. Everyone uses it, sites are coded specifically to work ONLY on Chrome and to go against W3C principles, and Google are forcing their own technology and standards on their users (sound familiar...ActiveX...), breaking compatibility with other browsers in the process to try and acheive full domination of the web.
Mozilla has its' problems as an organisation, but by God they're a lot better than Google in every respect. I would recommend everybody go back and give Firefox another go, especially if you haven't used it for a few years. True extension support (unlike Chrome with the upcoming Manifest3), true privacy (so they say, and I trust Mozilla a lot more than I trust Google), it's fast, and you get to make a stand against the Blink-ification on the web.
EDIT: Just read that last paragraph of your post, seems we're actually in agreement. 😅
Because it actually works, unlike Safari.
99% of the web is optimized for Chrome. And Safari lags far behind on supporting features of the web.
Apple should make Safari a Chromium browser immediately and put an end to this nonsense.
99% of the web is optimized for Chrome. And Safari lags far behind on supporting features of the web.
Apple should make Safari a Chromium browser immediately and put an end to this nonsense.
Telling someone to use garbage like Brave, and not the most functional and compatible web browsers in existence (Chromium Edge and Chrome) is terrible advice. That's your elaboration.
FireFox has the best font rendering out of all the browsers. Chrome derivatives have poorer text contrast.
I don't care for Google or Android, and I won't use Chrome. I've always been a Windows user and I've been generally pleased with Edge browser's performance before and after it became chromium based.
Yesterday I was reading a similar discussion on another site, and one poster said something to the effect of how he continues to be dismayed by how many otherwise tech-savvy people use Chrome and won't give Firefox another chance. I immediately x'd out of Edge and loaded up my Firefox profile.
Now, since I'm abundantly pleased with iOS/iPhone and with Apple, I eventually plan to switch from Windows to Mac. I love how Safari performs on my iPhone (I like keychain and private relay) and look forward to syncing it with a laptop. Even so, I do want to continue to support Mozilla/Firefox, and I also dabble with Tor.
Yesterday I was reading a similar discussion on another site, and one poster said something to the effect of how he continues to be dismayed by how many otherwise tech-savvy people use Chrome and won't give Firefox another chance. I immediately x'd out of Edge and loaded up my Firefox profile.
Now, since I'm abundantly pleased with iOS/iPhone and with Apple, I eventually plan to switch from Windows to Mac. I love how Safari performs on my iPhone (I like keychain and private relay) and look forward to syncing it with a laptop. Even so, I do want to continue to support Mozilla/Firefox, and I also dabble with Tor.
When did this happen? I know Apple did this with Safari but my Ublock Origin still works on Firefox.
People talk about compatability but I can't remember any site that didn't work with Firefox. I would say the same about Safari but I recently found one that didn't.
I just don't see the reason to use Chrome unless you're really into the Google ecosystem. I don't want Google tracking my browsing history. I'm sure they still do to a point but I'm just not going to make it that easy for them. It's also a memory hog so yeah there's that.
If someone likes the way Chrome works then use it. What works for me might not for someone else.
Why Chrome, IE, Edge, Safari or any other browser?
To be blunt, most users aren't too discriminating about the browser they use, and just use the bundled default on the device or computer. The same could be said for email clients as well.
They don't know KHTML from WebKit, Blink, MSHTML, Trident, Presto, or Gecko, nor do they care.
Unless there is a desired feature, compatibility issue, or other problem to be addressed, they're unlikely to seek an alternative, and even then it may only be employed at certain times to solve a specific problem (like a bad online banking site), and not become their primary browser.
The browser ballot imposed by the EU's settlement with Microsoft in response to IE's dominance was designed to make users aware of other browsers available to Windows, and have them make a conscious choice. The way the winds are blowing, Apple is drifting toward that shore as well.
Every new browser touts that it will be the fastest, most compatible, or whatever, and initially, that is usually true. Chrome was fast and light, compared to its peers, but like others, it, too succumbed to getting slower and more resource hungry. Technology progresses, and without the will and commitment to devote resources to continuing development, stagnation occurs, and the situation becomes ripe for the competition.
As a rarity for Google's products, that often fail to stick to walls, Chrome is successful because it's a competitive product, is heavily promoted, and promises better integration with other popular Google products, as well as being the default on Google's devices. Safari enjoys similar benefits among Apple users.
Those who recall the days of the Windows, and by extension, IE hegemony will recognize why a dominant browser, or platform, is bad for users. As a Apple user in those days, sites that "worked best with IE," didn't function properly, or flat out rejected other non-IE browsers were not an uncommon thing. Even worse was that, like Windows, IE was a mediocre product, and gave MS undue influence over the web.
A similar situation existed with media, with QuickTIme, RealPlayer, Shockwave/Flash, and other proprietary standards battling and causing unwarranted headaches for users, forcing the installation of different extensions, and codec packages, just to simply make full use of the web, which was designed for open, agnostic standards. It was a mess that wasn't solved until HTML 5 media became the norm.
Make no mistake, these companies, including Apple, don't devote sizeable resources to developing browsers out of the goodness of their hearts, but for their own self-interest. There are some real competitive advantages, both technical and business, that are expected in return, and depending on one's viewpoint, that can be a good or bad thing.
The likelihood of compatibility issues as severe as in the past isn't as high, but it's still important to have players like Mozilla and others play a role, even if only to keep the giants from becoming lazy, complacent, and not striving to advance the technology in general.
The direction of the free and open web being driven by a single company, no matter if it's Google, Apple, or Microsoft, is not a good thing, and the notion of a benevolent Google Chrome, or Apple Safari, is a myth.
To be blunt, most users aren't too discriminating about the browser they use, and just use the bundled default on the device or computer. The same could be said for email clients as well.
They don't know KHTML from WebKit, Blink, MSHTML, Trident, Presto, or Gecko, nor do they care.
Unless there is a desired feature, compatibility issue, or other problem to be addressed, they're unlikely to seek an alternative, and even then it may only be employed at certain times to solve a specific problem (like a bad online banking site), and not become their primary browser.
The browser ballot imposed by the EU's settlement with Microsoft in response to IE's dominance was designed to make users aware of other browsers available to Windows, and have them make a conscious choice. The way the winds are blowing, Apple is drifting toward that shore as well.
Every new browser touts that it will be the fastest, most compatible, or whatever, and initially, that is usually true. Chrome was fast and light, compared to its peers, but like others, it, too succumbed to getting slower and more resource hungry. Technology progresses, and without the will and commitment to devote resources to continuing development, stagnation occurs, and the situation becomes ripe for the competition.
As a rarity for Google's products, that often fail to stick to walls, Chrome is successful because it's a competitive product, is heavily promoted, and promises better integration with other popular Google products, as well as being the default on Google's devices. Safari enjoys similar benefits among Apple users.
Those who recall the days of the Windows, and by extension, IE hegemony will recognize why a dominant browser, or platform, is bad for users. As a Apple user in those days, sites that "worked best with IE," didn't function properly, or flat out rejected other non-IE browsers were not an uncommon thing. Even worse was that, like Windows, IE was a mediocre product, and gave MS undue influence over the web.
A similar situation existed with media, with QuickTIme, RealPlayer, Shockwave/Flash, and other proprietary standards battling and causing unwarranted headaches for users, forcing the installation of different extensions, and codec packages, just to simply make full use of the web, which was designed for open, agnostic standards. It was a mess that wasn't solved until HTML 5 media became the norm.
Make no mistake, these companies, including Apple, don't devote sizeable resources to developing browsers out of the goodness of their hearts, but for their own self-interest. There are some real competitive advantages, both technical and business, that are expected in return, and depending on one's viewpoint, that can be a good or bad thing.
The likelihood of compatibility issues as severe as in the past isn't as high, but it's still important to have players like Mozilla and others play a role, even if only to keep the giants from becoming lazy, complacent, and not striving to advance the technology in general.
The direction of the free and open web being driven by a single company, no matter if it's Google, Apple, or Microsoft, is not a good thing, and the notion of a benevolent Google Chrome, or Apple Safari, is a myth.
Last edited: