3 ms·
Nah, both Firefox and Chrome are battery sucking vampires while Chrome is a slightly better looking battery sucking vampire with more superpowers (extensions).
by nofilter 9y ago
Nah, both Firefox and Chrome are battery sucking vampires while Chrome is a slightly better looking battery sucking vampire with more superpowers (extensions). Ever since browser engines started to actually work (remember when Webkit and Gecko were like from different worlds at rendering web sites?) I've not really cared for that as a developer and find that whatever code I write also happens to work most everywhere. So, to conclude, Safari is pretty good.
- tradersam 9y agoI don't agree. On Windows, Firefox is much better with RAM and battery than Chrome — and on both Windows and macOS, looks much better too.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- fro0116 9y agoFirefox has always been my browser of choice, but I will concede that Safari is vastly superior when it comes to resource usage, especially when you take content blockers vs traditional JS-based ad-blocking into account. Anyone know of plans for Firefox and/or Chrome to implement a similar 1st-party content-blocking solutions for their respective browsers?