Slashdot Mirror


Should You Leave Google Chrome For the Opera Browser? (vice.com)

mspohr shares a report written by Jason Koebler via Motherboard who makes the case for why you should break up with Chrome and switch to the Opera browser: Over the last few years, I have grown endlessly frustrated with Chrome's resource management, especially on MacOS. Admittedly, I open too many tabs, but I'd wager that a lot of you do, too. With Chrome, my computer crawls to complete unusability multiple times a day. After one too many times of having to go into Activity Monitor to find that one single Chrome tab is using several gigs of RAM, I decided enough was enough. I switched to Opera, a browser I had previously thought was only for contrarians. This, after previous dalliances with Safari and Firefox left me frustrated. Because Opera is also based on Blink, I almost never run into a website, plugin, script, or video that doesn't work flawlessly on it. In fact, Opera works almost exactly like Chrome, except without the resource hogging that makes me want to throw my computer against a brick wall. This is exactly the point, according to Opera spokesperson Jan Standal: "What we're doing is an optimized version of Chrome," he said. "Web developers optimize most for the browser with the biggest market share, which happens to be Chrome. We benefit from the work of that optimization."

Slashdot reader mspohr adds: "I should note that this has also been my experience. I have a 2010 MacBook, which I was ready to trash since it had become essentially useless, coming to a grinding halt daily. I tried Opera and it's like I have a new computer. I never get the spinning wheel of death. (Also, the built-in ad blocker and VPN are nice.)" What has been your experience with Google Chrome and/or Opera? Do you prefer one over the other?

303 comments

  1. Exception to butterage by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why not? It could hardly be much worse ... could it?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Exception to butterage by mhkohne · · Score: 1

      Why not? It could hardly be much worse ... could it?

      If you know what's good for you, you'll stop taunting Murphy NOW, while you've still got all your limbs.

      --
      A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
    2. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stuck in a boring rut?

    3. Re: Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      H1B this, H1B that... I miss the old slashdot. Who can forget the old tropes like "indo-chimps with fricking lasers", "In Soviet Russia, streets shit on indo-chimps" and of course that brilliant April Fools Day "OMG indo-chimps!!!"

    4. Re: Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Found the retard. Fuck off to reddit, that's where you belong.

    5. Re:Exception to butterage by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Assuming the addons you want are actually available. I use the following:

      - Searchonymous
      - DeGoogle
      - AdBlock Plus
      - Tab Cookies
      - ScriptSafe
      - Privacy Badger
      - LastPass
      - Search by Image
      - Remote Torrent Adder
      - Tampermonkey
      - Chrometana

      Why do I use all of this?

      Well, I get annoyed how when I searched Amazon for an 8 port switch, I get emails from them about more switches, and other websites show me ads for switches, even though I no longer want a switch. And then there was the time I was idly curious what an ounce of gold was worth and looked it up, and then other sites (slashdot included) started showing me ads to buy gold (which is a terrible idea in general, by the way.) Searchonymous, DeGoogle, Tab Cookies, and Privacy Badger all work to avoid this.

      Plus there are the news websites that will block content after so many visits (tab cookies), the anti-adblock sites (tampermonkey), and sites that show annoying javascript popups asking for your email address (scriptsafe.) And then I like to just be able to click torrent links to download them from my server (remote torrent adder) and right click on images to search using them (search by image) and redirect Windows 10's lame bing searches to Google, (chrometana) which I've fully anonymized via the first two mentioned addons (not to mention, bing sucks.)

      The web truly sucks without going through all of this crap, but it just ends up being necessary.

      And no, chrome doesn't go slow for me with all of this, even though I run an i7 2600k from 2012, albeit I have 16GB of RAM (I run the occasional virtual machine) which likely makes all the difference, but 8GB should be plenty to avoid problems, and IMO if you still run on 4GB of ram these days...well I just feel sorry for you.

    6. Re:Exception to butterage by locopuyo · · Score: 1

      Most Chrome addons also work on Opera. Opera also has some things Chrome doesn't such as built in mouse gestures and speed dial that work better than any plugins you can get for Chrome. Opera actually used to have a lot more features that other browsers didn't before they switched engines. Vivaldi has most of them though which is why I use that as my primary browser now.

      I agree what you say about the "resource hogging". I have 16GB Ram and I want the browser to use it if it makes browsing faster. I've never had problems with any browser using too much.

    7. Re: Exception to butterage by hardeep1singh · · Score: 2

      Vivaldi uses Chrome Web store for extensions.

    8. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure about Opera, but Chrome went in the bit bucket when I found out that they were going to try to have it connect through your bluetooth devices to snoop!

    9. Re:Exception to butterage by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      I have the solution right here, it's called a tab suspender:
      https://chrome.google.com/webs...

      Why this is not built in is another thing entirely

    10. Re: Exception to butterage by tigersha · · Score: 1

      You forgot about Natalie Portman and hot grits

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
    11. Re:Exception to butterage by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      I just grabbed the opera .deb package and installed it, total elapsed time roughly 30 seconds, and it is suh-weet. Thanks to whoever posted this for the suggestion. Chrome is really pissing me off these days. Firefox still likely be be my main browser because of vastly superior tab handling and actual open source project.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    12. Re:Exception to butterage by dillee1 · · Score: 1

      Bro, all my google advs are women lingeries, shoes, skirts etc. You don't event want to know what I searched for.

    13. Re:Exception to butterage by ZeRu · · Score: 1

      Would you care enough to point me to the guide on how to use tampermonkey to browse sites like forbes.com?

      --
      If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
    14. Re:Exception to butterage by rnturn · · Score: 1

      That's one of my Opera annoyances. LinkedIn often has links to articles on forbes.com and you're forced to copy the link to another browser to read it.

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    15. Re:Exception to butterage by jaklode · · Score: 1

      Last I looked, it's on the todo list, but properly suspending tabs requires storing their actual state, and that's not really there yet. Though there were some experiments with just killing the renderer (tab discarding): https://developers.google.com/... (see end for tab serialization).

    16. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your shit's a mess.

      Get rid of all of that Google shit, download Vivaldi and set your default search engine to Startpage.com.

      Replace AdBlock Plus and Privacy Badger with uBlock Origin. Replace ScriptSafe with uMatrix. Replace Tab Cookies with Vanilla Cookie Manager.

    17. Re:Exception to butterage by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Wasn't Opera sold to a Chinese consortium? You gona trust it with your data?

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    18. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and because firefox is what is used in tor browser.

    19. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's one of my Opera annoyances. LinkedIn often has links to articles on forbes.com and you're forced to copy the link to another browser to read it.

      Another solution is to just not read articles on Forbes.com, I've found it works quite well since there's plenty of other sites out there.

    20. Re:Exception to butterage by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      Why not they trust Google with it. Abusing the data is still abusing the data no matter what company has it.

    21. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not use Internet Explorer? It could hardly be much worse ... could it?

    22. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't Opera now owned by a Chinese firm? If so, wouldn't it be prudent to determine if that browser is not an "open sesame" application for different actors? All the shenanigans with the nsa tools comes to mind...

    23. Re: Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea I do, that sounds way better than I what ads I gots

    24. Re:Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I went from Opera to Vivaldi because of that fact.

    25. Re:Exception to butterage by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      And yet Opera is now owned by a Chinese company. Opera is not on any system I own and should I ever need to install it, it would only be in a VM.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    26. Re: Exception to butterage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mae Ling Mak, naked and petrified.

    27. Re:Exception to butterage by paulatz · · Score: 1

      The problem of Opera (and Vivaldi) on Linux is that they do not have a license for h264, they try to grab the dynamic library codec from google chrome or firefox, but often it does not work. And the instructions to do it manually change every 3 weeks, and you have to read through 20 forum posts written by pimpled youths to find out how. So the 4 milliseconds you saved loading the page faster are wasted

      Solution: just use Firefox, it is slow and ugly, but it is actually free, and it is the only browser that supports ublock on Android, and one you get used to ublock you cannot surf the normal internet any more.

      Since they have ditched FirefoxOS and all that horsepiss, Firefox has begun to improve again. It will take a couple more decades before it is a good browser, now it is just the best

      --
      this post contain no useful information, no need to mod it down
    28. Re:Exception to butterage by subnomine · · Score: 2

      I use:
      -ShareSSN
      -BingAllTheThings
      -AdMeMore
      -PublicCookies
      -RunScriptAsRoot
      -PrivacyNot
      -PassGas
      -DPickPlus
      -RandomTorrentAdder
      -Taperworm
      -Bingalicious

    29. Re:Exception to butterage by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      > Abusing the data is still abusing the data no matter what company has it. No, it's not even close to the same. A government is far more powerful than a company, and there is no clear dividing line between a Chinese company and the Chinese government, especially a Chinese Internet security firm and the Chinese government.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    30. Re:Exception to butterage by Kartu · · Score: 1

      No "MRU" tab switching makes Chrome makes it a "no-thanks, I'll stick with Opera" to me.

  2. Is this an Apple problem? by Zaelath · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Something to do with not enough RAM installed and inability to do anything about it?

    1. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, Chrome on macOS is terrible. But even on Windows it's a resource hog.

    2. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by ArchieBunker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah he bought a Macbook with soldered in ram and then complains when he uses too much of said ram.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    3. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah. Sounds more like a Chrome problem but more correctly is sounds like these are Macs from before the soldered in RAM. At least the one from 2010 is... this would be an intel problem for limiting ram.

      Internet is weird these days, people bash on Firefox for being a resource hog then defend chrome or attack MacOS. What happened to all the old neck beards who at least knew what they were talking about?

    4. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by postbigbang · · Score: 2

      Jason needs anger management control.

      Opens a bunch of tabs, admittedly, then wants to throw his computer against a wall.

      Hope he never gets married.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    5. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the land of /. Where we call any feature one individual doesn't need "bloat", we have Chrome. Chrome. Chrome comes with its own update manager, notification engine, print service, font packages. They have basically tried to wedge an entire OS inside a bleeping browser yet we don't seem to talk about that. All we say is that it uses lots of memory. Chrome is a bloated, viral piece of adware. So go ahead and use Opera. You can hardly do worse than you are doing now.

    6. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct. Apple hasn't increased the max allowed amount of memory on MacBooks in over seven years. This is Apple's fault.

    7. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not if it's a 2010 MBP you bozo.

    8. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by bestweasel · · Score: 1

      I'd guess it's a problem with Chrome on Macs. I'd regularly have 100+ tabs, 10+ windows open without any problems (until the Windows update a few days ago when they all disappeared after a reboot).

    9. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      I have 100s of tabs open in Safari and it doesn't have that problem.

      I know, Parkinson's Law and all that. Still, I shouldn't need a hardware upgrade because programmers are lazy.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    10. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Zaelath · · Score: 1

      I'm somewhat assuming that Opera (and Safari) are both keeping 100s of tabs "open" in the loosly defined way that Android keeps 100s of apps "open"; i.e. they're really not and as soon as they get focus they have to reload.

      Chrome on Windows seems to do the same thing, these days. It will still consume all available RAM first before it starts caching, but seems to avoid swapfile. My experience on older macs was they treated swapfile like real memory so you only got application caching once you ran out of RAM + swapfile, which is awful. The solution was to have lots of RAM.. which they don't.

      I'm not sure if the difference is in the OS or the Chrome build, or just that I don't regularly use a machine with less than 8GB of RAM, but I do note that Windows always seems to be hovering around 7GB of 8GB used and what becomes slow is opening new tabs as Chrome swaps out old ones. The rest of the OS doesn't suffer at all.

    11. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone told me thirty years ago that a company would increase the amount of memory in 7 years, I wouldn't have believed them. Apple has just given-up.

    12. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Chrome is a resource hog on Windows too. I came back last weekend to find that all 16GB of RAM on my work computer were spoken for, causing things to run at a crawl. I checked Task Manager and could see various tabs each taking up over 1GB, so I closed Chrome out, killed its background processes for good measure, and immediately regained 9GB of memory, even though I had only had around 6-8 tabs open. Others at work have had similar issues, so much so that we have to be careful about having Chrome running while also using VMs or doing memory intensive tests.

    13. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Zaelath · · Score: 1

      Can I take a guess that your 6-8 tabs were all running McAfee Enterprise Security Manager?

      I'd be rapt if that POS could run in less than 1GB in any browser over a weekend.

      Regardless, there's limits to what the browser can take the blame for; if you run flash/etc with a million memory leaks in it, anything is going to grind to a halt.

    14. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Nope. I remember I had these...
      - Gmail
      - Google Calendar
      - Fastmail
      - Overcast.fm
      - JIRA
      - YNAB

      Google's tabs were by far the biggest offenders, with YNAB and JIRA not far behind. Overcast and Fastmail were both decently well behaved. I think I had another tab or two open, but I don't remember what it would have been. Maybe a particular issue in JIRA?

    15. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Zaelath · · Score: 1

      Yeah, something stinks anyway. I've had Chrome open for weeks at a time with (currently) 114 tabs between 14 windows and there's a handful of Chrome processes with more than 200Mb, one with 500 (probably gmail).

      I do ad block, and a lot of ads are notorious for leaky flash scripts... so perhaps that's the issue?

    16. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      I have Flash configured in my Chrome settings to be disabled until I enable it on a per-case basis. I also run ad blockers that block almost all third-party requests by default, so it shouldn't be anything of that sort. It just seems to be bad behavior on the part of a few browser-based apps that appear to not clean up after themselves well.

    17. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Maybe you shouldn't believe the one who said "640 k RAM is enough for everybody"

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    18. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I have a NEC ultrabook with 4GB of RAM soldered in. Performance in Chrome is fine, no issues at all. It gracefully frees up memory when other apps need it, and the machine doesn't feel slow even with many tabs open.

      Maybe the Mac OS version of Chrome is really bad or something, but for me Chrome is absolutely fine with 4GB of RAM. That's hardly surprising considering that most Chromebooks have less than 4GB and run Chrome really well.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    19. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Llian · · Score: 1

      Chrome is a resource hog on Windows too. I came back last weekend to find that all 16GB of RAM on my work computer were spoken for, causing things to run at a crawl. I checked Task Manager and could see various tabs each taking up over 1GB, so I closed Chrome out, killed its background processes for good measure, and immediately regained 9GB of memory, even though I had only had around 6-8 tabs open. Others at work have had similar issues, so much so that we have to be careful about having Chrome running while also using VMs or doing memory intensive tests.



      Can say I have never had this happen to me. Currently have 32 tabs open, some JS heavy, others just html. Not going above 99MB of my apparently 8gb (mobo isnt recognizing the other 10 I just realized. Taking donations for a new board!
    20. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      No, it's Intel's fault. 16GB is the maximum amount of LPDDR supported by their current mobile chips. The ones that support 32GB are due Real Soon Now.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    21. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The problem is mot the size of RAM.
      The problem is that Chrome opens every tab in its own process. And default process VM footprint on a Mac is the size of the RAM, hence every process occupies 4 or 8 Gig swap space. More RAM would make the problem even worse.
      How Chrome however manages to actually use 500MB or more for a single tab is beyond me.
      So: you are mot insightful but an idiot. And your up,odder, too. When a 100kB Web site needs half a gig of RAM, then ot is the fault of the browser/programmer, not the owners.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    22. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I have the same problem with Safari and Chrome.
      Usually a runaway Javascript. The worst thing you can do is having dozens or a hundred tans, watching a youtube video and stopping it in the moment it is loading an add. That is a nearly 100% chance for a beach ball.
      However I still can log in via SSH and can kill the tab.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    23. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      No, the tans are not reloaded.
      At least not usually.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    24. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 1

      No, modern browsers are just pigs. The last browser engine that seemed to really care about resources was Presto which they sadly killed off. Presto w/ 50+ tabs was in the lower 100MB range, Chromium easily eats into the GBs there.

    25. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by MSG · · Score: 1

      I remember when Chrome used less memory than Firefox, and people blamed Firefox. Now Chrome uses lots of memory and people blame the user.

      All those complaints about Firefox got Mozilla's attention. They worked hard on addressing those issues. Google doesn't seem to have been as careful. My wife uses three applications on her Mac: Chrome, Slack, and Atom. The latter two are based on Electron, so the core of all three applications is essentially the same. And all three consume more memory the longer they run. Without actually running a profiler on it to verify, I am confident that they're leaking memory. The thing about memory leaks is, it doesn't matter how much memory you have in your computer. No amount will ever be enough. Memory is nothing more than the fuse in a time bomb that ends with your computer swapping until it halts.

      Quit blaming the user. Chrome shows all the signs of being a leaky application, and that problem is inherited by all of the other applications that use it as a base. Google needs to fix this. It's their problem.

    26. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by denguydj · · Score: 1

      I have a 2012 mbp pro with only 8 gig of ram... i open tons of chrome tabs with no issue. I'm wondering if its just a site that's coded in a way that causes chrome on the mac to go haywire or a bad advertisement on a webpage.... Guessing its a software bug of some sort.

    27. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      That was proven false. The excuse was that it would use too much power, which someone suggested was false as well.

    28. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Fuck dude, all those tans will give you cancer.

    29. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      I doubt 18GB is supported by any DDR3/4 motherboard.

    30. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      That generation of MBPs still had upgradable ram. I have a 2011 and upgraded the ram to 16GB just fine.

    31. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

      This shouldn't be insightful, because it's wrong.

      That generation of Macbooks still had upgradable ram. I have a 2011 and upgraded the ram to 16GB just fine.

      http://www.everymac.com/system...

      Don't get me started on Apple's current shit-tastic lineup, but the 2010s, give or take, were the golden age of macs that kicked ass.

    32. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pale Moon is a modern browser and it's very easy on resources.

    33. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have 6 GB of ram and I never run out of ram. Coincidentally I use Opera. I also keep a minimum of 50 tabs open at any given time.

    34. Re: Is this an Apple problem? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      No it wasn't. The chips support 16GB of DDR3 or LPDDR3 or 32GB of DDR4. It's on the spec sheets. They could have used DDR4, but that would have meant the RAM would be consuming about 10W even in standby mode, which is not acceptable in a laptop.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    35. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Yet you can a non-Apple laptop with the same chips and install more than 16GB of RAM.....?

      It's 100% absolutely an Apple problem.

    36. Re:Is this an Apple problem? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can, and it's DDR4, with a power drain of around 12W idle (and even in standby mode). These laptops exist, but they have such terrible battery life that they barely count as laptops.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  3. "Open too many tabs" by DatbeDank · · Score: 1, Informative

    The majority of people who have 10+ tabs open don't need all of them opened at once. Close out the tabs you don't need and use bookmarks if you need a handy reference back to something.

    Or get more RAM. The sticks are dirt cheap.

    On a side note: Opera's a great browser, however i'm skeptical of its Chinese ownership. If i'm going to have any intelligence agency know my private details in and out, I prefer it to be the NSA and CIA. /sarcasm

    1. Re:"Open too many tabs" by lucm · · Score: 1

      Or get more RAM. The sticks are dirt cheap.

      The guy (and the reader who commented in the summary) uses a Macbook. That machine will die with the already obsolete specs it had when the guy bought it in 2010.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    2. Re:"Open too many tabs" by EvilSS · · Score: 5, Informative

      The majority of people who have 10+ tabs open don't need all of them opened at once. Close out the tabs you don't need and use bookmarks if you need a handy reference back to something.

      Or get more RAM. The sticks are dirt cheap.

      On a side note: Opera's a great browser, however i'm skeptical of its Chinese ownership. If i'm going to have any intelligence agency know my private details in and out, I prefer it to be the NSA and CIA. /sarcasm

      The problem is it shouldn't take over 100MB of RAM to display a webpage. Opened this very /. page in a Chrome incognito window (so no browser extensions in the tab, clean as I can get it) and it settled in at around 140,000 KB of RAM. That is ridiculous.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    3. Re:"Open too many tabs" by whoozwah · · Score: 1

      ram is not cheap right now. when I built a system last year 8GB stick cost 40 bones. it's currently around 70.

    4. Re:"Open too many tabs" by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      GIven the problems I have been having with Slashdot since the advertisements started popping up all over the place, I'm not surprised at all. I almost have a seizure every time I load the page and the ad at the top makes the content shift all over the place.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    5. Re:"Open too many tabs" by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      Ha ha I remember when 16 mb cost me thousands. Fuck I'm old.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    6. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100MB to display a page? Is it still 90'? If you read some information regarding web page rendering, you wouldn't say that.

    7. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the great thing about opening a lot of tabs: YOU CAN JUST STOP FUCKING DOING IT!

      Yes, websites are way too bloated. But if you're using some old piece of shit computer with too little RAM, opening 50 tabs is just being stupid. You don't drive cross country in a '67 Cadillac and then complain about poor gas mileage.

    8. Re:"Open too many tabs" by mspohr · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm "the guy" who owns a 2010 MacBook Air. I realize that this was never a high performace machine and is now obsolete. I would buy a new Mac but the offerings from Apple are even more pathetic than in 2010.
      I had abandoned the machine but dug it out to do my taxes and when the whole "get a VPN" thing happened, I decided to try Opera. I was amazed that the machine was useful again! Instead of endless bouts of soul sucking beach ball spinning, I could just use the machine and it rarely pegged the CPU or filled up the measely 2 Gig memory. It felt like a new computer.
      So, if you are suffering from a slow,, memory hogging web browser, I highly recommend Opera.
      P.S. If you couldn't tell, I am a cheap old geezer.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    9. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On a side note: Opera's a great browser, however i'm skeptical of its Chinese ownership. If i'm going to have any intelligence agency know my private details in and out, I prefer it to be the NSA and CIA. /sarcasm

      Run Nirsoft's smsniff before you fire up each different browser, including Opera. Note the IPs talked to. Then browse just 1 website on each, and again see what IPs are "talked" to. Turn off blockers and filters first, of course.

    10. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Apple are even more pathetic than in 2010...

      Don't know about 2010, but the mid-2012 MacBook released over seven years ago supported up to 16 GB of memory. That's what we have over fifty of because even the newest models do not support more memory. The day Apple releases an upgrade, we're placing an order for fifty. It's been in our budget for over three years. As it stands now, we have a ton of beat-up and old laptops that are giving us trouble. Most of our employees travel a lot, so I don't blame Apple but it is annoying. I've probably flown at least 250 times since I got my 2012 MacBook, and Delta broke the hinge, United put several dents in the bottom, and Ukraine Air bent the side so bad I can no longer insert a CD, but it still works. Apple makes incredible laptops, but not upgrading the amount of memory in over seven years is just ridiculous.

    11. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Gavagai80 · · Score: 0

      P.S. If you couldn't tell, I am a cheap old geezer.

      Cheap? You spent a fortune on a macbook. You could've bought a new low-end laptop every single year for less total cost, and had better performance most of those years.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    12. Re:"Open too many tabs" by lucm · · Score: 1

      I'm skeptical of Opera because it's owned by the Chinese. And it's the same reason I don't trust most of the cheap VPN providers: they're all Chinese.

      Maybe Opera is a good "nasty stuff" browser, but one thing is for sure, I wouldn't do my taxes on a Chinese browser using a Chinese VPN. I'm not saying that the Chinese spies are involved, but that's a huge country with very little law enforcement for digital crimes; using their VPN sounds to me like using a Russian credit card pin pad.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    13. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to take over 100MB of RAM to display a webpage, if you don't care about performance. It takes so much RAM because using that RAM makes it faster.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    14. Re:"Open too many tabs" by mspohr · · Score: 3, Informative

      My MacBook was about $1000 and I'm still using it seven years later... so about $150/year.
      Before I installed Opera, I retired the MacBook and bought a Chromebook which has much better performance... but it did cost $250.
      I now use the Chromebook (Flip) as a tablet... works great. I'll keep using the MacBook until new improved software kills it again.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    15. Re:"Open too many tabs" by mspohr · · Score: 1

      I think I'd rather have the Chinese eavesdropping on my browsing rather than Google. I have nothing to do with China but Google is ubiquitous in the US.
      BTW, the VPN is provided by a separate Canadian company, Surfeasy.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    16. Re:"Open too many tabs" by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Number of tabs shouldn't matter. They should go into an idle state and then get swapped out if they're using too much memory that's needed for something active.

      Or just drop everything in them except the address and reload the page when the user switches to the tab, since chrome seems to like to do this for half the sites anyway.

      Also, people aren't "using too many tabs." People are using tabs as a workaround for snap-back functionality being removed.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    17. Re:"Open too many tabs" by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      Or get more RAM. The sticks are dirt cheap.

      This works if, and only if your mobo isn't already maxed out.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    18. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This works if, and only if your mobo isn't already maxed out.

      holy fucking shit, stop the presses

    19. Re:"Open too many tabs" by gbell · · Score: 1

      I'm showing 129MB, and slowly climbing - for several minutes now. Weird. Memory leak?

    20. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anubis+IV · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Or get more RAM. The sticks are dirt cheap.

      I take it you're unaware that RAM prices are nearly twice what they were at this same time last year?

      The fabs for two of the three major manufacturers are currently in the middle of transitioning to smaller manufacturing processes, resulting in the industry being unable to keep up with demand. The fact that the mobile market keeps asking for more and more of their attention doesn't help matters either. As such, prices are actually expected to keep going up until around the end of the year.

      If you'd like to see the price tends over the last few years, PCPartPicker has some pretty good charts highlighting the issue. Suffice to say, picking up RAM is not so cheap as you suggest. Maybe next year.

    21. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My web browser (waterfox, a few versions behind, ads disabled because I have good karma) is using a grand total of 344,000K of memory. That's after I opened this page. It was lower by about 24 megabytes before I navigated here to say OH MY FUCKING GOD

      THIS WEB BROWSER IS USING ONE FORTY EIGHTH OF MY TOTAL AVAILABLE MEMORY
      HOLY FUCKING SHIT
      CALL THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO PUT OUT THE FLAMES OF MY INDIFFERENCE!

      Memory is there for a fucking reason. It's there to be FUCKING USED.

      A fucking THIRD of a motherfucking GIGABYTE is not too much memory for a full fledged browser with several addons you ABSOLUTE CRUMB-DUSTED BUTTER MUFFIN.

    22. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The majority of people who have 10+ tabs open don't need all of them opened at once.

      True, but it's telling that a bloody web browser with 5 tabs open can hog more system resources than the CAD/CAM software it's running beside.

      Or get more RAM. The sticks are dirt cheap.

      Maybe so, but it's not that simple..

      Me: I need more memory for the CAD/CAM Machines
      Boss: Why?, I thought we'd already done that when we got the software, has there been an upgrade?
      Me: No, the CAD/CAM software works fine, the problem's the web browser...

      Somehow, I think not....

      On my home machines, I'm already maxxed out, so on the desktops and I'd need to buy new motherboards, the laptops? I'd need to buy new ones.

      On a side note: Opera's a great browser, however i'm skeptical of its Chinese ownership. If i'm going to have any intelligence agency know my private details in and out, I prefer it to be the NSA and CIA. /sarcasm

      Personally I use the Yandex browser, FSB FTW!

      (Posted using Opera running on a Linux box, as I've hobbled Chrome with so many BS blocking extensions that /. pages no longer render sensibly, and I'm not inclined to try figure out why..FWIW, on this Linux box, Opera is no better/no worse than Chrome)

    23. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been using my Acer C720 Chromebook since about the end of 2013 (almost 3.5 years) and I only paid $150 for it originally. I get about 10 battery life still with normal usage running Fedora 22 and have no problem using Chrome although I normally use Firefox. It's not meant to be used for any sort of hardcore work and I don't need more than 10 tabs open at a time. My thinkpad was 7 years old and pretty much looked new before it was stolen. I upgraded it to 8 GB RAM and put in an SSD and it still functioning as a workstation running Fedora 21 at the time. You don't have to spend much to get something that lasts. I think it's more in how you treat it. I always put my laptop in a bag when I'm not using it and shut it down each day. I don't have any systems anymore that take more than 30 sec to boot so waiting for it to come back up is not a big deal. Seems to be working well for me and the battery life never seems to be an issue.

    24. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      The majority of people who have 10+ tabs open don't need all of them opened at once. Close out the tabs you don't need and use bookmarks if you need a handy reference back to something.

      Yah, shove it. I typically have 500-600 tabs open and I like it that way. Just make it work.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    25. Re:"Open too many tabs" by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Have you tried running one of the stripped down Linux builds on it? I keep win 8.1 on my netbook for compatibility with certain software and hardware I often need on service calls but when I'm just surfing, watching vids, etc? I run Porteus. Its lightweight on resources, fast, and the best part is its designed to run from flash media so I can just keep it on an SD card and not mess with my 8.1 install.

      As one cheap old geezer to another ya can't get cheaper than free, all you need is an old flash stick or in my case a 4Gb MicroSD I had lying around from my last phone paired with a MicroSD to SD adapter. I'm sure you have something like that sitting in a drawer somewhere and with Porteus you can try and if you don't like it? It hasn't affected anything.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    26. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Xest · · Score: 2

      Are there any breakdowns about what browsers do with all that memory? I'd be intrigued to know what they're filling it with.

      I've always thought the same, it seems excessive, I understand that they can speed things up by caching, which in turn saves memory, but even here I'm struggling to understand what you could possible cache that would turn a 5mb web page into a 150mb slab of cache - even if you cache all the markup, the scripts, the images, the CSS, and have them in raw form, and displayable form (i.e. the DOM, resized images etc.) I'm still not entirely sure how you end up with so much. Even if you're JIT'ing the scripts and storing the JIT compiled versions it still seems entirely excessive.

    27. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rendering the full page to a bitmap takes less RAM than that. It looks like a very poor choice of technology if the goal was just to make it faster.

    28. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copies of the executable-code of course!

      Those chrome.exe's in the Taskmanager aren't just for show.

    29. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The majority of people who have 10+ tabs open don't need all of them opened at once. Close out the tabs you don't need and use bookmarks if you need a handy reference back to something.

      I use tabs as a pre-fetching mechanism. Most web pages these days have so little content that if I were to browse in one tab, half my time would be wasted waiting for the page to load. So I've gotten used to opening links in new tabs, so that they've (hopefully) finished loading by the time I get to them.

      As this breaks the recursive browsing model (click link, start reading, click link, read page, click back, finish reading, click back, continue reading), the two ways of browsing can't really be mixed. It's an either-or situation. And opening links in new tabs easily results in 100s of open tabs.

      I wouldn't mind if the browser only loaded the first 10 or so tabs (should be configurable), and then loaded the next one every time I close on, but on every browser I've tried, it has been a choice between loading them all and not loading at all until switching to the tab (which would be useless as prefetching).

      I suspect that many of the people who have more than three tabs open have them open for the same reason.

    30. Re:"Open too many tabs" by OneAhead · · Score: 1

      Doesn't even need to be "stripped" - I find that anything running MATE will do fine on a lot of really old computers. In general office use, the web browser is by far the biggest load on CPU and memory, and it has come to a point that one just can't get by with 2GB total RAM anymore (running Firefox at least - dunno about Opera but Chrome is definitely a bad idea).

      But as for MATE... 15 years ago, its direct predecessor GNOME 2 was the desktop environment that was so polished you wouldn't even notice it was there. Its code base has been kept alive by the MATE project but hasn't been subject to the bloat everyone else fell prey to. Result is that it's still nearly as smooth as it used to be, and really flies on remotely-close-to-modern hardware; in my subjective experience, its responsiveness is even better than XFCE. Just don't expect to be "in" with the UI-fad-du-jour.

    31. Re:"Open too many tabs" by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The problem is it shouldn't take over 100MB of RAM to display a webpage.

      Holy crap! I mean I only have 4GB in this computer. I just realised I had 50+ tabs open and therefore my computer must be unusable now. Except it's not. Chrome resource manages just fine in a way to ensure good performance. If it uses all my RAM and makes the machine faster then let it providing it frees it for other tasks when needed.

    32. Re:"Open too many tabs" by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      100MB seems pretty reasonable. It's the page I'm working on, so using 2.4% of the computer's RAM (4GB total) is fine. The page itself contains a fair chunk of Javascript, images and other BS that wasn't blocked because you disabled your defensive extensions. Most people prefer their browser to be smooth and fast, so some JIT compilation and pre-rendering of parts of the page is reasonable.

      Keep in mind that a 1080p screen requires about 8MB of RAM with 32 bit colour. The page is a few screens high.

      For 2.4% of my old laptop's RAM, the huge performance benefits seem to be more than worth while.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    33. Re:"Open too many tabs" by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Suggestion for next time you buy a laptop. If you want it to last 7+ years and still be useful, make sure you can upgrade it. Chances are the CPU will be fine, but you will want more RAM and a bigger SSD. You will also probably want to upgrade the wifi and Bluetooth, so make sure that is a socketed card.

      Don't forget the battery either. Even if you rarely use it, it has a finite lifespan. Beware of crappy laptops that come with weak chargers (e.g. Macs) because when under load they use the battery to supplement the power supply, meaning that your battery is consumed even faster. Get one with a charger a few millimetres thicker.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    34. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Exitar · · Score: 1

      But after you give your private details to NSA and CIA, Trump will share them with the rest of the world.

    35. Re:"Open too many tabs" by macxcool · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but I bet Arch Linux with i3wm would really fly ;-)

    36. Re:"Open too many tabs" by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      I mean, I get that but over 100mb? The source for the page is maybe 1/10th that, images and everything included. And testing just Edge the entire browser footprint only went up by about 40mb when loading the same page (it doesn't give a nice breakdown of per-tab memory like Chrome does).

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    37. Re:"Open too many tabs" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      While you can hackintosh some laptops, chances are pretty low that you can get it running on a $300 laptop.
      Considering my hourly pay, it is not worth tinkering 10 hours to make a $300 plastic laptop into a fake Mac. I rather pay the extra money and have a sleek metal laptop that e.g. connects flawlessly to my timecapsul.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    38. Re:"Open too many tabs" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      How would loading 140kB HTML into 160MB RAM make anything faster?
      Using more RAM makes it slower, as soon as you swap. And algorithms that have to run over 160MB instead of over 140kB are obviously a factor of 1000 slower ... (*facepalm*)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    39. Re:"Open too many tabs" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The first windows PC I bought, with a 16" EiZO monitor and EISA bus and SCSI drives had 16 MB, 64MHz x486-DX2 ... the total package costed something like $8k. That was 1992 or 1993.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    40. Re: "Open too many tabs" by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip. I'll give it a try.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    41. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The majority of people who have 10+ tabs open don't need all of them opened at once. Close out the tabs you don't need and use bookmarks if you need a handy reference back to something.

      This is the equivalent of telling someone they're holding their phone wrong.

      Tabs are not equivalent to bookmarks. I frequently open multiple articles in new tabs without leaving the main page of a news site. This results in 10+ tabs being open. I do the same when shopping online, or looking up things and want multiple sources, or viewing interesting pictures out of a collection. Using tabs this way eliminates the need to wait for each page to load when viewing multiple items on the same page.

    42. Re:"Open too many tabs" by dasgoober · · Score: 1

      Use OneTab https://www.one-tab.com/ to close your tabs, but keep them handy

    43. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you should switch to lynx. It might better fit your machine's performance.

    44. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I would not use chinese or russian (non-open source) software. Yeah, Google, Amazon, Apple have lots and lots of information on me, but they're not state actors or under their control. Qihoo 360, as a Chinese security firm, is embedded in the Chinese military-industrial complex. I know you might think the US has too much coordination between tech and the intel community, but it's nothing compared to china.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    45. Re: "Open too many tabs" by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      1. That is some bad fucking math. You should not be in charge of purchasing anything more than gum. 2. Why are Airlines handling your laptops? These are business people? Jesus, they are shitty, too. They should be carrying them on, for many reasons.

    46. Re: "Open too many tabs" by Brockmire · · Score: 1

      Yes, because browsers just display HTML code and not render it. Oh wait....

    47. Re:"Open too many tabs" by Xest · · Score: 1

      The Chrome executable is 1.1mb so that accounts for less than 1% of it unless it's substantially compressed and decompresses heavily in memory.

    48. Re:"Open too many tabs" by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      The big one is probably the bitmaps - I don't mean the images, I mean converting the HTML into easily composited image layers.

      HTML and CSS these days is so powerful you can write a compositing window manager in it. Elements can have variable transparency, and it's generally fairly elegant and smooth when animated, even if all you're doing is moving the scrollbar. So at a guess, I'd suggest most web browsers (caution: have not looked at code) are rendering text into bitmaps that are then cached and composited to generate the final screen image. This is also probably why there's a noticeable slowdown when your browser has to insert something, like an ad, that causes elements to be resized and shuffled.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    49. Re:"Open too many tabs" by fedos · · Score: 1

      I would buy a new Mac but the offerings from Apple are even more pathetic than in 2010.

      Or you could look for a computer that isn't a Veblen good.

    50. Re:"Open too many tabs" by martinfb · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard?
      The NSA and CIA are owned by Putin!

      --


      Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
    51. Re: "Open too many tabs" by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Actually, I had replaced it with a Chromebook and was very happy with it.
      Now I switch back and forth between the two

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    52. Re:"Open too many tabs" by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I remember several years ago, I was in Microcenter for some reason and I saw 8GB of DDR3-1600 for $35. I was like - double my ram for less than $40, why not? Glad I did.

      Couple of years later in late 2014 I was building another computer and I popped over to get 16GB of RAM for it too, figured it would cost about $75 or so. To my shock, 8GB was $80! Computer is still running on 8GB and it looks like the prices haven't come down either. Ridiculous.

  4. opera's VPN by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

    the downside to the built in VPN is that many sites outright block it; so while it would be 'nice' -- it's usefulness is somewhat diminished.

    1. Re:opera's VPN by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Not sure which sites you visit but I haven't had any block the browser because of the VPN. Some sites get confused when the VPN randomly sets itself to some random country but you can set the VPN country and this seems to make everyone happy.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    2. Re:opera's VPN by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      the one that comes to mind is craigslist.org. (using the US VPN)

    3. Re:opera's VPN by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Just tried Craigslist and it worked fine. Thinks I'm in Dallas but no problem switching to SF Bay Area.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    4. Re:opera's VPN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you just not care about privacy? Opera is owned by a Chinese company, by using their VPN you're shipping _ALL_ your web traffic to them. Do you not see any privacy implications here?

  5. I switched by tezbobobo · · Score: 1

    When I was doing my Masters dissertation I switched. A LOT of tabs meant my computer was slowing down. Opera has been a dream. In addition, Australia records net activity so the built in VPN is nice. The plugins are all available too (90%).

    1. Re: I switched by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      90% of the time it works 100% of the time

    2. Re:I switched by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does the new Opera have the lazy loading of tabs? That is, does it load a tab only when the tab is selected?

  6. Depends by jargonburn · · Score: 1
    If you are running into the problems you described, it's worthwhile to try switching in hopes of finding a browser that suits your needs/habits.

    I use Chrome, as a rule, though I also use Firefox, IE, and Edge depending on what I'm doing. (No, I'm not a web developer.)

    I do run into this issue if I have about 100 or so tabs open; however, I normally only run with 1-10 tabs split between 1-2 windows. Frankly, I shudder at the idea of having more than 15 or so tabs open on a regular basis.

    TL;DR

    Your mileage may vary. Chrome works for me. Figure out what works for you.

  7. Is Opera spyware like Chrome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just don't get why most people use a spyware browser like Chrome?
    I prefer Firefox.

    I tried Opera years ago. If it's not spyware like Chrome, it might be useful.

    1. Re:Is Opera spyware like Chrome? by dszd0g · · Score: 1

      Looks like Opera Mini is worse. It includes all the Google spyware that Chrome has plus additional third party spyware:

      https://www.reddit.com/r/opera...
      http://www.opera.com/privacy/m...

      Even the privacy policy for the non-mini versions include pretty vague data collection:

      "The information we collect may include: personal data, for example your name, email, IP-address, location; and non-personal technical data, for example who manufactured your device, your screen's resolution, your mobile operator's region and code."

      --
      This message is encrypted with Quad ROT-13 to protect the author's copyright under the DMCA.
    2. Re:Is Opera spyware like Chrome? by nomadic · · Score: 2

      My life is boring enough that Google is welcome to my information. What are they going to find out about me? I like sex, pizza, and laziness? I freely admit those things.

    3. Re:Is Opera spyware like Chrome? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I like sex, pizza, and laziness?"

      So, they're not collecting any personally identifiable info?

  8. solution by supernova87a · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just use The Great Suspender -- idle tab suspending service: https://chrome.google.com/webs...

    1. Re:solution by tezbobobo · · Score: 2

      You shouldn't need to use an extension. That's part of the point.

    2. Re:solution by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't need an extension any more. For a few versions now Chrome has been automatically unloading tabs from memory when memory pressure increases. When you switch back to them they are automatically reloaded from cache.

      Chrome is very well behaved with memory. Unused memory is wasted memory. Chrome uses as much memory as it needs to for performance reasons, until there is pressure. Then it releases that memory. There might be a few extra milliseconds delay opening another app as Chrome has to free some RAM for it, but the overall gain in terms of interactive performance more than makes up for it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:solution by tezbobobo · · Score: 1

      Does it come with free VPN too? Because your internet history is saved by your ISP under law in Australia.

  9. I suppose I'm a hopeless old fogey by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because I still use Firefox.

    1. Re:I suppose I'm a hopeless old fogey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose the upgrade path for you would either be SeaMonkey or Pale Moon.

    2. Re:I suppose I'm a hopeless old fogey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firefox is the absolute worst. Just wait for 'Web Content' to spawn....

    3. Re:I suppose I'm a hopeless old fogey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider using Palemoon. Based on an old fork of Firefox that has taken on a life of its own, but without any of the Firefox/Google controversial code built in.

    4. Re:I suppose I'm a hopeless old fogey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because I still use Firefox.

      Hear, hear!

      I've tried Opera along with iCab and others. I prefer the way FF works (when it works). I also like to see the title of my hidden tabs, which is harder to do in Chrome.

      My primary computer is a 2008 Mac Pro with enough RAM and HD to do almost anything I want, except run FF correctly. It runs much better on my newer, but less powerful Macbook Air.

      Another old fogey who's tired of bloated software.

  10. Mu by drinkypoo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I use Chrome for Chromey things, like Cleanflight Configurator or CHIP Flasher. I use Firefox for everyday browsing. Opera is not even on my radar. I have enough compatibility problems with Firefox (when people expect to be developing for Chrome.) But I prefer not to run Google's browser, in addition to all the other things I do with Google services. I tried using it for Google websites, but it turned out that I actually had a superior experience with Firefox, so I stopped doing that. I haven't tried it in some few Chrome versions, so I'm not sure that's still the case, but I'm actually having few problems with Google sites in Firefox these days — for example, G+ works better than Facebook, whose video control tends to punch Firefox right in the nuts.

    Sometimes, you actually need Chrome to use a website. For everything else, there's Firefox.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Mu by lucm · · Score: 1

      I use Chrome for Chromey things, like Cleanflight Configurator or CHIP Flasher.

      I also use Chrome for Chromey things, like a Poser Detector which started beeping like crazy when I scrolled past your post.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    2. Re:Mu by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I also use Chrome for Chromey things, like a Poser Detector which started beeping like crazy when I scrolled past your post.

      These are literally the only things I actually use Chrome for now, and I literally just installed them on a second machine today so that they would be both on my Windows machine and on my Linux machine, whose [antiquated, budget] hardware I've just been through and whose Ubuntu install I am just now upgrading. And hilariously, it's got a long RAID boot time issue — it's not even booting from the RAID, just from a SSD. But I'm updating Ubuntu some more before I even work on that.

      The CHIP device has so far turned out to be a turd, and this last time trying to use the flasher it didn't even respond so I think it's now a dead turd. Cleanflight is for my SK450-based dead cat, which I've flown all of once, crashed, and repaired. Maybe eventually I get time to take it out again.

      If you have any questions, you may direct them to that brick wall over there.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Mu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I noticed a year ago that Google seems to have crippled the performance of Maps on Firefox, Maps is the only reason I installed Chromium as unfortunately there is nothing on par with Maps, else I use Firefox for everything.

  11. Dear Slashdot by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I use a program capable of utilizing large amounts of ram and then max out my system resources. Please help! I have no idea what I'm doing wrong...

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re: Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is it is not really the webpage that needs that much ram. It's the stupid adress sanitizer chrome built in that blows up memory usage about 4times on a good day, just to be able to catch a segfault inside the browser instead of letting the OS do it. Not to mention how much performance is lost. Firefox started using that brain fart of google - adress sanitizer too

    2. Re:Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are "utilizing" a memory leak and your "capability" is a bug. A couple of gigabytes is more than enough for any browser,

    3. Re:Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uninstall Chrome. Problem solved! ROFLMAO. The Google is not your friend.

    4. Re:Dear Slashdot by HalAtWork · · Score: 1

      Ask meathead to fix your computer, just hope Gloria doesn't distract him, maybe invite Lionel over to distract her and Edith while he goes to work

    5. Re: Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they let the underlying OS handle segfault when it doesn't let the underlying OS do anything else? If I wanted ChromeOS, I'd buy a Chromebook. If I don't, stop forcing it on me.

    6. Re:Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My fashion accessory handbag keeps getting full what can I do?

    7. Re: Dear Slashdot by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Google wants you to use a Chromebook and they'll embed it into your regular computer if they can convince you to use it.

    8. Re:Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meathead? I wouldn't let a sociology major USE my computer, let alone fix it.

      Get Lionel to fix the computer. He was an engineer.

    9. Re:Dear Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would Arch let Lionel near it? Yeah I guess so, and pat his own back the whole time for doing so. You're right, that's the most likely scenario.

  12. Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by SubaruStarship · · Score: 1

    No ads. No JS. Pure content, all the time. Open as many tabs as you want! The maximum you'll need to view every site is ~160.

    1. Re:Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      No ads. No JS. Pure content, all the time. Open as many tabs as you want! The maximum you'll need to view every site is ~160.

      I miss Archie, Veronica, and Jughead.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    2. Re:Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      I miss Procomm.

      But Telemate was almost a whole operating system in a terminal emulator program.

    3. Re:Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by SubaruStarship · · Score: 1

      I miss Archie, Veronica, and Jughead.

      As do I. (I assume you were being sincerely wistful.)

      I miss curated web site indexes. I miss the plethora of distinct search engines that used to exist. I miss pressing 'g' and typing in a URL in Lynx. I miss the burps and chirps of a dial-up modem. I miss having civil conversations with interesting people, free of trolls. I miss opening up Pine and seeing one or two letters from friends instead of a dozen from spamers. (Though I don't miss the chain letters. Sheesh!) I miss perusing the seemingly endless lists of newsgroup topics. It was glorious and awe inspiring, and while it was still largely a text experience, much was left to the imagination.

      When did the Internet become overrun by corporations? When did it become fractured and politicized? For a brief moment we were all Netizens in an egalitarian society, united by our common interests. Truly, I miss the simplicity of the Internet that was.

    4. Re:Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by SubaruStarship · · Score: 1

      I miss Procomm.

      But Telemate was almost a whole operating system in a terminal emulator program.

      Me too. Procomm was magical, in its own way. Especially once I figured out how to use XMODEM to download files. :)

      Never heard of Telemate. Was it available as shareware, too?

    5. Re:Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by rnturn · · Score: 1

      That brought back some memories...

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    6. Re:Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't tease me! gopher was awesome.

    7. Re:Should you leave HTTP for Gopher? by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      I miss Archie, Veronica, and Jughead.

      As do I. (I assume you were being sincerely wistful.)

      I miss curated web site indexes. I miss the plethora of distinct search engines that used to exist. I miss pressing 'g' and typing in a URL in Lynx. I miss the burps and chirps of a dial-up modem. I miss having civil conversations with interesting people, free of trolls. I miss opening up Pine and seeing one or two letters from friends instead of a dozen from spamers. (Though I don't miss the chain letters. Sheesh!) I miss perusing the seemingly endless lists of newsgroup topics. It was glorious and awe inspiring, and while it was still largely a text experience, much was left to the imagination.

      When did the Internet become overrun by corporations? When did it become fractured and politicized? For a brief moment we were all Netizens in an egalitarian society, united by our common interests. Truly, I miss the simplicity of the Internet that was.

      Oh I was genuinely was being nostalgic. As for when it was overrun, I'd say around the mid 2000's when it became about user retention and not openness, and ad revenue became the driving force behind everything. Sure there were commercial sites and ads well before that, but that's when it seemed to have become the driving force behind anything and everything.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  13. Use a better tab manager: Tabs Outliner by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    I usually end up 100 tabs open throughout the days/weeks/months. Usually this is my sign that I need to start closing tabs down and save them for later.

    One of the solution is to use a better tab manager: Tabs Outliner

    Why?

    * It lists ALL your tabs (both open and closed) VERTICALLY in its OWN window.
    * You can name a tab group
    * You can close all tabs in a tab group
    * You can "Garbage" or "X" a tab. The former permanently removes from the tab manager, while X closes it the window but leaves the link in the tab manager.

    Chrome is a memory pig -- but I've found being more pro-active with its memory usage stops it from having to restart the app all the time.

  14. Still on Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never had any of these issues that keep coming up from the corporate browsers, ad blocking actually blocks ads as well instead of just hiding them...

    1. Re:Still on Firefox by chipschap · · Score: 1

      I'd been using Vivaldi but ran into odd compatibility problems (unexpected as it's closely enough related to Chrome), and so went back to Chrome. Chinese-owned Opera has never been an option and unfortunately Firefox is going down the drain.

      Well there's always lynx or w3m :)

    2. Re:Still on Firefox by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      Curious about the compatibility issues you ran into? Have you tried running the snapshot branch? Browser is still _somewhat_ in it's infancy, and is getting updates all the time, some that fix stuff, some that break stuff and then more that fix stuff that was fixed before. It's good enough to use as my daily for the past 6 months or so, but every so often you do run into that nagging irritable bug, but no showstoppers for a good year now, I'd say.

  15. Motherboard has to fire Jason Koebler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jason Koebler is a fucking idiot and you should not take his advice. Opera is owned by an agent of the Chinese government. That's right, a Chinese investment group controls Opera and several internet security companies.

    PS - Cute page, loads fine in Firefox, I'm guessing it lagged on Chrome?

  16. No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try Vivaldi instead.

    1. Re: No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bach is much better.

    2. Re: No!!!! by mfearby · · Score: 2

      Agreed. Bach is for true connoisseurs ;-)

    3. Re: No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bach is overrated and often used as an example of "classical music" by dilettantes. Vivaldi is better.

    4. Re: No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bach overrated? He's always in the top 3 amongst people who know about that music: Bach, Mozart, Beethoven. Even such geniuses as Schubert, Haydn, Mahler and OK, Vivaldi aren't quite in that league. It's like saying Leonhard Euler is overrated.

      Here's Vivaldi's unearthly Nisi Dominus.

    5. Re: No!!!! by HumanWiki · · Score: 1

      I prefer DeBussy.

    6. Re:No!!!! by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 1

      I try them regularly, but right now Opera has a bunch of convenience features that are lacking from vivaldi and that makes them still better to use for me. For instance, I use the video pop out thing _a lot_, and vivaldi has a weird bug that if you type to fast it does not properly auto-complete (eg. if I type "re" and hit enter very fast, it will search for "re", if I wait for maybe 1/10th of a second, it will have completed to "reddit.com" and open that).

    7. Re: No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bach overrated? He's always in the top 3

      Precisely.

      amongst people who know about that music

      Among people who claim to know about music, but are actually musical laymen. Go ask anyone with a doctorate in music who their favourites are and I bet Bach won't be among them.

    8. Re: No!!!! by mfearby · · Score: 1

      Whilst I do like Vivaldi's "Nisi Dominus", it's no Bach "Magnificat" ;-)

      Take the "Et misericordia" movement, for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    9. Re: No!!!! by mfearby · · Score: 1

      Among people who claim to know about music, but are actually musical laymen. Go ask anyone with a doctorate in music who their favourites are and I bet Bach won't be among them.

      And we all know that those with doctorates in music are the true arbiters of good music, ha ha! You crack me up.

    10. Re: No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then there's always the St Mat Pat, the 2nd violin partita (Chaconne in D), the Goldberg Variations, the double violin concerto, all the cello suites, the suites for keyboard and violin, the Christmas & Easter Oratorios, the 48 Preludes & Fugues, oh and the motets (Komm Jesu Komm), and then we can go on to the rest of the cantatas and the organ works ...

    11. Re: No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't even know what you are talking about, dabbler.

    12. Re: No!!!! by mfearby · · Score: 1

      Ah, of course. The St. Matthew Passion, one could not forget that at all. I have 5 different recordings of it. It's definitely a desert island disc, but which one should I take with me? :-D

    13. Re: No!!!! by lsllll · · Score: 1

      I just got into SMP last year and haven't been able to get enough of it. I've watched pretty much every rendition of Erbarme Dich on YouTube and watched the full SMPs they have on YouTube as well. I even got the 3 disc Richter 2 set on EBay so that I could listen to it on my hifi set.

      So, what are the 5 and which one's your favorite?

      More so on the subject, I do have to say that Bach is perhaps the greatest composer I have listened to and Glenn Gould's rendition of Bach's works are some of the greatest recordings of the last century. The partita in E minor is so chilling. Anyone who says Bach doesn't deserve a place in the top 3 admired classical/baroque composers of all time is at best clueless. Having said that, I do have to say that I don't care much for Mozart's works (his requiem, PC in D minor, and many arias excepted). And Beethoven and Chopin also have their special place in my collection. The only contemporary composer I cared for was Shostakovich.

      --
      Is that a roll of dimes in your pocket or are you happy to see me?
  17. Will it help Slashdot load faster? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

    What the fuck did these guys do to this site? Been away, you know.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    1. Re:Will it help Slashdot load faster? by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      This site even spins a little dial at the bottom center of the frame when you close a single browser tab that has 'Slashdot' running in it. They're running a script that takes a meaningful amount of time if I click the 'x' to close a browser tab.

      Weird. Has the NSA purchased Slashdot? It makes sense they would and it was probably cheap...

  18. Sounds great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Link me the source, I'll get it compiled & migrate over.

  19. dual E5 Xeon by epine · · Score: 1

    Just two weeks ago, I picked up a used dual-E5 at a good price, with sixteen available RAM slots (once I score the second CPU).

    This, mainly to run my many web tabs, and perhaps one other heavy application at the same time.

    1. Re:dual E5 Xeon by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      In the old days the above would have been a joke about running emacs.

      It's sad how things have become.

  20. But my extensions! by serendipitousus · · Score: 1

    That sounds great, but I'm so locked into my suite of Chrome extensions. It's not just the browser, it's the whole app ecosystem that's built into it. If that transfers too, then I'm on board. But I suspect that my boatload of Chrome extensions is part of the problem.

  21. I ditched Chrome too, but not because of tabs by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

    Unlike some less enlightened people, I understand the advanced concept known as "bookmarks" and thus have no need for opening more than a few tabs at any given time.

    What got me off Chrome is just how long it takes to load initially. It's takes about twice as long as Firefox to come up. Makes you wonder what on earth it's doing... probably phoning home to Google and checking for updates, maybe sending telemetry info, and what else?

    Or if it's not doing anything special, then it must be very bloated.

    For now I'm doing fine just using Firefox and uBlock Origin (ad blocker) 90% of the time.

    I may try Opera again (last time was in the late 90's), but why pay for something (or put up with a stripped free version) when a FOSS that does the job is available?

    1. Re:I ditched Chrome too, but not because of tabs by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Opera is free and includes a free ad blocker and VPN.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    2. Re:I ditched Chrome too, but not because of tabs by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      I, for one, paid for the Opera Browser.

      This was back when the Opera Browser's installer fit on a single floppy diskette. That was also a time when Opera boasted about their browser fitting on a single floppy diskette.

      Times change, huh?

    3. Re:I ditched Chrome too, but not because of tabs by schleimkeim · · Score: 1

      Makes you wonder what on earth it's doing... probably phoning home to Google ..., maybe sending telemetry info, and what else?

      It's a Google product. You can be sure that this is exactly what it does. Constantly.

    4. Re:I ditched Chrome too, but not because of tabs by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Some people work different, some people think different.
      What good is my shiny laptop if I can mot open a few hundred tabs?

      What good is my dell at my workplace if I can mot have open 100 other tabs there?

      Why should I bookmark something, thinking about a good name for its folder (considering that most browsers have no decent bookmark management anyway) when I simply can keep the tab open?

      If I need to find something, for that I have some AppleScripts, well on my Mac, not on my Dell, ofc.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  22. Brave by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had similar issues with Chrome. I tried Firefox but it had its own set of issues. Opera works better than Chrome and all of the extensions I have tried have worked with no problem. I am currently using Brave primarily. It is the most stable and quickest browser for me. The downside is that extensions don't usually work. So for me it is Brave most of the time, Opera when I need to use extensions, and Chrome on the rare occasion when Brave and Opera do not serve my purposes.

  23. Should I use Opera : Do you value privacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have nothing to base this on other than good old fashion paranoia but I'm not touching a browser that was bought by an investment firm based in a country (China) that actively monitors, filters and flat out blocks it's citizen's network traffic. And yes, the US, UK, etc all do this to some degree or another but China goes a step beyond and uses it to filter political content that it find objectionable and at least the other countries aren't there (yet). Businesses in China enjoy significantly more freedom than they did 20-30 years ago but they are still very much accountable to the government and there is absolutely zero chance that Chinese government is not ultimately going to have influence on the browser or the VPN service. It's very telling that while the Wikipedia entry mentions that Opera was started in Norway there is no mention of Chinese investment anywhere on the page (Golden Brick is listed as the owner). Reviewing the change history shows that anytime an edit mentions it, it's scrubbed as not relevant. If that's not relevant, then why is it's Norwegian origin's relevant? Given this history Chinese companies have of installing shady spyware on computers (e.g. Lenovo but there are others) and the preponderance of Android malware that phones home to China I'm comfortable with going guilty until proven innocent on this one.

    (And yes, I realize the irony of siding with Google on a privacy issue... but at least you can download the code for chromium and build it)

  24. Interesting by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 5, Informative

    For years, no one mentioned Opera except to scoff in passing, but now that it's been bought out, suddenly it's the best thing since sliced bread.

    But, thankfully, Opera was forked into Vivaldi for those of us who were concerned about the direction Opera is going/went.

    At one point, years ago, I paid US$35 for Opera because it completely rocked -- it was and has been, ahead of the curve for years. Now, I dropped Opera and only run Vivaldi (except I have to use Chrome for some peculiar website shit but that's it Just one site, essentially).

    Did I mention this better browser, Vivaldi, by chance?

    --
    "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
    1. Re:Interesting by gweihir · · Score: 1

      The bookmark-management in Vivaldi still sucks (is it so hard to implement what Opera 12.x had?), but otherwise it is a fine browser.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Interesting by alexmagni · · Score: 1

      I happily use Vivaldi (under Linux), and the perfect solution to your problem is the Neater Bookmarks extension

    3. Re:Interesting by deep2k · · Score: 1

      I am also using Vivaldi as my primary browser. It is very much the "Opera of old" and I have personally found very few page incompatibilities - YMMV

    4. Re:Interesting by John.Banister · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that recommendation. Do you know of an extension that puts the Panel (Sidebar) category Icons across the top of the panel rather than down the outboard side?

    5. Re:Interesting by gweihir · · Score: 1

      That works with Vivaldi? Excellent, thank you!

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    6. Re:Interesting by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Just got it, and finally things work well ;-)

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    7. Re:Interesting by samwichse · · Score: 1

      This for sure.

      Opera was the first software I ever paid for! But after 12.15, the switch to Chrome made it totally unappealing. It lost its configurability, etc.

      That's when I jumped to Vivaldi and never looked back. It's the real "Opera on Blink" that Opera Software ASA should have released. Lots of configuration options (though still not quite back to the level of the old Opera), fast, and stable.

      I like.

  25. No, it's owned by China. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But you should leave Chrome for Vivaldi.

  26. Stick with Safari by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I stick with Safari. Chrome on a Mac has always been a resource hog...not to mention a privacy nightmare.

    1. Re:Stick with Safari by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      I would use CyberDog, but it's the Apple browser that doesn't get any respect any longer.

    2. Re:Stick with Safari by SubaruStarship · · Score: 1

      I would use CyberDog, but it's the Apple browser that doesn't get any respect any longer.

      Hahaha, wow. CyberDog! I worked for an ISP back in the day, doing telephone technical support. A customer called in one time and told me they had CyberDog on their system, so I had to download and install it on mine so I could help them use it. I remember mentioning it to my coworker/boss, the sysadmin, who cracked up about the name CyberDog. From then on it became a running joke about us needing to officially support CyberDog. Good times.

  27. O.o? Have you tried......? by hermank · · Score: 1

    If you are using Chrome, have you tried OneTab?
    Opera is a company controlled by some Chinese now. How about Vivaldi ? OneTab works on that, too.

  28. Why not use Safari? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get it, why not just use Safari then? It works very well (flawlessly on the vast, vast majority of websites) and is quite fast. It's noticeably faster in daily use than any other browser I've tried on the Mac. Yeah, sure, keep Firefox and Chrome around for the extremely rare times when some idiot hasn't programmed a site to work with HTML standards properly and you have to browser flip until you find one that works, but overall, there just aren't many downsides to Safari. Opera, on the other hand, has unfortunately been purchased by a company in China, and as much as I would like to use it, the reality is I'm not using anything programmed by companies in China or Russia. It's simply too big a risk.

    1. Re:Why not use Safari? by mspohr · · Score: 1

      Pick your poison... China or Google?

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  29. This was true of Safari, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Safari used to do that, too - the browsers would just let Javascript do whatever the hell it wanted. You need four gigs of memory, Javascript program? No problem! Here you go!

    Apple recognized this was a problem and fixed Safari. I wonder if Google doesn't really want to make experiences on Macs better for a reason...

    1. Re:This was true of Safari, too by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't Apple fix the problem if a program is sucking up immense amounts of memory running on their OS?

  30. Still Firefox, for now by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

    Since Mozilla cancelled Aurora (FF Developer Edition), I've been using the "Mozilla Developer Preview", which self-identifies as Nightly, but appears to be a version behind (54). With Nightly 55, almost all extensions are listed as "Legacy" and most of their icons are removed from the interface. So things aren't looking very bright now.

  31. Vivaldi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Switch to Vivaldi, not Opera.

  32. For Chrome? Sidewise by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

    You should take a look at Sidewise, it does everything that Tabs Outliner does without the gawd-awful interface.

    And unlike Tabs Outliner, you can actually select multiple tabs in Sidewise.

  33. You bastards! by Grand+Facade · · Score: 1

    Giving away my secrets to those who do not know the secret handshake....

    --
    Rick B.
  34. User Error by hawkeyeMI · · Score: 1

    He's not using it in accordance with hardware constraints. I use the hell out of chrome all day every day but I have 64 GB of RAM and a high end Xeon.

    --
    Error 404 - Sig Not Found
  35. I just switched to Chromium from Firefox by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    Hardcore Firefox user since it was released first as Phoenix. I had to switch as I noticed in both my Windows box at work older i7/8GB Ram and at home A10/16gb of ram Firefox was making my systems slow as hell. It all started around the same time a few updates ago. Switched to Chromium and all slow downs went away.

    Yes I'd prefer to have something not controlled by Google but the Original Opera is now gone and haven't bothered to look at alternatives.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  36. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. Why would we. Opera is irrelevant.

    1. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this

    2. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Admittedly, I open too many tabs, but I'd wager that a lot of you do, too.

      Dear Slashdot,
      I keep shooting myself in the foot, now it hurts and there's quite a lot of blood on the floor. Can anyone recommend a suitable tazer so I can carry on shooting myself in said foot, but only give myself massive electric shocks instead?

      Sometimes, the problem is higher up the chain of events...

    3. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Opera is based on Chromium. It uses the exact same sandboxing.

    4. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, let's see.... you think the user should do manually what the computer can in principle do automatically? Tabs ARE a form of bookmarking. Why should I have to manually compensate for the browser's poor memory management?

  37. I made this switch ages ago... by Hugh+Jorgen · · Score: 0

    After being served a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena years ago I would not trust Google with any private data. Opera other than a recent constant "pinning" issue for windows is great on Mac and Windows.

  38. depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    opera is very heavy. it has a lot of bloat to it too.

  39. Poor Chrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You were the shining example of the slim browser until you got popular. Opera has never really been the shining example of anything other than putting tabs on top. If Opera grows in popularity, further attempts
    to monetize that popularity will bloat it to as well.

  40. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It may make some pages faster to hog all the memory but it makes EVERYTHING ELSE slower to hog all the memory, and that includes the other pages you have open.

    Cache things if RAM is cheap, but FFS DON'T use all my RAM just because your dev box has a lot of it.

    1. Re:Bullshit by Trogre · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bingo!

      And this is why devs and beta testers need to be forced to do all their testing on a first-generation Athlon64 with less and 1GB RAM.

      Not because they expect their audience to use such a machine, but because their audience will be using their program and a dozen others at the same time.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  41. Waterfox by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    I started using Waterfox years ago because Firefox didn't have a 64 bit browser out yet and I wanted the benefit 64 bit could bring. I keep using it because quite frankly I still need certain NPAPI plugins and as of FF 53 your SOL if you need them. Sure I can download the ES version but then I'd be stuck on an old version without access to any new updates. I like it enough that I even started using it on my Mint laptop. Waterfox strips out all of the telemetry and data collection and keeps NPAPI available should you need it. That said I have Chrome and Maxthlon browsers loaded as well and frequently pit them against each other. I like features of each but I always end up back at Waterfox. I just installed Opera to give it a try again and it loaded smooth and looked very polished. Then I tried to import my bookmarks and it crashed and now crashes when I try to launch it. Not a very good first impression.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  42. who? by brunnegd · · Score: 1

    Does anyone use Chrome? No one that I know.

  43. Re: Brower problem, not hardware problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't use open source. The code isn't optimized.

  44. Go fuck yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Opera is a passed around hand me down. Chrome is where it all fucking started for Opera - after they dumped their homegrown shit. Current model and last model Macbook pros i have 3 of run chrome just fine tons of tabs. Chromium is always an option. Dont be a cheap ass get 16gigs of ram. Ublock origin to block the adware and websites arent bad. Barely warms the case.

  45. Webpage is an application by iamacat · · Score: 1

    If it wants or needs to use a certain amount of memory, there is little a browser can do to help. It's like saying you want to use iOS or Android or Windows or OSX to "use less memory in Photoshop". For the most part, you need to choose websites that work well for you.

  46. I have used them all. by JimSadler · · Score: 2

    Opera is a great browser. Chrome is also wonderful as is Firefox. Frankly I prefer Firefox with one serious complaint. Right now my Firefox browser will not play sound on You Tube or video or sound on Netflix. That was not an issue until the latest update. Chrome has also gone through releases that would not run NetFlix. I am not aware of how Opera is doing with Netflix lately. I will say that Netflix is a big enough deal that any browser should be able to run it perfectly with zero tweaking.

  47. Try The Great Suspender extension by thisisauniqueid · · Score: 1

    Try The Great Suspender -- it suspends tabs that are not in use.

  48. Re: Brower problem, not hardware problem by tigersha · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I think it is pretty sad that my Ipad has 2GB of RAM, is more powerful than a frikkin Cray XMP and still useless when displaying a page with text and a few pictures

    2GB is enough to save the names of all the people on earth with a bad compressor. If you have a good one you could probably fit the addresses too. It should not be so hard.

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
  49. Page won't load in Chrome. That's his point? by mfearby · · Score: 1

    The article being linked to freezes in Chrome. Is that his point? Internet Explorer 10 won't load it either (due to a bad certificate) but Firefox does.

    PS, my CPU fan has just gone crazy with Firefox going bezerk, and now even Chrome is struggling to cope after I reloaded and managed to get the page to render. Maybe the problem is that his web site sucks and has far too much advertising and other embedded garbage on it?

    1. Re:Page won't load in Chrome. That's his point? by mfearby · · Score: 1

      Oh, just lovely. His web site is one of those annoyingly infinite scrolling/loading abominations.

  50. 640GB is as much as any computer will need by aberglas · · Score: 1

    eom

  51. Re: Brower problem, not hardware problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because that page with 'text and a few pictures' actually loads 10 mb of scripts and video players and comments sections and sidebars and headers to surround the text that you actually want to see with useless garbage you don't.

    This is why for any site you visit frequently you need to spend 5 minutes going apeshit on it with ublock/abp and its element hider making all the custom filters you need to so absolutely nothing loads *except* the 2kb of text you actually care about. Page download and load times fall to almost literally zero.

    (Wait, can you not do all that on an iToy? Well sucks to be you then.)

  52. Fucking hillarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's fucking hilarious, I have than a 17 tabs open, digiKam w/Image editor and I'm streaming Venture brothers, on a 2010 vintage Lenovo upgraded to 16 Gig w/ crappy intel graphics running 2 monitors,(neither of which are the built in screen), and I'm not having any chrome slowdown issues. I'm running OpenSUSE Leap 42.2 w/KDE. And I'm frequently running MyEclipse as well.

    So those Macs are just expensive pieces of machined aluminum shit.

  53. I don't like Opera anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Opera seems buggy, though that might be version dependent.

    I would not trust Opera with my privacy needs (!) I stopped trusting Opera many years ago.

    I only use Opera because I know how to customize it.

    After installing Opera will have you see bookmarks suggestions just pop up from nowhere in the speed dial.

    Visit porn sites? Some porn sites url's auto-stick to your speed dial. Afaik, there is no way to stop this other than to hide the speed dial, but does the Opera browser stop this? Who knows. For all I know Opera browser and their devs just do what they want which is not good.

  54. Use an adblocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Miraculously, your browser will suddenly be able to support many more open tabs.

  55. yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because the situation is even worse on most mobile devices because they are under resourced when it comes to ram,it's only realy in the last year that we have seen devices with sensible amounts of ram,4gb+,so lock up due to chrome hogging everything is awful,I never,ever use chrome if I could un-instal it I would,it's rubbish,but I have used opera for over ten years,its a simple decision, opera works,chrome doesn't..

  56. No by mysidia · · Score: 2

    Over the last few years, I have grown endlessly frustrated with Chrome's resource management,

    Sorry..... SECURITY trumps resource management, and Chrome is much more secure than Opera thanks to being miles ahead in process sandboxing.

    especially on MacOS. Admittedly, I open too many tabs, but I'd wager that a lot of you do, too.

    So stop doing bad things. You've gotten into a lazy habit of holding too many tabs open. Yes, tabs have their place. Their place is not to have 10+ tabs open; if you find yourself opening more than 5 or 6, you need to concentrate efforts on bookmarking things to check back later and close tabs.

  57. Chrome performance by rnturn · · Score: 2

    I thought Chrome was going to give me a better `browsing experience' than I'd been getting from Firefox which still seems to refuse to work well with the majority of the Javascript it encounters. Alas, Chrome was actually worse than Firefox. Javascript seemed to be less of a problem but memory utilization was through the roof with my 8GB desktop swapping all the time and grinding the whole system to a halt while that was happening. What has made Chrome much better is `The Great Suspender' add-on. It's nothing less than a damned Godsend. Set it up to suspend tabs after five minutes (even pinned tabs) and auto-unsuspend when you switch back to them and waiting for memory swapping is almost a think of the past. The only drawback is that the back button acts oddly when you unsuspend a tab--it'll take you back the `click to unsuspend this tab' screen.

    Opera on the other hand... well I've been mainly using Opera for LinkedIn as it seemed to run that site better than most other browsers. I still find that it's a bit of memory pig though I admit that I haven't explored whether there are add-ons that can control this a bit. I haven't bothered to switch to using LI with Chrome. Yet. I might be abandoning Opera if that test goes well.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  58. CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by XSportSeeker · · Score: 2

    Oh yeah, le old complaint about Chrome using too much ram...

    I mean, go ahead, use Opera and tell us what you think of it. I don't think people should be trapped into using certain browsers only because everyone uses it, seriously.

    But the CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM complaint is pretty stupid and it was several times explained why it behaves this way at this point.
    Put simply, resources of your computer that are not used are just that... not used. Having a browser that leaves a whole metric ton of free RAM around benefits no one.
    Chrome was a browser developed to take as much advantage of your machine as possible. It's definitely not lightweight, so alternative browsers can be a good thing if your computer is crappy, but how much free ram it leaves behind is a very stupid reason for switching.

    Chrome uses separate processes for each and every tab to solve problems with one tab crashing the entire browser. It dynamically allocates as much ram as possible to pre-load stuff and speed up things. Just make a test yourself. Open Chrome, run as many tabs you like, saturate the ram... with a reasonable machine. Then open some other software that chews up ram... like, I dunno, something from Adobe CC. You'll see that even though Chrome was using all the ram, you are still able to open another sofware and use it without problems. That's because Chrome will set the limit of ram usage to a lower threshold.

    It's by no means perfect or anything like that, but if you are gonna criticize it, it's better to look a bit more into your complaints before spouting nonsense.

    1. Re:CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by pz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Put simply, resources of your computer that are not used are just that... not used. Having a browser that leaves a whole metric ton of free RAM around benefits no one.

      Except that modern OSes do a very nice job of utilizing all of that spare RAM as disk cache, and when the cache gets allocated away to greedy applications, everything else on the machine appears to slow down.

      There is no cogent argument against efficient use of resources when modern CPUs are more than fast enough to do things like view web pages.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    2. Re:CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Software should not try to be clever that way.

      Instead it should try to support the OS paging functionality.

    3. Re:CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      Having a browser that leaves a whole metric ton of free RAM around benefits no one.

      Except other applications.

      Believe it or not, there's even an upper limit to how much L3 cache you actually need.

    4. Re:CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Having a browser that leaves a whole metric ton of free RAM around benefits no one."

      Bullshit, that means I can load other programs if I need to without having to wait for Chrome to free up resources it shouldn't be fucking utilizing in the first place.

    5. Re:CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Save that in Firefox, I can have dozens of tabs open without slowdowns, but if I use chrome by the time I have 5 open everything is at a crawl and all of my ram is being used by Chrome.

    6. Re:CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by pz · · Score: 1

      I fear the AC has mis-read my comments. I'm suggesting that there is no cogent argument for Chrome's wasteful use of resources. The straw-man is that Chrome wants to provide the very fastest experience for its users, so is wasteful and inefficient with space to speed execution. Except that modern CPUs are really very fast, well fast enough for web pages, so the incremental performance benefit to Chrome's spatially inefficient ways is not worth the performance decrease to every other aspect of the system because Chrome is hogging all the memory.

      Or, to rewrite my post more explicitly: There is no cogent argument for Chrome's inefficient use of memory resources when modern CPUs are more than fast enough to do things like view web pages.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    7. Re:CHROME USES TOO MUCH RAM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the theory, but not the practice far a lot of people. I had the same experience as the user in the story: My whole system (4G RAM at the time) was becoming unbearably slow (including chrome btw). Looking for a solution for the slowness, I saw heavy swapping and one program (chrome) taking an inordinate amount of memory. Replacing chrome with another browser solved the problem. Ergo, on my system (and that of the user in the article) the theory was not working, and chrome was actually using too much ram, slowing everything, including itself, down to unusable speeds. Maybe it works better on other systems or in more recent versions (i haven't retried chrome yet), but if you are experiencing the slowness, checking out another browser may be a solution not requiring investing in extra hardware.

  59. Stop looking at resource managers by Cley+Faye · · Score: 1

    I can't tell about Chrome on MacOS (because I don't have one), but maybe Chrome usage of system resources needs a bit more analyzis to be on point. I use it on both Windows and Linux-based system (Ubuntu/KDE right now) and it's working fine, even with multiple tabs in multiple windows, a situation that's very common for me (I keep things open in their own window during work).

    To me this sounds like the old complains we got when people look at their free RAM, and see it's close to 0, just because of some cache. I don't know exactly what Chrome is doing because, well, I don't look at it unless the system becomes unstable, which it doesn't. But since I can happily launch some heavy stuff (mostly video transcoding and games) while keeping my tabs open, I'd say Chrome is not the magic culprit most people accuses it to be.

  60. Chrome pwnd Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't Opera bought by Google already? That's how I understood the browser scene for the past 7 years. Not sure when exactly was Opera bought by Google, but I am sure it was. That's why Opera version 14 up to the current one is running the Bling engine which is built by Google.

    captcha: connive

    1. Re:Chrome pwnd Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In short the same hog (read pig), with a different clothing.

  61. Not open source by pop+ebp · · Score: 1

    As much as I don't trust Google, at least Chrome is (mostly) open source.
    Opera is not open source except for the third-party open source components that they used and modified.
    And given that it was adware not too long ago, I simply can't trust it.
    I need to trust my browser.

    1. Re:Not open source by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > And given that it was adware not too long ago, I simply can't trust it.

      Granted, 12 years is peanuts in geological time. But it's an awful long time in terms of software releases.

  62. My experience with Opera by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    When IE was the standard, Chrome was blooming and Firefox was all the rage on our group (the Geek), from around 2006 through 2010, I used Opera almost exclusively. I can safely say that was the browser's best period, although I have been using Chrome and the odd Firefox the past 6 years.

    I've looked at Vivaldi, but it felt crude with a UI that passes a "Windows Millennium" - it just tries too hard to be fresh, when all it needs is to be simple. After this post, I will try back Opera's latest but with the amount of extensions (especially ad-blocking and privacy ones), and the Google services I got going with Chrome integration, I feel it might be a bit too hard to switch now.

  63. I tried Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tried Opera around version 15 or so. Worked about as well on Linux as Internet Explorer.

  64. Why stop at Opera? by Rattenhirn · · Score: 1

    Vivaldi is more like Opera than Opera itself nowadays

  65. CHROME hogging resources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try using THE GREAT SUSPENDER that halts tabbed pages until you re-open them . . .

  66. Firefox by markdavis · · Score: 1

    >"Should You Leave Google Chrome For the Opera Browser?"

    Firefox.

    1. Re:Firefox by Herve5 · · Score: 1

      Yes, Firefox.
      (With, on linux, alternative like Pale Moon and Min -for I always felt the need of being able to cross-try an ugly site with something else; on mac iCab also excels, being the one that invented adfiltering, what, ten years before Firefox was even born.)
      Chrome is Google, and I don't Google. Firefox is open, and from mac to linux this'll always remain key for me.

      --
      Herve S.
  67. How? by StormReaver · · Score: 1

    How does Opera offer that much less memory/CPU usage for multiple tabs? Tabs will still have Javascript (which is what sucks all the CPU time) and most of the memory. So unless Opera is suspending Javascript, the tabs will still use CPU cycles and memory.

  68. opera in linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i was an opera user for many years, since it became available for linux, trying it again now and works great but won't give me any sound on
    sirius xm satellite radio stream

  69. Chrome is not secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it collects all the URLs you visit, and your browsing activity. Firefox is probably a better choice than Opera at this point, but stay away from Chrome.

  70. THIS & stalling scripts make it WAY faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-7 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/

    Ads/script & malware rob speed/security/privacy

    Hosts add speed (via hardcodes/adblocks), security (vs. bad sites/malware/poisoned dns), reliability (vs. dns down), & anonymity (vs. dns requestlogs/trackers).

    Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus + less security bugs/complexity & faster vs. addons/routers/remote dns!

    Avoids DNSChangers in routers/IP settings & dns redirects (99.999% of ISP DNS != patched vs. it) + lightens DNS load & resolves faster from local system RAM!

    * Via what u NATIVELY have in the IP stack in FASTER kernelmode!

    APK

    P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e01211ca36aa02e923f20adee0a3c4f5d5187dc65bdf1c997b3da3c2b0745425/analysis/1433430542/

  71. Re:Brower problem, not hardware problem by thsths · · Score: 1

    What I find shocking that even on an i7 CPU with 16GB of RAM, Chrome cannot scroll smoothly. I do not really care whether it uses 1GB or 3GB of RAM, but smooth scrolling is something I do expect.

  72. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


       

  73. Get Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mozilla makes a slick browser you could check out? https://www.getfirefox.com/

  74. Depends On The Version by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should You Leave Google Chrome For the Opera Browser?

    Is Opera 12 still better than Chrome? Absolutely!

  75. Re:Brower problem, not hardware problem by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

    Chrome is probably not your problem.

    I am on an older machine right now with an i3, 4 GB, and 30+ open tabs. Scrolling works fine on all of the sites I have open.

    This is temporary setup though, so I don't have any plugins. But it does show that vanilla Chrome offers tolerable performance on old hardware.

    There are a lot of things it could be---outdated video drivers, plugins, antimalware, to name a few---but your situation is very much an outlier.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  76. Why not Brave? by mitchy · · Score: 1

    An honest question - I switched to Brave a few months ago and it's now my go-to browser on everything, from MBPs and smartphones to gaming PCs. It is also a truly FOSS browser (see https://github.com/brave) which should ring true to this crowd.

    --
    "The mind is a terrible thing to, um, uh, oh bollocks." -- Me
    1. Re:Why not Brave? by mitchy · · Score: 1

      Also forgot to mention that my primary reason to switch wasn't performance but privacy. *Maybe* Opera can claim that, but being closed source means we will never know for sure...

      Brave does their code out in the open, they encourage pull requests, and more. To me that's hugely compelling.

      Back on topic - after the switch I was blown away by the raw speed, probably similar with Opera with blockers native (and not waiting for an API hook to fire and instantiate plugin, blah blah). Definitely a fan of browsers with those controls built in as part of the core.

      --
      "The mind is a terrible thing to, um, uh, oh bollocks." -- Me
  77. Corporate Mandates by tmjva · · Score: 1

    Then there are those of us doomed to the corporate limitation of only "authorized" software. Only two browsers are allowed, Chrome and the thing with the big blue "e" icon.

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT
  78. PC master race by skovnymfe · · Score: 1

    Buy a proper computer. Insert 32GB RAM. Don't look back.

  79. Opera? Doesn't the author mean Vivaldi? by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

    Should You Leave Google Chrome For the Vivaldi Browser?

    FTFY.

  80. Peeking over my shoulder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is exactly how I came to Vivaldi, right down to the $35 years ago.
    I like and use Vivaldi everyday.

  81. Opera crashes from running out of memory by fruitbane · · Score: 1

    I use Opera at work to host a Slack channel, and after being open all day mostly just in Slack, it will often crash with an Out of Memory error, so it's far from a perfect browser.

  82. Firefox is still king here ... by kbahey · · Score: 1

    While Mozilla have taken several wrong turns with Firefox, it is still king when it comes to usability and resource usage.

    If you don't like its look, then you can install Classic Theme Restorer and have it look like what you are used to.

    If you are like me with lots of open tabs, then it works fine as well. My record open tabs is 1,488 (yes, not a typo). Right now it is around 492. You can do that if you install uBlock Origin and NoScript, and therefore web site would not eat your CPU and RAM by all there inefficient Javascript, or obtrusive ads.

    Install the Auto Unload Tab, and memory usage will go down too. Set it to unload a tab after it was inactive for an hour or too.

    To top it off, use Session Manager to be able to save sessions with all the tabs that are in it.

    Yeah, despite all its drawbacks, Firefox is still the best.

    Oh, and I am on Linux (XFCE4, via Xubuntu), on a 9 year old laptop that was upgraded to an SSD drive, and max RAM (8 GB).

  83. Open Standards and Specifications. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Just as long sites are designed to work with the actual HTML standards, and the browser supports them, why should I really care if someone is using one browser or the other. I personally like some browsers better than others, I am fine to use what I am happy with. But what gets me are sites, who limit what you can use because they use a browser non-standard thing, that forces me to use an other browser.

    I have tried Opera off an on over the past decades, While I never had any problems with it, I never really though it was that great. But I am a limited Tab Person, so it never bothered me anyways.

    Microsoft back in the late 1990's won the browser war, however they failed to get their objectives. So now we have a population of browsers that we are free to use based on our personal preferences. And that is a good thing.
    I take the exception of "Should you leave google chrome for the opera browser" We should use what we want because they should support the actual standards, and our choice isn't on if it renders the page, but on external features that we may or may not need or want.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  84. WHY DOESN'T THIS COMMANDLINE SWITCH WORK? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: --disable-javascript ? They don't want you to - Google & Chrome ad machines = "modern" webbrowsers!

    * Are they STUPID thinking folks wouldn't notice & YES, to allow the BIGGEST INFECTOR THERE IS TO RUN (javascript & ads) when users may not want it to!

    (I just tried it in Vivaldi - which I had HIGH hopes for - not anymore!)

    APK

    P.S.=> I have ALL the old Chrome commandlines documented - THAT ONE is removed (& this IS why) in Chrome, Opera (CHOPERA Chinese/Chrome (me) Phantom of the Opera (the REAL opera 12.18) per creimer credit)... apk

  85. Not unless Opera supports Chrome extensions... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

    Without extensions you might as well use Edge.

    If having too many tabs open is giving you grief install The Great Suspender. It suspends tabs, freeing up resources and memory.

    1. Re:Not unless Opera supports Chrome extensions... by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      Without extensions you might as well use Edge.

      If having too many tabs open is giving you grief install The Great Suspender. It suspends tabs, freeing up resources and memory.

      It does. So does Vivaldi -- both are based on Chromium.

  86. Recent Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You probably want to re-try Firefox, especially its Nightly versions. Uses less memory than others and is rather snappy.

  87. Might as well use Tor by emil · · Score: 1

    At least with Tor, you can be more confident that you are not being keybridged.

  88. Chrome not recommended by whitroth · · Score: 1

    It's just broken a *lot* of websites. SSL certs have a name... and a SAN, an alternate name. Chrome, instead of doing a fallback, as I understand it used to, and everyone else still does, it says "nope, nothing good here", and won't let you get to the site.

    This includes a metric *ton* of US federal government websites, and it's going to take several years for the certs to expire and be replaced... and you won't be able to get to them with chrome.

  89. Miles? by emil · · Score: 1

    Sorry..... SECURITY trumps resource management, and Chrome is much more secure than Opera thanks to being miles ahead in process sandboxing.

    You let me know when my tabs open in chroot() jails.

    Surprisingly, somebody is working on this, but it certainly doesn't look like a priority.

  90. Maybe I'll give it a shot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have one Chrome window open right now and it's only displaying Google search results (i.e. no graphics or dynamic content; page weight is all of 356KB) yet Chrome is using 1,148MB of memory, in 4 separate processes.

    Firefox isn't much better. With one window open containing just three tabs of Slashdot articles, Firefox is noshing on 1,215MB in two separate processes.

    I often run out of memory and have to force close applications or even reboot to get back to a usable state.

    Certainly can't hurt to give Opera a try.

  91. Search bar by volmtech · · Score: 1

    On my old PC videos on some sites will not load or run very slowly using Chrome or Firefox, Opera runs them without complaint. I use the bult in VPN to post on forums that have blocked my computers IP. I do wish I could get it to switch to the new tab when I click on a link.

    For general web surfing I use Firefox because it will open the links I click on and has a search bar. I often type a word I can't spell or a subject I want more information on into the search bar then open a new tab. The search bar information is maintained across tabs. After I complete my search I switch back to my first tab. In Chrome and Opera I can only type into the address bar and that information disappears if I open a new tab.

  92. Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I prefer firefox.

  93. only complaint by bobmajdakjr · · Score: 1

    my only complaint is opera 45 doesnt rememeber pinned tabs.

  94. Firefox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give Firefox a try again. It's been almost 10 years since many left, when Chrome rose in popularity, and things evolve in a decade. (And at least THAT company is not borderline evil... Which do you actually trust to not be collecting everything on you for advertisers, to make another billion?)

  95. My favourite St. Matthew Passion recordings by mfearby · · Score: 1

    The five recordings I have are as follows:

    1989. Monteverdi Choir, English Baroque Soloists, John Eliot Gardiner
    2000. Bach Collegium Japan, Masaaki Suzuki
    2008. Dunedin Consort, Dunedin Players, John Butt
    2009. Collegium Vocale Ghent, Philippe Herreweghe
    2013. RIAS Kammerchor & Akademie für Alte Musik Berlin, René Jacobs

    If I use the "Erbarme Dich" movement to compare them all, I'd have to say that my favourites might have to be the Suzuki or Herreweghe recordings. The singing in the Jacobs and Butt versions is too operatic for my liking (probably because their altos use vibrato whereas the tenors don't in the Herreweghe and Suzuki discs). John Eliot Gardiner's alto (Anne Sofie von Otter) doesn't use enough vibrato to annoy me, and her singing is very good, which you'd expect from a name like that.

    The orchestral playing of the Dunedin Consort is excellent, with quicker tempi, as is the Akademie für Alte Musik Berlin, so if you prefer that over the singing then you might like these. It's probably best if you just get them all, I think. Each has their own selling points ;-)

  96. CHROME, A BROWSER STRAIGHT OUT OF HELL. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's up the Java script issue popping up from Chrome lately?
    I have developed Hypertension from My Computer dragging, and it was configured to handle the worst of issues.
    FUCK CHROME.
    OPERA is the new Champ.
    No Bull Shit, Ad Blocking ability which saves me lots of headache and makes the Browser fast.
    If I uninstall Chrome again, it will be the last time