Hacker News Reader

Comment by nobleach | Hacker News Reader

This annoys me, but in the end, I can click the "no thank you" button and it all goes away. I do think their claims to be the "faster and more secure" browser are dubious at best. But at least MS allows other browsers to be installed. iOS will give you a Chrome lookalike with a WebKitWebView engine, and no v8 JS engine. (I'm not calling JSCore bad). It's like saying, you can have any browser you want, as long as it's Safari. I get _why_ they do it, but it's an anti-competitive practice.

View on HN

It feels like you're giving Google's ChromeOS a pass here.

You can install run Android apps on many Chromebooks now, so you can install Firefox if you want: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-to-run-firefox-quan...

You can also install linux or on some even windows if you want

More like I don't truly consider ChromeOS a viable OS. I do own a Chromebook, and for me it's more like a dumbed down tablet (Like a Nook) with a keyboard. But you're right, it's not right that Google does it either.

It may actually be faster and more secure, it does well on artificial tests at least. But my issue with it is generally stability. More crashes and some sites don't behave as well. Video streaming in particular is iffy. Since Chrome is most tested against now, I just have the most stable overall experience with Chrome. Even if it had the worst performance I'd probably still be using it for that reason.

I didn't know that on iOS chrome is essentially safari. that sucks. like how can they get away with it? The EU should not let apple ban competing browser engines.

It will always be faster in Windows. When you're running IE, you're running IE. But when you're running Firefox, you're running Firefox + IE :-D

What? Howso? Firefox doesn't piggy back on edge/ie.

Well, you know, up until recently (don't know if still is) IE was a core part of the operating system, not just the browser itself. That meant that using IE alone will have for example less battery usage than using Firefox, or any other browser, "alone", as you would be running IE too.

Uh, theres no reason for IE to use less battery because it's 'part of the OS'. In the end, IE still has to do all the tasks to render a webpage which Firefox or Chrome have to do. It might be able to leverage some fancy hidden OS features to be slightly more efficient/use the hardware better in some way, but fundamentally it doesn't have much of an advantage.

I think you got me wrong. What I meant was that, when you're browsing the web with IE, it is IE which is draining your battery. However, when you're using Firefox, it's not only Firefox who drains your battery, but also this always-running IE process. My comment was mostly a joke, I don't know to what extent this might be a thing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com