Chromium vs Firefox : Need testimonies
PhillW at Ubuntu.com
Fri May 31 23:15:03 UTC 2013
we did actually do some tests via
It was pretty clear that the slimmed down Ffox was better for low resource
machines (as evident in post
In all my dealings with Chad from Canonical who looks after Chromium, I
have have never had any cause to doubt his honesty and openness. That he
suggests staying with Ffox for ubuntu is a massive statement. IMHO, Lubuntu
would be wrong to not follow his advice.
On 31 May 2013 22:55, Yorvyk <yorvik.ubunto at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 31/05/13 21:56, Yorvyk wrote:
>> On 31/05/13 20:25, Nio Wiklund wrote:
>>> On 2013-05-31 19:53, Julien Lavergne wrote:
>>>> So, if you have feedback on using both browsers, please bring it to us
>>>> :-) But please, keep the discussion on this topic (feedback on low
>>>> spec hardware).
>>> I prefer Firefox in general (maybe because I am more used to it) but I
>>> use both. Sometimes it is convenient to run both at the same time.
>>> But since I'm interested in the support of old and 'small' hardware, I
>>> have also tried Firefox and Chromium-Browser with very limited RAM (less
>>> than 1 GB). Then it is very obvious that Firefox is better. I have the
>>> same experience as Lars Noodén with the "it's dead, Jim" message in
>>> System - 450 Mhz PIII - 640 MiB RAM - Matrox MGA G200 VGA Controller
>> Neither Firefox or Chromium will play Flash. Chromium invariably
>> displays the 'It's dead Jim@ message, FF just displays a blank space but
>> at least it leaves the rest of the page intact.
>> Memory usage when both idle with no extensions using about:memory in
>> Firefox - 39804k
>> Chromium - 81164k
>> Should have mentioned the memory readings took place using Saucy with
> Firefox 22 and Chromium 25.
> Lubuntu-users mailing list
> Lubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/**
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Lubuntu-users