I find Aurora faster then Chrome and it displays fonts/pages better. I also think the memory use is much better then Chrome. Maybe its the Nvidia acceleration?
When the top 5 processes on my system are chrome, and all over 1.5gigs in size call bullshit all you want. But when I close chrome and 8 gigs of memory is freed, I call that bullshit.
I very rarely experience chrome crashes, but when it happens, it's always the entire browser. I'd be a lot more worried that crashes almost certainly imply security holes than how much it interrupts my browsing session.
It was chrome's marketing earlier now it's Microsoft's. I think they are both great browsers on their own. I find IE10 to be even better and so much faster though.
> I see tons of ads for IE. Never for FF. Microsoft's marketing is working.
Are you using FF while browsing? Because I'm pretty sure those MS ads are using User Agent targeting. I would not expect you see any IE ads while already using IE.
> FF is slower than Chrome (at least the desktop versions).
This is a misconception held by people that haven't used Firefox as of late. I actually frequently encounter crashes in Chrome, whereas I do not with Firefox.
Not it's actually still very slow. Theres a JS demo ever 3 days on HN that runs terribly in FF. Plenty of other 'pushing the envelope' demos do the same thing to FF. To their credit the FF team is usually here, or finds them, and bugs are quickly reported.
The funny thing is, most users don't care about how their browser performs in "'pushing the envelope' demos" - they care about how it performs when they're browsing the web.
No, that shows javscript benchmarks, not the more ambiguous notion of "browser speed".
Anyway, Chrome and Firefox are tied in Kraken, which is the benchmark Mozilla created to simulate real world loads. (And thus, presumably, the benchmark they care most about when optimizing.)
