Comments on: Firefox v.s Chrome Extensions: What We Learned So Far

By: Jay

Jay — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 08:32:10 +0000

It is nice to see an open mind. I too have issues with Chrome and privacy.I see Google poised to become the next Microsoft… It's my way or else mentality.”Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”

By: Bailey

Bailey — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:36:52 +0000

As Google loves to claims their love for opensource, their hogging of Chromium suggest the reverse otherwise. Also, Joshua is right about Chrome's extension ability. It's a mix of css/html/and js. So it's extremely crippled compares to firefox.

By: Bailey

Bailey — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 08:36:52 +0000

By: Bailey

Bailey — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 03:36:52 +0000

By: kikeman

kikeman — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 19:19:47 +0000

Download Google Chrome —–> 67 MEGA BYTES (Mb) (very fast but very heavy)

” Firefox ————-> 25 Mb

” Opera ————-> 20 Mb

” Internet Explorer 8 –> Do you know ?

…the latest versions of.

By: Phil

Phil — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 23:04:46 +0000

I´m glad to see articles with this grade of reflection
As well I may add the privacy issues in Chrome.

By: Joshua

Joshua — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 21:08:16 +0000

I'm glad you have an open mind on the subject and chose to write a follow up article. I apologize for being so offensive in my response to your other article.

I didn't know that Mozilla was planning on borrowing the separate tab separate process feature into Firefox. That's good news. Although I don't remember the last time Firefox crashed, at least not since I installed Windows 7 this summer. On rare occasions Firefox stops responding as result of a bad script or something, but it returns to normal after 5 to 10 seconds.

I remember reading sometime ago about the big difference between Chrome and Firefox extensions. That difference was that Chrome extensions were coded in JavaScript. What that means is that there is a strong lack in capabilities for Chrome extensions. The best example I can give is the one that the article explained. In Firefox there is an extension called Adblock Plus, it actually prevents the advertisements from loading (thereby saving bandwidth). In Chrome advertisement blocking extensions are only capable of hiding the advertisements (they still load even though you don't see them). I don't know if this still holds true, please do correct me if I'm mistaken.

As for Google picking and choosing which extensions they catelog, I don't blame them. If they wanted you to download Youtube videos, they would allow it without additional software (Google owns Youtube for those who may not be unaware). It really doesn't make a big difference though since those refused extensions will still be spread everywhere else on the web.

I'm glad Google is promoting Chrome's extensions. Competition is always good, it should result in Mozilla pushing to improve Firefox.

By: Inolvidable

Inolvidable — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:24:05 +0000

I don't like the way Google is taking. We are not accustomed to such practices by the company. I'm not sure Google can legally allow an addon that can download copyrighted material from protected web pages as vevo, but more important than one single video downloading addon is the shift in company policy to not so open software. But sooner or later had to come because Google is becoming a monopoly and it is logical that some of their products can harm each other if left wide open. The company has now a confortable bur wieldy position, let's see how they evolve