What is you preferred internet-browser?

"Modern HTML" is a lot better than the 1990s version.
Well, I remember compiling Mosaic, and wondering how I might best use it (apart from reading the Mosaic documentation, which was resident as HTML files in the file system). Getting an Internet connection helped in that quest, but that came several years later...
 
"Modern HTML" is a lot better than the 1990s version.

What will the next thread be? "What's your favorite color?!"

I respectfully disagreed, I have bunch of old laptops that can't open the majority because: trackers, misuse of javascript, excess of CSS, then we have a thousand of HTTP requests every second, and websites are bombarding by CDNs which should make content faster while instead inject other shit!

Today we need a computer just to run a browser, actually we have OS that are just a browser.

Internet was designed to be fast and light today is fat and slow, I don't see where it is any better...
 

SirDice

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
I have bunch of old laptops that can't open the majority because: trackers, misuse of javascript, excess of CSS, then we have a thousand of HTTP requests every second, and websites are bombarding by CDNs which should make content faster while instead inject other shit!
This has nothing to do with HTML standards. Blame the developers of those websites, not the technologies they used.
 
This has nothing to do with HTML standards. Blame the developers of those websites, not the protocols they used.

This is because you interpreted "modern HTML" as a matter of standards when I was referring the way the majority misuses it!

Also in my humble opinion XHTML was better than HTML5, eventually the whole point of HTML5 was resolving the failure point of Flash/Silverlight to inject DRM into the HTML...
 
This has nothing to do with HTML standards. Blame the developers of those websites, not the technologies they used.
True enough but I notice some of the worst web developers jump on new gimmicks as *soon* as they come out. The growing HTML specs seem to nurture this kind of "greedy fat kid" behavior.

So I think to fix things we need to limit their "creativity" to ~HTML4. That way the worst they can do is shite mouse trails.
 
the whole point of HTML5 was resolving the failure point of Flash/Silverlight to inject DRM into the HTML...
And you still can't because there is nothing in HTML to do that.

Also in my humble opinion XHTML was better than HTML5
A lot of people will agree with you. Today you find a lot of people trying to replicate XHTML but call it React and Angular and other things. XHTML was built into the browser and you could do what you wanted with it. React, et al, you do what they say you can do and how to do it.

I was referring the way the majority misuses it!
And can't even follow the standard to boot.
 
And you still can't because there is nothing in HTML to do that.

Before they made it simple and rationale:


But then became evil:


😩
 
I prefer Firefox because I'm not a huge fan of Chrome because I feel it uses a lot of resources & I'm not a fan of the Google connection. I don't want to use Chromium, but I have to.
I prefer to have two browsers open on my system. One to watch youtube videos and the other for everything else.
So I'm using Chromium for youtube, because I figure it would be the best for that and Firefox as my browser of choice for everything else.

I would gladly use something else instead of Chromium, but I can't think of anything as good. I installed Opera or well "Linux-opera" and it didn't work as well. Felt buggy to me.
 
Sure, but "today" we referred to HTML5 as HTML5+JS+CSS3, once we used the terminology AJAX; without JS many website don't work.
Yeah, this is really annoying. Everyone and their mothers absolutely have to use JS and it's the root cause of why so many websites and web browsers are so heavy these days that you need gigs of RAM.
 
Firefox, only, still, yet.
That's why I'm watching such threads very carefully because I feel the need to switch to another browser:
- i don't really trust firefox to so protecting me and my privacy as the announce (feeling)
- with every new version firefox feels slower, more overloaded to me
- and often enough comes up with a lot of new ....rubbish I do neither need, nor want nor use

Chromium to me is out of question, because it's google.

Iridium, Falkon,.... okay, thank you,...
...keep on!
Thanks
 
I've tried Iridium and Falkon. They're both good. To be honest when it comes to watching youtube, Firefox and Chromium are better. I could not get the ad block for youtube working on Falkon. That is why I'm currently using Chromium at the moment. I would like to try something other than Chromium TBH.
 
Google's deep pockets funded Chromium and you can make a case that it is more tightly integrated than Firefox. Firefox features have been added on rather than "built in". The problem is that Google was not being alturistic; they were looking to monetize the choices users make while browsing the internet.

Looking at cell phones is instructive. If you "DeGoogle" android, you essentially double the time between battery recharges. Restated, roughly 1/2 of the energy in your smart phone is working for Google.

Degoogled Browsers www/ungoogled-chromium and www/iridium take two different approaches to finding and removing Google's data harvesting code. If I could only use one browser it would be either iridium or ungoogled-chromium.

The reality is that I'm not confined to one browser and the case can be made to use all three browser engines: gecko, blink and webkit with frequent deletion of cookies and other stored data. You are tougher to fingerprint for targeted advertising and also force some competition.
 
Top