Honestly I try to switch to Chrome every month or so, but it just doesn't do what Firefox does for me. I've actually been using a Firefox mod called Pale Moon [1] that takes out some of the not so useful features for work (parental controls, etc) and optimizes for current processors. It's not a huge speed increase, but it is definitely noticeable.
Oh, and Chrome doesn't have Vimperator [2] :) Joel [1] http://www.palemoon.org/ [2] http://vimperator.org/ -----Original Message----- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Richard, Joel M Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2010 4:24 PM To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Safari extensions If I remember correctly, the latest versions of Firefox had problems, but I don't know if it's related to performance necessarily. More like bloat. http://bit.ly/c1c3m1 Either way, I definitely find Firefox too slow to use after the switch to Chrome, which took all of 5 minutes to completely convert me. If Chrome were a drug, I'd be strung out and living on the streets. But what's to say it won't head the same way as Firefox in the future (bloat-wise.) It's also a memory hog, especially when you load up Firebug. Chrome's debugging tools are like a dream come true. That said, I'm not that kind of developer, so I won't be able to help port any extensions to Chrome or Safari. Testing, yes, porting, no. :) --Joel Joel Richard IT Specialist, Web Services Division Smithsonian Institution Libraries | http://www.sil.si.edu/ (202) 633-1706 | (202) 786-2861 (f) | richar...@si.edu ________________________________ From: Raymond Yee <y...@berkeley.edu> Reply-To: Code for Libraries <CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU> Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 16:15:59 -0400 To: <CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Safari extensions Has anyone given thought to how hard it would be to port Firefox extensions such as LibX and Zotero to Chrome or Safari? (Am I the only one finding Firefox to be very slow compared to Chrome?) -Raymond On 8/5/10 1:10 PM, Godmar Back wrote: > No, nothing beyond a quick read-through. > > The architecture is similar to Google Chrome's - which is perhaps not > surprising given that both Safari and Chrome are based on WebKit - > which for us at LibX means we should be able to leverage the redesign > we did for LibX 2.0. > > A notable characteristic of this architecture is that content scripts > that interact with a page are in a separate OS process from the "main" > extensions' code, thus they have to communicate with the main > extension via message passing rather than by exploiting direct method > calls as in Firefox. > > - Godmar > > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Eric Hellman<e...@hellman.net> wrote: > >> Has anyone played with the new Safari extensions capability? I'm looking at >> you, Godmar. >> >> >> Eric Hellman >> President, Gluejar, Inc. >> 41 Watchung Plaza, #132 >> Montclair, NJ 07042 >> USA >> >> e...@hellman.net >> http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/ >> @gluejar >> >> --
