Which one loads faster in your computer? Firefox or Google Chrome?

[Theo Haffey]

I did a test to see how long it took for me to be able to start typing an address in the address box from the time that I opened each browser. Results:

Firefox: 62 seconds
Google Chrome: 14 seconds.

Do a test and post the results here.

I left out IE because I don't like it.

[hobbit709]

1. My Mozilla SeaMonkey loads in about 1.5 seconds.

I'd say your slow load is more the result of connection speed than how long the browser takes to open.

[HopeHoops]

4. I haven't tried SeaMonkey, but Firefox, Thunderbird, and Sunbird are standards for my machines

So is OpenOffice. I've got the M$ Office shit on a couple of boxes but I rarely have to use it for anything. OO opens all of the M$ documents just fine and saves them back in a way that M$ Office doesn't have a problem with. It's a hell of a lot faster too. Oh, and no fucking Clippy.

[hobbit709]

6. I have OpenOffice but the one I'm used to since my DOS days is WordPerfect.

Will open any document format including .pdf. And does a better job of converting to and from M$ Orifice documents than MS does.

[HopeHoops]

13. I still remember a lot of the CTRL codes from WordStar.

Some things just won't leave the gray matter, even after they are seriously useless.

[HopeHoops]

2. Firefox.

That's the only browser I use on a Windows machine, so it wins automatically. IE doesn't qualify for a browser. It never has. And Firefox takes between 15 and 40 seconds to load on different machines, but that's sort of apples-to-oranges since I'm talking Vista and Win 7, different processors, and various plug-ins (I use a bunch of them). It fires up almost instantly on my Linux box, but that also has a solid state drive and damn near EVERYTHING fires up immediately so it isn't fair to consider it for timing purposes. Solid state drives WILL become standard in the next few years.

As for Google Chrome, I refuse to let it infect my machines. Google has made NO effort to hide the fact that it is nothing more than a data collection tool so they can sell information to advertisers. Visit Victoria's Secret? Expect some ads for lace underwear and sex toys! That's the ONLY reason they created it. Oh, it also does web browsing to some extent too, but it isn't all that secure. I wouldn't trust Chrome or IE for financial transactions, well, not unless you are the sort to send money to Nigeria to cover taxes so you can get your multi-million dollar check.

On the Mac, Opera and Safari are both good browsers.

[Theo Haffey]

10. That's misleading

If you don't use Chrome you don't know that Firefox is faster, regardless of the disadvantages Chrome has in non-speed related issues.

[21st Century FDR]

11. Well, then I'll say it.

I've used both. Technically Chrome is "faster", but it's not worth the security risk.

The very first thing I block when I set up the NoScript plugin on a Firefox browser is the spyware known as "Google Analytics".

Somehow, I don't think Google Chrome is going to allow that to be blocked.

I don't do ads, or spyware. Until Chrome allows me to get rid of these things, it's not a consideration.

Besides, I just don't like the way the damn thing is laid out on the screen. Only thing that tops that in annoyance is the new "Unity" desktop in Ubuntu 11.

[HopeHoops]

12. Technically, Chrome IS spyware - that's what it was designed for.

[NewJeffCT]

3. Chrome opens faster for me

but, neither opens as slowly as Firefox on your computer - somewhere around 4 seconds for Chrome and 7-8 seconds for Firefox. Also just tried IE and it opened in 5 seconds. Safari took 17 seconds, though. However, I'm on a PC and not a Mac.

[graywarrior]

5. Chrome

[backwoodsbob]

7. you need a comp

firefox loading time to typing ability was under 10 all three times I tried it and my comp is old and my connection isn't great

[Forkboy]

8. 17 secs for Chrome, 4 for Firefox.

Pretty good either way.

[GoCubsGo]

9. Firefox takes forever to load.

I suppose that if I got rid of some of the add-ons, it might load faster. As for Chrome, I pretty much only use it for a live-streaming TV. It seems to work better than Firefox.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

14. Chrome, but...

...it's got some catching up to do before I'd consider using it full-time instead of Firefox.

[laconicsax]

15. It was Chrome, but now it's Firefox.

Firefox 3 used to take as long as 5 minutes to start. I switched to Chrome, which usually takes 10-20 seconds.

A while back I decided to try out Firefox 4, and it consistently opened faster than Chrome, but hung up more. After the Firefox 5 update, it still opens faster and hangs up more than Chrome, but less than Firefox 4

[pokerfan]

16. About 4 sec for FF, 6 sec for Chromium

Ubuntu 10.04 LTS