Secondly, most extensions and content blockers which vastly improve my browsing experience and productivity are not available on Safari, especially after the last major update where they wiped most of them out. Chrome is less good at all other (secondary) things (like conserving your battery or system resources), but I find that tradeoff worthy in my particular use case. Many of the more complex websites containing web apps often either completely break down or don't work properly on Safari (even the big ones like WhatsApp or FB/Messenger). I also use Firefox sometimes, which can launch separate instances (multiple Firefoxes in your Dock), but switching between multiple instances is nowhere near as clear or intuitive as switching between different user windows.Ĭhrome because it's better at what a web browser is supposed to do - display web content as fast as possible. I can have separate browser sessions for each job or each project, etc. I can keep my social-media and shopping quarantined from my general surfing and work use. I still use Safari for some personal surfing, but I need Chrome-like browsing for work because Chrome-based browsers are the only ones that can run multiple user accounts at the same time. I've used Chromium, but it has problem off and on, so now I'm using Brave, which is built on Chromium, but more stable, and comes with built-in privacy protections, built-in Tor (if you want to go really, really private), runs all Chrome extensions, and includes a way to "tip" to support favorite sites. I'm moving off of Chrome proper because of Google's lack of privacy. Modern Macs support hardware encoding/decoding with their T2 chip. Netflix says H.265 saves them 20% bandwidth over VP9, and they are pretty much the end-all-be-all of streaming. At lower bitrates H.265 is better quality than VP9. I still don't see the benefit of WebM over industry standard containers. It's fine if VP9 is your preference but that doesn't mean that companies that prefer H.265 or AAC or Apple Lossless (which Apple doesn't charge licensing fees for either) are part of some vast conspiracy to screw the user and fill their coffers with more money. But that doesn't mean everything outside of open source is evil.
Safari or chrome for mac password#
Like I said before, Apple does not allow any extensions which can keep track of the sites you visit or record every password you type into a field. They're a security and privacy nightmare. I'm fine with Safari not supporting WebExtensions. If you buy a BMW you can't expect to repair it with the same parts as a Chevy Lumina. Banging your drums and saying that "Safari does not have your best interests in mind" doesn't really change that.Īpple has the right to use proprietary APIs. For others, though, a browser like Safari can be an entirely valid choice - and that includes for reasons like privacy and trust. If nothing is ever good enough, in your opinion, unless it's open source, then Firefox is the way to go (and probably a switch to something like Linux as well). Sure, that's "only" the underlying browser engine.
But for the end-users, it would certainly suck to have a bunch of devices that would no longer support video playback.Ībsolutely none of that is possible with Safari because, and I repeat, Safari does not have your best interests in mind.
Safari or chrome for mac plus#
Plus there was the whole deal about it being unclear whether WebM (including VP8/VP9) is patent-free or not. Apple obviously chose to back H.264/H.265 instead.
0 kommentar(er)
