-   2016 Members Choice Awards (
-   -   Browser of the Year (

jeremy 12-28-2016 11:40 AM

Browser of the Year
Which browser do you prefer when browsing LQ?


Timothy Miller 12-28-2016 11:42 AM

Lets be honest, due to intelligent decisions by the admins, ANY browser will work pretty well with LQ. It's other sites where a favorite emerges...

273 12-28-2016 11:52 AM


Originally Posted by Timothy Miller (Post 5647256)
Lets be honest, due to intelligent decisions by the admins, ANY browser will work pretty well with LQ. It's other sites where a favorite emerges...

Good point -- don't mean to sound like a suck-up but I've not met a browser on which LQ renders badly.

As to Browser Of The Year -- I'm just glad I can now vote Firefox as a Debian user!
Long-live the spirit of Iceweasel and long-live the Iceweasel team but I am glad of this.

rokytnji 12-28-2016 02:02 PM

Like mentioned above. I come here using Dillo and Links2 from time to time.

But to be honest. I use mostly Seamonkey.

stanvan 12-28-2016 03:08 PM

Opera is my usual choice these days, but I frequently use Firefox and Chrome/Chromium too.

jamison20000e 12-28-2016 08:06 PM

Chrome (Unstable) for video &c Firefox for gmail. :p

cowlitzron 12-28-2016 09:35 PM

I voted for SeaMonkey, because in addition to a web browser which uses Gecko, it also has an email client, a web composer, and before version 2.46, shipped with a chat client. The chat client is still available as an add-on. It has the same layout engine as Firefox and unlike Firefox, doesn't require addons to be signed by Mozilla in order to work. For those who used Netscape 4 many years ago, there are themes available which use Netscape 4 icons.

poorChristian 12-29-2016 02:57 AM

Pale Moon, for the strong ability of the user to control, and it using Goanna, the best layout engine on Linux which is independent of the big corporate backed engines. Other browsers that I have used this year.

SeaMonkey is a strong all in one suite, with the option of using a skin that makes it use Netscape 4 icons.
Firefox works strong too for the most part, except it usually won't login to and no longer allow extensions that are not signed by Mozilla.
Google Chrome and Chromium, looks nice with great HTML5 support and is heavy on the resources. QupZilla (QtWebEngine) uses a Qt version of Chromium and uses a high amount of RAM. Slimjet is very useful to play games on Ubuntu Precise, on which the latest Chromium doesn't run. But, now with Adobe now supporting the latest version of NPAPI flash, Blink browsers (or an often buggy Freshplayer) are no longer needed to play most flash games. Konqueror is a very versatile app and an excellent file browser. But, QtWebKit4 hasn't been updated in over two years and Wikimapia and a few other dynamic sites won't work with it. Konqueror is on its way to drop support for QtWebKit4. Many JavaScript sites barf on KHTML. I've also used Konqueror-Trinity. It is a very good file browser, but has weak JavaScript support and displays text and input boxes over other text on Wikipedia and Conservapedia. Midori is a light weight browser, but tends to be crash prone on Ubuntu xenial and doesn't display Facebook correctly. Epiphany has a nice display, but has few extensions and configuration options. Closed source, Vivaldi is very much like what Opera used to be, but I couldn't get true fullscreen to work in flash games. I've also used Opera, works well with the Blink engine, but not like it used to be.

Michael Uplawski 12-29-2016 03:57 AM

w3m. Because, while other browsers just do a job, w3m has never failed me in situations when there was no other web-browser available.

nodir 12-29-2016 04:23 AM

There is also netsurf and surf.
Right now i use netsurf.

jeremy 12-29-2016 11:12 AM

NetSurf has been added.


ugjka 12-29-2016 11:20 AM

Qupzilla, because it is QT

teckk 12-29-2016 12:32 PM

1st. Dillo with images off and the user agent set to a small device.

"Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 6.0.1; SM-G920V Build/MMB29K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/52.0.2743.98 Mobile Safari/537.36"
Majority of web browsing. Not for everything though.

2nd. My own browsers in python using (Gtk, WebKit, Gdk) or one using (Qt, PySide) with buttons to easily turn images and scripts on/off, with a windows/firefox user agent

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; x86_64; rv:48.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/49.0"
A little slow, but no worse than firefox, and they only do what I want. Gives me webkit's web inspector, frames, scripts.

3rd. If those won't work then inox. (Chromium stripped)
Blink and v8 are faster, and gives me chromium's web inspector, which I like.
But it still sends off info to google all the time, so I use it only when necessary. It is a nice browser though.

4th. I use lynx once in a while for a text copy of a page or to get all links.

lynx -dump -listonly > links.txt
5th. I have firefox installed, it works ok, but it is very slow, I don't use it anymore.

Tried Qupzilla, web inspector doesn't work. Used Midori for years but it's quite slow now and it pulls in zeitgeist. Tried netsurf, surf, elinks, links, w3m, dwb, Uzbl, Xombrero....

Haven't tried Vivaldi or Brave yet.

Knightron 01-02-2017 06:45 PM

Switched from Firefox to Palemoon and then to Chromium at the end of 2015. Been using Chromium since. Thinking about going back to Firefox or Palemoon because the pause download function in Chromium is superficial and the downloads window doesn't say how big a file is. That is very frustrating. I'm not voting this year. Still posting though to follow the discussion.

audriusk 01-05-2017 02:30 AM

Was a longtime user of Opera until they decided to use Chromium as a basis for their future development. At that time the Linux version wasn't available for at least a year, so I, feeling that Opera abandoned their Linux users, started using Firefox occasionally to see how it feels and eventually switched to it completely. It's not without faults, but I like it overall and also think that Mozilla currently is the most trustworthy browser vendor (at least from the major ones).

I also have Chromium installed, and even though it does feel snappier than Firefox, the attitude of its developers reeks too much of "we know better than our users" for my tastes. A good example would be disabled ability to turn off smooth scrolling in user settings, and even though it could be turned off in chrome://flags/ for now, it's very likely that this flag will be removed in the future versions completely.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:10 PM.