Anomaly

My XP machine is about five years since I installed XP on it and it runs as good as the day I installed it. I have to wonder what you are doing to slow XP down. One thing I do is use as many portable apps as possible. This really cuts down on the garbage that gets installed and messes up the registry. As for you XP hanger ons get serious. Windows 7 is a huge improvement. Don't give me the BS about money either. Some of you are talking about using XP until it's cancelled so you expect me or anybody to believe you won't have the money to get a new machine sometime in the next 15 years? Bull. The price of computers now is so cheap it's not an issue and even if it is in the short term I'm sure between now and when XP is discontinued you will be able to save enough. I think it' just plain laziness. You can't be bothered to learn a new OS so you stagnate. Your loss if you choose to become a fossil.

No FireFox doesn't do that yet and I never said it did. It's heading that way though. Chrome does it and it's memory hog.

They run in a separate process just like Chrome. Chrome also separates the extensions and that's in Firefox's future plans. Your talking in circles. Since FireFox 3.6 the plugins have run in a separate process. This is the path Chrome has taken and the result is an increase in memory usage. What are you talking about and what is your point?

What planet are you on? FireFox certainly does separate processes. How can you discuss this intelligently if you don't even know the basic facts?

I don't use IE it just sits there. It's too slow, lacking in features, ugly, clunky, nothing good I can say about it. So as a result I don't use it and don't know if it would crash. I do know Opera, FireFox, Safari, and Camino never crash for me. Chrome doesn't crash often but it crashes more than the others combined for me.

FireFox now runs the plugins in a separate process just like Chrome and it's causing problems as well as an increase in memory usage just like Chrome that's my point.

Your point? Mine is that the separate process for tabs and plugins is not this great thing they make it out to be. I would argue it's not needed since I don't have browser crashes except on Chrome.

Firefox is making a big mistake as far as I'm concerned. When you choose to start following instead of leading you lose the game. Firefox is CLEARLY being influenced by Chrome's so called success. Check out Firefox 4 beta and you will see a drastic change in appearance now to. Of all the browses to follow why a a browser marketed to morons? Chrome is a moron browser for sure. I think the time is right for a competitor to come out with a light weight advanced browser for the people that started using Firefox and Opera back in the days when they were light weight and for tech types.

Wrong again. Chrome is the only browser I have that crashes and when it does it takes the whole browser down not just the one tab.

I never had an issue with Firefox memory usage before or stability. These so called improvements are not improvements. They made these changes to follow Chrome which is a stupid move. All the browsers are now pigs and will get worse not better from this point on.

It's higher in resource usage. All the browsers are going that way now though.

Yes and you also get half the speed and 1% of the features of Opera. I find IE 8 gets up there in RAM to.

Yes the RAM usage has jumped since the 10.50 update. 10.10 was much leaner. I'm afraid all the browses are now pigs. The developers just don't care any more because they assume we all have 6 GB of RAM.

Chrome having extensions is one advantage it has although many of the Chrome extensions are just junk. No where near as polished as FireFox extensions.

That's another change that is not an improvement. I don't know what these clowns are thinking when they make some of these decisions. I think you have to be a baboon with a learning disorder to work for the Chrome development team.

Until Chrome gets some basic features and stops being a dumb browser I don't care how fast it is. I also don't like how they keep making changes that are for the worse and thinking they are improvements. In the development builds they removed the ability to make sites into their own short cuts. This was the one thing Chrome could do that the other browses couldn't. It was one of the features Google used to highlight when advertising Chrome. They have also removed the page button in the tool bar and put all the info for it under the one remaining tool button. They than added layers to that button so now you have to dig many clicks deep to get basic functions. They seem to be getting more stupid every release.

Yeah that gets them going. They think your an idiot if you don't say Mac OH S TEN.

What do you mean? Macs and PC both use mother boards, hard drives, optical drives, processors, screens, etc. They both use the major manufacturers of these components. Macs and PC are both computers so why wouldn't they use the same components. Ford, Toyota, GM, and all the other car companies use similar components. How could they not? Is Mac supposed to invent all new components? Mac makes nice stuff. It's the fan boys who buy and use Mac products just because they thinks it's the cool thing to do and bad mouth PCs without knowing what they are talking about that are the problem.

Unfortunately so do I. I like Mac products and think OS X is the best OS right now but I like it for the right reasons. Not because it's cool to or it's the in thing or stupid things like that. In fact the one thing I hate about Macs is the fan boys. They make it embarrassing to admit you use one sometimes.

I have voiced my displeasure about Chrome on here before. I think it's an alright browser but I also think it is attracting simpletons not competent computer users. This video is very funny and so true. http://www.downloadsquad.com/2010/07/05/hitler-finds-out-about-opera-10-60/

I updated to 10.60 today on Windows XP, Windows 7, and Mac. There is a very noticeable difference in speed. 10.60 is very fast. There is also some minor UI improvements. The Speed Dial thumbnails look better. The tab images that pop up when you hover over a tab look nicer and transition nicer when you move from one to another.

Yes I haven't tried Redo yet but have read many reviews and none of them mention any options other than making a plain image. There is no mention of any kind of browsing the image, setting compression or priority, or setting weather it makes an image of the entire drive including free space or weather it just backs up the used space. On Macrium you can control these things. I will be giving it a good try out in the next few days.

I use the Windows 7 imaging feature and it's nice but too many here don't use Windows 7 and are 10 years behind the curve so Macrium and Redo are a nice combo for them until they decide to join the present.

Even with the missing features in the free Macrium it has more features than Redo as far as imaging goes. No need to boot from disk to make an image, the ability to mount and browse the image, control compression etc. These features are missing in Redo. As far as non imaging features Redo has much more.

It's another of many boot/recovery CDs. The nice thing about it is that it has a very nice UI and is Linux based. It gives you some nice tools among them is a cloning tool that clones Windows and Linux so you can use the tool on either platform. Since it's Linux based you don't have to jump through hoops to build it like you do with the Bart PE disk because of MS BS licensing. Just download the ISO and burn it to disk. Also once burned to disk if you boot from the disk there is an option to install to USB thumb drive. I don't see this replacing Macrium for many here because in order to clone with Redo you need to be booted from the disk with Macrium you don't. It's a good idea though to have clones from more than one program just in case one doesn't work out for you. You never know when that will happen until it's too late even if you verify your images that's no guarantee they will work.