View Full Version : Poll: Paying for a browser?
Fahrenheit
2007-09-08, 13:12
So, before I am un-ceremoniously shipped to University, with just myself and a small wooden duck for company, I have decided that I need to rethink my browsing habits. Not just in the sense that I spend way too much time on this idiot-box, but because the browsers I use get on my breast.
Safari and Camino at first was no contest for me - I loved the ability to block ads in Camino, and since Safari 3.0b had no proper ad-blocker, I was set on Camino - even though it was fugly and lacking in many of the Chocolate box qualities that makes Safari so 'Mac'. But then, to my small, desk-raising delight, PithHelmet came out for 3.0, and I was transformed into the beauty of an ad-free, all Mac world. But, one thing, I find Safari so damn clunky sometimes - it seems to react as quickly as my 16 year old Dachshund to a command, and all in all, Camino (for me at least) seemed to be quicker at rendering.
Oh, no, I thought, this won't do - I'm a real boy now, and I'm not going to take this shit. Like a woman getting rid of the marks of her ex-boyfriend, I zapped Camino and Firefox, Shiira, Opera and all that jazz to the recycle bin, and bit the bullet - downloading OmniWeb.
Holy Fuck™, I thought, this is fast. No, seriously fast. Pages seemed to appear quicker than my friends when I told them I had the Vanessa Hudgens picture. Why the hell had I been using the other browsers? The thumbnail drawbar on the side is unobtrusive and beautiful, and more importantly, useful! Ad-blocking is site specific, works with the user, and did I mention it was fast? Holy christ. This is porn x 3.
Of course, you have to pay for it. But $14.95, or like £7.50 for me, seems very reasonable for an app that I use more than any other on my computer, bar none.
I would recommend people to at least give this baby a try, I know there are some die hard fans, like Bryson, but more people need to see this in action. :)
This post was bought to you by The Omni Group.
psmith2.0
2007-09-08, 13:16
No, I'd never pay for a browser. I'm completely happy with Safari, and have used it since the day it came out in January 2003. I've tried the others, but I always come back. I'm not so picky or demanding that I can detect fractions of seconds in load times, etc.
Everything seems to render well, pop-up ads are blocked, I never have problems with it, etc.
Not about to pay for something that I can get for free, that works well and is good for me.
I guess that could apply to more than browsers, now that I think about it...
;)
Let me put this way.
You can choose to spend your money or your time.
You can get a broswer that performs as well as Omni for free with some modification, but that'll cost you time.
Or you can just click the Download button and be done with it. That'll put a dent in your wallet.
Which is more valuable to you? That's why Omniweb and other paid browsers (are there?) exists and that's why free browsers exist, too.
psmith2.0
2007-09-08, 13:23
Third option: you can not be such an obsessive/compulsive type, constantly stop-watching everything, and just realize "fast is fast" and be done with it as well.
:p
Never underestimate the "I don't really give a shit; it works well for me and I'm not that hung up on such things" mindset. It's very liberating.
But, having said that, I'm big on people getting - and using - whatever works best for them. It's not for me to determine. We're all different, so more power to ya, Farenheit! Enjoy.
Fahrenheit
2007-09-08, 13:24
Its not the split seconds though. It really is a lot faster - I only have a 1MB connection, so I notice. Applenova loads 2 seconds faster at least on this. Its incredible, its as though its expecting me to load it.
Ahh, so that's three choice then.
Money, Time or Shit.
Hmm, where does Power and Sex comes in the picture? :confused:
:D
Shades of Blue
2007-09-08, 13:33
I'd pay for a browser if it was better than the others that I could get for free, but when I tried OmniWeb, it totally messed up its rendering of Google Reader. Since I use that all the time, that's not acceptable, and it makes me wonder what else OmniWeb can't render correctly. So now I'm back to bouncing between Safari, Firefox, and Camino; this month it's Safari 3 beta.
turbulentfurball
2007-09-08, 13:40
There'd have to be a 'must-have' feature worth paying for that wasn't available for free, and I can't see such a thing existing. The whole browser market is now geared towards a free distribution method and a return to charging for the software just wouldn't work, I'd imagine.
Saying that, Safari and IE aren't strictly free; they're bundled with the OS, so you are paying for them to some extent.
Safari with PithHelmet right now.
I've been using Safari on my Macs since 2004, with a little tryout of Firefox for a month when I first switched.
I don't see any reason to switch from Safari right now, but I do keep Firefox around for those random sites that won't come up in Safari.
If I may summarize Farenheit's post:
Bryson was right all along.
;)
I'd just like to add that I've also been singing OmniWeb's praises for ages. Glad you like it Farenheit - and, obviously, I have no qualms paying for software that I like and use every day, even if free alternatives exist.
Personally, I would never pay for a browser. If its only 2 seconds faster, its not worth it, I mean come on. Now if it was 20-30 seconds faster, maybe, but 2 seconds... :lol: Paying for a browser is like getting bottled water, its a matter of taste.
Fahrenheit
2007-09-08, 17:53
Personally, I would never pay for a browser. If its only 2 seconds faster, its not worth it, I mean come on. Now if it was 20-30 seconds faster, maybe, but 2 seconds... :lol: Paying for a browser is like getting bottled water, its a matter of taste. 2 seconds x however many pages you look at a day.... ;) It adds up, I can tell you.
I'd pay for a browser, but it'd have to be really damn good.
I've never used OmniWeb.
Electric Monk
2007-09-08, 20:42
OmniWeb, incidentally, is really damn good.
It needs a UI refresh but other then that it remains totally worth the 30 USD I spent on it a couple years ago, and it's, IIRC, 15 USD now. There was a bad patch for a while when they were shifting from WebCore to WebKit but it's much better (and faster) now.
So, yeah I'd certainly pay for a browser if it was good enough. I'd pay for a mail client too, if anybody put out a really good one (c'mon Kiwi).
I'm sure OmniWeb is good, but there are SO MANY free options out there that I won't even consider using a for-pay browser. Those $15 are useful for a lot more than getting yet another piece of software that serves a completely redundant function. They all display web pages. OmniWeb might do it better, but they all serve the same function.
My opinion would probably change if I made more money than I do, but right now I'm totally broke. Still, even if I started making tons of money, another web browser would be one of the lowest things on my "to purchase" list.
PowerDrift
2007-09-09, 03:09
I never bothered to try OmniWeb before, but I'm using it now and WOW, it's fast.
I'd say it's worth $15.
With internet connections as fast as they are these days, every browser seems to load every page in about .34 seconds to me.
It amazes me how some people can claim Safari is slow or Firefox is lightning fast... I just don't notice a difference between any of them. Sure, some tasks are faster in one than the other, but raw html rendering? Come on...
For me, it's not so much a matter of rendering speed, but feature set. link (http://forums.applenova.com/showpost.php?p=496599&postcount=12)
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.