You couldn't ask for a lamer topic!

[Spectere]

would you recommend IE9? I swear I have some plugin that causes memory leaks with chrome and every time I check my running programs it has like 9 things that say chrome.

Very much so.  However, aren't you running Windows XP?  IE9 does not support Windows XP.  There's just too many things that rely on Vista/7 at this point.

If you're still on XP, Opera is a good choice.  Just know that you might have to do some configuration and adaption to make it work for you if you're used to other browsers.

I do like when there's some consistency between competing products, but I do still prefer CTRL+SHIFT+N. It just makes more sense to me that to get a new window, you press CTRL+N, and if you want to modify that window to become a private window, you just hold down shift, and voila. I should point out that CTRL+N is extremely natural and is already part of windows.

I'd consider this to be an issue like that XP and Vista stuff (you know, Vista moving options to places that actually made sense, but bothered people because it wasn't the same as XP...) CTRL-N and CTRL-SHIFT-N make more sense than CTRL-N and CTRL-SHIFT-P.

[

In a sense, I do agree, but private browsing is a major mode shift as well.  Considering the implications of it (i.e. not saving history, not using or saving cookies, etc) I don't think it makes sense to consider it a simple modifier of the new window button.

In Firefox, CTRL-SHIFT-P does make a great deal of sense, since it doesn't merely open a private window, since Firefox can't handle having private and non-private windows open at once.

[Bobbias]

In Firefox, CTRL-SHIFT-P does make a great deal of sense, since it doesn't merely open a private window, since Firefox can't handle having private and non-private windows open at once.

Thats... Not very cool.

I did not know that about FF. One more reason to stick to Chrome over FF, in my book. I see what you mean about that making less sense for Firefox.

[Spectere]

Yep.  It's funny how IE seemed to be the first browser to get private browsing right.  If I've got my history right, Safari was the first browser to feature it, but its implementation is almost identical to Firefox's.  In fact, I'd say that Firefox lifted its implementation from Safari, except for the fact that they got it wrong.  Safari's private browsing mode is unique, as it doesn't sppear to function.  The browser just picks up from where it left off like nothing happened.  When you click it on, the browser stops collecting history from that point forward.  It's far less jarring than Firefox's implementation.

Firefox's implementation also nukes the clipboard when Firefox loses focus in InPrivate mode.  I don't think I have to explain why this is, quite possible, the stupidest fucking design decision on the face of the planet.  I think that speaks volumes about Mozilla's arrogance -- they seem to think that their browser owns the system clipboard.  Assholes.

IE is the first one that I consider to be usable, and that's the model that Google used for Chrome.  IE8's InPrivate mode, from day 1, popped open a new private window.  Additionally, it displayed "InPrivate" to the left of the address bar, making it clear that the browser would not record any data from within that window.

Opera's implementation is kind of strange.  Rather than using the concept of a private window, it uses private tabs.  If you spawn a new tab from within a private tab, it'll create a private tab by default.  Similarly, opening a link within a private tab will spawn another private tab.  The only indication that a tab is private is a doorhanger icon on the tab itself, in place of a favicon.  I'm not a fan of this implementation, as it takes a bit of scanning to see which tab is private and which one isn't, especially on a high resolution screen.  Still, it's not horrible, and it is very flexible, so it does fit the browser that it was designed for.

TL;DR version: When it comes to private browsing: IE/Chrome > Opera > Safari >>>>>>>>>>>> Firefox

[Bobbias]

I don't hate the idea of private tabs, sometimes I wish that I didn't need a new window for private stuff, like say banking or something. Kinda interesting that it actually has private tabs instead of separate windows.

[Spectere]

The problem isn't the concept of private tabs, it's the difficulty in telling the difference between private tabs and regular tabs.  I literally didn't notice any difference in the tab itself, only the favicon.

[Bobbias]

I was just saying I don't really hate the idea of private tabs, I do think that the favicon being the only way to tell them from normal ones is shitty though.

[Spectere]

Just fired up Gran Turismo 5 because I've been in a racing mood lately, and I figured I'd share the love (I've been mainly playing Forza 3).

HELLO, 1GB+ of updates!  Yikes!

Well, on the bright side, at least they've added and fixed a ton of things.  Maybe it won't be Bumpercar Turismo as much now (at least Bumpercar Motorsport 3 has a rewind feature so that you can undo the AI's "mistakes").

Edit: Speaking of Forza, I was pretty amazed to see that they had a 2009 Chevy Aveo5 LT.  Like every other car in Forza, even if you're using automatic shifting, it still simulates a car with a manual gearbox.  The thing that's amazing here (aside from the fact that the Aveo is the last car I pictured being in a racing game) is that my dad happens to own a 2009 Chevy Aveo5 LT with a manual transmission.  I am actually very impressed at how closely Forza handles the car's acceleration characteristics and handling.  Even the shift time feels about right.

I've also driven a car that I "own" in Gran Turismo 5.  A friend of mine has a 2003 Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder and, coincidentally enough, that popped up in my used car lot in only a few in-game days in the exact same color.  I'm pretty sure that GT5 simulates the transmission in the same way that Forza does (i.e. automate shifting, not simulate a real automatic) but aside from differences in acceleration I remember it feeling pretty close to the same.

Gotta love it.

[MortifiedocAlot]

Back from Opeth concert, and it was surprisingly awesome. Mikael was goddamn awesome and did a fair ammount of crowd warming, also they did a lot of cool new takes on their songs. Only thing I disliked is the fact that they never did any of their more metal stuff, he never screamed once.

Still, when they did porcelain heart they fucking killed it.

[Bobbias]

Lucky bastard. And yeah, after listening to Mikael seems to do a lot of crowd warming. Kinda sucks that they didn't do their harder stuff, and I hope they're not permanently moving away form that stuff, but some of their new stuff is still fucking amazing.

[Spectere]

RIP Steve Jobs.

[MortifiedocAlot]

More like rest in peace AMERICAN jobs.


eeh eeeeeeeeeeeeeh?

[OmegaOmni]

RIP Steve Jobs.

They could have saved him...sadly the defib ran on flash.

[MortifiedocAlot]

ba-dum-tis

Also I was reading some random creepy stories off of reddit and I was reminded of something that happened to me a while back. Long story short, I had a surprisingly vivid dream about an event that happened like weeks later, and when it happened I had this massive wave of deja vu. I can remember having actual real life events mimic each other in an creepy way, but I swear I've had a few dreams that loosely predicted real life events that happened later.

[Spectere]

More "exciting" browser stuff on my laptop: I dumped Opera and went to Chrome.  In an extra-ordinary change of character, Opera decided to get crash-happy.  I pinpointed it to the memory usage growing perpetually as it stayed running when a plugin was present on one of the web sites that I was visiting.  For instance, if I were to go on YouTube and let the browser idle, the memory usage would seem to get worse and worse, and Opera would eventually cause the entire system to start dragging (my laptop uses a single core Pentium M).  It's not an issue with Flash itself, as I used Firefox in the exact same way and its plugin container never ballooned, so I can only assume that it's a bug in Opera.

I believe that it's plugin system in general was flawed.  Watching any sort of streaming video on this system was literally impossible, while both IE8 and Firefox 7 were able to play 720p YouTube videos (which I think is impressive, considering the age of the system and the video card that it's equipped with).  Opera managed about 0.2 fps on 360p content, which is not an exaggeration in the slightest.

Considering how I use my laptop (i.e. hibernating and sleeping instead of shutting down, and expecting to be able to use my web browser between usage sessions), that was unacceptable.  I'm back on Chrome on this machine and it really does seem snappy as far as XP browsers go.  It's kind of a shame that Opera didn't work out, as I rather like it.

I'm still happy with IE9 on my desktop machine so far.  There are a few niggles (not being able to CTRL+PGUP/PGDN between tabs is very ARGH sometimes) but nothing too horrid.  It took less adjustment than going from IE9 to Opera, but it wasn't as straight-forward as going from Firefox to Chrome.

[MortifiedocAlot]

I'm pretty sure my chrome has a memory leak. Leaving it open and then trying to use it again makes it initially really sluggish.