Why do I need two browsers these days?

There is no governing body controlling browsers. Just web standards, and the developers can choose to follow them or not.

Many sites exploit different behaviours of browsers for their uses.

Today, Browsers are marketing tools, using every conceivable method to either hijack your home page, add malware and bloatware to your system. It's out of control. Perhaps it wouldn't be so bad if they still did what they were designed to do, but they don't. Images don't show, erratic behavior not only during a session but with malware popping up notices on your desktop.
I've shut off everything I could to prevent getting anything transferred to my desktop. Even with this, some still manage to sneak in and change settings. Google may be the worst offender. They seem to encourage vendors to load user's screens with junk. They hide added downloads for additional software that needs to be unchecked before continuing. Sun's Java is just as bad. I don't want nor do I need Ask or anything else they try to push. I continually turn everything off. Yet there is something else unwanted there within a week and I need to start again. Even with good anti-virus software.
When users revolt and turn to basic browsers that just work, maybe then they will realize that they are pushing customers away, advertising will get less hits so revenue will fall. It's only by organizing users that anything can be accomplished o get rid of this garbage being pushed at everyone. There is not a single browser that will properly display all of the common graphics formats and perform it's designed basic functions without issues,

Hi There,

There are some reasons for needing more than one browser.

Some browsers use the Gecko rendering engine while others use the webkit engine while IE uses the Trident engine. While very similar, html code, CSS and Javascript can be rendered a little differently from one to the other.

Another reason; HTML 5 and CSS 3 is being implemented slowly in each browser. Whenever there is a browser update more compatibility for the newer code is being included.

HTML 5 and CSS 3 includes more html tags ( some are being eliminated ). CSS3 is offering quite a few more ways to style webpages...for example ; rounded corners for tables and boxes. Actually CSS 3 is offering a lot of nice ways to style pages.

Some browsers are "leaning" toward more connections with social media...direct links...send to facebook, etc.

I have found one browser "Comodo Dragon" that is more "old school" than the rest. Duck Duck Go is the default search engine and Dragon does not track your browsing information then sell it to marketing firms.
It also is easy to go to properties and really "lock down" all your security information.
Comodo Dragon is based upon Firefox (stripped down ) and uses the Gecko engine.

I also use many different browsers for checking the web pages that I make to be sure they display correctly.
Usually I check with Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, Opera and Safari and at different screen sizes.

Those are my observations about this subject.
Al Whitmire

Some sites require a specific browser. Used to be that that was almost only Microsoft sites that required iExplorer, but now even Google is requiring that you use Google Chrome for some sites -- but they do provide what they call something like Chrome Frame to allow you to use Firefox and iE and other "unsupported browsers" or "unsupported versions of this browser". Don't cripple your access by restricting yourself to one browser: one size does **not** fit all.

software testing does not usually occur in every browser. More than likely, I.E. gets the most testing. Each browser has slight differences in the implementation (and interpretation) of standards.

I have two browsers installed -- IE 10 and Chrome. I use IE all of the time with no problems. (If it matters, I am running Win 7 Pro -- it is faster than Win 7 Home but to my experience, is the same speed as Win 7 Ultimate. I also have tried Ubuntu and while it is a nice Unix based system, I do not like it much -- system or browser.) I used Chrome once a few years ago to see if the problem I was having was browser related -- it was not (it was an internet backbone issue). I have tried several other browsers -- Chrome, Firefox, Opera to name a few. I do not like how they work. Some of the details to me, are not at all intuitive. There are cases with certain sites, one or more of these other browsers will not work or works badly (page displays that are cut-off and the like). I have not had this issue with IE. I have worked in the computer business for about 45 years, the last ten of which I was a consultant at large customer locations (banks, retail, clinics, insurance and others) places with from a few thousand employees to several hundred thousand employees. Without fail, all of these businesses used IE as their only sanctioned (and in almost all cases, allowed) browser. The larger of these business were almost constantly internally evaluating other browser offerings and finding them short of capability -- one or another major application would not work.

I have read recently that Chrome is now the most popular browser beating IE by a little over one per-cent. This is based on a statistical engine looking at the Web. Other sources estimate that IE covers from 27% to 54% of the market. I do love the people that use an alternate browser (to IE that is) and encounter a website that gives them difficulty, blame it on the website -- often, IE will work anyway. I have encountered this many times. Exchange: "The website does not work!", I try it and, "It works fine, what browser are you using?", "XXXXXXX", and I say, "Oh!"

Some of the companies with many employees don't allow or discourage their employees from browsing the internet and so any study that only examines the Web will be underreporting the usage by these large companies where the typical employee uses it constantly for internal reporting and the like. I have little doubt that many individual users have gone away from IE or are starting out not using IE for whatever reason. It is interesting however, that many major corporations that are looking at the situation constantly are sticking with IE. Outside the US, many areas have an inherent dislike for MS or US products -- I suspect that non-IE usage is much higher there. It is true that the companies I worked at only had a few million or so employees but it is also true that all of them used IE across the board. During my 10 years of consulting, I did not encounter a single company at which I worked that did not use IE as their main or only browser.

Which is the most popular? I do not know for sure. I do know that. I have had no significant problems with IE since 1995 -- even during their supposedly weak period several years ago.

Why do many people claim to have problems with IE? I don't know that either. Someone else may answer that question.

. . . . T.

I've read a couple of dozen answers and so far none I have seen even suggest this -- perhaps in some later posts.

The thing is. There are industry-wide standards for all the various coding languages. The problem is two-fold. First, and most important, is that site-developers do not adhere to them. This happens because often there is a default that accepts bad code in the right way.

Example, suppose a certain response is supposed to be "Yes" or "No". In the past, most codes would simply check for one -- let's say "No" -- and if that answer wasn't given, then the checker would "assume" the answer was "yes" and continue in its merry way. Certain browser designers, though, were getting testy about this. After all, the answer might have been "noo" or "yeah" or ... So they were demanding that the site use the code the way the code was supposed to be used and designed browsers to reject poor code -- for the protection of the user ultimately. Other browser designers said fuggedaboutit.

I remember when Microsoft suddenly tightened ship. Sites across the web were suddenly non-responsive for IE7 (I think it was). Major sites like those of my bank and of some my clients weren't working. I had a discussion with Microsoft who kindly explained the issue and showed me some of the coding problems they were dealing with. They were no longer going to allow coders to call their bluff. And by gosh it worked. Within 30 days, every major player I knew of and most minor ones were writing better code, which meant safer sites.

On the other hand, Firefox, however, had a different problem, and that was an inability to keep up with certain contingencies or else they just didn't care about them. For example, a number of different do-it-yourself blogging and web-development sites (such as Tripod, among many) allow clients to work in situ and see the results as they go. They write plain text into an editing box that allows either text view or html view via a toggle switch. Tripod can't handle that. What works in IE (all versions) never has worked in Firefox. It's getting close on a decade and that little itch hasn't been scratched yet.

What I have found is that well-written code and IE seem a close-to-perfect match, at least up through IE9. I am seeing some issues with IE10 that I need to explore ... is it me or is it them?

Sloppy code always has at least one browser on which it works -- the browser that was used by the developer, one who thought what works in one browser will clearly work in another. Yeah, right!

But it's not because some company is out to get your money or business. If that really, really wanted your business, the sites and/or browsers would be doing what they should, not vice-versa.

It's not cupidity, just stupidity.

My sister and bro-in-law have a system where he uses Firefox, while she uses IE. AFAIK, both allow you to set up some sort of "user profiles", but he's saying it's just simpler and easier this way.

Every now and then, I like to fire up FF or Chrome to see stuff that doesn't render correctly in IE (such as a video clip, can't click on a button to continue, or reading stuff on a page).

W3C is a consortium that sets standards that define the web platform, but browsers have so much to battle these days, and it is like hitting a moving target. For security, I use chrome with Windows 8, and keep everything updated, and have had no problems with form data as you state that you have. I still get a few pop ups/unders on a few sites, but for the most part, it is flawless. If I were you, I would uninstall, and reinstall Chrome, to see if it doesn't clear the CreatSpace access situation.

Actually, there is a body out there that sets standards for web content. And sometimes it takes them forever and 3 centuries (or so it seems) to agree on a particular standard - like HTML 5 took a very long time to ratify.

But as far as browsers go, I do understand what you mean. Some things work fine in one but not so much in the other. The problem is, there are many ways to get from point A to point B. Picture in your mind a tiger.

One person might describe the tiger as "a big furry orange, black and white cat." Another might say, "It's the largest naturally occurring feline on earth and lives mostly in Southeast Asia, India and Siberia." And yet another might just say "KITTEH!"

The point is - all of these might describe the tiger - but will do so in a different way. And those differences can be better or worse at describing the cat in question. It works the same way with browsers. Some programmers are better at interpreting the standard and some are more clever at writing the code needed to render the page successfully.

And if that weren't enough - then there's the people who write the web pages themselves. Smart web developers these days will go through the pains of having all of the major browsers and will test their work against them all to make sure they all look good on the screen. And, of course, there are those who don't bother with such.

I have actually needed to use the Google Chrome - based SRware Iron web browser in order to e-mail working links to various web-sites. ( With Yahoo e-mail )

If I use FireFox,the links to the web-sites that I send out in e-mails from Yahoo must be copied and pasted into the address bar of the recipients' web browsers.

If I use SRware Iron in the same manner,the recipients can just "click" on the links to the web-site(s) in the e-mails sent from my Yahoo e-mail account. ( No copy and paste necessary with SRware Iron. )

I don't know why this is in the year 2013 but,that's the reality of the situation.

This problem has been going on for years and by far the worst culprit in all of it has to be Microsoft Internet Explorer.

There is web standards that browsers are supposed to adhere to but most of them go their own way and decode the HTML code in their own way.

IE was the worse one, originally not incuding Java and having it's own Microsoft J, and it's own totally different implementation of HTML rules, and even with HTML5 there are some rules that Microsoft have decided shouldn't apply to it's browser.

Some web programmers write their code so they detect the type of browser that is being used, whilst others think - well why should I bother writing code specifically that works with most browsers but then have to right separate code for one specific browser.

HTML5 should hopefully be sorting some of this out, but even with modern browsers they all implement CSS differently which tells the computer how to display the data on screen and where to put things

The biggest problem with this is all to do with positioning and size and what each browser sees as sizes is different

Width is a good example of this problem -

if I set a division (<div&gt of a web document to be 100 pixels wide, and then give it a border of 1 pixel, padding of 1 pixel and margin of 1 pixel -

in firefox I would get a box that is 100 pixels wide on the inside and in total the box would be 106 pixels wide because there is 1 pixel each side for the border, 1 pixel each side for the padding, and 1 pixel each side for the margin, however when IE renders it, it would give me a box that has 94 pixels inside as it includes the pixels for the border, padding and margin.

Now 6 pixels don't seem really that much to be making a fuss over, but if you had a number of these division and you'd added them all up to fit perfectly and use 100% of the space, suddenly they start over running the end of the page - and where does the web browser put these divisions that have over run.

Again this all depends on the browser and the CSS settings, some word wrap them onto the next line, some just add scroll bars, some merge them with text.

So it's an absolute minefield and a nightmare for web developers that all web browsers don't follow the same rules.

I honestly don't see the problem with browsing, but then again, I don't do it too wildly.

I only use Chrome, and it satisfies my every need.
If you have privacy issues, I suggest using the following methods:

1: Browser of your choice in Sandboxie: This isolates the browser into a folder, and the browser can only access that folder. It's like a VM but with only the folder. Contrary to VM's its very lightweight, and you only lose 1-2% of performance.

2: Browser of your choice in VirtualBox/VmWare Player/Workstation: That is if you don't want the browser to have access to actual hardware information. This method uses a lot more resources.

3: Android in VirtualBox: Same browsing experience as would be done on an android phone/tablet / phablet

4: Browzar: a 220kb browser, that neatly cleans up for you, and works wonderfully.

As for automatic form filling. I don't use it, especially for passwords. Have 20-30 passwords, remember them all. It's actually advantageous to remember your passwords, as it improves your memory, and allows you to do the same stuff when not on your own computer.

When your browser gets popups, etc, or gets slow, just use eraser to wipe the sandbox, and reinstall the browser.
I do this 4 times a year, It takes 5 minutes of your life.

Ultimately, browsing and maintaining a good browsing experience is like maintaining your house. You have to do house cleaning on a regular basis or live with the consequences.

To reply to a small part of your password situation, I offer a solution I found a while ago. I use the free version of LastPass to keep the password mess under control. It has quite a few easy to understand options to keep pass words safe.

BTW: I also prefer pass words that are actual words, e.g., for a shopping site (think amazon, etc) I would find it easier to remember "2013AmazoN#!" than this "YRhmnw4Uu3". LastPass website is: www.lastpass.com

The paid version is $12 USD ($1/month, but they bill annually, presumably when/if you buy the premium version). I didn't opt for the premium version, but I will eventually so I can access passwords and other security features like protection from keyloggers (see: https://lastpass.com/features_free.php ) for all features.

Finally, keeping a small stack of 3 x 5" cards with website, login, and password is helpful as well. I keep all my passwords (written in pencil of course) on separate cards just in case.

Hope this helps a little.

Well, let's not lose sight of the patent wars on this one. And each particular leech of a browser wants their share of our wallet and each others wallet.

We all agree it's a problem, but what IS the solution? What can be done to make any browser render any web page correctly? The only thing I can think of is to have the web standards body run scans of websites and post scores for compatibility standards met to be used by all browsers for a minimum acceptability set by the USER of the site in his particular browser. That'll set up a howl by the website and browser people heard to the moon and back. But if their websites are NOT up to standards, and we as users are NOT visiting their websites, their wallet might be hit hard enough to FORCE them to become compliant. It still won't stop their greed to siphon every last penny from our wallets to their particular bank accounts, but at least we might get something for the penny (or yen, or ruble, or....)

I use Chrome primarily, but sometimes use Explorer on occasion. I use Lastpass on both for authentication. I find more and more sites like Godaddy, changing their login form so that it breaks Lastpass. Or at least requires you to manually paste your username and password. A real treat with Godaddy especially, as they log you out automatically every few minutes.

As for crashing, on Win8 64 with Chrome, I cannot honestly remember when it last crashed.

I often run into a website logon that doesn't work with Firefox, and a few with IE. It's such a PITA to have to remember which sites work play nice with which browser and which don't...especially frustrating if it's a site I haven't logged into in a while and forgot about the incompatibility, thinking I forgot my password or something's wrong with my computer. BUT, it's the price we have to pay to have competition .

I remember a comment by Bill Gates years ago when confronted on the issue of bundling IE with Windows and being anti-competitive. His point was trying to come up with a platform that was universal and worked with everything, instead of a bunch different, competing companies writing different programs that might or might not be compatible with websites or windows. He was right. I think this idea is embodied with Apple's tight control of apps and programs compatible with OSX...they want everything to run properly. Of course the flip side is some programs just aren't available at all for OSX, and having them (Apple) control everything drives up the price of everything

I myself have 3 PC's running presently, (2 more need reworking) these 3 all have Win 7 Ultimate on them along with some variation of Linux in a dual boot configuration. My HP laptop has Win7 with Ubuntu 13.04, dual monitor configuration just updated from 12.04 last week, an older desktop, 4 years old maybe but updated with new (more powerful) processor and more ram (4g max it can handle) and a great video card running Win 7 and Linux Mint 12 KDE, a newer desktop, less than a year old running Win 7 with Linux Mint 12 Cinnamon, FF runs in all my Linux installs and I have 3 browsers installed in all my Win 7 installs, IE 10, don't use it very often at all but has never given me an issue, Chrome, haven't used it in a couple of weeks and FF, which I use daily. When I build a new PC, FF is one of the first things I install after drivers, and every time I install FF I also install FF Sync, Adblock plus and Last Pass every time. I used to use one called SeaMonkey a few years ago, but then switched to FF as my main browser, lovin it so far.

You're not alone, my friend, I feel exactly the same as you do. Recently I wrote an opinion on Windows 8 criticizing their 'advanced' software for taking us back to the days when end-users had to be tech-savvy scientists. I'm spending 80% of my time trying to navigate Win8 trying to accomplish the simplest of task (like read a document) - so much time and effort that oftentimes I FORGET what I was trying to do.

I use two browsers too - Firefox and IE and for the same reasons. I have never agreed to tracking my keystrokes/location/surfing but recently it seems that that option is built into the installation of software and combined with other security options you MUST turn on. And now when I search or click onto a site I am presented with ads for merchandise in my city. Plus search results present local options first. This is so annoying because I use the web so I could have knowledge of what's happening throughout the country and not JUST in my neck f the woods and that's one reason I never opted for tracking of any kind. Plus I use a popup blocker (which works on one browser but not the other) but there are now survey boxes that float in anyway.

And, I agree there should be governing body that controlls standards and authorizes all upgrades and new software before they are released to the public

True there are laid down standards for web design however there is no ability to regulate whether people follow these standards or not. Microsoft, and others, have introduced new non-standard tools that allow web designers (many of whom have little experience or training) to use new graphical effects and so on. Then of course there are the browser plugins which should not be, but frequently are, essential to view a particular site. All sites SHOULD have a basic text structure that allows people to use them without displaying images (which means all images should have a text descriptor). From the browser producers aspect their products are subjected to thousands of daily attacks from idiots with nothing better to do than try and break stuff - not to mention criminals seeking to rip people off - they have to keep beefing up the code to plug holes - my guess is that each "fix" generates at least two more problems.

All we can do is to keep emailing the webmasters of sites that don't display properly because it is their job to keep up to date with the almost daily changes to web browsers OR they could remove all the fancy features from their sites and deliver one that conforms to the standards guidelines (few sites do these days). It needs to be remembered that anyone in the world can build and display webpages and for many sites the person who designed it has moved on, or simply lost interest.

The bottom line is that requiring more than one browser is almost inevitable - I couldn't manage with less than three and actually have 6 different ones installed - on top of which my anti virus provides me with a secure browser for financial transactions which operates outside of the desktop environment. Overall I feel that, although occasionally frustrating, having a wide range of tools to use for similar tasks is a good thing as it helps to provide a richer less boring experience

I agree that in a perfect world, all web-sites would be standard-conforming and all browsers do the same.

But here in the real world, people frequently deviate from strict HTML, and I wouldn't want a browser that treated these deviations as fatal errors. So it's good that they do the best they can, even though that won't always be identical between browsers.

It would be good if all browsers offered the same features (such as writing .mht files, supporting DownThemAll, displaying graphic alt-text on hover), but it's the nature of development that useful features start in one place, and spread out until there are copyright or technical limitations.

Other reasons are bypasses to bugs -- for example, the W7 snipping tool doesn't seem to work if Firefox is active, and FlashPlayer sometimes writes garbage temp files on the hard drive (though I've not tracked down which browser uses the add-on that does this).

On my IOS5 iPad, Safari has a low limit on the number of tabs, so Chrome offers a huge benefit.

Web developers need to test their sites with all the popular browsers to be sure they work as intended, setting a minimum number of four or five.

I'm a luddite and use both Chrome and Firefox. I keep getting hourglass hangups and crashes on firefox, especially when on graphics heavy pages like google images.Once that starts happening I use Chrome. Chrome seems to want to have the same issues but usually won't crash, it does slow down terribly. Recently I have had issues with youtube videos. The video will say it's 3 minutes long and then complete after 20 seconds or so. I have 3 computers. 2 at the office and one at home and I have the same issues on all 3 of them. This is on windows 7....

Do WHAT exactly?