Advice Request Chromium versus Chrome on Windows

[Windows_Security]

On Linux most choose Chromium since it receives updates. On Windows decision is a bit harder due to lack of auto-update (at least for 32 bits version)

On Windows Chrome updates flash in user folders while Chromium uses the PPAPI version Adobe. Because I use software policies (which block execution) in user folders, I have to copy past the updated flash in AppData to Program Files folders. Always when you are in hurry this happens. I got so annoyed by Google updating dll in user folders, that I decided to switch to Chromium (link) and stop using flash also.

Due to increase of mobile devices, most websites have flashplayer with HTML-player. When using Chromium you have to disable the irritating "missing Google API" warning (link).

I am curious what the opinion is on MalwareTips of Chromium versus Chrome and why.

 

[SHvFl]

I use Chrome. My software allows auto update without issues so we skip that. Flash it's blocked because it's dead and useless but if i really have to use it i open Firefox.
I see no reason to change from Chrome tbh. It seems solid, gets security updates and new features. I don't know but i trust Chrome devs more. To change from Chrome they must mess up something really bad.

 

[DardiM]

Can we give our opinion on Chromium based Browser , or only chromium ?

Currently, I use Vivaldi, another Chromium based Browser that isn’t finalized yet (you can only download technical preview to see how it works), and like it a lot

I use Chrome. My software allows auto update without issues so we skip that. Flash it's blocked because it's dead and useless but if i really have to use it i open Firefox.
I see no reason to change from Chrome tbh. It seems solid, gets security updates and new features. I don't know but i trust Chrome devs more. To change from Chrome they must mess up something really bad.

May be wrong, but that's Chrome that use Chromium source code as base and add other stuff (Flash Player, PDF reader, tracking , etc ) , no ?

 

[SHvFl]

Can we give our opinion on Chromium based Browser , or only chromium ?

Currently, I use Vivaldi, another Chromium based Browser that isn’t finalized yet (you can only download technical preview to see how it works), and like it a lot


May be wrong, but that's Chrome that use Chromium source code as base and add other stuff, no (Flash Player, PDF reader, tracking , etc ) ?

Maybe you are right, i don't know either. I just don't see the point in doing any switch.

 

[DardiM]

Maybe you are right, i don't know either. I just don't see the point in doing any switch.

I think some users prefer Chromium because they don't like what Chrome adds (tracking and other stuff)

 

[tonibalas]

For some time now i prefer chromium based browsers since they are updated as often as Chrome.
Also Chrome was slow on my system so i prefer others and i am happy with their performance.

 

[Deleted member 178]

I use Chrome because it is widely supported by almost everything decently coded.

 

[Windows_Security]

Thx for sharing your considerations and thoughts

 

[jamescv7]

Chromium or Chrome will do, both have decent performance and reliability.

It just play down on some certain features at all.

So either choose one and you will not gain lose.

 

[woodrowbone]

Great to see Kees here, a strong addition to any forum!

/W

 

[yigido]

If you want to update your Chromium daily basis and integrate PPAPI Flash into Chromium.
You can use this: chrlauncher

It is great tool to update Chromium and add Flash player into Chromium browser.

 

[OokamiCreed]

For Windows, I find Chrome to be a very nice stable/fast experience across the web (especially for HTML5 video). Chrome is also known to be a very secure browser and is widely supported across a large range of devices/platforms and for the most part, support new web technologies more efficiently than say Edge (this is my own opinion based on use experience of the browser).

For Linux, I also use Chrome. For Debian/Ubuntu based distros, I install using .deb file directly available from Google's site. For Arch based, I install via AUR which does have the ability to auto update (at least on Manjaro) via whatever software you chose to update your system as a whole. Some distros (like Solus, Zorin, etc) have a built in feature to install many popular browsers - in this case, Chrome and they both support auto update (not handled by Chrome like on Windows).

In regard to performance (on both Windows and Linux), I find both run about the same speed. Chromium may be lighter on drive space and RAM since it doesn't offer the Chrome's full range of features by default (such as built in Flash and I believe support to play different formats of media). If you don't like Flash and don't need any of the built in feature that Google has added to Chrome, you mind as well run Chromium (at least on Linux for convenience).

 

[yigido]

You cannot watch Twitter and Netflix videos with bare Chromium. Do you know that? You can try!
Chrome also has some paid codecs for such websites and encryption decryptors.

 

[rebel4life]

i cant use google chrome for facebook to play my games on there so im also using comodo dragon and microsoft edge for watching videos that i cant on google chrome

 

[yigido]

i cant use google chrome for facebook to play my games on there so im also using comodo dragon and microsoft edge for watching videos that i cant on google chrome

Strange, Comodo Dragon hasn't that paid codecs in it. So I cannot play Tiwtter videos in Dragon. I reported it to Comodo 1 year ago and they will release a fix in the September lets see what will CD 52 will bring us.