does google chrome run well with os x el capitan vers 10.11.3

None at the time, will you look again or just continue to guess?

are you hijacking the post now?

I'm sure it's fine, I'm sure kennethfromowosso is long gone having not want to put up with the 6 people in all of the internet who invested time giving a rats butt about this

pinkstones wrote:

It uses up way too much RAM. Like, gigabytes of RAM. If you're looking for a browser alternative to Safari, download Firefox. It doesn't use anywhere near as much memory, and it doesn't actively track you and every move you make on the Internet, even when you're not actually using the browser.

Google's business practices are extremely shady when it comes to that.

more nonsense. From Activity Monitor…

JimmyCMPIT wrote:

are you hijacking the post now?

I'm sure it's fine, I'm sure kennethfromowosso is long gone having not want to put up with the 6 people in all of the internet who invested time giving a rats butt about this

Am I hijacking the post? So if you respond to me you are making a point but If i respond to others I am hijacking the post. Got it.

You know as well as we do that without context your postings are just nonsense, don't you?

dialabrain wrote:

pinkstones wrote:

It uses up way too much RAM. Like, gigabytes of RAM. If you're looking for a browser alternative to Safari, download Firefox. It doesn't use anywhere near as much memory, and it doesn't actively track you and every move you make on the Internet, even when you're not actually using the browser.

Google's business practices are extremely shady when it comes to that.

more nonsense. From Activity Monitor…

It's not nonsense, and I don't care about your specific computer. I care about what I continually see on EtreCheck reports from people who have posted them on these forums. When they're complaining of slowness, and even when they're not, if they've got Google Chrome installed and running, it's taking up to twice more RAM than anything else. Furthermore, look at how many friggin' "helper" applications Chrome needs to run, as opposed to just lonely ol' Firefox, hanging out by himself. It's ridiculous.

There's nothing in the Etrecheck report that points to an obvious issue with Google Chrome, which means a look at the console logs for any relevant errors via Console.app — please don't post more than a hundred lines or so here if you choose to do that, and please make sure there's no confidential data in what's posted, and please don't post more than two copies of any repeating blocks of errors that might be getting logged — and also a look at both Activity Monitor.app to see if there's something obvious there around disk or network or other activity that might hinder Chrome, and a look at general network performance. Others have suggested trying a different browser as a test, and that'd be a useful test to see if this is a generic problem with the disk speeds or the network performance or the DNS servers or such.

(Or did I just take a look at an Etrecheck report that has nothing to do with the original poster's system?)

MrHoffman wrote:

There's nothing in the Etrecheck report that points to an obvious issue with Google Chrome…

I'm not the original poster and i'm not having a problem. And you are correct, There i no obvious issue with Chrome.

pinkstones wrote:

Google Chrome installed and running, it's taking up to twice more RAM than anything else. Furthermore, look at how many friggin' "helper" applications Chrome needs to run, as opposed to just lonely ol' Firefox, hanging out by himself. It's ridiculous.

Add the "friggin' helper processes together and see if it equals Firefox's 1.32GB much less twice 1.32.

You're welcome to believe what you like.

The meanest Gb user I know of is Opera. Both Chrome and Firefox use large amounts of memory, which matters not if you have 32 Gb in the bank but for many people with 4 or 6 Gb it is far more important. Remember, Chrome is Google related, and that in itself is not something to write home about. My readings at the moment are ...

Opera ... 77.2Mb, Safari ... 280.4Mb, Firefox ...785.1Mb. I use each, more or less equally but for different purposes and have very few extensions

Which version of Opera are you running?

Opera 25.0, the best I can have with the 10.6.8 Snow Leopard OS I use.

And this, of course, raises another point. We do not know which machine the OP is using. Their profile just says iMac with 10.11.3. It could just as well be my old machine which can be upgraded to that OS if I wanted ... but I don't. And my maximum RAM is 6Gb.

What I am saying is when answering questions here it is always as well to check the machine background wherever you can, otherwise you can be writing guidance that may not apply. If the OP doesn't specify, then ask them.

seventy one wrote:

What I am saying is when answering questions here it is always as well to check the machine background wherever you can, otherwise you can be writing guidance that may not apply. If the OP doesn't specify, then ask them.

Very true. The OP just asked if it runs well on 10.11.3. He didn't say he was having a problem running Chrome.

FWIW, I installed Opera 35 to see what they have been up to. It does use quite a bit more memory than Opera 25 apparently. About what one would expect from a modern browser.

I use Chrome and do not see it using that much Ram. Perhaps it depends on other system parameters. I would say one should try it if one desires and then make their own conclusions.

dialabrain wrote:

JimmyCMPIT wrote:

I can only report my personal experience and those of the users I support in a corporate office.

What I can say is, anecdotal evidence is close to meaningless.

Got anything else?