Friday, August 06, 2010

Browser Comparison: What's the Most Pixel-Friendly Browser? [Web Browsers]

Source: http://lifehacker.com/5605440/browser-comparison-whats-the-most-pixel+friendly-browser

Browser Comparison: What's the Most Pixel-Friendly Browser?Firefox 4 Beta is out with a revamped UI, Google Chrome continues to gain popularity, and Opera has a slick new version. Let's take a look at which browser uses your screen the best without wasting space.

Note: You can do all kinds of tweaking in browsers like Firefox to maximize its viewing area. If you just want slim browser out of the box, this is what you've got to choose from.

For this comparison, we used the latest version of each browser: Firefox 4.0 Beta 2, Safari 5, Chrome 6.0 dev, Opera 10.60, and IE 8. (Even though the platform preview for IE9 is out, it doesn't have usable window chrome yet, so it wouldn't be fair to include it.)

To keep everything consistent, we made sure that the bookmarks bar was hidden, and left the rest of the settings as default. The only major difference otherwise is that Internet Explorer, Opera, and Firefox have status bars by default, but Chrome and Safari do not—though it's worth noting that Google Chrome shows a status bar at the bottom when you move your mouse over a link. We could have disabled the status bar in Internet Explorer, but then you lose the ability to highlight a link to see the source.

Firefox users will be quick to point out that you can maximize your viewing space with a few quick tweaks, and there's no question that the customization abilities built into Firefox can yield a browser configuration that's tweaked for a small screen, but for the purposes of this comparison we used the default configuration—not to mention that many add-ons aren't working for Firefox 4 yet.

Regular Browser Winner: Chrome

When it comes to maximizing the pixels on the screen, Google Chrome's simple interface has the edge over everybody else in the default configuration, and even if you hide the status bars on IE, Firefox, or Opera, there's still a big difference in pixels.
Browser Comparison: What's the Most Pixel-Friendly Browser?

Maximized Browser Winner: Chrome

Once you maximize the browsers, the gap between browsers becomes even more clear, with Google Chrome using just a little more than half of the pixels that Internet Explorer does.
Browser Comparison: What's the Most Pixel-Friendly Browser?

Full-Screen Browser Winner: Firefox

In full-screen mode all the browsers maximize to fill 100% of the height of the screen, but the clear winners are Firefox and Internet Explorer—since you can move your mouse to the top of the screen and the toolbars drop down to make browsing easier. Opera and Google Chrome don't do this, and it's worth noting that Safari doesn't even have a full-screen mode that we could find.
Browser Comparison: What's the Most Pixel-Friendly Browser?

Browsers with Side Tabs Winner: Chrome

Opera and Google Chrome both come with built-in options to move the tabs over to the sidebar. Opera's is enabled by default, and on Chrome you'll have to use a command-line switch to enable it, but vertical tabs are a useful feature that can help maximize your screen space. If you're a Firefox user, you can use the Tree Style Tab extension to move your tabs to the side, though we had some issues in Firefox 4.0—and it's not built in—so we didn't include it here.
Browser Comparison: What's the Most Pixel-Friendly Browser?

It's pretty clear from the numbers that Google Chrome's interface is the best choice out of the box if you're using a smaller display, though if you wanted to spend the time to configure Firefox, you could probably come up with a setup that used even less pixels.


What about you? What browser do you use when you want to make the most of your netbook or smaller laptop screen?


The How-To Geek uses Google Chrome because it never slows down. His geeky articles can be found daily here on Lifehacker, How-To Geek, and Twitter.

Read More...

Pocket Filters Splash Some Color Onto Your Photos [Photography]

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5605677/pocket-filters-splash-some-color-onto-your-photos

Pocket Filters Splash Some Color Onto Your PhotosAre your Facebook photos of the same boring friends standing around drinking beer getting a bit drab? Photojojo's pocket-sized lens and flash color filters should jazz things up, letting you saturate your scenes with one of eight sturdy acrylic chips.

Pocket Filters Splash Some Color Onto Your Photos

The filters can either be placed over either your camera's lens or flash, providing a fully or partially colorized picture, respectively. The flash-only effect is particularly interesting, casting colored light over objects in the foreground only, giving your pictures an otherworldly look.

Pocket Filters Splash Some Color Onto Your Photos

The filters also open up all sorts of color experimentation—want to tint half your shot? Cover half the lens. Or use multiple filters to create beautiful gradients. At only $15 and small enough to fit in your pocket (or on your keychain), Photojojo's filters are an easy way to play with the images you create. [Photojojo via Wired]

Read More...

Android Users Can Now Bump Phones to Send Money Via PayPal [Android Apps]

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5605866/android-users-can-now-bump-phones-to-send-money-via-paypal

Android Users Can Now Bump Phones to Send Money Via PayPalThe PayPal Mobile app for Android has received an update that features bump technology just like its iPhone counterpart. This means that Android users can now simply bump their devices together to send money.

There's also a new feature "which lets you automatically calculate the total cost of a bill and then collect money directly from friends when out to dinner."

The app is free and available on the Android Market now. [PayPal Blog]

Read More...

A Secret TV Panel To Hide Your A/V Skeletons [Secrets]

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5606277/a-secret-tv-panel-to-hide-your-av-skeletons

A Secret TV Panel To Hide Your A/V SkeletonsSome people put safes behind paintings. Me, I just want to put my home entertainment accessories behind a secret wall panel. How hidden is it? Here's what it looks like closed:

A Secret TV Panel To Hide Your A/V SkeletonsForget the Blu-ray player and cables, I'm stashing my valuables slightly less crappy possessions there as well.

Architect Dan Herchenroether put together this sweet set-up to save space in his cottage home:

Dan mounted the TV on a board that he hinged with gas springs so it would be easy to open and close when necessary. Additional space in the compartment is accessible from a panel on the other side of the wall that's totally inconspicuous when closed.

Dan, you're welcome over to my apartment any time. Just please bring a set of tools and some gas springs with you.

UPDATE: Reader Matthew (and several commenters) point out that this would be a major code violation in many areas. So know that before you start knocking down walls. [Apartment Therapy via Lifehacker]

Read More...

Google Says There Are 129,864,880 Different Books In Existence [Books]

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5606342/google-says-there-are-129864880-books-in-existence

Google Says There Are 129,864,880 Different Books In ExistenceGoogle, who's been determinedly digitizing the world's books, thought it might be prudent to figure out just how many books are actually out there to begin with. They made a special algorithm, natch, and came up with 129,864,880.

This post on Inside Google Books blog explains the whole process. First, you have to decide what exactly counts as a book—Google's notion is pretty similar to the set of texts that ISBNs—International Standard Book Numbers—are attributed to.

But ISBN is a relatively new standard, having come around in the 1960s, and a relatively Western one, too, so there's a huge selection of books—old books and foreign books, largely—that don't have ISBNs.

So Google leapfrogged ISBN and pulled down metadata from some 150 sources, including "libraries, WorldCat, national union catalogs and commercial providers," and then eliminated the duplicates. That got them to 600 million records. After eliminating more duplicate holdings, microforms, maps, audio recordings and other assorted non-books, and after adjusting the number to account for serial publications, the number is 129,864,880. Hey, I've read a few of those! [Inside Google Books via CrunchGear]

Image credit Patrick Gage

Read More...