I wanted to revisit my Aside Browser review after using it as a near-main browser for about two weeks. At first I saw it as just “a browser with AI attached.” After keeping it open for real work, the impression changed. It does not feel like an immediate full replacement for Chrome. It feels more like a browser that reduces the annoying work around GitHub, documentation, dashboards, and research notes.
From a developer’s point of view, the question was not only “is the AI good at answering?” It was whether the browser could recover the context behind many open tabs, help summarize GitHub and official docs, and separate browser-side evidence from code-side work.
My current verdict is simple: I am not deleting Chrome. But I am likely to keep Aside for GitHub triage, technical reading, source collection, and logged-in browser checks.
Related Posts
- Aside AI Browser Review: You’re My Web Task Runner Now
- After GitHub Copilot’s Billing Change, Where Do Claude Code, Codex, and Cursor Fit?
- Agent Memory and Context Graphs: Could This Actually Work Inside a Company?
Summary
- Aside Browser felt most useful for source collection, GitHub checks, and logged-in web work rather than casual browsing.
- Chrome is still the safest default for compatibility, extensions, and everyday stability.
- Arc Browser is stronger when the main problem is organizing tabs and workspaces through Spaces, Profiles, and Split View.
- Dia Browser feels more AI-native around work context such as Slack, Notion, Calendar, and GSuite.
- Aside’s best fit for developers is collecting browser-side context that coding agents do not handle well.
In this article
Why I tried Aside instead of Chrome
Chrome is familiar, but tabs eventually become a pile of unfinished work. GitHub issues, PRs, official docs, blog drafts, Search Console, WordPress admin pages, and AI-tool pricing pages can all sit open at the same time. The real problem is not the number of tabs. It is remembering why I opened them.
That is where Aside became interesting. Its homepage describes it as a browser built for “real work” across websites, accounts, and history. After two weeks, that description made more sense to me. Aside is less like an answer box and more like an agent that can organize browser work beside me.
Compared with Chrome
Chrome is still the practical default. Extensions, compatibility, login reliability, and developer tools make it hard to replace overnight. For payments, company accounts, and workflows that depend on a specific extension, Chrome still feels safer.
But Chrome does not explain the context behind the mess I created. Tab groups and bookmarks help, but reconnecting a PR, a release note, and an official document is still human work. Aside’s advantage was visible exactly there.
| Area | Chrome | Aside Browser |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline stability | Very high | Still needs long-term checking |
| Extension ecosystem | Strong | Familiar if Chrome-based, but still needs validation |
| Tab/work context | User organizes it manually | AI help fits more naturally |
| GitHub/docs summaries | Usually needs a separate AI tool | Works inside the browser flow |
| Security confidence | Familiar and conservative | Convenient, but policy checks matter |
Memory use and perceived performance
I would not say Aside is simply lighter or heavier than Chrome. Browser memory depends heavily on tab types, extensions, video, developer tools, and logged-in web apps. Ten tabs can feel very different depending on whether they include GitHub, Notion, Figma, or YouTube.
In my use, keeping Aside open for a long time with AI work attached did not feel like a tiny helper process. But as a second browser dedicated to research and organization, the tradeoff made sense. For a fair comparison, I would open the same URL set in Chrome and Aside, wait about 10 minutes, then compare the total browser-process memory in Activity Monitor.
Measurement note: empty tab, 10 GitHub/doc tabs, 10 tabs with video, and 10 minutes after AI work should be measured separately. “Ten tabs” alone is not a useful AI-browser benchmark.
Tabs and work context
If you have used Arc, your standards for tab management may already be higher. Arc tries to reshape browser habits with Spaces, Profiles, Split View, and a calmer workspace model.
Aside feels different. It is less about designing a beautiful workspace and more about using open tabs and history as work material. For developers, browser tabs are not just pages. They are context: GitHub issues, PRs, official docs, error searches, and drafts. Passing that context to AI is where Aside becomes useful.
Using it for GitHub cleanup
GitHub was the place where Aside made the most sense. README files, issues, pull requests, releases, and discussions can become too much to scan manually. Even if a coding agent understands the repository, collecting the PR page, CI link, release note, and external docs from the browser is a separate job.
Aside for Developers describes this gap clearly: let coding agents handle code changes, and let Aside gather browser evidence such as CI pages, private dashboards, staging screenshots, log links, and screenshots. That matches real development work.
- Understanding a repository from its README and recent releases
- Extracting the remaining issue from a long thread
- Putting PR notes, CI failures, and relevant docs into one packet
- Collecting GitHub and official-doc evidence for a blog post
I still would not trust a summary blindly. Code intent, security impact, and performance impact need repository context and tests. Aside is safer as an evidence collector, not as the final judge.
How often I used the AI features
I did not use AI on every page. For short news or simple searches, I often just used normal browsing. But for long documents, GitHub pages, pricing pages, technical blogs, and multi-candidate comparisons, I reached for it much more often.
| Situation | Usefulness | Feeling |
|---|---|---|
| Long official docs | High | Good for finding key points and changes |
| GitHub README/issues | High | Faster first-pass understanding |
| Product/service comparison | Medium to high | Useful for tables; final judgment stays human |
| General search | Low to medium | Chrome search is often enough |
| Code editing | Low | Claude Code or Codex fits better |
Compared with Arc and Dia
Arc and Dia both come from The Browser Company’s broader browser direction. Arc’s page emphasizes Spaces, Profiles, Split View, and a calmer internet experience. It also currently points users toward Dia for active security patches and enterprise-grade protection, which feels like a sign that the center of gravity is moving to Dia.
Dia is more explicitly AI-native. Its homepage emphasizes Morning Brief, reading across Slack, Notion, Calendar, GSuite, and turning scattered context into answers or reports. In that sense, Dia feels like a browser for work context, while Aside feels like an agent for executing and documenting web tasks inside logged-in browser state.
| Browser | Main impression | Best fit |
|---|---|---|
| Chrome | Stable default | Compatibility, extensions, familiar browsing |
| Arc Browser | Workspace and tab organization | People who want Spaces/Profiles to separate work and personal contexts |
| Dia Browser | AI-native work-context browser | People with lots of Slack, Notion, Calendar, and GSuite context |
| Aside Browser | Logged-in web work and browser evidence | Developers/researchers handling GitHub, dashboards, docs, pricing pages, and source collection |
AI browser competition
The AI browser race is no longer just about attaching answers to a search box. Chrome owns stability. Arc owns workspace feel. Dia leans into workplace context. Aside leans into browser-task execution and evidence capture.
For me, the realistic answer is not choosing only one. Chrome remains the default browser. Claude Code and Codex handle code. Aside handles GitHub research, browser evidence, and source collection. Arc or Dia may fit better if you want to change the entire browser workspace.
Pros and cons
What I liked
- It is useful for summarizing long GitHub pages, official docs, and pricing pages.
- It fits logged-in dashboards, CI links, and browser surfaces that normal AI chat handles poorly.
- It separates roles nicely: code in Codex/Claude Code, browser evidence in Aside.
- It can help my blog workflow by keeping source URLs, dates, and changed claims closer to the work.
What I did not like as much
- It does not immediately replace Chrome’s stability and extension ecosystem.
- AI summaries are convenient but dangerous if treated as final judgment for issues or PRs.
- Memory use and AI cost need to be watched during long sessions.
- Company work, private repositories, and admin pages require security-policy checks first.
- If you only browse casually, the advantage may not feel large.
Will I keep using it?
I will keep using Aside Browser for now, but not by replacing Chrome completely. Chrome remains my stable default. Aside is more likely to stay as my browser for GitHub cleanup, technical reading, blog research, and logged-in web checks.
For an AI browser to matter, it needs to finish one annoying browser task I would otherwise postpone. Aside gave me a fairly direct answer to that. It is less a Chrome replacement and more a practical AI assistant for the browser work around development.
References
- Aside official homepage
- Aside for Developers
- Aside for Researchers
- Aside Memory
- Arc from The Browser Company
- Dia Browser official website
- The Browser Company