What is Digg?301 Comments
- tippmann1, on 10/11/2007, -18/+304does this surprise anyone? have you opened up iTunes on windows lately? ever notice how long it takes from the time that you click the icon to the time it actually opens up?
- MoeB, on 10/11/2007, -57/+256Isn't safari a beta? Why don't you use a nightly build of firefox 3 to compare them.
- eazhar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+113Mirror:
http://canuq.com/digg/466da2e7adac5.jpg - GeneralGore, on 10/11/2007, -8/+107@tippmann1
I usually click the icon before I go to bed and then hope that it will be open by the time I wake up. - Blue_Eon, on 10/11/2007, -9/+107"does this surprise anyone? have you opened up iTunes on windows lately? ever notice how long it takes from the time that you click the icon to the time it actually opens up?"
It's horrendous. I am almost even scared to update iTunes anymore for fear of it taking even longer to open.
Anyway, I noticed that Safari was taking 3 times memory as much as Firefox when I d/led the beta today. - elvenseven, on 10/11/2007, -21/+87"Safari 3. The world's best browser. Now Windows too." and the Mac vs PC advertising are just a little overboard and desperate.
- Nick5309, on 10/11/2007, -21/+81LOL, nice background. And yeah, i agree. For me,
Safari.exe 163k
Firefox.exe 8k
= - geminitojanus, on 10/11/2007, -4/+58If you think these apps are leaking memory you have no idea what a memory leak is.
What happens when you leak memory is that the application allocates the space, and then loses reference to it. We've got exceptional tools to check for memory leaks, and WebKit is heavily profiled and checked for leaks and regressions in rendering (and most of this is automated; just run a script).
These web browsers are _NOT_ leaking memory. They're keeping it. The more caching they do, the faster they are. The tradeoff is exacty memory size to speed. CPUs are so fast these days they can render something completely in microseconds, but if the system can't fetch the images from disk or the network any faster, then you've absolutely maxxed out the speed of web browsing.
WebKit has come _damn close_ to that limitation, by caching every last thing it possibly can into memory. When optimizing, speed is the _absolute_ most important element in WebKit development, damn the memory usage, because people have more memory than they're actually using (so much so that kernels start caching the hard drive in RAM because, well, there's nothing better to do with it). If you want a browser you can configure, choose Firefox, you've got all kinds of access to its internals and how it uses the memory and the hard disk. If you want the fastest browser that's widely available, Safari/WebKit is it. It's always a tradeoff (and personally, I'm willing to have a slow browser if I can get rid of the terrible popups, screaming, blinking, dancing advertisements). - wxpbofh, on 10/11/2007, -25/+75Me on Vista Ultimate;
Safari, 1 tab open (Apple start page) after browsing around new apple site a bit = 316 MB RAM in use.
Firefox, 6 tabs open, 6 extensions installed, been open for 6 days and used quite heavily = 130 MB RAM in use.
Conclusion: I'll stick with FireFox. - awhiteflame, on 10/11/2007, -3/+51Jesus! Didn't expect that. Went from 101 MB to 1 MB.
- geminitojanus, on 10/11/2007, -4/+51"How does [Safari] render pages so blazingly fast? how come IE and FF havent figured that out already?"
They have, they just have certain limitations. WebKit is so fast because of the way it uses memory, and because the critical section through the code is _exceptionally_ fast; the code is under almost constant hand-holding, and absolutely _no_ regressions are tolerated. They're practically nazis about how crucial speed is to them, damn all other metrics (which means memory caching is an absolute _must_ for absolutely everything).
Firefox 3 is damn fast in the same way Safari is because of the same optimizations along the critical section, and replacement of the rendering backend to use the fastest one available on whichever platform you're on.
IE is the "integrated" choice for Windows. Firefox is the open-source, al-a-carte browser, configure it exactly how you want. Safari/WebKit is the speed demon. They all play their part. - iFlop, on 10/11/2007, -3/+47See what happens to memory usage if you minimize the window.
- dontbejack, on 10/11/2007, -2/+42Exceeded bandwidth. Yay.
- geminitojanus, on 10/11/2007, -7/+43Imagine that, swapping out when you minimize the app.
I wonder what other browsers can do that:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Config.trim_on_minimize - shawnanigans, on 10/11/2007, -11/+46@MoeB
Ya, because a nightly build should be as stable as a public beta. - rudy23, on 10/11/2007, -10/+45Heres my question.
How does i render pages so blazingly fast? how come IE and FF havent figured that out already?
My digg comments pages load mad fast. forum sites which used to take forever come up wiwithin minute.
In fact I havent used any other browser since i downloaded this beta. - writedawg, on 10/11/2007, -10/+45mmmm... smooth fonts are pretty.
- rudy23, on 10/11/2007, -12/+43exactly. who cares how much memory it takes up as long as the end user experience is smooth like butter.
- Casedot, on 10/11/2007, -12/+39Opera is way faster than safari on my computer (Vista business)
- drjones78, on 10/11/2007, -6/+33- Close all apps on your machine.
- Open up a bunch of safari tabs and windows.
- Open up the processes tab under the task manager.
- Look at all that memory Safari is using!
- Minimize Safari
- Launch all the most memory hungry apps you can find, the more the better
- Maximize Safari
Notice anything different?
Safari will allocate more memory for itself, if nothing else is sharing the RAM. Open up all sorts of applications that may be memory hogs themselves, and Safari will be much more forgiving on your RAM.
Biggest non-story ever. I will still use my Firefox, as nice and snappy as Safari is, I need my extensions, I've become dependant on them, and it will take a lot to make me switch browsers, even though I have no love or loyalty to Firefox. - Raian, on 10/11/2007, -7/+29Okay so what gives.... Most of us have an ample amount of ram, yet we don't want any application to use it? I have 2GB of Ram on my computer-- I'd guess the norm is at about 1GB, maybe that's presumptuous-- I'm sure that Safari or most other apps will use the ram as needed if it is available, we all know that Safari doesn't need 200MB to run, but will use it if available.
This is much more of a psychological thing than anything-- everyone bitching, just get over it-- welcome to the future. - steelmaverick, on 10/11/2007, -3/+25So...not only is the server down, but duggmirror ITSELF is down. Great.
- drjones78, on 10/11/2007, -8/+29Good lord guys.. there is a story about this?
You have RAM for a reason... So far safari seems to be very well behaved with your memory. Yea, it will take a good chunk, but it will give it back should your system need it. You all remind me of the people who run 'top' in linux and complain that all their ram is eaten up while the system is idle. Its called pre-caching... load as much crap as you possibly can into memory.. you can dump it if you need to, or the computer can use it to get something done faster. Using lots of ram doesnt automatically mean bad programming. - pinkSocks, on 10/11/2007, -3/+20Yes. My Firefox is currently at 249 Mb, and it's pretty standard.
- TheADOGuy, on 10/11/2007, -12/+28Nice...I love that the Apple guys are saying "But its Beta...you can't compare them"...but they hammered on every MS beta release as if it was a finished product. All I want from the Apple-Fanboys is equal treatment. Complain when it sucks and exhault when its great. That's what most of the MS guys do.
- Decon89, on 10/11/2007, -3/+16It's pretty crazy indeed. I didn't want to take a screenshot at the time where it used 200mb because I had browsed with it for an hour, but then again, it was pretty light browsing.
- canuq, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15mirror:
http://canuq.com/digg/466da2e7adac5.jpg - bradleyland, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15@geminitojanus
You're wasting your breath. No one wants to hear about memory caching or how RAM is cheap. They want to scream about "memory leaks" when they have no ***** clue what they're on about. You were at zero when I got here, now you're at one. Let's hope that enough sane people digg your post to keep you above board, because what you say is not only true, it makes sense. - pnrl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Apple is unfair to Opera lately. Opera has been working hard on their innovations and Apple just ignores it.
First they claim that iPhone has the only real web browser. Well, Opera Mobile supports CSS2, JS+DOM+AJAX and latest WinMobile betas even support Flash and tabbed browsing!
Jobs also claimed that they're first to enable watching "YouTube from your sofa", while Opera Wii does that for quite some time now.
and now the dubious claim of fastest browser. Safari on a Mac is faster than Opera, but mainly because Safari is optimized for OS X and Opera is not. On Windows roles are reversed. - chamblah, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12good thing it's a beta app and not a final release with a huge documented memory leak that has survived 3 name changes.
- TenebrousX, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14"Do you never use opera tabs? Opera for me 17 Tabs, 438 Megabytes, Safari, 23 Tabs, 187 MB."
Ok, you caught me, I'm a big liar. With 17 tabs open, I use a whopping 85 MB!
http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/6246/lieslg3.png - geoken, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16I have to agree. If you look up browser benches that aren't supplied by Apple, you'll almost always see Opera ahead of the other browsers.
- Lawr, on 10/11/2007, -4/+14definitely. 290MB is the highest I've seen for Firefox, but the difference is even though Safari broke the 300MB mark earlier tonight, it was still running like I had just opened a fresh copy, where as Firefox at 200MB+ is just begging to be closed and restarted.
- thekms, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13My Firefox with some 10 or 15 extensions uses 70K on idle; Safari uses 30K. No idea why you guys are getting that kind of problems...
- WhereAmI, on 10/11/2007, -7/+16@assezdefromage (#7135914)
How long have you had it open?
And do those tabs involve porn? - hifiDesign, on 10/11/2007, -10/+19For one, it IS a beta, and two, isn't FF/win afflicted with the same memory leak problem we have on macs? On my work G5, FF can easily get up to 200mb with multiple tabs open after an hour or so.
- ricodued, on 10/11/2007, -4/+12@mygrayarea (#7136218)
Agreed. On my 1.13Ghz Celeron laptop, it definitely "feels" a lot faster than Firefox, but it still likes to crash. A lot.
The text rendering is beautiful though. Almost compelling enough to get me to switch. Almost. - Caiman, on 10/11/2007, -5/+13I cant seem to load your page in safari. ***** ***** browser. Oh, I cant seem to load it in Firefox, or IE, or Opera either. ***** bandwidth exceeded!
- YKKonMyZipper, on 10/11/2007, -7/+15Never thought any one would want Safari on Windows in the first place. Most apple software sucks for windows, it always has. Thats why I own a Mac >_> not that it is my only reason
- cubed2d, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Normaly in programming speed comes as a trade off for ram useage, possibly why its so fat at the moment? they got the speed increases at the expence of bad memory management? probly take a while to clean up but they can probly optimise the memory useage later.
- Theipolicy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+13Yup, "Exceeded Bandwidth" sure does prove it.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10It's worth pointing out that this is, in all fairness, beta. Wouldn't it make more sense to wait until a final version to make these kinds of decisions?
- hifiDesign, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7@myfanwy: Googling "firefox memory leak" seems to yield more discussions about an actual problem (and hacks on how to fix it) than it does debunking the memory leak "myth". Furthermore, when I leave two tabs open and the memory usage increases exponentially despite my not browsing anything, that is not what I would define as caching. That's a memory leak, or for those who prefer the proper terminology, it's a ***** PROBLEM.
I like what this guy has so say about your caching "feature": http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=177439&cid=14721749
I use FF every day and love it; wasn't trying to prove Safari better than FF or vice versa. I was trying to illustrate why people shouldn't bitch so early in the game—the app has been out a day. - 360modena, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6@riverbelow
"I really don't care "what people are buying" or songs similar to my song I'm listening too or even other albums by this band. I'm pretty sure there's no option to turn it off either, and it also takes up a lot of window room."
Are you referring to the mini-store in the bottom on the library browser window? This can be turned off in OS X iTunes with shift--M or by going to View>>Show/Hide MiniStore. I'm sure the Windows version has a similar menu selection. In addition, you can turn off the grey arrows next to songs in Preferences>>General>>Show links to store (uncheck). - RAiNsTorm, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9It is damn beta software that has been out for like 6 hours. This is the problem, morons that can't understand the concept of BETA software. "but OMGWTFBBQSAUCE I want ALL of my plug-ins and themes and have it do my laundry 2 hours after the first beta release!!11!!1"
Stupidity +1 - CeeAyy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7OK, let me get this right; If I get a fast car I should expect it to run on a small amount of gas at any speed? Browsers cache pages to display them faster which means more memory usage. Isn't that basic information that we should all know? If my BMW uses more gasoline than my Prius, I shouldn't use my BMW even though it is much faster? Is the most important thing for a browser to use the least amount of memory or to browse quickly?
- Tsen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I agree with cbtf.
This is still a beta release, and it's pretty damned fast--just looks like they might have a few memory leaks to take care of, and perhaps trim down the caching in their code. Other than that, I'm VERY happy with it--Digg loads easily three or four times faster. Other pages the differences aren't as great, but they're still noticeable. - hypercrypt, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8It clears out the memory though. I had quite a few tabs open, including the Safari on Windows comments, a few hundred MB where used, but after leaving it for a while and watching a QuickTime movie for 15 minutes the memory usage as down to 9MB. Who cares if the browser uses a lot of RAM, as long as it is fast and does not leak too much (which FF and IE love to do, Safari 2 leaked quite a bit too over time, not sure about this version though)
- Giever, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Does anyone know if you can get this kind of font smoothing throughout the rest of Windows? All I know of is Cleartype.
- alwaysmc2, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9"exactly. who cares how much memory it takes up as long as the end user experience is smooth like butter."
Generally speaking, if a program takes up too much ram it could bough down the whole system. i.e., there *is* a point where a program should be a bit more efficient. -
Show 51 - 100 of 302 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is ![[PIC] Safari: A fat browser ain't a fast browser!](http://www.2and2.net/files/466da2e7adac5.jpg){kind=link}
