What is Digg?Sponsored by FUNimation Enertainment
Watch the First 8 Minutes of Evangelion 1.01 Movie -- Anime view!
funimation.com - Available now on DVD. The rebuild of the ground breaking anime Neon Genesis Evangelion.
129 Comments
- yacoutamia, on 10/11/2007, -34/+102Hah! Take that Steve Jobs!
- alakev, on 10/11/2007, -4/+56RTFA, is just a test of how fast gmail loads!!
- gmprunner, on 10/11/2007, -13/+59Is it really accurate to assume that Safari is slowest based on it's performance on some tests that are all about Google? Shouldn't there be more than one website being used for this kind of evaluation?
- alexf, on 10/11/2007, -4/+47Yeah, the guy only tested three web pages-- all from the same web site. You need a more extensive sampling.
And, yes, I hate that guy too, but where is Opera? Not being a fanboy, but since Opera also claims to be the fastest browser, it wouldn't hurt to put them in. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+37Not really that in-depth.. I'd like to see more tests done.
- kinesis8, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30I have a question too. According to Steve, iBench is the standard for benchmarking html rendering speeds. How is the accuracy of iBench compared to the methods used in this article's test?
- Aggaman, on 10/11/2007, -4/+28This is not an accurate test.
Safari does not do well on Gmail, and never has done. I have no idea why this is, but it does not translate to Safari performance in general.
So which tests are we going to take? The iBench tests that are specifically calibrated to get a general sense of speed by downloading from multiple sources, and which aren't controlled by Apple, or the pick of some troll who is trying to make Apple look bad by specifically cherry picking sites where it is known that Safari has problems.
Someone needs to slap this dishonest hack. - glittalogik, on 10/11/2007, -9/+32Ditto - not a wide enough spread of sites, and Opera should have been included as well. Buried as inaccurate.
- epyon180, on 10/11/2007, -25/+48Just a random note, ***** the mighty mouse, that is possibly one of the worst designed pieces of technology I have ever waisted my money on.
- toxicityj, on 10/11/2007, -7/+29I'm going to say this before someone says "its still just beta! give it time!". if its still beta, and its not the fastest browser, then Apple shouldn't be advertising it as the fastest browser around. and they really shouldnt be advertising it as the best browser, because seriously..FF2 is better. Opera is better. IE7 is better.
- christianw, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19firefox sucks ***** on osx
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -14/+31I have noticed a huge number of improvements...
Youtube videos play smooth when running in the background
You can now right click on an image and make it your background...yes finally!
Search within website heavily improved
YTMND loads up and is smooth....same goes for a lot of animated gifs
I am happy with it - ColinCampbell, on 10/11/2007, -9/+26Numbers don't lie, people do. I don't know how accurate either Apple's or Wired's tests are, so I'm just going with my gut feeling as far as browser speed is concerned and using the one I think is fastest.
- richgustavson, on 10/11/2007, -8/+24"Details and a graph of the results after the jump."
SHUT THE ***** UP.
There was no jump; stop using this stupid, useless, and cliche phrase, especially when it's not even needed or applicable. - DigitalDud, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18Well unless you're running OSX in which case Firefox is even slower than its Windows counterpart and looks even less like a native application.
- jskidmore, on 10/11/2007, -5/+202 seconds * 500 page loads * 365 days = about 100 hours.
Would you like to save that much time? I would, and I think most others would too.
(and how are browsers going to improve if you don't do these benchmarks...) - HigherLogic, on 10/11/2007, -6/+20It always amazes me that Opera gets left out of tests, and when they are included, it's not in every single one like the others. I've only seen a couple benchmark tests that inlcuded a good number of browsers and versions in the sampling.
See, this is the ***** that bothers me:
"Firefox may be getting bloated, but it's still the fastest Windows browser, particularly for running Google web applications."
It's the fastest Windows browser compared to what, ***** IE and Safari, who JUST joined this lineup?! Please. - iNunchuk, on 10/11/2007, -11/+23According to the Popularity meter API on Digg, this story is supposed to become popular. Digg me down if it does.
- Niten, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Same here. Safari, on either my Mac or on Windows, is much faster rendering Digg pages with massive numbers of comments than anything else I've tried. And I really trust iBench's results much more than these limited, seemingly arbitrary tests.
I don't generally use Safari myself (I'm heavily addicted to Firefox's extensions), but one thing Safari 3 truly has over the competition is speed. - baddog121390, on 10/11/2007, -10/+21Where is Opera on those benchmarks?
- thatsmyaibo, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14@linked
Did you even read it? It wasn't much of a comprehensive test. They tested Gmail on all the browsers and I'm guessing you made an assertion based on the title and description. Get the facts before you blow your useless steam. The people who dugg you up are no better. - danakin, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15You simply can't claim "It's beta" and hide behind that as an excuse anymore. It really doesn't fly once it is PUBLIC beta, because it is expected that the public use it for general use.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I'm not sure that it's fair that they only tested using Google web applications, not any others, such as ones from microsoft or yahoo.. but interesting nonetheless.
BTW, did it really take them 15 seconds to load Gmail?? It usually takes me no longer than 5 seconds.. - Jammerdelray, on 10/11/2007, -6/+14I disagree...Using Both Firefox 2 and IE 7, Safari 3 was blazing fast.
- HigherLogic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Wrong. Opera passes the Acid2 test as well...but you probably won't see that on any comparison charts from Fx or Safari, it wouldn't prove their point very well. Best to just leave it off like it doesn't exist.
- armbar, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8@mingistech:
Why use a slow, crappy product just because a lot of other people do? - catwh0re, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7This test is botched. Depending which browser you use the google website will provide different functionality and design. (Hint Firefox gets the best speeds out of them all because google is optimised for firefox above all browsers.)
I'd stick with the accepted web bench marking software for results, and not a home-brew test on a few pages from one particular company.
You could sit around all day and customise tests to show any browser being faster than another- IE is probably the quickest on microsoft.com. Safari is probably the fastest browser for apple.com etc.
We could craft webpages to show any result we liked.
The point here is the web benchmarking software, which everyone uses for comparative benchmarking, shows Safari to be the fastest. P.S Webkit is pretty lightweight and fast, based on kHTML it too is an open source project like mozilla. - AJay85, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10Buried as inaccurate. Title should say "Wired News Benchmarks Show Safari 3 is Slower than IE 7, Firefox _when loading Gmail and Gcal_"
Also, there was no Opera comparison and the volatility of download times not taken into consideration.
I'm sure many will blind-Digg, many will not read the article critically, and this will make the front-page Most Popular, just like the "Leopard looks like... Vista" article. Wheee!
Full disclosure: I love my Mac. - dharh, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Too limited a test, using Safari's worst web pages. It did not even include Opera. It needs a whole host of test page results before i'd consider it useful.
- k4zz4m, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7Screw the article man. I have had first hand experience. My desktop which has core 2 duo, and 4GB memory, and yet its loading slower than dialup. Where as my laptop, core duo, 2GB ram is fast as hell, exactly what Steve Jobs said it would be. So, it all depends on your hardware, it is in beta, and therefore, I think its just minor bug fix will do it.
But in the end, firefox is still my favourite cause of the addons and all. But Safari is 2nd. You be the judge, dont take some gay mofos blog. - bIuebonics, on 10/11/2007, -24/+30the most amusing bs that came out of jobs' mouth was that safari is the most innovative web browser there is! ... uh... yea, and IE7 was revolutionary when it came out! seriously, jobs could stand on stage and begin urinating and people would happily lap it up.
- DigitalDud, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7The big difference is really the memory footprint, with all those Cocoa libraries Safari gets pretty ridiculous memory usage, it makes Firefox look lean by comparison.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8NEWSFLASH - You can turn off the status bar at the bottom of IE and FF!!
- kalidav, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Smaller is better. Rather annoyed they didn't test Opera though. *sigh*
- DigitalDud, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Not to mention these apps likely have different scripts for each browser.
- armbar, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I use it to see what a link is pointing to before I click it. Besides, it's only around 15px.
- Darcy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I really can't see the point in benchmarking browsers, other than to bring angry fanboy traffic to your site. Anyone who is interested enough to care should just try it for themselves, it takes a couple of minutes to download and install, and they are all free. There's so much bias and FUD on the web when it comes to software, you would have to be an idiot to take 98% of what you read seriously.
- Cink420, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9I wouldn't say I'm sick of it...its new to windows users and it makes sense that that community wants to get in it and mess around with it.
- zephc, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Wow, someone call the Wired writers a Whaaambulance:
- Wired News Benchmarks Show Safari 3 Is Slower Than IE 7, Firefox
- Review: Safari for Windows Offers No Compelling Reason to Switch
- Cocoatech PathFinder 4.7 Trumps Apple's Finder Again
- Apple Tries To Pass Off Web 2.0 As iPhone "Feature"
- Safari For Windows: Six Security Exploits In One Afternoon
- OS X Leopards New Finder: Yawn Inducing
WTF are they QQing over? - DCB360, on 04/11/2008, -15/+19Firefox>Safari
- drjekelmrhyde, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9I'm with you on that this is the second test I seen without Opera being tested
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Steve Jobs always lie when it comes to Mac vs PC. I still remember when he exaggeratedly benchmark IBM chip and Intel with very high result in favor of IBM back in 2001. The tide has turned, now they use intel chips on their Macs. Why? Because they are far superior when it comes to desktop computing.
Look at steve now, bragging about safari being at least 50% faster than any browser available like Firefox/IE7. - armbar, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4No amount of screen real estate is worth a Goatse. Just keep that in mind during your Intarweb travels.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5That's what Mozilla's Camino is for right? http://www.caminobrowser.org/
(I don't really know how good it is, I don't personally own a mac) - donveto, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4and the speed prize goes to .... *drumroll*
Opera ... *aplause*
Proof Here:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html - rdrr, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Just to be fair... Don't trust any numbers that come from the company that makes the product. Look for independent benchmarks.
- HappyScrappy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4----DATELINE----
Company skews benchmark to favor what they sell.
Film at 11. - smhill, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I agree. I tried it right away and the side by side the speed was much faster than IE and faster, but not by much on FF. I tried a couple of big digg pages and google mail and CNN. All were faster.
Sure, it crashed, and was buggy, but it was faster on my quick tests. Maybe the wired tests go deeper, it might be that Safari starts displaying the page quick, but still still take the same time or more to fully load, but especially with the big digg page, Safari appeared to pop it open almost instantly and IE took twice as long at least. It wasn't a cache thing either, It was the first time I visited Digg in Safari. If anything IE should have had some of it cached. - rblinne, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Not only is this just gmail sites but also these particular pages have completely different javascript executed for IE vs. FF vs. Safari. Thus, a truly apple to oranges comparison. Speaking of gmail, at least with this version Safari can now do rich-text editing in gmail and we can access the Writely pages. Apple was slow in keeping up with the Webkit updates so Safari for Windows was the best thing that ever happened for Safari for Mac.
- Zamyatin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Agreed, Buried as inaccurate. Testing on google-only Ajax implementations is just bad testing. I'm amazed WIRED even printed this. It's well known that quite a few of Google's apps have had problems on Safari support (Google Docs, Gtalk, come to mind), and have been admitted by Google to be problems on their end. Testing on sites that heavily implement a number of Google Apps on safari, it should not be a surprise Safari rendered these pages slower. Go do some real testing. A number of reports of XP users have stated that, while ugly because Safari does not follow typical Windows UI themes, Safari appears to at least "feel" faster, and can be supported by industry-standard tests to actually be faster.
I'm not saying Safari is the end-all-be-all for windows, but considering this is the first shot beta to get Safari on Windows, doesn't seem like *that* bad a rollout.
Anyway, anyone who bothered to read and think about the way WIRED's test was performed should have figured out that the way they performed that test was just plain stupid. -
Show 51 - 100 of 130 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is