What is Digg?197 Comments
- stefilini, on 06/13/2008, -10/+137Loser --- IE7
- skaspud, on 06/13/2008, -3/+93Startup time—Winner: Opera
JavaScript & CSS—Winner: Safari
Memory use—Winner: Firefox 3 - nakile, on 06/13/2008, -2/+84So it's basically telling me that "Anything is fine, except IE." I could believe it.
- ericcire, on 06/13/2008, -1/+50IE had the lowest TTFI (time to first infection).
- AgmLauncher, on 06/13/2008, -3/+51Too bad they didn't do a test to see how much CPU power was being consumed by the browsers. Go look at Safari's CPU usage when idling, and the when scrolling up and down while it renders text. It's a scary, scary number. I have an Athlon 64 3200+, and safari uses as much as 50% of my CPU power while I'm scrolling up and down a page.
I found it physically impossible to use applications like Photoshop while Safari was open, thanks to that CPU power nonsense (and I have 3 gigs of RAM in case anyone is wondering)
Why? Thanks to that silly text "sharpening" it tries to do (which actually just makes text blurry). Safari is actually very laggy to use, and thanks to Firefox's extensions, has like 1/20th the functionality of FF3. I would take Safari over IE7, but I sure as hell would take Opera or FF over Safari. - Bauer22, on 06/13/2008, -7/+49I think what people should learn from this is stop using Internet Explorer. Just because its already on your PC doesnt mean its better.
- rcFz, on 06/13/2008, -6/+45Opera did suprisingly well. If it didn't overall win, it came in second. LONG LIVE OPERA.
- idavidtang, on 06/13/2008, -1/+37Winning last place.
- Hebug, on 06/13/2008, -10/+44Opera beats Firefox in everything except memory usage. Sad that despite Opera being as efficient if not more so than Firefox, it receives such little love.
Go Opera! - chadisawesome, on 06/13/2008, -1/+34did anyone else see: "Safari for Windows 3.1.1" and think they missed "for workgroups" at the end?
- Ploppyplop, on 06/13/2008, -1/+32Hatred.
- seanmx, on 06/13/2008, -1/+28a kick in the pants
- stutimandal, on 06/13/2008, -1/+23Anyone has to be a real optimist to test IE for performance.
- Radan, on 06/13/2008, -1/+22Winning is for winners only, which IE clearly isn't. IE is the little whiny kid no one liked, but everyone had to be nice to because he was related to the principal.
- alpha88, on 06/13/2008, -3/+24Oh wow IE. Oh. Wow. Couldn't you at least try?
- inactive, on 06/13/2008, -20/+40Opera is kind of like Kirsten Dunst. Its ok but there's just something not right about it
- NathanCH, on 06/13/2008, -4/+22Good test. HOWEVER. They should have tested the 3 browsers on OSX too. (No need to test IE7, I mean, cmon)
- mrblaack, on 06/13/2008, -12/+30I've been a skeptic of Safari for awhile but I tried it other day on a friends computer and I was surprised at how well it performed. It was fast and it has a nice clean design interface. It's come along way.
- Anpheus, on 06/13/2008, -2/+18Measuring CSS display in Safari is hard because certain Javascript events don't occur at the right time.
Source: http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/safaribenchmarks.html
Quote: "In Safari, it seems onload fires before the page has been displayed, before layout has been calculated, before any costly reflows have taken place. It fires before images have completed decoding (this can also happen in rare cases in Opera, but Safari seems to do it everywhere), meaning that a substantial part of the load time is not included (note that this bug is marked as fixed in their bug tracking system, and the fix could turn up in a future release, but is not yet available publically). So basically, onload is not trustworthy in Safari for checking page loading times." - UberNick, on 06/13/2008, -3/+18Aww, but what did IE win?
- Matteos, on 06/13/2008, -0/+15Gonorrhea will do that too. Maybe you should see a doctor?
- cesclaveria, on 06/13/2008, -1/+14it did pretty well, but I would not call it surprising, the opera dev team has always worked very hard.
if it wasn't for firebug I would not bu using Firefox (although, opera has some new dev tools that are looking really nice) - WiZZLa, on 06/13/2008, -1/+13http://operawiki.info/OperaAdblock
http://www.fanboy.co.nz/adblock/ - HigherLogic, on 06/13/2008, -2/+13Don't forget that Opera beats Firefox in CSS3 (by a long shot), Acid3, and support of HTML5.
- BootsElectric, on 06/13/2008, -1/+12To the disdain of Tech wieners everywhere, market share.
- clockdist, on 06/13/2008, -1/+11I only use Safari on the iPhone /sarcasm
But seriously, Opera 9.5 is suprisingly fast and renders more sites better than previous versions. - HigherLogic, on 06/13/2008, -2/+12It has built-in ad blocking :-/
- KloroFormd, on 06/13/2008, -1/+11No need for benchmarks to come up with that idea. Just basic HTML/CSS knowledge.
- Terr01, on 06/13/2008, -2/+12The Real WTF is Google Docs and Spreadsheets, not Opera.
- Maver1c, on 06/13/2008, -2/+12they do..
- virtualball, on 06/13/2008, -2/+12A place in hell.
- inactive, on 06/14/2008, -1/+10They didn't use Firefox 2 in this test. Firefox 3 (Release Candidate 3) was the one they used. Pass the joint then try reading the article again.
- Mootabolife, on 06/13/2008, -8/+17The same can be said of Windows.
- nakile, on 06/13/2008, -1/+10I'm on Leopard here, so my results might be different...
Safari 3.1.1 CPU usage @ Idle: 0 - 1.2
Safari 3.1.1 CPU usage when scrolling a page: 12.5 - 25.6
Firefox RC3 CPU usage @ Idle: 1.1 - 2.9
Firefox RC3 CPU usage when scrolling a page: 21.2 - 31.6
When it comes to it, they both are crappy in this aspect. But why Firefox needs CPU time to idle is beyond me. It's also worth mentioning that Firefox was a little more sporadic, at times it would just to 41 or so when at idle for no apparent reason. Still, that's nothing compared to how it uses only 80MB of RAM compared to Safari's 140MB on the exact same page. So I guess it depends on what's more important to you, CPU power or RAM availability.
I could go on all day... - Coded1, on 06/13/2008, -0/+9...I dont feel the need to install a hundred different apps on my browser myself since the web does this for me!
Fixed that for you ;) - NathanCH, on 06/13/2008, -4/+13Do you honestly think that'll change anything?
- Terr01, on 06/13/2008, -0/+8I'd like to know what happens with more than eight tabs. I'm more of a "16-32 tab guy".
- BootsElectric, on 06/13/2008, -1/+9Why do people need to assert this everywhere? He didn't even say whether his friend's computer was a Mac or not.
- StammesOpfer, on 06/13/2008, -0/+8I had to read it like 6 times then realized it was the safari version number not the reviewer trying to do all this on a highly outdated OS but yes I was right there with you on that one.
- Tenoq, on 06/14/2008, -0/+8The 'proof' can be found by launching Windows Explorer, estvir. Oh what's that? It looks like a browser? :p
Most of IE is based in the DLLs in system32 - and they run when you boot. i.e, preloaded. :p - valkyries, on 06/13/2008, -1/+9Microsoft = still rich as hell
- BlueSkyfish, on 06/14/2008, -0/+8Your processor and RAM are more than enough to be able to run Firefox fine. You must have a ***** of spyware running in the background.
- skadd, on 06/14/2008, -1/+9Opera has adblock..
My favorite filter:
http://my.opera.com/Tamil/blog/ad-block - Ramble, on 06/13/2008, -0/+8Silverlight beta 2 works on Opera (I believe).
- Raptor007, on 06/13/2008, -0/+7I'm glad to see all the browsers getting faster. Firefox 2 and Opera 9.2 were both very sluggish, and now Firefox 3 and Opera 9.5 are much faster while still gaining new functionality. (Safari's always been pretty snappy, but I don't feel like it has enough customization features.)
I'm glad they included IE for completeness, but really speed is the least of IE's problems... - lynx44, on 06/13/2008, -0/+7I totally agree, that didn't make sense to me. I never use IE outside of website development, but they're comparing all the new browsers, but for some reason don't use IE8? I don't expect much, if anything, out of it but I don't buy the typical IE bashing arguments. Whether it be better or worse, I want to see the difference when compared to its competitors.
- subxero37, on 06/13/2008, -1/+8I think the tests could've been done much better, but they do show the essence of what he was trying to show: to a human being, which one is the best performer? Easy answer: stop using IE, and you'll notice a big difference. And pages will look nicer.
- Radan, on 06/13/2008, -1/+8They could compare it to the WINE port of IE. Oh, the feeling you get when it takes three seconds to just render the UI when you reload a page. It makes me all tingly inside of all the joy of using a version of IE that is even worse than the original.
Sigh, what won't a man do to insure his webpage works for 60% of the population? - FLarsen, on 06/14/2008, -0/+7Opera has both spell checking and adblock.
- ep53, on 06/14/2008, -0/+7But seriously though, in every day practical terms, who really notices (or is willing to change browsers) if their browser take 1/10 of a second longer to boot up, I'm more interested in practicality and ease of use/ functions. Heck, even if it takes 2 WHOLE seconds longer I'm not really too bothered. Its not like a type a search at the exact same speed every time.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 198 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is