thumbs up!
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tuxchick Oct 22, 2009 4:15 PM EDT |
You nailed it, Steven. I don't need to watch zombie movies to get a good scare anymore, I look at the page sources. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 22, 2009 5:40 PM EDT |
I have a CSS file on one of my sites that prints out at more than 50 pages (and I did print it out for some unknown reason). |
| caitlyn Oct 22, 2009 5:58 PM EDT |
Yep, Steven, you nailed it. A couple of other browsers you may want to try which may give ou better results: Arora (WebKit based) Kazehakase (Gecko+WebKit) Midori (Webkit) ...and, of course, Konqueror. I think you'll find these to be a little less resource intensive. I was very impressed with hv3 for a lighter browser that supported Javascript (not Flash) but development seems to have stalled. |
| Steven_Rosenber Oct 22, 2009 10:25 PM EDT |
One thing I'm noticing but can't quite quantify: It seems that in Javascript-intensive situations, Firefox does better than other Gecko-based browsers. Is the Javascript-rendering engine separate from the main Gecko engine? But the rest of FF pretty much makes it a wash ... |
| henke54 Oct 23, 2009 2:20 PM EDT |
Talking about 'thumbs up' -> http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/23/linus-torvalds-gives-wind... ;-P |
| techiem2 Oct 23, 2009 2:44 PM EDT |
I believe the js engine is fairly specific to the browser itself. An interesting benchmark to run is the SunSpider benchmark on the webkit site. http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider.html I used it as one of my tests a while back when I had to do browser benchmarks for class. I'll have to try it with the current batch of Linux browser I have installed sometime... The results were rather interesting. Versions Tested (all in Windows...blegh) Google Chrome - 1.0.154.53 Opera - 9.64 Internet Explorer - 7.0.5730.13 Mozilla Firefox - 3.0.8 Arora - 0.6 SunSpider times: * Google Chrome - 3572.8ms +/- 4.5% * Opera - 12315.6ms +/- 5.1% * Internet Eplorer - 105645.2ms +/- 0.7% * Mozilla Firefox - 6646.0ms +/- 10.9% * Arora - 7180.0ms +/- 5.3% The interesting this is that IE's horrible score was mainly due to the Base64 and Input Validation String Tests. If you care to look at my fancy page (lol): http://fbcdubois.no-ip.org/mmontgomery2browsers.html |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!