Chromium on Ubuntu 10.04 Slower than Firefox?
I finally tried my ISP's DNS servers and that seemed to take hold, though I don't know why. It shouldn't make a difference but I've been surfing from my Lucid Lynx VM for two days now without a hitch. That leads me to my second problem. |
|
|
Comments (13)
firefox: browser appeared in 7 seconds, home page loaded and ready to go in 13 seconds chrome: browser appeared in 2 seconds, home page loaded and ready to go in 4 seconds.
That tells me a lot more than some poster's subjective "I think firefox felt faster to me"
Quoting:The elephant in this particular room is the fact that the writer was running Ubuntu in a VMYes, I remember thinking that - if he can't duplicate it on a real linux machine, I'd chalk it up to the constraints of a weird environment.
Viewing YouTube took exactly the same CPU as Firefox, so that's not a winner.
But maps.google.com always, ALWAYS choked for me, be it Konqueror, Iceweasel/Firefox. But in Chrome, at last, the maps and things spring into being.
So I'll keep it for that application.
But if I'm not doing that specific set of tasks, I'm using Chromium more and more. It behaves a bit better than Epiphany, which is also based on Webkit.
Opera 10.60 seems to be faster than all. This benchmark probably don't mean much: http://clients.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/results.action?key... , but from my usage it seem to be true.
I still would like NoScript and Cookie Monster, but I enable javascript and cookies per site. One thing that is true though Opera backward compatibility such as for Widows98 and Linux powerpc allow good browsing experience for older computer.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post
