Why Does Web Browsing STILL S*CK On the Mac?

dstranathandstranathan
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Web browsing (IE, and Netscape) have always been slower than the PC version. I used to blame the apps, then I blamed OS 9. But in X, its obvoius that web browsers are WAY slower than the Windows versions. STILL. Where's that "UNIX-is-better-and-NEXT-basically-invented-the-web" performance that I waited years for?



Can somebody please explain to me why this is?



Surfing the Web is one of the most common Mac and PC tasks. Its ubiquitious. Everyone does it. Why does the Mac do it slower?



Pages 'snap' quickly on the PC, and drag on the Mac. Web-based Java and JavaScript both seem to lag on the Mac as well. Loading images in Mac browsers seem to take forever, yet the Mac is "the best consumer graphics computer"...



...Scratching my head and looking at those Dell computer ads on TV.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 54
    graphitemangraphiteman Posts: 428member
    Have you tried iCab <http://www.icab.de>? It's much faster.
  • Reply 2 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    Have you tried the Mach-O builds of Mozilla?

    They're much faster to render pages than Omniweb, Netscape, and especially IE.
  • Reply 3 of 54
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>Have you tried the Mach-O builds of Mozilla?

    They're much faster to render pages than Omniweb, Netscape, and especially IE.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    [conspiracy theory]

    You know, I'm convinced that the Mach-O builds of Mozilla don't actually exist and are some attempt by those who think that they are l33t to make the rest of use search the web in vain for a build. Someone is tracking the number of google searches for Mach-O Mozilla and laughing.



    I've figured you out: Mach-O really is Macho and it's your way of feeling manly. So there.

    [/conspiracy theory]



    Actually, a link to a build would be nice. Thx.
  • Reply 4 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    It's something you generally have to build yourself- however, OrangeCream in the Mac forum at ArsTechnica throws his builds up onto his iDisk on a fairly regular basis.





    Chimera seems to beat the crap out of any PC or Mac browser, right now, too...
  • Reply 5 of 54
    spartspart Posts: 2,060member
    [quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:

    <strong>It's something you generally have to build yourself- however, OrangeCream in the Mac forum at ArsTechnica throws his builds up onto his iDisk on a fairly regular basis.





    Chimera seems to beat the crap out of any PC or Mac browser, right now, too...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    What is his iDisk SN?
  • Reply 6 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by torifile:

    <strong>Actually, a link to a build would be nice. Thx. </strong><hr></blockquote>Dude, that was funny.



    Here ya go:

    <a href="http://homepage.mac.com/risc_abacus/"; target="_blank">http://homepage.mac.com/risc_abacus/</a>;



    Also, do realize that Chimera uses the same engine as Mach-O; so, you could compare CFM Mozilla and the other browsers to Chimera even if you couldn't get the Mach-O Mozilla.



    [ 03-29-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
  • Reply 7 of 54
    corvettecorvette Posts: 561member
    When is chimera 0.2 going to be posted. It's been a while now.
  • Reply 8 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    "when it's ready"



    They want everything (namely, plugins and quartz) to work properly before releasing 0.2. I'm going to try to pull the CVS later tonight and see if I can compile that they've got so far. It'll take me a while, though, because I need to pull and build a fresh copy of Fizilla first.
  • Reply 9 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    Whoa. :cool:

    &lt;/Keanu&gt;



    Well, I just finished building Fizilla and "Navigator 0.2.0" and I can certainly see why they haven't released it yet. The app *looks* really nice and has a gorgeous splash screen and about box, but stability in the browser is shot all to hell and it's got wild bugs everywhere. There's still no plugin support, no CoreGraphics antialiasing, no download manager, and no contextual menus. They've set up the basics for some preferences panes and improved the sidebar a bit, but that's about all the improvements I can see. Of course, I just now pulled my code from the CVS and used (mostly) the standard build options, but these guys probably have all sorts of custom options when they compile and have extra code that hasn't made public.



    Hrmm. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />



    FYI, all the code and compiled object files and binaries together for this project total 856 MB. The last time I built the full Mozilla, it took about 1.5 GB.



    [ 03-29-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
  • Reply 10 of 54
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Starfleet, you ****ing bastard, that link [edit]almost[/edit] cost me a powerpoint presentation.







    "Malicious code is funny!" -



    [ 03-29-2002: Message edited by: groverat ]</p>
  • Reply 11 of 54
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    [quote]Originally posted by groverat:

    <strong>Starfleet, you ****ing bastard, that link [edit]almost[/edit] cost me a powerpoint presentation.







    "Malicious code is funny!" -

    [ 03-29-2002: Message edited by: groverat ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Heh, I just thought omniweb was blowing up again. I didn't even get it. Damn wolfpack, totally screw my NCAA bracket by beating MSU and then starfleet does this



    [ 03-29-2002: Message edited by: torifile ]</p>
  • Reply 12 of 54
    dstranathandstranathan Posts: 1,717member
    Please reread my inital post guys.



    I don't care which app is the best on the Mac, I want to discuss the PC VS the Mac in terms of web browser "snappiness"



    And any way, most consumers who sit down in fron of a Mac for general use



    1) will surf the web.



    2) will use IE or Netscape.



    Those people can tell that the Mac is slower when surfing the web. I know this because I talk to novice users who tell me they think Macs are 'slow' when hitting sites like eBay, etc.



    I am concerned that Macs wont sell well if they cant get a faster "web experience"
  • Reply 13 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    Heehee, I'm glad you guys liked my "browser capabilities test page"... don't blame me; blame your browser for not properly handling the code! [quote]Originally posted by dstranathan:

    <strong>I don't care which app is the best on the Mac, I want to discuss the PC VS the Mac in terms of web browser "snappiness"</strong><hr></blockquote>Gee. How do you expect us to discuss "snappiness" without discussing which app handles the web best? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> [quote]<strong>And any way, most consumers who sit down in fron of a Mac for general use



    1) will surf the web.



    2) will use IE or Netscape.</strong><hr></blockquote>True, many people stick with default software (IE) and never think to replace it. However, if you're going to make an argument about browsing generally "sucking" on the Mac, you can't simply ignore the better browsers. If said Mac users are competent enough to check any Mac news sites regularly, they're sure to stumble upon Omniweb or Mozilla eventually.



    Also, OmniWeb and Mozilla are the only two browsers actively being developed; Microsoft's updates to IE are laughable! Mozilla is about to hit 1.0.0 and OmniWeb 4.1 is, well, in perpetual sneakypeek mode. Both are becoming excellent browsers (don't forget Netscape is based on Mozilla) and may one day replace IE is the default browser.



    Besides, if someone ONLY wants their computer for fast and snappy internet surfing, they probably are better off with a PC. Honestly. It's not the speed of web browsing that makes the Mac a great platform; it's the other great software such as the iApps and various Mac-only programs. It's how Mac apps interact with each other and interface with the user.



    [ 03-30-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
  • Reply 14 of 54
    patchoulipatchouli Posts: 402member
    I agree. Web browsing is just not as fast as it is on my PC (which is old). It's what I do most while on a computer and the 'user experience' on the Mac is just not a good one.



    I also don't understand why so many people knock IE for OS X. So far I have used Netscape, OmniWeb, and Opera and IE is the most stable (has not bombed yet) and fastest browser yet. I certainly wouldn't make a judgment call due to the name attached to it.



    Netscape has always been a horror (buggy, slow, lags, long launch time), Omniweb is a cool browser, but it is buggy and has bombed out a few times (and I hate that it loads the entire page to cache before it displays it and it also takes too long to startup). Opera is pretty stable, but just too slow to render pages.



    IE (in my experience and to my surprise) has been the one I seem to go back to. There are plenty of things I don't like about this browser - but it works faster, launches quickly and is more stable which is something the others don't do (yet).



    I will check out the others that you guys mentioned. I think it's pretty sad that we have to try 4 and 5 browsers to see which works best. Apple needs to incorporate their own into the OS maybe. I am sure the DoJ will not care.



    [ 03-30-2002: Message edited by: Patchouli ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 54
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by Patchouli:

    <strong>



    I also don't understand why so many people knock IE for OS X. So far I have used Netscape, OmniWeb, and Opera and IE is the most stable (has not bombed yet) and fastest browser yet. I certainly wouldn't make a judgment call due to the name attached to it.



    Netscape has always been a horror (buggy, slow, lags, long launch time), Omniweb is a cool browser, but it is buggy and has bombed out a few times (and I hate that it loads the entire page to cache before it displays it and it also takes too long to startup). Opera is pretty stable, but just too slow to render pages.



    IE (in my experience and to my surprise) has been the one I seem to go back to. There are plenty of things I don't like about this browser - but it works faster, launches quickly and is more stable which is something the others don't do (yet).



    I will check out the others that you guys mentioned. I think it's pretty sad that we have to try 4 and 5 browsers to see which works best. Apple needs to incorporate their own into the OS maybe. I am sure the DoJ will not care.



    [ 03-30-2002: Message edited by: Patchouli ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I agree. I still use IE as my main browser. I like OmniWeb, but I really don't see what everyone likes so much about it (besides its looks). The only other brower for OS X I like is Mozilla, but for some reason I still use IE the majority of the time.
  • Reply 16 of 54
    corvettecorvette Posts: 561member
    I don't understand why Mozilla does not come in just the navigator form. I don't want it as a huge 35mb package with all the other apps that come built in. I just need the web browser portion. What is all this other crap? The email thing is horrible, so is the web editor.



    Damn you mozilla!
  • Reply 17 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by corvette:

    <strong>I don't understand why Mozilla does not come in just the navigator form.</strong><hr></blockquote>Netscape may release Navigator alone, but the Mozilla project works to get *everything* ported. I'm sure if you build it yourself, there's are switches you can put in at compile to make the browser only.



    Besides, if you don't like the other parts, just don't use them. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
  • Reply 18 of 54
    artman @_@artman @_@ Posts: 2,546member
    [quote]Originally posted by dstranathan:

    <strong>Pages 'snap' quickly on the PC, and drag on the Mac. Web-based Java and JavaScript both seem to lag on the Mac as well. Loading images in Mac browsers seem to take forever, yet the Mac is "the best consumer graphics computer"...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Pages (after loading) "snap" back fast in IE on OS 9.2.2 and in OS X for me. I have had some Windoze friends who were surprised about this. I am also still on a dial-up 56 kb modem. Pages load pretty good in my opinion.



    Another point that should be made are that many web sites are still designed and programmed on Windozes computers and software. Many companies don't or won't design/program/test their sites for Macs. I have worked for only one company that did. Another company told me "F*ck Macs"...



    Then there are the sites with:

    1. Half MB Flash intros.

    2. Bad Java or too much Java programming.

    3. Horrible color and image optimization.

    4. Untested (uninvited!) sites for Macs.

    4. Cold Fusion or ASP garbage.

    5. IDIOTS who have absolutely unnecessary pop-up windows or resize my browser!

    6. Poor CSS or even HTML.



    The Web to me has become a vast waste of talent and code honestly...But IE is still my browser of choice. All the others are still catching up. When a final build for Mozilla, Omniweb, iCab and others are available then recommend them...I ain't touching them now.
  • Reply 19 of 54
    imacfpimacfp Posts: 750member
    Once I'm on-line I find that most pages load fast given that I have 56K. The problem though is getting on line. There is a lot of problems with OS X and Internet Connect. AOL sucks and Earthlink is not far behind.
  • Reply 20 of 54
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by Spart:

    <strong>



    What is his iDisk SN?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    <a href="http://homepage.mac.com/sillyoldbear/FileSharing5.html"; target="_blank">http://homepage.mac.com/sillyoldbear/FileSharing5.html</a>;
Sign In or Register to comment.