It's the speed at which different JS scripts completed. If you test them in different browsers you can see how fast different browser engines and their varying versions can render JavaScript within a webpage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotek2001
Safari already has a 'restore session' option and it's been there since 3.0
Thanks, though I don't think the eye rolling emoticon is called for.
PS: I opened some pages and killed app with Activity Monitor. It does not all the tabs I had opened at teh end of the last season correctly
Quote:
Originally Posted by webhead
Does safari have a zoom tool? That would be a nice feature, I'll check out firefox just for that feature alone.
It's a feature of the WebKit engine that came after Safari 3.1. But it's in the Safari 4 beta which you can DL for free from Apple with a free ADC membership or by DLing WebKit. Though you have to enable it via Terminal with the command: defaults write com.apple.Safari WebKitDebugFullPageZoomPreferenceKey 1
I use Firefox for some finicky sites that don't like Safari, but on my 2.0 G5, I never know what the cursor keys are going to do. When I use the down arrow, I'm plunged to the end of the document instead of scrolling down a line at a time.
I'd hoped that Firefox 3 would cure that, but nope.
I haven't noticed any difference between the 3.0 final and the RCs on either my Vista PC or Mac, but it's still better than Safari IMO. Other than having a fast page rendering engine, I've been never able to warm up to Safari that much, and FF3 is so much better at dealing with large amounts of bookmarks, extensions can be very useful at times, and it doesn't suffer from certain websites that don't seem to want to load.
FF3 seems good to me, it's a massive improvement over FF2.0 on the Mac which was horrible.
It's great to have a full Firefox that looks this good on the Mac because it can run the FF extensions like Firebug. Very useful to web developers.
I can't understand all the talk of instability with Safari, anyone who gets that many crashes must be surfing some pretty hardcore sites. Safari works flawlessly for me 99% of the time. The only problem I've had is the cryptic error message when a site drops the connection on me, like Facebook seems to do a lot.
I doubt FF3 will be able to match Safari in JS performance longer term.
i've been using it all day and i think i'm going to make the switch. it seems to run faster on my computer without any hiccups that i've been getting with safari.
It's the speed at which different JS scripts completed. If you test them in different browsers you can see how fast different browser engines and their varying versions can render JavaScript within a webpage.
yes, i figured that but tell me how to read the data. i put in both for the comparison mode, so how do i know which is better?
Steve Jobs seems to be guilty of the same misunderstanding of mathematics as the folks from Mozilla: 3 times faster does not mean the same thing as 3 times as fast. Three times faster would be FOUR times as fast, which is a more impressive way to state the same thing. Precisely because Mozilla chose to say 3.0 is 3 times faster instead of saying it is 4 times as fast, my bet is that they really mean it is 3 times as fast. Steve Jobs likes to make very similar statements of improvements in processor speed: how many times faster a new machine is rather than how many times as fast, so it is likely he is making the same mistake. If you don't get the difference, think of the meaning of 100% as fast versus 100% faster or 50% as fast versus 50% faster.
yes, i figured that but tell me how to read the data. i put in both for the comparison mode, so how do i know which is better?
The shorter time in milliseconds is the better browser engine for JS. You only need to do the side-by-side comparison is for seeing the performance of each individual test. Unless you write JS you only need the overall time for comparison.
Ok, got FF3, been using it for the pass few hours...
Pros: noticeably faster, interface looks more mac like (this can go both ways i guess)
Cons: Spell check not working with mac's dictionary (needs to d/l add-on), scrolling speed seems to have increased on my mac, but slowed way down on the PC.
I can't understand all the talk of instability with Safari, anyone who gets that many crashes must be surfing some pretty hardcore sites. Safari works flawlessly for me 99% of the time.
In my experience, it seems to be related to Flash, and as such, may not even be entirely Apple's fault. (We've already been reading about issues with Adobe's Mac plug-in.)
But yes, I am a Safari user, and yes, I have had frequent crashes with Safari in the recent past, though I've had very few under the current version, so that's a good thing.
What I don't understand is when certain people (and I'm not referring to you, Parsec, but to others) feel that they can conclusively tell people that there must be "something wrong with your machine" or even imply that they're being dishonest when they report frequent crashes.
Just because one person hasn't had any encounters with bugs in a particular program doesn't mean that they don't exist. They might only kick in under certain circumstances or certain configurations. Maybe certain websites crash Safari while others don't, and it just happens that some people visit those sites and others don't. Who knows. Or maybe it has to do with your preferences, or the number of tabs or windows you typically keep open (I usually have a couple of windows and a bunch of tabs), or the amount of memory in your machine, or who knows what. But a lot of people have had problems in the past with Safari crashes, though for me, at least, things seem to be getting a lot better.
Safari scrolling on a macbook is much smoother than Firefox. It seems the reason for this is because Safari translates a slow two finger slide on the trackpad into small incremental movements of scrolling. Firefox doesn't differentiate making for a more choppy scrolling experience.
Just noticed a huge improvement over previous versions of Firefox. Older versions of FF would throw a huge intrusive pop up in your face if it required you to "remember a pass, never for this site, or not now" . Now instead of a pop up an additional header is pushed down giving you those options and allowing you to continue viewing your destinations site without being intrusive.
I doubt FF3 will be able to match Safari in JS performance longer term.
If I'm not mistaken, FF3 is pretty matched with JS performance with Safari 3.0.4 that was released back in November 2007. The new WebKit builds, which should find it's way into Safari 4, with SquirrelFish and multi-threaded JS parsing (or whatever it is) beats Firefox 3 by quite a bit.
Having purged history and cache I tried again and again. After multiple attempts, I could not contact the server on most after the appointed time. On two, the graphic cited download for 2.0.014. I think, if they wanted to set a record, they should have planned availability from near midnight of the appointed date, along with updates to load page graphics and links, and sufficient robust servers to handle the load: respect for the fact that users' time is valuable, too. No or precious few reloads and retries necessary! Poor, verging upon puerile, planning, folks.
I finally got it downloaded, at 2pm or so MST. It certainly doesn't "feel" as fast as Safari. (I don't have a stopwatch or the technical ability to pump identical tests through the browsers to give you cycles, load times, types of pages, all that. I'm no true geek. I just know what I feel.)
One thing I notice right off the bat, though, is this: I use a Google Personalized Home Page ("iGoogle"). Upon going to my gmail, then returning to the home page, I find that many of the gadgets are unable to refresh their contents: they contain "Information not currently available." This condition persists in spite of page reload, clicking the "home" button, clearing cache, etc. This symptom DOES NOT occur in Safari (nor does it occur in Opera!)
I do websites. I'll keep using Firefox for cross-browser testing and for a couple other things it does uniquely well via its add-ons. But I think, my browser of habit on the Mac will be Safari. (On my Windows machines, I suppose, it'll be a different story.)
After playing around with Firefox for a while this evening, I decided to run some of my own in-house tests. So far I'm barely leaning towards Safari over Firefox, but as you can see, the results are pretty even: [linky]
After playing around with Firefox for a while this evening, I decided to run some of my own in-house tests. So far I'm barely leaning towards Safari over Firefox, but as you can see, the results are pretty even: [linky]
FF3 loads Apple.com faster than Safari 3
PS: What are using to time the page loads?
Quote:
Originally Posted by perryskeath
Using an iMac 2GHz Intel Core Duo with 2GB RAM:
Safari 3.1.1 had a score of 4.3273 seconds (4327.3 msec)
Firefox 2.0.0.14 had a score of 15.9500 seconds (3 to 4 times slower than Safari3)
Firefox 3 had a score of 3.9954 seconds (just slightly faster than Safari 3, almost exactly 4 times faster than Firefox 2)
You should check FF3 and Safari 4. Both are a big improvement over the previous version.
Comments
can you tell me what the hell i'm looking at.
It's the speed at which different JS scripts completed. If you test them in different browsers you can see how fast different browser engines and their varying versions can render JavaScript within a webpage.
Safari already has a 'restore session' option and it's been there since 3.0
Thanks, though I don't think the eye rolling emoticon is called for.
PS: I opened some pages and killed app with Activity Monitor. It does not all the tabs I had opened at teh end of the last season correctly
Does safari have a zoom tool? That would be a nice feature, I'll check out firefox just for that feature alone.
It's a feature of the WebKit engine that came after Safari 3.1. But it's in the Safari 4 beta which you can DL for free from Apple with a free ADC membership or by DLing WebKit. Though you have to enable it via Terminal with the command: defaults write com.apple.Safari WebKitDebugFullPageZoomPreferenceKey 1It's a preferable method than zooming the Mac's display
I'd hoped that Firefox 3 would cure that, but nope.
It's great to have a full Firefox that looks this good on the Mac because it can run the FF extensions like Firebug. Very useful to web developers.
I can't understand all the talk of instability with Safari, anyone who gets that many crashes must be surfing some pretty hardcore sites. Safari works flawlessly for me 99% of the time. The only problem I've had is the cryptic error message when a site drops the connection on me, like Facebook seems to do a lot.
I doubt FF3 will be able to match Safari in JS performance longer term.
It's the speed at which different JS scripts completed. If you test them in different browsers you can see how fast different browser engines and their varying versions can render JavaScript within a webpage.
yes, i figured that but tell me how to read the data. i put in both for the comparison mode, so how do i know which is better?
yes, i figured that but tell me how to read the data. i put in both for the comparison mode, so how do i know which is better?
The shorter time in milliseconds is the better browser engine for JS. You only need to do the side-by-side comparison is for seeing the performance of each individual test. Unless you write JS you only need the overall time for comparison.
Pros: noticeably faster, interface looks more mac like (this can go both ways i guess)
Cons: Spell check not working with mac's dictionary (needs to d/l add-on), scrolling speed seems to have increased on my mac, but slowed way down on the PC.
I can't understand all the talk of instability with Safari, anyone who gets that many crashes must be surfing some pretty hardcore sites. Safari works flawlessly for me 99% of the time.
In my experience, it seems to be related to Flash, and as such, may not even be entirely Apple's fault. (We've already been reading about issues with Adobe's Mac plug-in.)
But yes, I am a Safari user, and yes, I have had frequent crashes with Safari in the recent past, though I've had very few under the current version, so that's a good thing.
What I don't understand is when certain people (and I'm not referring to you, Parsec, but to others) feel that they can conclusively tell people that there must be "something wrong with your machine" or even imply that they're being dishonest when they report frequent crashes.
Just because one person hasn't had any encounters with bugs in a particular program doesn't mean that they don't exist. They might only kick in under certain circumstances or certain configurations. Maybe certain websites crash Safari while others don't, and it just happens that some people visit those sites and others don't. Who knows. Or maybe it has to do with your preferences, or the number of tabs or windows you typically keep open (I usually have a couple of windows and a bunch of tabs), or the amount of memory in your machine, or who knows what. But a lot of people have had problems in the past with Safari crashes, though for me, at least, things seem to be getting a lot better.
Safari scrolling on a macbook is much smoother than Firefox. It seems the reason for this is because Safari translates a slow two finger slide on the trackpad into small incremental movements of scrolling. Firefox doesn't differentiate making for a more choppy scrolling experience.
Just noticed a huge improvement over previous versions of Firefox. Older versions of FF would throw a huge intrusive pop up in your face if it required you to "remember a pass, never for this site, or not now" . Now instead of a pop up an additional header is pushed down giving you those options and allowing you to continue viewing your destinations site without being intrusive.
I doubt FF3 will be able to match Safari in JS performance longer term.
If I'm not mistaken, FF3 is pretty matched with JS performance with Safari 3.0.4 that was released back in November 2007. The new WebKit builds, which should find it's way into Safari 4, with SquirrelFish and multi-threaded JS parsing (or whatever it is) beats Firefox 3 by quite a bit.
I finally got it downloaded, at 2pm or so MST. It certainly doesn't "feel" as fast as Safari. (I don't have a stopwatch or the technical ability to pump identical tests through the browsers to give you cycles, load times, types of pages, all that. I'm no true geek. I just know what I feel.)
One thing I notice right off the bat, though, is this: I use a Google Personalized Home Page ("iGoogle"). Upon going to my gmail, then returning to the home page, I find that many of the gadgets are unable to refresh their contents: they contain "Information not currently available." This condition persists in spite of page reload, clicking the "home" button, clearing cache, etc. This symptom DOES NOT occur in Safari (nor does it occur in Opera!)
I do websites. I'll keep using Firefox for cross-browser testing and for a couple other things it does uniquely well via its add-ons. But I think, my browser of habit on the Mac will be Safari. (On my Windows machines, I suppose, it'll be a different story.)
After playing around with Firefox for a while this evening, I decided to run some of my own in-house tests. So far I'm barely leaning towards Safari over Firefox, but as you can see, the results are pretty even: [linky]
Safari 3.1.1 had a score of 4.3273 seconds (4327.3 msec)
Firefox 2.0.0.14 had a score of 15.9500 seconds (3 to 4 times slower than Safari3)
Firefox 3 had a score of 3.9954 seconds (just slightly faster than Safari 3, almost exactly 4 times faster than Firefox 2)
Hey guys,
After playing around with Firefox for a while this evening, I decided to run some of my own in-house tests. So far I'm barely leaning towards Safari over Firefox, but as you can see, the results are pretty even: [linky]
PS: What are using to time the page loads?
Using an iMac 2GHz Intel Core Duo with 2GB RAM:
Safari 3.1.1 had a score of 4.3273 seconds (4327.3 msec)
Firefox 2.0.0.14 had a score of 15.9500 seconds (3 to 4 times slower than Safari3)
Firefox 3 had a score of 3.9954 seconds (just slightly faster than Safari 3, almost exactly 4 times faster than Firefox 2)
You should check FF3 and Safari 4. Both are a big improvement over the previous version.
edit: Either you added FF3 or I didn't see it.