Are you saying this benchmark is indicative of general slowness issues? On the basis of what do you say this?
-- Mark
Mark,
Like I said, it's indicative of the "snapiness" of IE versus other browsers on the same machine. I've noticed, unscientifically but visually on Windows machines, that IE often loads web pages much faster that NS. Certainly, the large stream of text in this script, which we are debating, appears to point to an advantage of IE/Windows over ???/Mac. Have you ever noticed that IE loads up much faster than Netscape or Mozilla on Windows? What do you attribute such a feat to? How much of IE is already in memory as part of the OS? Anyway, from my personal assessments, I don't see this "benchmark script" as alterning my appreciation of the Macintosh platform over Wintel.
Software optimization is software optimization. Nothing prevents it from flying along. Certainly, nothing at all prevents Apple from taking OS code and optimizing it specifically for their platform.
True. But how much is Apple willing to spend to do that? In the end, how much will really be gained in browsing websites for the average user? I'd rather see Apple put that time and money to optimizing the crap out of Java! There's much more to gain there for enterprise apps IMO.
True. But how much is Apple willing to spend to do that? In the end, how much will really be gained in browsing websites for the average user? I'd rather see Apple put that time and money to optimizing the crap out of Java! There's much more to gain there for enterprise apps IMO.
It's not an either/or decision. Apple is big enough to give both projects full attention, and that seems to be what they're doing. Their Java implementation has already won a lot of admirers, James Gosling not least among them.
As for IE: Since it's been "integrated into the operating system" the whole of IE is loaded at startup (which probably means that its launch time is part of the time you spend staring at a desktop that you can't interact with yet). When you "launch" IE you're just launching a window, basically. If you use Mozilla's Quick Launch feature on Windows, that does basically the same thing: Loads Gecko into memory and keeps it there, so that when you "launch" Mozilla you really only have to launch the interface.
MS doubtless optimized the heck out of IE's code. That's probably why IE is one big monolithic DLL - because everything's commingled, for really high speed. I wouldn't be shocked to find some of the support code in the kernel.
If you use Mozilla's Quick Launch feature on Windows, that does basically the same thing: Loads Gecko into memory and keeps it there, so that when you "launch" Mozilla you really only have to launch the interface.
So, that's the same as having in OS X an application open (loaded in memory) and simply ask for a new window?
QS Dual-1ghz, 1.5gb RAM, 10.2.6: (open apps: terminal, the browsers below, bbedit, fetch, msn messanger, along with 20 or so bbedit docs in the menu bar -- all told, around 10% CPU usage prior to test).
Mozilla 1.4 14395
IE 5.2.2 65489
Safari 1 (V85) 11418
Camino 0.7 9116
Firebird 0.6 10953
Dell 867 mhz, 256 ram, XP (no other apps open)
Mozilla 1.4b 12469
IE 6.0.26 7484 #
# IE kept crashing. 2 restarts before it finally worked.
Comments
Originally posted by mark_wilkins
Are you saying this benchmark is indicative of general slowness issues? On the basis of what do you say this?
-- Mark
Mark,
Like I said, it's indicative of the "snapiness" of IE versus other browsers on the same machine. I've noticed, unscientifically but visually on Windows machines, that IE often loads web pages much faster that NS. Certainly, the large stream of text in this script, which we are debating, appears to point to an advantage of IE/Windows over ???/Mac. Have you ever noticed that IE loads up much faster than Netscape or Mozilla on Windows? What do you attribute such a feat to? How much of IE is already in memory as part of the OS? Anyway, from my personal assessments, I don't see this "benchmark script" as alterning my appreciation of the Macintosh platform over Wintel.
Originally posted by Amorph
Software optimization is software optimization. Nothing prevents it from flying along. Certainly, nothing at all prevents Apple from taking OS code and optimizing it specifically for their platform.
True. But how much is Apple willing to spend to do that? In the end, how much will really be gained in browsing websites for the average user? I'd rather see Apple put that time and money to optimizing the crap out of Java! There's much more to gain there for enterprise apps IMO.
-- Mark
Originally posted by Addison
Why are the PC's beating the pants of our Macs. the difference cannot be explained by pure MHZ?
true:
366 mhz PII sony vaio laptop.
18447
Pc's are just faster on the web...
Originally posted by DVD_Junkie
True. But how much is Apple willing to spend to do that? In the end, how much will really be gained in browsing websites for the average user? I'd rather see Apple put that time and money to optimizing the crap out of Java! There's much more to gain there for enterprise apps IMO.
It's not an either/or decision. Apple is big enough to give both projects full attention, and that seems to be what they're doing. Their Java implementation has already won a lot of admirers, James Gosling not least among them.
As for IE: Since it's been "integrated into the operating system" the whole of IE is loaded at startup (which probably means that its launch time is part of the time you spend staring at a desktop that you can't interact with yet). When you "launch" IE you're just launching a window, basically. If you use Mozilla's Quick Launch feature on Windows, that does basically the same thing: Loads Gecko into memory and keeps it there, so that when you "launch" Mozilla you really only have to launch the interface.
MS doubtless optimized the heck out of IE's code. That's probably why IE is one big monolithic DLL - because everything's commingled, for really high speed. I wouldn't be shocked to find some of the support code in the kernel.
Safari on a G4 Cube. I did have iTunes playing at the same time, though.
Originally posted by Amorph
If you use Mozilla's Quick Launch feature on Windows, that does basically the same thing: Loads Gecko into memory and keeps it there, so that when you "launch" Mozilla you really only have to launch the interface.
So, that's the same as having in OS X an application open (loaded in memory) and simply ask for a new window?
Power Mac G5 @ 1.8 GHz and 1.5 MB ram
Safari 1.0 (v85.5)
6143
Same as above with iTunes and mail running
Mozilla 1.4 14395
IE 5.2.2 65489
Safari 1 (V85) 11418
Camino 0.7 9116
Firebird 0.6 10953
Dell 867 mhz, 256 ram, XP (no other apps open)
Mozilla 1.4b 12469
IE 6.0.26 7484 #
# IE kept crashing. 2 restarts before it finally worked.
36500 in internet explorer
1.8 w/ 1gb ram & Raptor 10k boot drive
11196 IE6 700Mhz Celeron 256mb W2K
10682 IE6 550Mhz Pentium 256mb W2K
4677 Dual P4 2.2 1GBmem IE6 W2K
4550 Dual P4 2.8 1GBmem IE6 W2K
3614 Dual Xeon 3.06 2GBmem IE6 W2K
174849 G3 300Mhz IE5
53497 as above but Safari
41118 XServer Dual 1.3 2GBMem X.2 IE6
7595 same as above but Safari
So my $400 el cheapo 700Mhz Celeron beats every f**kin thing.
Spent $30000 on the Dual Xeon. Stupid really!
BIG difference in Safari and IE on Mac.
Why is this?
Dobby.
Originally posted by dobby
BIG difference in Safari and IE on Mac.
Why is this?
Cuz apple wrote safari so it's obviously gonna work better with their hardware and osx. And MS is poo
Anyone done a before and after the new version of Java?
Yep. QS Dual 1GHz, 1 GB RAM, no open apps accept for Safari:
Before: 10350
After: 10393
It actually works slower!