[Spliff]

Okay, this isn't a Windows is better than OS X thread. I'm looking for some answers, not a bitch session.

I come across a lot of articles and forum postings that state that web browsing in Window's OSes is noticeably faster than browsing in OS 9 or OS X. The reason for this, according to the posters, is that IE is built into Windows; it is not so much an application as an extension of the OS.

This sounds like BS to me. Why should that make a difference? Isn't web browsing speed dependent on the efficiency of the network code in an OS and on the html rendering engine of a particular browser?

So, is web browsing faster in Windows? And if so, why does Windows have a technical advantage in this area? What is Apple doing wrong, if anything?

Again, I'm not looking for a flame war or whine session. I want some answers.

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Spliff ]

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by Spliff:
<STRONG> Isn't web browsing speed dependent on the efficiency of the network code in an OS and on the html rendering engine of a particular browser?</STRONG>

Bingo. The HTML rendering is much faster on PC's/

[MacGorilla]

There are so many factors that affect browsing speed. I would have a hard time saying any OS is inherently faster at web browsing. My fatest web browsing experience was using Opera on QNX. Go figure.

[aaroncsmith]

You've just stumbled upon one of many ugly little secrets that Apple and their defenders don't want the world to know.

I don't think that it is solely because of IE's integration into the Windows kernel, either.

I just think that MS has the best programmers money can buy on their payroll, and since 1997 their #1 priority has been to make Windows web browsing second to none. The entire OS, drawing layer routines, network code, etc. is geared toward this one goal.

The other dirty little secret is that mHz does matter. For rendering web pages, I'll take megahertz/memory bandwidth over Altivec any day. So will 95% of the computer-buying market. Fan or no fan. I think this is the real problem.

OS X just exacerbates this problem with Quartz: jerky scrolling, crappy window re-sizing and delayed reaction to button clicks, window swapping, etc.

[moreno]

welcome to the real world....

[Kestral]

Have to agree with Aaron and everyone else here. It's embarassing that my brother's 500 mhz PIII machine upstairs renders web pages much much faster than my 500 mhz iBook. His machine's net connection was acting up recently so he used my iBook for the first time ever to do some web surfing. Without knowing the speed of my machine or any other stats, he complained about how dog slow it was for web surfing (at the time I was booted in OS 9 using the latest version of IE). It's true. Even the Mac apologists can't deny it. It's also frustrating.

Mhz Myth or no Mhz Myth, I don't care if a G3/G4 wins every Photoshop bakeoff by a factor of 10 vs. a PC, (I haven't had Photoshop installed on a Mac since 3 Macs ago in almost 5 years), Macs are failing in key metrics such as perceived system responsiveness, web page browsing/rendering, application loading. I don't know what percentage of people use Photoshop and I don't care. I think it's more important to have faster HTML rendering (since almost everyone surfs the web), better system responsiveness (since almost everyone uses the GUI when using a Mac, with the exception of a low percentage of hard core power users who use the command line interface) and other such real word metrics, as opposed to cushy graphic design job with an Aeron chair, unlimited lattes and hot-rodded double processor RAIDed RAM up to the wazoo metrics.

[Agent69]

I used NT 3.1 on a 486 when it came out and it was very slow. Now, WinXP runs pretty quick on my 1.5Ghz P4. System 7.0.1 on my Powerbook 100 (68000 CPU) was slow but 9.2 is darn fast on my 500Mhz iBook.

In my observation, new operating systems are pretty slow on the CPUs that they are introduced on (though there are exceptions). Not that it helps any of us right now.

Agent69

[haffar]

Yes I agree with you completely about windows being faster. Forget Windows; have you seen the speed differences browsing in OS X vs. OS 9 ? I have a DSL connection, and browsing in OS X is like browsing on a 28k modem (this includes Omniweb and IE). I think Apple needs to take a hard look at optimizing all the operations in OS X.
All these guys who think faster hardware is the answer are wrong. Faster hardware is important, but if the software is lagging behing, it is just a waste.

[sahara]

Personally I don't think it has much to do with hardware. It is amazing how slow OmniWeb is compared to the Mach-O build of Mozilla (don't have link with me). If you have not tried the Mach experimental build, try it. It renders web pages as fast as the Windows machines I've used. And scrolling is like it was on OS 9. No lag whatsoever. Much much faster than the carbon Mozilla. Much much faster than Opera.

(Someone was talking about Mach in another thread. Here is the link: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/n...1.dmg.sit.bin)

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: sahara ]

[foamy]

A few of observations.

1. Browsing on Window with IE is way faster than any browser on any Mac. Using IE on our PII-333 is faster than on an Powermac 867 running any browser... sad, but true.

2. OpenTransport may be one of the problems. Using the macho build of mozilla that Sahara has a link to, rendering is way faster on a fast connection (45Mbs). My understanding is that the macho build uses unix code for the backend (networking) and carbon for the front end (appearance). When compared to the same browser which uses Carbon for both the front and back ends, the difference is noticeable. The only conclusion I can come up with is the networking code is an issue.

3. It's not the hardware. Browsing with NN4.7.x on my *old* PowerMac 7200/90Mhz, was excruciatingly slow (T1 line). The same machine with an older version of LinuxPPC and NN4.7 for Linux... browses like a champ...so much faster it's not even funny. Same thing goes for running NN4.7 via Xwindows connecting to our Sun server.

4. The coding language doesn't matter. C++ browsers like NN, Moz, iCab, etc are all slow in comparison. Omni written in Cocoa is slow. Opera written in C++ and Assembly code (I read that somewhere, don't know if it is true) slow in comparison.

I'd like to hear the opinions of more knowledgeable people.

[dont.wanna.tell]

Salve!

Sorry I did only a small research on this topic and the result is purely on my "felt" responsivness.

So here we go: Normal web-browsing without any "extensions" on macos 9 is (most of the time) dog slow on any way, not only because of the bad rendering time but most of it for the dog slow go back function.

What do I do most of the time? Open new links and going back. ( I think that that is the reason why people are so excited about tabbed browsing in mozilla. Because it makes browsing seem fast, because loading a web page in the background is *much* nicer.

Opera is darn fast on os 9. It also renders the pages pretty nice.
iCab is fast but looks very ugly.
Netscape is ok with rendering, but the go back function.... *uuah*
Mozilla is still bad in almost any department. But its getting better and better.
Netscape 6 *see mozilla*
Explorer: Ok, but from Microsoft. Dont like their attitude.

OS X:
iCab: Fast but verryugly.
Opera: Nice on its way. Looks pretty ugly too.
OmniWeb: Dog slow ui, but: Looks absolutely gorgeus and has a nice and fast go back function. (fast enough for me to take it for its prettyness. )
Mozilla: Pretty bad. Same os os 9. *Netscape too* (Look out for the Mach-0 builds! They should be amazing)
Explorer: Pretty good, locks the ui sometimes but ok.

So this is for normal browsing, in something like osx.macnn.com or this forum.

But thats not all: If I'm going to the web I'm always searching for theese special sites, where there are pretty games *flash*, nice video *rm, avi, quicktime* and fancy actions *java and javascript*.

And thats the real problem. Flash for example, is soooo much slower on a mac than on windows, that its almost a shame to use it. The same goes out to almost any other plugins. Even java being one of the best implementations on os X is just a pain in the a**.

So my conclusion: Do something that the pc people cant do: Have more than one browser window open at once _and_ use it.

Its just a totaly fast browsing experience, and only the bottlenecks still suck, not being able to use plugins in a propper way. (((

cu Martin

[bmedina]

It all has to do with the efficiency of the networking code and the speed of the rendering engine.

OpenTransport has never been very fast, so web surfing under OS 9 will always be slower than in Windows or a properly optimized OS X browser. Almost all the Carbon browsers for OS X use OpenTransport, so they will be slower as well. The only (graphical) Carbon browser that I know of which doesn't use OpenTransport is Mach-o Mozilla. Hence the speed improvement between the purely Carbon and Mach-o versions.

The rendering engine can help to offset some of the performance hit in having slower network access. Depending on how the engine lays out the page (incrementally or all at once) and how fast it can render in general can all affect perceived speed. Opera under OS 9 is one of the best I've seen, though it still isn't as fast as Mach-O Mozilla. Once the Mozilla rendering engine is completely optimized (this should happen by the 1.0 release), we'll see speeds that are as fast or faster than Windows IE. The oddball in this case is OmniWeb, since it uses Cocoa networking instead of OpenTransport. Theoretically, it should be able to reach Windows-like speeds, bu the rendering engine has to be up to par before this will happen. From what I've seen, big strides have been made in 4.1, and version 5 should be even better.

But in the end, none of this matters if scrolling and resizing are as slow as they are now in OS X. People will still perceive a browser as slow if it is slow to respond to user interaction. OmniWeb is the worst in this case, and I believe Mozilla is the best (though still nowhere near where it needs to be).

Both Apple and the browser developers will need to do a good amount of work before we see Windows IE-level speeds on any OS X browser.

[davecom]

This is mainly a software issue. Take note that the current version of IE on the mac and the current version on the PC use different rendering engines. I believe essentially the whole speed difference is IE's rendering engine on the Windows version being much better optimized and more efficiently coded than the mac version.

[Toyin]

I've got a DP 500mhz with 1.5gb of ram and a PIII 550mhz with 256mb of ram. They both share the same internet connection.

The G4 is as quick as the PIII on most pages, using IE, Omniweb, and Mozilla (mach-o). However if the web page contains extensive javascripts, Java, or any mark-up languages the PIII is faster then G4.

I find surfing back and forth through cached items much faster on the G4 then on the PIII.

All said and done, I surf 99% of the time on my G4 and the PIII is used for pages that can't be rendered correctly.

[wallinbl]

Originally posted by bmedina:
<STRONG>It all has to do with the efficiency of the networking code and the speed of the rendering engine.</STRONG>

Well, OS X is based on BSD. Windows' networking code is based on BSD. Don't think there is much difference there.

Perhaps the problem is the 2D drawing speed on the Mac? Probably not because Photoshop seems to do quite well there.

What else? The rendering engine? Shouldn't Mozilla have the same rendering engine on all platforms?

We can expect that IE doesn't perform as well. MS has played dirty tricks since day one. It would serve them well for Office/IE/etc to have subpar performance on the Mac. Heck, they claim that Linux is not a robust enough platform to run IE or Office.

[wallinbl]

I just downloaded the above mentioned version of Mozilla, and it is quick as lightning for me. I click a link (or type a URL), there is about 1 second of pause, and then the entire page appears, fully rendered. I'm on a cable modem (which is pretty fast - 270K/s downloads). I haven't tried the T1 at work, or the modem.

While I'm at it - how do you uninstall an application? I have another version of Mozilla installed that I'd like to remove. Just throw the folder in the trash? There must be more to it than that.

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by wallinbl:
<STRONG>While I'm at it - how do you uninstall an application? I have another version of Mozilla installed that I'd like to remove. Just throw the folder in the trash? There must be more to it than that.</STRONG>

You're obviously new to the Mac, my friend.

This ain't Windows. Life's simpler here, and you can just drag the app to the Trash to uninstall. This is the way things were in System 6, this is the way things were *most* of the time in OS9, and thankfully, it is almost always the case with OS X!

[wallinbl]

Originally posted by CharlesS:
<STRONG>

You're obviously new to the Mac, my friend.

This ain't Windows. Life's simpler here, and you can just drag the app to the Trash to uninstall. This is the way things were in System 6, this is the way things were *most* of the time in OS9, and thankfully, it is almost always the case with OS X!</STRONG>

I've had it since Friday. Haven't used a Mac since 1991. I'm used to Windows (and Linux) having application files all over the place. DLLs and whatnot get left if you don't uninstall. Do all apps install completely within their own folder, or does the system do the clean up?

Back on the subject of this thread, I just noticed that the above mentioned Mozilla build can't seem to do SSL. Bummer.

[Mactoid]

Originally posted by wallinbl:
<STRONG>I just downloaded the above mentioned version of Mozilla, and it is quick as lightning for me. I click a link (or type a URL), there is about 1 second of pause, and then the entire page appears, fully rendered. I'm on a cable modem (which is pretty fast - 270K/s downloads). I haven't tried the T1 at work, or the modem.</STRONG>

I too have just got that Mach-O Mozilla build. It's amazing! Just like wallinbl said, 1 second pause, and then &lt;wham&gt; the page is there, in its entirety. And this is on my pitifully slow rev A iMac. Granted, the interface is not comparable to Omniweb, but this thing sure can fly.

[Scrod]

Originally posted by wallinbl:
<STRONG>Do all apps install completely within their own folder, or does the system do the clean up?</STRONG>

For most things, it's not a case of the app "installing", as you simply copy the file (or package) to a folder on your hard drive. Unless you're installing something like samba which needs to stick files in /usr/share and elsewhere, you generally won't end up with more than one or two extra files. With Mac OS X (unless it's a situation like I just described), it's extremely rare to have more than one file/package placed in more than one location after running an installer.

[GatoVolador]

with Christmas coming up, how about this:

Santa Jobs, all I want for Christmas is as-fast or faster-than Web browsing in ALL areas with Mac OS 10.2 compared to XP.

[muchfresh]

I have only used I.E. 5.1 in OSX 10.1.1 on a firewire Powerbook 500Mhz G3 256MB

Speed is not as good as my 866Mhz PIII dell 256MB Windows2000 Advanced server. But it is really close.

I think IE is a crappy port. Mouse button down and open menus will still hang the entire application. so more than likely IE doesn't use Carbon Events. It is also a CFM app not a Mach-O app.

[karbon]

Originally posted by Spliff:
<STRONG>So, is web browsing faster in Windows? And if so, why does Windows have a technical advantage in this area? What is Apple doing wrong, if anything?
</STRONG>

My PII 300Mhz wintel-box with Win2k and IE 6.0 is A LOT faster than my iBook 500Mhz G3 with OS X 10.1.1 and IE 5.1 when browsing the web. I am sure Apple is very aware of this, and my guess is that Microsoft is hard at work on making a really good and well-deserved update to the old and outdated Internet Explorer for the mac-platform.

While speed is a major issue, so are the lack of key features you have come to expect from a decent web browser:
- Autocomplete in forms
- Full certificate support (still have to use Netscape for some sites. On IE 6.0 for pc this works just fine.)
- Fast Flash-playing (the plugin for IE 5.1 is painfully slow)
- Multithreaded surfing, so one web-window does not affect the other.
- Password remembering for login forms

The most scary thing however, is that Microsoft seems to be the only company that can actually deliver a full-scale browser for the mac-platform! (omniweb, icab, opera and netscape lacks too much)

[CharlesS]

Originally posted by wallinbl:
<STRONG>

I've had it since Friday. Haven't used a Mac since 1991. I'm used to Windows (and Linux) having application files all over the place. DLLs and whatnot get left if you don't uninstall. Do all apps install completely within their own folder, or does the system do the clean up?

Back on the subject of this thread, I just noticed that the above mentioned Mozilla build can't seem to do SSL. Bummer.</STRONG>

Well, welcome aboard! If you're used to files and DLL's being thrown all over the place, you're in for a welcome surprise. In OS X, here's the rules:

1. If you installed it by dragging it to the hard drive, you uninstall it by dragging it from the hard drive to the Trash. This is the case for Mozilla, which installs via drag and drop, as it is for a large majority of applications, because most install via drag and drop these days.

2. If you ran an installer to install it (rare with OS X), then depending on the people that wrote the installer, it might have installed some libraries, but if it did, they should be in one of these two folders: /Library/Frameworks or ~/Library/Frameworks. Furthermore, these frameworks usually have full English names, as opposed to the typical Windows "WHOKNOWS.DLL", so you can usually tell what they are.

3. If the installer for an app is in .pkg format and you want to see what it's been up to, click on the link in my signature. If you've trashed the package, there's always the packages in /Library/Receipts, from which you can get the same information.

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: CharlesS ]

[Nonsuch]

What am I missing about Mozilla? I tried it out and it doesn't seem any faster than Internet Explorer, plus it's as ugly as a baboon's ass.

[Edit: Having forced myself to persist a little longer, I will stipulate that Mozilla is somewhat faster than other OS X browsers I've used. It's still butt-ugly though.]

I'm going to give Opera another chance ... it's my preferred browser on Windows, but the last Mac version I tried couldn't run five minutes without crashing. Nice to have choices.

[ 12-10-2001: Message edited by: Nonsuch ]

[bmedina]

Well, OS X is based on BSD. Windows' networking code is based on BSD. Don't think there is much difference there.

Yes, and that's why the new Mozilla is so fast: it uses the BSD networking code. Half the point of my previous post was that the other browsers use OpenTransport instead, resulting in a comparative slowdown.

[Zoomzar]

Can anybody link to this amassing build of mozilla??

Zoomzar

[Toyin]

I really hate Mozilla and Netscape and I'm using this build for over 50% of my surfing now. It's still pretty buggy but the rendering speed and scrollng speed are winning me over. I don't know how I lived without tabs before

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla/n...imental/macho/

[KellyHogan]

This is one of the reasons I still use Windows. For internet and games, it is really ahead in just about all cases. Proper multi-threading also means I can browse a few sites, run a file sharing program and messenger at the same time with no performance hit.

But I will take the Mac when it comes to my Photoshop and writing work. The onscreen display of graphics and text is a bit better and more comfortable on the eyes.

[jock]

Would anyone like to guess how many resources Microsoft devote to IE, lets face it if they can't make the best browser then what hope is there.
Speaking of which here's hoping that Netscape can overcome the 800 pound gorilla...

[Spheric Harlot]

Of course, everybody knows that the *real* reason browsing is so much faster on Windows is because Bill Gates invented the internet.

[supernature]

Mozilla is definitely the fastest browser for OS X (don't care about OS 9), but the one thing that REALLY irritates me about Mozilla is their chaching. Going back to a page takes just as long as if I were going their the first time. Other than that, Mozilla is definitely at least twice as faster than OmniWeb 4.1 sp11 and about 50% faster than IE 5.1.

OmniWeb is still beta, and I have seen it much faster before. So it's still a good contender. Currently, Omniweb can't even properly load a web page that is refreshed once a second. It just keeps building pipelines. oh well.