 |
 |
Fastest web browser: Mac, Windows, Linux
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I found a site that did a decent comparison of most web browsers on Mac, Windows, Linux.
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html
Draw your own conclusions, though Opera looks great on Mac, and on Windows, Linux. I was surprised at the antiquated hardware used to conduct the test, though. Ancient.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN  Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cooperstown '09
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by terapatricks
Opera looks great on Mac, and on Windows, Linux.
Opera does not look great on Mac. In fact it's butt-ugly.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Opera may be the fastest...but is it the most accurate? And like TETENAL says, it's a monstrosity on OS X.
In general, an app has to be a heck of a lot better than the competition to make up for an UI that looks like a direct port from Windows. Right now, Opera is not a heck of a lot more accurate nor is it a heck of a lot faster.
It would be what I'd recommend to people if they want to save a total of a 1 minute during their day...but not if these people care about having a better UI experience.
If there's a thing I've learned in the past 2 years that most people don't know or understand, it's that there's often a tradeoff between accuracy and speed. I started realizing the impact of accuracy on speed when I used two cycle-exact emulators that require almost 10 times more CPU power than emulators that took shortcuts (granted, emulators are an extreme case).
A lot of people are unforgiving. They'll take speed over everything else because they don't know or care what's going on in the background. If the renderer or emulators is taking shortcuts and sacrificing accuracy to gain a bit more speed, these people will take it over one that is slower but more accurate. It's sad but that's how it works in this world.
I'm not jumping to conclusions and accusing Opera of taking shortcuts with their Javascript engine and rendering engine *but* keep in mind that it's a possibility (I haven't used Opera enough to know how much of CSS et al. is implemented, if it's implemented correctly, etc.) All I know is that Webkit is open-source, so you can check to see if it's taking shortcuts to boost speed. To my knowledge, the Safari team is much more interested in accuracy than speed.
Then there are total flops like IE which are neither accurate nor speedy. 
(
Last edited by Horsepoo!!!; Dec 23, 2005 at 01:06 PM.
)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status:
Offline
|
|
About the History test… the guy could have used the offline mode within iCab, there is no way any other browser would do it faster.
On Mac OS 9, no single browser stands out as the fastest. In fact, my condolences to anyone who has to use one of them, they all perform badly
I can not find the an entry date for the article, anyway… I guess it is way old.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Admin Emeritus  Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status:
Offline
|
|
It can't be old -- it includes Firefox 1.5, which is brand new.
But actually, running on a slow CPU isn't a bad idea: it'll magnify the speed differences to the point that they become measurable. On a 4GHz CPU, you'd be talking about millisecond differences that no human could measure.
Oh, and see how this was posted in the Mac OS X forum? No, this didn't discuss OS X at all. Ka-chink.
tooki
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top