Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

prerender.cloud

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 236 posts

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#81

Post by chipperyman573 »

wtallis wrote: post #61
moreira wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might just be because of the difference in platforms. 32-bit Mac has been gone for half a decade, whereas 32-bit Windows is still out there (32-bit Windows 10 exists), and those wouldn't be able to run 64-bit Chrome, so they may be using 32-bit as the default in order to avoid user confusion.

More specifically about OS X: support for 32-bit hardware was dropped in 2011, but support for 64-bit applications has been available on all 64-bit hardware since 2007, even if you were running the 32-bit OS kernel. Apple handled that transition way better than Microsoft.

It helps that Apple controls the hardware of their devices.

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#82

Post by curiousgal »

to3m wrote: post #73
tdkl wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly they aren't bookmarks and then people moan about memory usage, when they should get a reality check instead.

I don't know if you're familiar with the ins and outs of writing computer programs, but it's actually often practical to make a program that does one thing do another instead. So in this case one obvious thing that could be done is to have a dormant-type (exact terminology TBC) tab. Such things would have an entry on the tab bar like a normal tab, but wouldn't actually have anything loaded until you clicked. Firefox…

>it's actually often practical to make a program that does one thing do another instead

Like using Photoshop to abort a system shutdown if you forgot to commit.[0]

0.https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-greatest-software-misuses...

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#83

Post by robotresearcher »

tdkl wrote: post #49
wiredfool wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tabs are the new bookmarks.

Sadly they aren't bookmarks and then people moan about memory usage, when they should get a reality check instead.

Now we know how people behave we can engineer the software to work well for them. Suspend the LRU tabs so they can be paged out, etc.

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#84

Post by crooked-v »

SiVal wrote: post #78
kbenson wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. "Weather for City: Santa Rosa, Philippines" That's the wrong Santa Rosa, in the wrong country. There's an interesting bug in there somewhere.

TO THE DEVELOPER, FWIW: I'm also in California and it thinks I'm in the Philippines in a town with the same name as one a few miles from here. I assume you use IP to find town, country; throw away country; look up town in a list with country names in alphabetical order (Philippines Note that even if you get the country right it won't be enough, because there is a "Springfield" in each of the 50 states. You'll have to…

> Note that even if you get the country right it won't be enough, because there is a "Springfield" in each of the 50 states.

D'oh!

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#85

Post by abrowne »

SiVal wrote: post #78
kbenson wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. "Weather for City: Santa Rosa, Philippines" That's the wrong Santa Rosa, in the wrong country. There's an interesting bug in there somewhere.

TO THE DEVELOPER, FWIW: I'm also in California and it thinks I'm in the Philippines in a town with the same name as one a few miles from here. I assume you use IP to find town, country; throw away country; look up town in a list with country names in alphabetical order (Philippines Note that even if you get the country right it won't be enough, because there is a "Springfield" in each of the 50 states. You'll have to…

I can confirm that it does correctly give me Minneapolis, MN, not Minneapolis, KS, which is what the MacOS Dashboard weather widget would display around 10.5 or so if you entered "Minneapolis".

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#86

Post by Rumudiez »

edblarney wrote: post #62

I'm still getting full white and black screens on Chrome 54. It's 2016.

Same thing for me, but only on my 2011 MBP. My girlfriend's 2012 MBP doesn't do it, and neither does my work 2015 MBP. I think it might be related to Chromecast, because that's the only difference between each of those browsers aside from hardware.

Do you have any extensions like that might be causing it?

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#88

Post by ilaksh »

thejay wrote: post #39
ausjke wrote: post #29

awesome news then, chrome really needs to improve memory usage, especially when I have lots of tabs open. under firefox I normally had 120 tabs open all the time, and it's fine. with chrome, I dare not to exceed 60 tabs. chrome triggers heavy swap all the time still, which renders the system very sluggish.

I too keep a lot of tabs open. I use OneTab and The Great Suspender chrome extensions to also keep memory usage under control. They've been indispensable tools for the tab hoarders like me.

Exactly. Its hoarding. So eventually they will have to build in features to protect hoarders from themselves.

Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54

#90

Post by BatFastard »

hackuser wrote: post #76
niij wrote: post #10

They mentioned that weather.com crashed their website. Their website is always extremely slow for me as well. It's ridiculous how poorly designed their website can be for such a simple service.

Try Weather Underground: Their graph is the most impressive, useful visualization of weather data around, IME. For example: https://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast... Note you can click the controls at the top right of the graph and add/remove elements. The graph is a bit heavy, but that may be necessary to generate the visualization.

What I didn't realize was that weather underground is now owned by the weather channel :(
Post reply on HN