101–110 of 126 posts
At the same time, right now it's relly backwards[1]. Luckily the shelf-life of Safari is much shorter than others, so we'll be able to use fetch() natively without polyfills soon-ish if you target modern browsers. [1] http://caniuse.com/#feat=fetch
On the other hand, WebRTC and Service Workers would make Safari meaningfully better, since these cannot be polyfilled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
10 hours vs 3 hours for current browser versions, running equivalent tabs/extensions/settings? Sorry but I don't believe you. Can you point to battery benchmarks or is this an off the cuff personal test? Are you talking about an old version of Chrome? You're aware they've been making progress recently? https://9to5mac.com/2016/09/06/google-chrome-mac-battery-per...
>>10 hours vs 3 hours for current browser versions, running equivalent tabs/extensions/settings? Sorry but I don't believe you. My experience is the same. I have a 2011 MBA. With Safari, the battery lasts 4 hours. With Chrome, about 90 minutes. My browsing habits are the same between browsers.
What was your test methodology, or was this ad-hoc?
If there were reliable sources reporting similar numbers it would be easier to swallow, but I can't find a single source that claims it's this bad.
Honnest question for Safari users: why Safari? I don't really know Safari. I used Chrome on Windows and iOS, and when I moved to OSX I naturally continued with Chrome. And the dev tools are really great.
Many reasons. Among those I care about: * It's a lot more power-efficient than any other browser. * In my experience, it's often faster than Chrome. * It follows platform conventions. I still get weirded out by Chrome cramming everything into that ⋮ button. * It syncs history, favorites, and open tabs over iCloud to Safari on my phone. It also supports Handoff. * It's not made by Google, a company that I prefer to gi…
* Properly hyphenates
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The power efficiency isn't even close. The 2016 MBP battery lasts about 10 hours running Safari versus 3 hours running Chrome. I've never particularly liked Safari, but I'm close to switching myself because Chrome is such a disaster. From the energy impact tab on the Activity Monitor: Chrome: 43 Safari: 0.3
10 hours vs 3 hours for current browser versions, running equivalent tabs/extensions/settings? Sorry but I don't believe you. Can you point to battery benchmarks or is this an off the cuff personal test? Are you talking about an old version of Chrome? You're aware they've been making progress recently? https://9to5mac.com/2016/09/06/google-chrome-mac-battery-per...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>10 hours vs 3 hours for current browser versions, running equivalent tabs/extensions/settings? Sorry but I don't believe you. My experience is the same. I have a 2011 MBA. With Safari, the battery lasts 4 hours. With Chrome, about 90 minutes. My browsing habits are the same between browsers.
Are you aware of the recent improvements in Chrome 53 energy use? Are your numbers before or after this? What was your test methodology, or was this ad-hoc? If there were reliable sources reporting similar numbers it would be easier to swallow, but I can't find a single source that claims it's this bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are numerous comments like this and they ALWAYS come up on Safari posts. Why exactly do so many people care?
People want to use Hangouts and Skype in their browsers, WebTorrent ( https://webtorrent.io/ ), and file sending services like https://dropub.com/ , to name just a few
Personally I'm heavy in the native app camp instead of trying to turn everything into webpages, so I guess that explains why I don't really know what this feature is and haven't been waiting for it.
Thanks
At the same time, right now it's relly backwards[1]. Luckily the shelf-life of Safari is much shorter than others, so we'll be able to use fetch() natively without polyfills soon-ish if you target modern browsers. [1] http://caniuse.com/#feat=fetch
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More power efficient which is key because I use a laptop all the time, and often on battery power. It fits better with macOS conventions compared to Chrome and Firefox. It's faster. Safari content blockers (I use 1Blocker) seems to not slow down page loading at all compared to conventional ad-blockers on both Safari and Chrome, which does. I used Chrome on Mac for years. Then Safari became better, and then it kept ge…
Is there any way to hook up bookmark syncing cross browser? Better battery life would be nice, but I like having Chrome's sync between Mac, Windows, Linux, and iOS.
At the same time, right now it's relly backwards[1]. Luckily the shelf-life of Safari is much shorter than others, so we'll be able to use fetch() natively without polyfills soon-ish if you target modern browsers. [1] http://caniuse.com/#feat=fetch
Nearly all these new language features can be polyfilled, so this doesn't change anything for most developers. On the other hand, WebRTC and Service Workers would make Safari meaningfully better, since these cannot be polyfilled.
At the same time, right now it's relly backwards[1]. Luckily the shelf-life of Safari is much shorter than others, so we'll be able to use fetch() natively without polyfills soon-ish if you target modern browsers. [1] http://caniuse.com/#feat=fetch
too bad fetch still can't abort a request.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30233302/promise-is-it-po...