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

State of web browsers in 2018

ferdychristant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–217 of 217 posts

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#211

Post by TMWNN »

hnaccy wrote: post #138
SamWhited wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's actually really interesting; I don't tend to have a ton of tabs, but coworkers always told me Firefox did a terrible job with 100+ tabs and that Chrome worked better. This always made sense to me because of the multi-process architecture of Chrome, but I've never seen it myself. So you're suggesting that Firefox actually performs better now? Maybe all my coworkers complaining about it are just repeating lore t…

I have 1450 tabs open and Firefox is fine, Chrome would be an unusable mess.

I use ~1200 tabs. I used to deal with Chrome stalling by periodically killing all Google Chrome Helper processes, and a few months ago switched to Firefox (less sluggish) from Chrome. Last week I decided to try Chrome again and was pleased to find that (with the same tab set) Chrome 71 is amazingly fast; new tabs open instantly, I can immediately enter a search query or URL, and the browser remains stable over time. Firefox, by contrast, is noticeably slow (but better than older Chrome) when opening new tabs or handling queries. So it's back to Chrome for me; it is now only slow when starting for the first time, when it processes the 1200 tabs for a few minutes.

(I do use The Great Discarder, but did so before switching to Firefox, too.)

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#212

Post by Semaphor »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #208
Semaphor wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how anyone can claim FF is faster. I love FF and I switched completely from chrome. But Chrome is far faster. I don't know maybe it is because I have an abundance of RAM (32 GB) and others don't and that's why they think FF is faster. But for me, it's easy to test. Go to http://addic7ed.com/ and open the (very long, nearly 5k entries) [Select a TV Show] drop-down. On FF (and IE/Edge FWIW) there is…

I have 8GB RAM. It doesn't matter to me that Chrome would be faster if it could eat 4 times the whole RAM I have - what matters is that it's not. Also, it's a pretty weird test case to compare performance, probably not related to anything that actually matters. What's more, Firefox tries to style the drop-down to match with the system UI, while Chrome doesn't even bother.

> I have 8GB RAM. It doesn't matter to me that Chrome would be faster if it could eat 4 times the whole RAM I have - what matters is that it's not.

I specifically said that I can see it being a problem in low ram cases.

> Also, it's a pretty weird test case to compare performance, probably not related to anything that actually matters.

This is not some random benchmarks. Both of these problems are things that I regularly encounter on actual websites. And it's great that FF styles it, but I'd rather have performance than system appropriate dropdowns.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#213

Post by seba_dos1 »

Semaphor wrote: post #212
seba_dos1 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have 8GB RAM. It doesn't matter to me that Chrome would be faster if it could eat 4 times the whole RAM I have - what matters is that it's not. Also, it's a pretty weird test case to compare performance, probably not related to anything that actually matters. What's more, Firefox tries to style the drop-down to match with the system UI, while Chrome doesn't even bother.

> I have 8GB RAM. It doesn't matter to me that Chrome would be faster if it could eat 4 times the whole RAM I have - what matters is that it's not. I specifically said that I can see it being a problem in low ram cases. > Also, it's a pretty weird test case to compare performance, probably not related to anything that actually matters. This is not some random benchmarks. Both of these problems are things that I regul…

The only reason 8GB RAM can be considered "low" instead of "appropriate for most workloads" is Chrome.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#214

Post by Semaphor »

seba_dos1 wrote: post #213
Semaphor wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have 8GB RAM. It doesn't matter to me that Chrome would be faster if it could eat 4 times the whole RAM I have - what matters is that it's not. I specifically said that I can see it being a problem in low ram cases. > Also, it's a pretty weird test case to compare performance, probably not related to anything that actually matters. This is not some random benchmarks. Both of these problems are things that I regul…

The only reason 8GB RAM can be considered "low" instead of "appropriate for most workloads" is Chrome.

I don't even run Chrome outside of testing compatibility. I do run Visual Studio, often multiple instances. Right now I don't, only FF, a few apps and Stellaris (which only uses around 500 MB), yet I'm still at nearly 16GB of Memory usage. 8GB might be enough for many (most?) people, but not for me, and it has nothing to do with Chrome.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#215

Post by seba_dos1 »

Semaphor wrote: post #214
seba_dos1 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason 8GB RAM can be considered "low" instead of "appropriate for most workloads" is Chrome.

I don't even run Chrome outside of testing compatibility. I do run Visual Studio, often multiple instances. Right now I don't, only FF, a few apps and Stellaris (which only uses around 500 MB), yet I'm still at nearly 16GB of Memory usage. 8GB might be enough for many (most?) people, but not for me, and it has nothing to do with Chrome.

I also sometimes long for more RAM, but those situations definitely aren't what can be sanely considered "most workloads".

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#216

Post by BrendanEich »

gilrain wrote: post #36
Reinmar wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that Mozilla will be well-positioned as an alternative to Google. That sounds realistic and I hope it will be able to team up with bigger companies which would like to compete with Google (instead of helping it). However, that made me think about Brave ( https://brave.com/ ). What are your thoughts about it? It's also privacy oriented, but it's actually built on top of Chromium. What is even more interesting,…

Brave is rent-seeking the entire Internet and doesn’t deserve serious mention.

If you use "rent-seeking", you need to know what it means. I do not believe that you do know what it means. Economists use "rent" to denote extraction from existing wealth. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/economicrent.asp

Brave adds wealth by pricing users back in from the start (via a genesis block of tokens we give to users and referring creators), and by blocking inefficient, dangerous intermediaries (cut out the middlemen, as Marx said) for a much more efficient market.

Those intermediaries are the _grands rentiers_ today, and yet all but Google, Facebook, Criteo, Amazon, and a few others are dying. Ad/tracker-blocking is a user right but it alone cannot explain the walking death of most intermediaries in the Lumascape.

Rather, too many intermediaries arbitrage and abuse data. This induces not only the ongoing rise of ad/tracker blocking by users -- it cuts off residual revenue to publishers (who make If you are party to the existing Lumascape of ad-tech vendors, your post is projection and I suggest looking honestly in a mirror to see "rent-seeking". If you're calling Brave rent-seeking out of some irrational animus, take a closer look at the product itself, and let's reason together.

Re: State of web browsers in 2018

#217

Post by lousken »

TMWNN wrote: post #210
lousken wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

exactly what i saw - i regularly use over 200 tabs and in Chrome the performance goes to hell above that number (even on i7 6700k - also managing tabs is PITA), while Firefox just keeps chugging without any problems

I use ~1200 tabs. I used to deal with what you and ksec experienced in Chrome by periodically killing all Google Chrome Helper processes, and a few months ago switched to Firefox (less sluggish) from Chrome. Last week I decided to try Chrome again and was pleased to find that (with the same tab set) Chrome 71 is amazingly fast; new tabs open instantly, I can immediately enter a search query or URL, and the browser re…

I got used to tree style tabs so I wouldn't be able to switch, those extra windows which are necessary in chrome were awful
Post reply on HN