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

Chrome Is Bad

chromeisbad.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 306 posts

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#71

Post by qz2 »

enraged_camel wrote: post #61
qz2 wrote: post #48

To make an argument of this scale you have the burden of proof. There is no proof here past casual correlation. An analogy I see here is the scene from an old film where a woman walks behind a wooden screen and a goose walks out thus the woman is a shape shifting witch.

>>To make an argument of this scale you have the burden of proof. There is no proof here past casual correlation. And yet, as of this writing, it has 200+ upvotes and is at the top of the front page. HN audience really needs to do better. If you are reading this and are one of the people who upvoted the story, please really ask yourself why.

Oh this is normal. People upvote the title, then comment, then read it if the comments aren’t agreeing with their preconception. Humans are a mess of a species.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#72

Post by platelets2020 »

politelemon wrote: post #47
sroussey wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possible correlation and hand waving equals causation. I, too, was hoping for something, well, technical. Considering #1 on hacker news...

That this is so high right now is quite reflective of HN. It's nearly an exact match of the meme like utterance often seen on reddit: "chrome bad".

There's been a massive influx of reddit-quality comments for quite a while. I guess it was only a matter of time before it was reflected in the submissions.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#73

Post by offtop5 »

enraged_camel wrote: post #61
qz2 wrote: post #48

To make an argument of this scale you have the burden of proof. There is no proof here past casual correlation. An analogy I see here is the scene from an old film where a woman walks behind a wooden screen and a goose walks out thus the woman is a shape shifting witch.

>>To make an argument of this scale you have the burden of proof. There is no proof here past casual correlation. And yet, as of this writing, it has 200+ upvotes and is at the top of the front page. HN audience really needs to do better. If you are reading this and are one of the people who upvoted the story, please really ask yourself why.

Chrome lives in the causal consumer world.

Many of us believe, with some justice, the causalization of computers has been to the diminishment of power users.

Therefore chrome bad gets hundreds of upvotes. I guarantee you not everyone read the entire article, and then ran their own diagnostic CPU benchmarking to verify the results, and also compared it against chrome competitors.

It's more like the common folk like chrome, and chrome ruin PCS for us

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#74

Post by g0atbutt »

I've had noticeable issues with "WindowServer" in the past (taking 80% CPU usage and causing the fans to ramp up even when the system seemed like it should be idling even after a reboot) so I decided to give this a shot.

This is anecdotal but there is a noticeable difference for me with responsiveness after following these steps. Currently the WindowServer process is hovering around 14%.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#75

Post by systemvoltage »

The window to the internet should not be some monster that takes millions of developer hours and held ransom by a couple of big companies.

I should be able to build my own browser in a 3 month sabbatical.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#76

Post by ma2rten »

This must be how things like some alternative medicine and anti-vax start: Things like feeling healthy and your computer being slow can be very subjective.

The author appears to be technical enough to know that there is something called keystone on his computer, but not technical enough to benchmark and investigate further. The name keystone sounds kind of nefarious, so it makes sense that someone would be able to convince themselves that it makes their computer slower.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#77

Post by forgotmypw17 »

A lot of skeptical comments in this thread.

I'm not low-level enough to confirm or deny the specific claims in the article.

I will say that my experience with regards to CPU performance "leaks" and Chrome seeming to always be running in the background even when I didn't want it to, as well as Chrome starting up on system startup when there didn't seem to be any references to it anywhere I'd expect to cause that, are consistent with the article.

I saw a lot of "low-level integration" with my system going on, a lot more than I understood, ever wanted or asked for, and there was no way I knew of to turn it off. It was like IE on Windows all over again.

I was also able to solve the issues by removing Chrome from my systems.

I sometimes install it temporarily to do Web testing and remove it shortly afterwards, but I think I'll do that in a VM from now on.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#78

Post by arcticbull »

codetrotter wrote: post #60
comex wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another thing you can do: profile the process to find out what exactly it’s spending all that CPU time on. There are a few different ways to do this on macOS, including the GUI Instruments.app which comes with Xcode, and dtrace. But if you’re the sort who always has a terminal open, the quickest way is to just run sudo spindump Also useful when a process is hung, even if it’s not taking up CPU time. Sometimes the out…

Speaking of the GUI Instruments.app. Is there a way to start a process from there, instead of attaching to an already running process? I used it the other day and could only figure out how to attach to an already running process with it.

Create a new profiling environment based on the template you're interested in, making sure "Choose a profiling template for:" is set to "Your Computer > All Processes." Next, in the top-left of the window, where it says "Your Computer > All Processes", click on All Processes. Select Choose Target... and navigate to your binary and hit Choose. Then hit the red circle to begin recording. This will launch a new instance of the specified binary and profile it.

This may not work for binaries that set PT_DENY_ATTACH, though.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#79

Post by LeoPanthera »

The_Colonel wrote: post #46
LeoPanthera wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does Chrome do better than Safari?

Runs on my computer. (not a big fan of chrome though)

Well that's a great answer. ;)

It's kind of a shame that Apple killed off the Windows version of Safari. I often wonder if they would consider bringing it back.

Re: Chrome Is Bad

#80

Post by codetrotter »

arcticbull wrote: post #78
codetrotter wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking of the GUI Instruments.app. Is there a way to start a process from there, instead of attaching to an already running process? I used it the other day and could only figure out how to attach to an already running process with it.

Create a new profiling environment based on the template you're interested in, making sure "Choose a profiling template for:" is set to "Your Computer > All Processes." Next, in the top-left of the window, where it says "Your Computer > All Processes", click on All Processes. Select Choose Target... and navigate to your binary and hit Choose. Then hit the red circle to begin recording. This will launch a new instance…

Thanks :)
Post reply on HN