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

Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

robert.ocallahan.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 338 posts

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#171

Post by wingerlang »

skrowl wrote: post #28
rdtsc wrote: post #3

I have been very impressed by Firefox lately. Kudos to the whole team at Mozilla. Just about 5 years ago, it was looking to me like it was the end of Firefox. It was Chrome all the way. New features were coming out one after another. Faster rendering. Safe process isolation for each tab. Looked better. But I just switched back last month. It happened kind of randomly. Saw an announcement of a new release ( 33, I thin…

I've been reminding everyone I know who still uses Chrome to try Firefox again. Many have switched back. It's simply a better browser. One e10s is in stable, it's going to be even better. Google is a for-profit company that makes money selling your data and targeted, personal ads. Mozilla is not-for-profit and just wants to make the web better.

I went back to FF after using Chrome since its release, for about 2 weeks before I was fed up with it not playing every youtube video.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#172

Post by nly »

kbrosnan wrote: post #44
nathancahill wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What version of Firefox are you using? It hasn't done that in ages. You have to open the About window to check for new updates and install them.

Non-Windows still has modal update dialog. On startup for non-Windows you are blocked from using the browser until the update is complete. There is a dialog if you run out of date extensions. There is a nag dialog if you have an update pending for over 24h.

What platform? Most Linux distros compile Firefox with "--disable-updater --disable-installer", such that Mozillas auto-update doesn't even exist.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#173

Post by crucialfelix »

malandrew wrote: post #125
rdtsc wrote: post #3

I have been very impressed by Firefox lately. Kudos to the whole team at Mozilla. Just about 5 years ago, it was looking to me like it was the end of Firefox. It was Chrome all the way. New features were coming out one after another. Faster rendering. Safe process isolation for each tab. Looked better. But I just switched back last month. It happened kind of randomly. Saw an announcement of a new release ( 33, I thin…

TBH, the fact that bookmarking has not been completely separated from browsers makes me very sad. I know I can use a cloud service like pinboard.in. A universal bookmark sharing format would make the world a much better place. The fact that importing and exporting is still a thing sucks. Give me a content addressable store upon which multiple indices and management tools can be built and give me a way to choose how t…

RIP del.icio.us remember when browsers had extensions to sync your delicious bookmarks ? Or when bookmark sharing on delicious was a form of microblogging ? If you followed the right feeds it was the hackernews of the day.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#174

Post by espadrine »

bzbarsky wrote: post #79
wodenokoto wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see a source for the billion-dollar-a-year campaign, that sounds crazy. That's 3 times Mozilla's entire budget, if memory serves me right.

> I'd like to see a source for the billion-dollar-a-year campaign I can't find a source for the figure right now, unfortunately. And the whole thing is a guess, since Google doesn't release this information. All it releases is overall sales/marketing spending, which in 2012 was about $6 billion if I understand right (see " rel="nofollow">http://www.quora.com/How-much-does-Google-spend-on-advertisi... ). That includes…

I recall seeing a heavy metro ad campaign in Paris. All the slots were used. The campaign cost listed[0] (Q-Massifs) doesn't even have a regular price. Extrapolating from the regular campaigns, it cost Google beyond a million euros a week, and the campaign lasted more than that, if I recall correctly. And that is just one city, one campaign.

As for Google Search ads, let's take the number of search requests[1], an example CPC they give[2], an example CTR they give[3], the StatCounter portion of non-Chrome users[4], we get 1216373500000 * (1-0.3) * $0.10 * 0.005.

That's $425,730,725 for a one-year campaign in 2012. Given the prominence of this ad (and its unintentional scare value), the CTR is probably off, so that's a very conservative figure.

If that is indeed 70% of the whole campaign cost, the total is $608,186,750 per year.

[0]: http://www.mediatransports.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Qu...

[1]: http://www.internetlivestats.com/google-search-statistics/

[2]: https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/2375420?hl=en

[3]: https://support.google.com/adwords/answer/2615875?hl=en

[4]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers#Sum...

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#175

Post by Tloewald »

Firefox's hopeless video and audio implementation (especially on Mac OS X) remains a deal breaker for me. It means resorting to Flash in a lot of cases, which means I use another browser.

I'm glad to see strides being made in JavaScript performance, but basic browser functionality is far more important.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#176

Post by merih »

letstryagain wrote: post #65
ooozingly wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old are you? I won't get anything done if I kept re-loading my ~200 tabs.

You have 200 tabs open? How do you find the tab you want? How often do you look at each of the 200 tabs? What happens when you're on another computer? What happens if you accidentally close Chrome, do you open all 200 tabs again?

In Firefox you can search among open tabs by typing % in the awesomebar, I use this everyday with hundreds of tabs open. And there is also tab groups feature (which is activated by ctrl/cmd+shift+e). I don't know why this feature is not advertised more.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#177

Post by dbcooper »

Tloewald wrote: post #175

Firefox's hopeless video and audio implementation (especially on Mac OS X) remains a deal breaker for me. It means resorting to Flash in a lot of cases, which means I use another browser. I'm glad to see strides being made in JavaScript performance, but basic browser functionality is far more important.

Media Source Extensions are a high priority right now, so problems with html5 video (esp. with youtube) should be solved soon.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=778617

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1083588

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#178

Post by jacquesm »

IvyMike wrote: post #108
jacquesm wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome does not exist to give the world a fast and performant web, it exists to give google full control over the audience from request to delivery, it exists to increase google's control and serves as a collection mechanism for data that it would not otherwise get at. That it's a performant browser is a side-effect.

> data that it would not otherwise get at. My argument is that nobody would have put that data online in a slow and sucky web. If you think Google wants full control over the audience, surely they also want a large audience. (Note that I do not think that Google is evil. But if they were, I don't think they would need chrome to get most of that information anyways, given all the other ways they are collecting data. S…

The web wasn't 'slow and sucky' before chrome appeared.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#179

Post by higherpurpose »

fulafel wrote: post #150
MichaelGG wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. Especially as Google becomes more and more evil, Chrome looks less attractive. Even on mobile, I use FF, despite it needing a lot of work and having a lot of rendering and input issues. And Chrome on Android looks very sexy. On desktop, FF is fine, once more. Rust is also one of the most promising languages with a potentially massive impact on the world. Not only safer software, but exposing more programme…

Firefox Beta just got Opera-level responsive for me on Android and no rendering issues so far.

I haven't tried Firefox in a coupled of months, but to me Firefox rendering was the worst out of all the top browsers. I think Firefox does something on purpose that makes rendering worse, such as delaying it somehow in order to increase performance or whatever. So for example you won't get the whole page rendered immediately, and if you switch to a different part of the page, you have to wait for it to get rendered, too. I don't like that much.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#180

Post by personZ »

letstryagain wrote: post #65
ooozingly wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old are you? I won't get anything done if I kept re-loading my ~200 tabs.

You have 200 tabs open? How do you find the tab you want? How often do you look at each of the 200 tabs? What happens when you're on another computer? What happens if you accidentally close Chrome, do you open all 200 tabs again?

I suspect that the reason people keeps tabs open is a deficiency of all modern browsers -- if we had the ability to search the contents of our history of sites, it would dramatically reduce our need to desperately hold onto tabs.

Right now you can search the history, but it searches only the title and basic metadata, and as we know well from HN, titles are often wholly unrelated with the content.

So many times I've found a page that has interesting information, and I can easily remember snippets of the page, but without walking through my history manually for hours, I'm left with trying to remember unique phrases and instead searching the world of information on Google, having to winnow through a lot of chaff. It would be so great if a browser (or an evil cloud-synced variant) generated a search corpus of every page you visit -- understanding the overhead and costs, made viable by many cores and massive IO performance -- allowing you to say "I saw a site about banking regulation and overcommitments in the past week...where was it?"

Post reply on HN