41–50 of 58 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It works in Ubuntu. Maybe I'm missing your point. It didn't used to work on Linux at all, without jumping through a ton of hoops pretending to not be Linux.
The point is you should never have had to pretend, web browsers shouldn't contain DRM. It's not working for me on arch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"as a Mac user, having to boot up a VM" So are you a developer, or a Mac user? Do you develop for Mac users, or users?
For users. Yet I happen to be a developer on a Mac like many others. As mentioned before I'll make sure that it works in IE/Edge, but having to jump through hoops to do so will never make me treat the process as more than a checklist item close to finishing the project. Of course I don't expect Windows developers to see it any other way with Safari. This is a non-issue for cross-platform browsers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is exactly the attitude web developers had toward the IE/Netscape situation around the year 2000. I think that as web developers we have the responsibility to consider the health of the entire ecosystem, as well as long term consequences. If not us, then who?
I understand your point and I actually make sure that my websites target IE10 and up, but it usually happens after I'm done in Chrome. Have you worked with Edge/IE? The pain starts with, as a Mac user, having to boot up a VM and ends with the, in my opinion, horrible development tools compared to Chrome or even Firefox. In this state Edge will never be more than an afterthought.
Only IE, Chrome and FF and their mobile versions are relevant on my daily workflow when working on web projects.
Then I get hold of one of our pool Macs and iDevices and check Safari for a few hours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I think that as web developers we have the responsibility [...] I'm all for being idealistic, but you can't expect developers to use a software that lacks in performance, features and security. I'm talking about Firefox by the way, because if you really >consider the health of the entire ecosystem, as well as long term consequences that is the obvious choice, not Edge.
These things are somewhat self-reinforcing. Many sites feel slower with Firefox because they've been developed on Chrome and avoid the slower sides of Chrome, yet won't take advantage of the paths in Firefox that are faster than Chrome. This has been especially evident on some Google properties like Google Docs, or the incident where Inbox couldn't support Firefox because it implemented a function correctly where Chr…
Then there's the developer tools that slow everything down even more in FF, to almost a halt/crash on some sites, while on the same sites they have no impact on performance in Chrome at all.
That is with an i7 and a mid/low range GPU.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These things are somewhat self-reinforcing. Many sites feel slower with Firefox because they've been developed on Chrome and avoid the slower sides of Chrome, yet won't take advantage of the paths in Firefox that are faster than Chrome. This has been especially evident on some Google properties like Google Docs, or the incident where Inbox couldn't support Firefox because it implemented a function correctly where Chr…
The rendering performance difference is noticable on almost every site and it doesn't matter at all how they've been developed. Even sites developed in FF with no regard for Chrome features render more smoothly in Chrome. Then there's the developer tools that slow everything down even more in FF, to almost a halt/crash on some sites, while on the same sites they have no impact on performance in Chrome at all. That is…
While Chromium does beat Firefox in speed in several individual tasks the overall experience does not differ all that much between the two. Chromium is noticeably more memory-intensive than Firefox, this can go so far as to have the system slow down to a crawl with only two or three tabs open. With Firefox this is much less of an issue, it handles dozens of tabs without a hiccup.
Development tools are more or less on-par between Chromium and Firefox+Firebug (or Aurora). I do not notice the slowdowns you mention when using the developer tools - at least not when comparing between FF and Chromium - even though my system is much slower than yours (1.8GHz Pentium M, 2GB, ATI FireGL Mobility T2 + 128MB). Of course things just are slower on a system like mine so maybe I'm just used to waiting those extra few milliseconds here and there?
In my opinion Firefox has a much better user interface than Chromium, partly due to the fact that Firefox uses GTK (and as such looks (or can be made to look) like most other applications where Chromium comes with its own toolkit.
Once I'm done I test whatever I made on Safari on iOS (the 'new IE6'...) and prepare to jump through some hoops to work around the problems which invariably crop up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? Because firefox being slow was the entire reason I switched in the first place.
That's the Endless Treadmill. Netscape Navigator is slow, use this new and fast browser called IE. [time passes] IE is slow, use this new and fast browser called Firefox. [time passes] Firefox is slow, use this new and fast browser called Chrome. Chrome is slow...[to be continued]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the Endless Treadmill. Netscape Navigator is slow, use this new and fast browser called IE. [time passes] IE is slow, use this new and fast browser called Firefox. [time passes] Firefox is slow, use this new and fast browser called Chrome. Chrome is slow...[to be continued]
But the thing is, Chrome isn't slow.
I agree that in the recent years there's been a major push to make browsers great again, but the speed comes at expense of memory bloat. This might be an acceptable tradeoff - until you need to do something non-browser as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the thing is, Chrome isn't slow.
Neither is Firefox. (Unless you clobber them with a bazillion extensions, leave Flash always-on and open 3000 tabs) However, that is the perception. I agree that in the recent years there's been a major push to make browsers great again, but the speed comes at expense of memory bloat. This might be an acceptable tradeoff - until you need to do something non-browser as well.
Even now, for me Chrome cold boots far faster than Firefox does - after doing a taskkill /f /im chrome.exe, chrome opens anywhere from 0.4 to 1.2 seconds after hitting "ok" on a run dialog with "chrome" entered in it, but the same thing with "firefox" in it takes from 3 to 8 seconds to open.
And that's not even a fair test either, as chrome has about 20 or so extensions installed and firefox has none.
Don't even get me started on the android variants of the two either, firefox just feels sluggish and unresponsive next to chrome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neither is Firefox. (Unless you clobber them with a bazillion extensions, leave Flash always-on and open 3000 tabs) However, that is the perception. I agree that in the recent years there's been a major push to make browsers great again, but the speed comes at expense of memory bloat. This might be an acceptable tradeoff - until you need to do something non-browser as well.
Firefox has come a long way since the day I switched that's for sure, but it was slow back then, and that was before I even had the necessity for any extensions. Even now, for me Chrome cold boots far faster than Firefox does - after doing a taskkill /f /im chrome.exe, chrome opens anywhere from 0.4 to 1.2 seconds after hitting "ok" on a run dialog with "chrome" entered in it, but the same thing with "firefox" in it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox has come a long way since the day I switched that's for sure, but it was slow back then, and that was before I even had the necessity for any extensions. Even now, for me Chrome cold boots far faster than Firefox does - after doing a taskkill /f /im chrome.exe, chrome opens anywhere from 0.4 to 1.2 seconds after hitting "ok" on a run dialog with "chrome" entered in it, but the same thing with "firefox" in it…
Not sure about Android, but is cold boot time representative of anything? Personally, I do that two-three times a day, max. Open/close tabs, now that happens all the time. (To be precise: I don't care which browser does it fastest. All I care is that I don't perceive latency - milliseconds do not matter, hundreds of milliseconds do)