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

Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 64 posts

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#51

Post by gt565k »

rwg wrote: post #39
mattparlane wrote: post #33

Can't believe that no one has mentioned the chart yet -- a non-zero baseline is highly misleading. http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/browser_...

The misleading Y-axes on two of the charts on the IE blog post were the first thing I noticed: http://blogs.windows.com/ie/b/ie/archive/2013/06/05/internet... Here's the top chart (left) and the same chart except with a less misleading Y-axis (right): http://i.imgur.com/zI1UJeS.png

Hah! Great find. When I took a technical communication course, we explicitly talked about the ethical implications of misleading the audience by manipulating information and the perception of information.

Needless to say, the authors did a poor job of following standard ethical practices when presenting information to support their claim.

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#52

Post by wtallis »

cpdean wrote: post #27

I wonder how much more efficient text-based browsers are? Unfortunately Lynx doesn't support html5 video.

I doubt that text-based browsers have been very good about incorporating the latest advancements in JavaScript engines, so they could easily lose there.

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#53

Post by cl8ton »

rbanffy wrote: post #36
cl8ton wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I noticed that as I sit here reading the comments in Chrome that has 4gb of memory consumed and 2 cores almost pegged. IE10 is a great step forward, now if they would render with WebKit...

According to top, Chrome is behaving very well here. CPU load is below 10% as I type and memory footprint, although not negligible, is well within what I would consider reasonable (under 1 GB for 4 Gmail tabs and a couple less clever sites). Pegging two cores seems excessive. What are you running?

Windows 7 w/ 4 core & 16gb, Chrome will spawn processes like rabbits breeding if I leave it running too long (>4 days).

I have started threads here before about this and I'm not alone, I use it because the dev tools are awesome.

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#54

Post by wtallis »

rwg wrote: post #50
iamshs wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that misleading Y-axes? The intervals are same, only thing that will be different is the resolution, and going into that fine resolution amplifies the difference. I will not say it as misleading in a slightest bit.

The Y-axis should've started at 0 watts, not at (a rather arbitrary) 18 watts. Look at the "Flash Video" and "HTML5 Video" bars in the original chart. The blue IE bars are roughly half the size of the green Chrome bars, which might lead you to believe that IE only consumes roughly half of the energy that Chrome consumes in those tests. But as the numbers show, the difference isn't nearly that great. Starting the Y-ax…

The y-axis should have kept the baselines that the study authors used in their graphs (14.7W for laptops, 37.8W for desktops), since those starting points are what gives you the power draw due to the browser. What the Microsoft blog did by moving the baselines up from there was unethical, but having the chart show power consumption relative to idle instead of powered down is perfectly reasonable.

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#55

Post by lessnonymous »

mattparlane wrote: post #33

Can't believe that no one has mentioned the chart yet -- a non-zero baseline is highly misleading. http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/browser_...

Not to mention that the sites have no relationship to each other, so a line graph like this is pointless.

Here's the graph corrected for both zero-baseline and using a column graph: http://i.imgur.com/24UrJpB.png

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#56

Post by lessnonymous »

jmhain wrote: post #10

Wow, how crazy is it that every scientific study by Microsoft happens to prove the superiority of their products! What a lucky coincidence, since we all know they would never fudge the results.

I have no doubt the study is legit and nothing is 'fudged' beyond their own presentation of the graphs and other things their marketing department have done to promote the study.

The obvious truth is that Microsoft will only commission a study on something they've already proven to themselves internally. As will every other company on the planet.

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#57

Post by lessnonymous »

In other news, the material used to cover seats in a BMW has the highest¹ thread-count of all luxury car models.

____

1. Totally made this up. The point being that nobody chooses a car based on the thread-count of the material in the seats. And nobody chooses a browser based on the power draw.

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#59

Post by galaktor »

lessnonymous wrote: post #57

In other news, the material used to cover seats in a BMW has the highest¹ thread-count of all luxury car models. ____ 1. Totally made this up. The point being that nobody chooses a car based on the thread-count of the material in the seats. And nobody chooses a browser based on the power draw.

I agree that this is a metric that will hardly matter to anybody IRL. Maybe when it comes to mobile devices (Surface?) and limited battery life, but I'm not sure how relevant that even is (I wouldn't think that surfing the web draws most power on a Surface).

Re: Microsoft: Internet Explorer 10 Is The Most Energy-Efficient Browser

#60

Post by rbanffy »

cl8ton wrote: post #53
rbanffy wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to top, Chrome is behaving very well here. CPU load is below 10% as I type and memory footprint, although not negligible, is well within what I would consider reasonable (under 1 GB for 4 Gmail tabs and a couple less clever sites). Pegging two cores seems excessive. What are you running?

Windows 7 w/ 4 core & 16gb, Chrome will spawn processes like rabbits breeding if I leave it running too long (>4 days). I have started threads here before about this and I'm not alone, I use it because the dev tools are awesome.

Interesting... maybe it's something specific to Chrome on Windows or, possibly, a plugin. I'm running it both at home and at work and it stays happy even after a week on Esser machines.
Post reply on HN