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

51–60 of 338 posts

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#51

Post by e12e »

cddotdotslash wrote: post #45

While this is great for those keeping track of the stats, I doubt it will have much effect on the average consumer. Almost everyone I know uses Chrome; that includes family members, co-workers, tech-minded and non-tech-minded people alike. For them, it's been IE vs Chrome for awhile and telling them "Firefox is a tad bit faster" isn't enough to make them switch again. Unfortunately, I think Firefox lost too many peop…

> Even I know Google's policies and still choose to use Chrome purely because it's more convenient.

What do you find is more convenient with Chrome over Firefox?

I don't (yet) use all of the sync features in Firefox, but just having a unified history on Android and desktop is quite convenient, as is syncing saved passwords -- and knowing both how data is handled, and that I can set up a personal sync-server if I want to (actually tried that with the previous generation of sync) -- gives me peace of mind.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#52

Post by quaunaut »

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.

Honestly, my issue with Firefox all comes back to the Omnibar: I just like how Google does it better. And the only Firefox plugin I've seen that gets similar to that behavior, is slower at every step of the way. Also, having to manually add every search engine is a hassle even if you are willing to put up with the extra steps that plugin asks.

I really like Google, but I want to support open source(and am not quite willing to put up with Chromium). But for me, core usability is still king, and nothing really touches Chrome for that.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#53

Post by wodenokoto »

cddotdotslash wrote: post #45

While this is great for those keeping track of the stats, I doubt it will have much effect on the average consumer. Almost everyone I know uses Chrome; that includes family members, co-workers, tech-minded and non-tech-minded people alike. For them, it's been IE vs Chrome for awhile and telling them "Firefox is a tad bit faster" isn't enough to make them switch again. Unfortunately, I think Firefox lost too many peop…

That is not the point of the post. The point is that Mozilla for a long time have thought these benchmarks to be sidetracking and useless for normal users, and now that they are beating the competitions they can rightly say "we need to focus on something else" without sounding like sore losers.

Mozilla sees big potential in ASM-js and if the competition starts working on getting that optimized a whole new type of web application will be broadly feasible, which is something Mozilla cares much more about.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#54

Post by IvyMike »

jacquesm wrote: post #48
taf2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there is actually any evidence they use Chrome for much more than 1. disrupt IE/MS - i can say for certain they originally backed Firefox for this effort and only decided to split away to build chrome in the first place because they felt starting fresh they could build a better core and i believe they did. 2. enabling more people to build on the web, enables more of their ads to be shown. Firefox achiev…

There never was a good reason for Chrome to exist in the first place. Content companies should not produce browsers, it is too much of a temptation for them to optimize their content for their own browser and vv.

> There never was a good reason for Chrome to exist in the first place.

Chrome kicked off the browser performance wars, especially javascript. A fast and performant web was important to any strategy Google could have had, regardless of their status as a good or evil company.

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#55

Post by adamb0mb1 »

ooozingly wrote: post #29
Igglyboo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuinely curious if this is a common use case or not. I personally close chrome maybe half a dozen times an hour.

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

How old are _you_?!

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#56

Post by whatusername »

wodenokoto wrote: post #49
bzbarsky wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Google never backed Firefox with a billion-dollar-a-year advertising campaign like they have Chrome for several years now. 2) It's not an accident that Google's webservices work best (sometimes only) in Chrome. They're way past the "disrupt IE" goal. They're into the "tightly couple our web service and Chrome and try to force out other options" goal.

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.

What do you think it would cost to put an Ad on the google homepage?

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#57

Post by CarlHoerberg »

quaunaut wrote: post #52
skrowl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Honestly, my issue with Firefox all comes back to the Omnibar: I just like how Google does it better. And the only Firefox plugin I've seen that gets similar to that behavior, is slower at every step of the way. Also, having to manually add every search engine is a hassle even if you are willing to put up with the extra steps that plugin asks. I really like Google, but I want to support open source(and am not quite w…

That's fixed in 33: http://msujaws.wordpress.com/2014/08/01/faster-and-snappier-...

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#58

Post by miket »

MichaelGG wrote: post #39
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…

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…

Don't forget that a large chunk of Mozilla's revenue comes from Google: http://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/11/21/mozillas-reliance-g...

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#59

Post by hyperbovine »

wodenokoto wrote: post #49
bzbarsky wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Google never backed Firefox with a billion-dollar-a-year advertising campaign like they have Chrome for several years now. 2) It's not an accident that Google's webservices work best (sometimes only) in Chrome. They're way past the "disrupt IE" goal. They're into the "tightly couple our web service and Chrome and try to force out other options" goal.

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.

$1 billion is Apple's ad budget as of two years ago and a non-trivial fraction of Coke's overall annual ad budget. I call bs.

(http://www.asymco.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Screen-Shot...)

Re: Spidermonkey has passed V8 on Octane performance

#60

Post by BinaryIdiot »

bzbarsky wrote: post #40
taf2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there is actually any evidence they use Chrome for much more than 1. disrupt IE/MS - i can say for certain they originally backed Firefox for this effort and only decided to split away to build chrome in the first place because they felt starting fresh they could build a better core and i believe they did. 2. enabling more people to build on the web, enables more of their ads to be shown. Firefox achiev…

1) Google never backed Firefox with a billion-dollar-a-year advertising campaign like they have Chrome for several years now. 2) It's not an accident that Google's webservices work best (sometimes only) in Chrome. They're way past the "disrupt IE" goal. They're into the "tightly couple our web service and Chrome and try to force out other options" goal.

> It's not an accident that Google's webservices work best (sometimes only) in Chrome.

A web service that only works in Chrome? Maybe you mean web application (web service would be really odd to work in just one browser). Do you have a source for this regardless? I hadn't heard of this.

Post reply on HN