Linked by David Adams on Tue 23rd Dec 2008 16:40 UTC, submitted by judgen
Permalink for comment 341314
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-09-25
Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox has probably gone through more radical changes than most other software projects. They completely rewrote the rendering engine, invented a new scripting language and then completely rewrote its implementation, putting every tab into a new process would not be a big change compared to these. I think it would have been very possible, and cost much less for Google, and instantly benefit more users.
The reason for writing their own browser is entirely different, it's more of a market strategy issue than a software engineering one.
This is a sane argument and I often feel Firefox is still too bloated, but I do depend on some extensions and the "platform" is needed so extensions can be written on top of it. You don't like ad blockers, well many of us don't like ads, but Google gets their livelihood from ads, and would never put an ad blocker into Chrome, so I still see a future for Firefox.
Apart from that, I have some software engineering type problems with Chrome. Excuse the tech lingo. Full-method JIT is bad enough, but full-file JIT is a complete waste of memory and CPU time, especially on netbooks and mobile phones. (V8 uses full-file JIT while Firefox does tracing JIT). A "stop-the-world" generational GC uses roughly twice as much virtual address space than a reference counting GC. The speedier allocation is moot for most JavaScript uses or on ARM and AMD64. Again mobiles have limited address spaces. (V8 does stopping generational GC while Firefox does refcounting).
Google basically cloned the Sun JVM's design for V8, and we all know how poorly that thing performs on desktops. Mozilla had a very conservative implementation and is slowly replacing parts with innovative technology while paying attention to retaining the ability to lower resource usage in the future. Firefox is just better engineered. Which means nothing of course for most users, and with enough investment Google can bring Chrome up to Mozilla standards, but so far I don't like their choices.