Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 1st Mar 2010 21:56 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones "Mozilla, faced with new competitive pressures, has begun work on three separate, significant changes to Firefox. First is a new JavaScript engine that - with a transfusion from the project behind Apple's Safari - should run Web-based programs at least 30 percent faster. Second is a new graphics engine for Windows that will take advantage of hardware acceleration for graphics and text. And third is a programming tool to help bring to fruition a new system for Firefox add-ons."
Thread beginning with comment 412204
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

Try to do the same thing in window and you will notice the difference quite easily, you have idea of what is "real" firefox responsiveness, your just used to the linux version.


Seriously, you are going to have to try harder than that. Windows is not faster than KDE4, epecially Vista.

I have now put Arch Linux with KDE SC 4.4 on two systems, one is a desktop with AMD 64 Athlon X2 @ 2GHz + ATI HD 4350 graphics, and the other is a bog-standard netbook with 945GME graphics. Both systems, BTW, have open source drivers for the graphics, and both can support a 3D composited desktop. I have enabled the composited desktop on both.

On the netbook, if I oscillate the scrollbar slider vertically at 2Hz or so, I can get the page motion to phase-lag the scrollbar motion by 180 degrees (2 Hz is after all fairly quick movement). On the desktop, I can't, it stays in phase.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Windows is no faster or more responsive than Arch Linux + ATI open source drivers + KDE SC 4.4. It is S-L-O-W-E-R.

Understand?

I can't speak for Ubuntu and GNOME, but KDE speed and desktop responsiveness is just fine. More than fine ... it is very good in fact.

Edited 2010-03-04 13:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

saynte Member since:
2007-12-10

Really, you wiggled the scroll-bar on two Linux systems? That's pretty convincing. It's not clear from your comment that you compared Linux against Windows in your small test, as you mention you installed ArchLinux on both, open source drivers, etc. Did you perform the same test on both OSs?

If there's a feeling that the Linux version of Firefox is not as responsive it is probably because there are some places where the performance is/was noticeably worse.

See:
http://www.tuxradar.com/content/browser-benchmarks-2-even-wine-beat...

Although they are from last year, the notion that the Windows version may be more responsive isn't unfounded. They even run this test through WINE, and even that layer of indirection doesn't stop the Windows binary from outperforming the Linux one.

Reply Parent Score: 1