Linked by David Adams on Mon 19th Jul 2010 15:56 UTC, submitted by Jonathan DePrizio
Linux Maverick Meerkat, the version of Ubuntu slated to be released later this year, brings with it several features and improvements that the Linux community has been eagerly looking forward to. I've taken a look at the blueprints for this next release, and picked out a few of the major items that Linux end-users will be interested in. Here are 5 things to look forward to in Ubuntu 10.10.
Thread beginning with comment 434018
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Chromium
by vivainio on Mon 19th Jul 2010 17:32 UTC in reply to "Chromium"
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26


I guess most netbooks have hard drives now, but IMHO for your classic SSD based netbook Chrome isn't entirely ideal since there is no way to turn off disk caching


I have a classic SSD based netbook (asus eee 900) running Lucid, and Chrome is much, much faster than Firefox there.

They have an interesting way of spinnig it:

Ubuntu 10.10 aims to improve netbook support (using its Ubuntu Netbook Edition release), and part of this is a migration to the light-weight Chromium browser.


I wouldn't call Chromium "light weight", it's just faster. It's not like it's a reduced experience or anything (improved security through process separation, etc).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Chromium
by dylansmrjones on Tue 20th Jul 2010 07:26 in reply to "RE: Chromium"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Chromium (and WebKit-based browsers in general) ARE light-weight. Not in terms of functionality or supported standards (not that "light-weight" was ever intended to have that meaning).

The browser is light-weight in regard to resource consumption when compared with browsers like IE and Firefox. There has never (until now) been any doubt about the meaning of light-weight in regard to WebKit-based browsers. It loads faster, is less sluggish (particularly in regard to flash-infested sites), is less prone to crashing, and uses less memory and typically also less cpu time (all bets are off when visiting flash-infested sites).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Chromium
by Valhalla on Tue 20th Jul 2010 15:05 in reply to "RE[2]: Chromium"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

The browser is light-weight in regard to resource consumption when compared with browsers like IE and Firefox.


Well, actually that is a faulty generalization on your part. As for memory consumption, Firefox has the lowest when it comes to viewing multiple pages:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/firefox-chrome-opera,2558-4.htm...

The test shows Chrome to be the best at Javascript (those v8 guys know what they're doing), DOM, Acid3

here's the summary:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/firefox-chrome-opera,2558-10.ht...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Chromium
by renox on Tue 20th Jul 2010 07:44 in reply to "RE: Chromium"
renox Member since:
2005-07-06

"
I guess most netbooks have hard drives now, but IMHO for your classic SSD based netbook Chrome isn't entirely ideal since there is no way to turn off disk caching


I have a classic SSD based netbook (asus eee 900) running Lucid, and Chrome is much, much faster than Firefox there.
"

You misunderstood: he was taking about the lifetime of a SSD not the speed of Chrome with a SSD:
a MLC SSD has a not-so-great maximum number of write before it fails so you can improve the lifetime of a SSD if you turn off disk caching..

Reply Parent Score: 2