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 434071
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Chromium
by dylansmrjones on Tue 20th Jul 2010 07:26 UTC 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[4]: Chromium
by dylansmrjones on Tue 20th Jul 2010 17:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Chromium"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Those "tests" are not particularly impressive (but again, we're talking about tomshardware and that means silly benchmarks, like relying on info from the Task Manager in Windows - hilarious!). In general the review at tomshardware supports my statements, with the possible exception of the (btw. highly controversial measuring of) memory consumption with multiple opened tabs.

You should know better than relying on "tests" as those tomshardware are infamous for - and never rely on the task manager in Windows. It is embarrasingly misleading and inaccurate.

Reply Parent Score: 2