To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
firefox does not actually look bad
the article in question used firefox just because it makes it more "newsworthy" to talk of firefox
firefox is not the fastest in javascript at all, albeit they're working on it, i can't feel anything going "slow" in real life, except the initial startup.
html rendering itself is extremely competitive
firefox does not actually look bad
Indeed it doesn't. That's why I responded to the poster: there just is no need to jump to Firefox's defence like that. People just wanted to see how Konq-webkit compares to recent development version of Firefox and they did, nothing else. There is absolutely nothing wrong with comparing something current against another current thing, just do another comparison later on if you ain't satisfied with the current results.




Member since:
2006-02-15
Wait until Firefox 4 will be released, and compare then. The current beta is still significantly behind in performance from the planned release version.
I don't understand this mentality. It sounds just like you're just trying to defend Firefox and make it not look bad, ie. an excuse.
What's wrong with comparing _current_ development to _current_ development? There will always be something later on, you just can't ask everyone to wait until the next big thing before allowing comparisons.
Firefox v4 will come when it's ready and will undoubtedly get benchmarks done then but that's then, not now. This is now.