Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 18th Aug 2010 21:03 UTC, submitted by suka
Mozilla & Gecko clones In a recent interview with Mozilla's Chris Blizzard talks about the rising competition by Google Chrome, the evolution of the web platform and the prospects for WebM. He also promises that Firefox 4 will be "one generation ahead" of other browsers in relation to Javascript speed.
Thread beginning with comment 437349
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by Timmmm on Wed 18th Aug 2010 21:48 UTC
Member since:

They aren't even the same generation yet:

Reply Score: 3

RE: Really?
by Gusar on Wed 18th Aug 2010 22:42 in reply to "Really?"
Gusar Member since:

Keyword "yet".
There are plenty of bugs open in mozilla's bugzilla that describe what needs to be done to speed up JS in Firefox. Who knows if it'll be possible to do all that for Firefox 4.0, but it shows they do know what needs work.
Also, your link shows both engines (TraceMonkey and JaegerMonkey) separate. The plan is to use both engines together, each doing what it does best. This page shows it:
Getting the heuristics right will be one of the difficult parts, but you can see the progress in the v8bench results.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Chrome Is Very Nice, but Firefox Still Better
by kwanbis on Thu 19th Aug 2010 04:00 in reply to "Really?"
kwanbis Member since:

I'm a Netscape -> IE -> Mozilla Suite -> Firefox user.

I was not afraid to change from Netscape to IE when I realized IE was much better than Netscape 4.5.

I was surely happy to come back to Mozilla Suite when I realized how much better Mozilla Suite was compared to IE.

And I was very happy to jump boat to Firebird as soon as it was usable.

I have tried Opera since the times it fit a floppy, and I could never get use to it.

I even tried kameleon, safari, and countless others.

I mean, I'm not married to any of the browsers, so i'm not worried to change.

I have been trying Chrome weekly, and while it is a great browser, the truth is that it is not as fast as people claim. At least not to me.

Chrome is fast only for the first tabs. But if you are like me, and have near 20 to 40 tabs open you would start seeing not only how much memory it uses, but how slow it makes the system in general, and Chrome in particular.

And I have a 4GB i3, with Windows 64 bits.

Maybe Chrome takes 200 ms vs firefox 300 ms at doing some weird Javascript, but for me, Firefox is much more responsive than Chrome.

And Chrome does not even have real extensions.

Reply Parent Score: 7

sorpigal Member since:

Yes! Your progression sounds like me, right down to trying Opera and Chrome.

If you're like me and have 100 to 300 tabs open at a time, plus 15 extensions and a UI tweaked to suit your workflow then you know that no other browser comes close to competing with Firefox on any level.

Yes, Chrome has the ability to have extensions created now but the reality is that every feature I want is not available yet, and some may never come. Firefox, meanwhile, has them. The only thing I want from Chrome that Firefox doesn't have is a tab-process manager that lets me know which tabs are consuming the most CPU or RAM so that I can kill them independently.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Really?
by tyrione on Thu 19th Aug 2010 05:17 in reply to "Really?"
tyrione Member since:

They aren't even the same generation yet:

Agreed. They are all talk and no quantized facts.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Really?
by CaptainN- on Thu 19th Aug 2010 19:37 in reply to "RE: Really?"
CaptainN- Member since:

Mozilla's plan is to integrate the two engines sometime in September, and they know they will not be "fast" until that integration work is done, and they have an enumerated list of issues to tackle to get to that point, which is how they are able to predict when the performance improving integration work will complete. That's pretty quantified - even has a schedule.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Really?
by _xmv on Thu 19th Aug 2010 19:33 in reply to "Really?"
_xmv Member since:

Seeing the speed of the progress (20% performance improvement per week?!) if they keep up that peace they've a winner

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Really?
by PresentIt on Thu 19th Aug 2010 19:40 in reply to "RE: Really?"
PresentIt Member since:

It's easy to improve performance massively when it sucks in the first place. But then you'll hit a wall where you don't have any low hanging fruit or easy optimizations to do anymore.

Reply Parent Score: 2