IE9 is Most Energy Efficient Browser, So Says MS

[verbalizer]

And those reports are correct. MS has dropped the ball on IE for soo long that 3rd party browsers like FireFox, Opera, Chrome, have all surpassed IE in just about everything. Going to any of those 3rd party browsers is like going from a Ford Focus with IE to a Mustang GT 5.0

the fact that MS is forcing people to win7 when still more than 1/2 of the world is still on XP when IE9 is incompatible with XP
is a bad bad move..
I know what they want and trying to do but someone needs to tell then that you can't always have it your way MS...

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]malmental[/nom]the fact that MS is forcing people to win7 when still more than 1/2 of the world is still on XP when IE9 is incompatible with XP is a bad bad move..I know what they want and trying to do but someone needs to tell then that you can't always have it your way MS...[/citation]

No one is forcing anyone to use Windows 7
Same way no one forced you to upgrade from Windows 95 to Windows XP

You upgraded because it was a better product with more features, more stability and more security

By all means continue to use Windows XP but my personal feeling is that since XP was released in 2001, if you resent paying for seriously powerful upgrade once in 10 years you are just being cheap

 

[verbalizer]

No one is forcing anyone to use Windows 7
Same way no one forced you to upgrade from Windows 95 to Windows XP

You upgraded because it was a better product with more features, more stability and more security

By all means continue to use Windows XP but my personal feeling is that since XP was released in 2001, if you resent paying for seriously powerful upgrade once in 10 years you are just being cheap

you have me confused bro...
all my units are win 7 pro or ultimate.

and the reports actually say that MS is trying to force a move to win 7.
read up on it..

people running XP on today's hardware is behind in the times..
almost like someone running a i7-920 with a HD4670..
ooops. (your system configuration)
LOL..

 

[maestintaolius]

This just in, company says their product is better than the competition's.

 

[roleki]

On the surface, this test and the results might sound kind of meaningless, but I deploy users to BFE India/China all the time, and I think they might appreciate the 10 minute boost in battery life simply by changing browsers.

Me, I still lean towards Chrome but IE9 is leaps and bounds ahead of its predecessors, and I'm getting more of an appreciation for it the more I use it.

 

[K2N hater]

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]No one is forcing anyone to use Windows 7Same way no one forced you to upgrade from Windows 95 to Windows XPYou upgraded because it was a better product with more features, more stability and more securityBy all means continue to use Windows XP but my personal feeling is that since XP was released in 2001, if you resent paying for seriously powerful upgrade once in 10 years you are just being cheap[/citation]
I upgrade hardware often, not the OS. I find it much easier to upgrade CPU, RAM or a video card than backing up/reinstalling all the software (upgrading Windows over an older installation often runs into problems and slowdown so even MS recommends a fresh install). It takes no more than 15 minutes to upgrade any piece of hardware with the sole exception of the motherboard.

Though I can't disagree with you concerning Win98 security and stability it didn't take long before viruses and spyware begun to attack XP flaws. So, in the end Win7 can be safer than XP for now but soon it will be the main target of malware.

 

[ProDigit10]

I'm not surprised. Ever since Firefox 2.2.20 they only became crappier and bulkier.
Firefox is far from the fast browser it was.

 

[Guest]

Most crappiest browser for me. I first downloaded IE9 from official MS website when it just officially came out. And then Win 7 didn't recognize its own IE9 a few days later and reinstalled it automatically. Now it's been giving me errors every time I use. I'm sure it has something to do with add ons, which none of them weren't issues before. No new add on was added. It's simply that when Win 7 automatically installed IE 9, IE 9 became crap. So I installed Chrome for general surfing now. Thanks Microsoft!

 

[NightLight]

well, I have to use multiple browsers for platform testing, and I have to agree that ie9 is one of the better, if not the best browser I get to use "out of the box". There's something to be said about opera, they do have a minimum frame around the browser... For myself, I prefer Chrome.

 

[jerreece]

Is it just me, or does FireFox 4 win this one? I mean seriously, IE9 had the most about:blank power usage (not like anyone stares at a blank browser page). FireFox4 also beats IE9 @ the Fish & News tests. IE9 only beats out FireFox 4 with the Galactic test. Knowing that FireFox is generally more secure than past Internet Explorer versions, I'd probably stick with FireFox 4 until IE9 has proven it's something other than IE.

And WTF is this Galactic thing supposed to simulate? It shows us NASA images of the galaxy? So it's like... using Google Earth or something? FireFox 4 won at looking @ News Sites and the Fish demo. Those seem more realistic when comparing to real life web browsing. If my browser is open, I'm looking @ email, news, or closing the browser to play a game.

And since this is all about battery useage, quite frankly I wouldn't use a laptop to check out 3D or high resolution clips of NASA Galaxy photos anyhow.

 

[Guest]

The rampant fanboyism over web browsers is really quite pathetic. People being so insecure about their choices they have to constantly defend them is getting retarded.

The real test of IE9 should be it versus other browsers using the add ons they have to lower power consumption as that is much closer to real world use. Add ons like Ad Block stop the computer from having to download and display graphics and even video on audio on some sites which uses much more power then displaying the page without. As such Browsers with an a Flash ad removal add on like Chrome, FF... can use much less power then IE which I believe does not currently have an ad removal add on.

 

[jezzarisky]

Any chance you guys could add power efficiency options to your next Web Grand Prix? I mean if you're adding all of those synthetic benchmarks, why not add a few more real world applications, like wattage used with one tab vs 40, video playback, hardware acceleration, and laptop battery time across several types of laptops averaged.

 

[Raidur]

So IE9 is incapable of taking advantage of my hardware.

Thanks for the info MS.

 

[col_krismiss]

Strange, Microsoft's website has a test for showing off IE9's effect on battery life by showing a meter that indicates how often the browser sends requests to the CPU, the left side (green) for very little (better battery life) and the right side (red) very often (worse battery life). When I tried it in IE9 it was way off the charts red, however Firefox 4 was very very green....

 

[belardo]

We can trust the source of these results.... NOT.

 

[Guest]

The "summary" table is misleading, though accurate. It's out of context and few people will understand that the "W" in the table means the amount of power from the battery that was used by each application. If you click through it's entirely clear, but without that it is totally understandable that like a number of comments indicate, someone would think Chrome's 7.821 W in about:blank is better than IE9's 10.044 W in about:blank. The reality however is that isn't W/h.. i.e drew 10.044W from about:blank over 3:45 hrs and Chrome drew 7.821W from about:blank in 2:56 hrs.

 

[geeksalive]

After I installed the release version of Internet Explorer 9 (release version) on my Toshiba A205-S4707 running Vista Home Premium 32-bit, the computer started semi-freezing in the strangest way. It acted like something was bogging down the CPU, in that EVERYTHING got super-slow: click on an icon & wait 30+ seconds for anything to happen, type 50 or more characters in a web form like this comment-entry form before any of them display, etc.. Yet the weird thing was that Process Explorer showed the CPU to be nearly idle.

The first time it happened, I shut down and restarted. (It took a loooooong time to get it to shut down!) Then it seemed okay for a day or so.

Then it happened again. This time I came back to the sleeping computer, which had been running okay when I left it. I woke it up, and it was back to super-sluggish w/ very little CPU use.

So I shut it down again (and again it took a looooong time to get it to shut down), restarted it, and uninstalled IE9. Now I'm running IE8, and so far so good.

I'm still not 100% certain that the culprit is IE9, but I think it is. My best guess is that it is some sort of bug in its GPU usage for hardware acceleration.

This computer has an Intel T2450 dual-core CPU, at 2 GHz. Video hardware is Intel Mobile 945 Express, GMA 950, 256 MB video RAM, 1280x800. Driver is igdumd32.dll version 7.14.10.1437.

Any ideas, anybody?

Dave
My email address is here: http://www.geeksalive.com/