Web Browser Grand Prix 3: IE9 Enters The Race

[bwcbwc]

[citation][nom]adamovera[/nom]We only test final products in the WBGP.Where are ya'll getting a set date from?We add/modify tests every time with the WBGP. We're already looking into those suggestions.Doh! Fixing that now.[/citation]
1) Fair enough. But the deadline couldn't wait a week to include FF 4 final? Even allowing for the previous delays during beta, FF has a pretty good record of meeting their dates once the release candidates actually come out.
2) citation for set date: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/21/firefox_4_release_candidate_2/ -- ""There is no change required to our schedule. We still expect to release the final version of Firefox 4 for Windows, OSX and Linux on March 22nd as planned." -- Admittedly this statement came out after your original editorial decision...
3) As long as FF 4 gets its own performance review, no problem with the existing article, but without a blurb in the current article saying you _will_ test FF4 once it's released, your editorial decision can be perceived as biased. Especially since you still haven't confirmed whether you will do another WBGP, or at least an update article for FF4.

 

[mosox]

We can't ignore that Firefox, for instance, is open source and as a result it has lots and lots of add-ons that count much more than everything else, the browser itself counts for 20% and all those goodies for 80%.

Didn't use IE in the last years, do they have something like Adblock Plus? No Script? Built-in download managers? Proxy button? Greasemonkey and all those awesome scripts? No? Then I'm not interested.

 

[Guest]

you wanna know why memory usage is so high after you close all 39 tabs? because opera has this awesome ability(ctrl + z) that saves every new tab you open.So if you accidently close a tab you can open it back without the need to search web page history

 

[17seconds]

I noticed a big increase in speed going from IE8 to IE9 a few days ago.

 

[JOSHSKORN]

Exactly how does IE have an 8 tab limit? I was able to open several more tabs than 8.

 

[Guest]

Two things are missing, 1. The Kraken benchmark isn't matching what I'm seeing in which IE9 would be half the speed of Chrome, 2. Media heavy sites aren't taken into account for scrolling or performance (IE9 absolutely crushes the other browsers with these sites)

 

[JOSHSKORN]

How about a battle between the 64-bit browsers AFTER Firefox 4 is released? I believe it's just IE 64-bit and Firefox Minefield that are 64-bit.

 

[iamtheking123]

And yet there's an article benchmarking the unreleased Crysis 2, so the argument of "it's not final and released yet is bogus". For that junk logic you might delete the Crysis 2 review since Crytek might rewrite the whole engine by tomorrow. Same with Firefox 4, you're being stupid to think anything major is going to change between an RC and final.

 

[natmaster]

That's absolutely not how we do things here.

Adam is looking at the previously-linked build right now (in other words, we're actually playing ball, despite Mozilla's rush to take the wind out of MS' sails). We'll update once we have data from a final build of FF4.

Thanks much!
Chris

You make comments like, "despite Mozilla's rush to take the wind out of MS' sails" and wonder why everyone thinks you're being paid by Microsoft?

 

[natmaster]

Hey hey hey hey! Calm down, all of you!

- 64-bit IE9 sucks, that's for sure; however, no other browser provide 64-bit builds on Windows (it is noteworthy that the only real 'supported' - i.e. binary provided by maker - 64-bit browser is Opera on Linux), so it's not TOO MUCH of a problem.

- such an article can take some time to write: in fact, today was the last day it could be published without looking too much out of place, since indeed, Firefox 4 comes out on March 22 (as in, tomorrow) - and it's interesting to see how good Fx 3 must have been since it's still able to hold its own against browsers one year more recent.

- Adam isn't 'pro-MS', considering he's the one writing the Linux articles for Tom's; still, he does have a point in that IE9 is a damn good browser. I tested all 5, too: if IE is not THE ONE for me, it's because:
* Chrome is too cramped,
* Safari plain sucks,
* Opera is a bit too awkward to use,
* and IE9 is both too cramped and not available outside Windows.

Firefox has unofficial 64 bit builds (with specific code for the JIT), though it will start including builds officially in Firefox 5 (months away).

 

[natmaster]

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/products/download.html?product=firefox-4.0&os=win&lang=en-US

More importantly: https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/4.0/

They create that when they are ready to start pushing to mirrors. Firefox 4 has been BUILT since March 19th, they are just prepping for release. That's why there is a definite release date.

 

[reprotected]

No FF4 RC2?

 

[natmaster]

I recommend adding this (http://people.mozilla.org/~roc/scrolling-boxes.html) as a test case for rendering speed in future tests.

 

[natmaster]

Well isn't this embarrassing? Someone else on your team actually recognizes that Firefox 4 is done, and will be released tomorrow: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/mozilla-firefox-final-4.0-download,12427.html

You guys should really coordinate better.

 

[hi2udog]

Is it wrong that even if IE outperforms the competition, I would still feel just... dirty using it?

 

[Spawn666948]

But, how is IE9 when you click the back button? Sounds like a silly question, but, that's one of the things I've hated about IE. Takes forever to simply go back..."I was just there you idiot", I says to IE.

 

[mcshasta]

These articles always convince me that Opera needs a marketing budget.
No need for add-ons. Firefox reminds me of a microsoft product. Always having to develop the additional functionality it should have to begin with.

 

[ubercake]

New IE 9 is good, but it's just like Chrome. Chrome has been good from the beginning. Safari's always behind a few years. Are people still using Mozilla and Firefox?

 

[dark_lord69]

Well hopefully that will quiet these extreme fanboys. I'm not a fanboy of any browser but I do us IE because it's already installed anyways and I don't like a bunch of unnessary programs on my comuter. That being said I do agree with others that if FireFox 4 is supposed to come out tomorrow it should have been included in this test. Perhaps we can get an update with the new competitor?

 

[11796pcs]

I can actually tell on my HP notebook with 1 GB or RAM (I know scary right, it's also running Vista) that IE9 is faster than Chrome- it really helps when you are able to disable add-ons- really quickly and easily.

 

[oldbluekid]

Why haven't you taken down this feature review yet?
It is obviusly completely unfair/misleading when firefox 4.0 is out NOW.
I'm expecting to see some editorial action here.

 

[IzzyCraft]

for everyone commenting omg ff4 unfair they must have been payed off. I put this to you, YOU guys must all be payed by firefox to throw these accusations, try using hanlon's razor for a change assume incompetence over malice. Throwing ff4 why not rc1 why not chrome 11 why not opera nightly builds there even after reading the comments that explain mistakes in the articles that will be fixed and also the timing of the release of this article is well something...

 

[PudgyChicken]

So Safari pretty much is the worst of all tested. Who would've guessed lol. Apple should cut their losses and drop it like its hot.

 

[Guest]

I'm already using FF4. The official announcement and release is set for tomorrow, but you can already upgrade the RC1 to final.
Not including FF4 on IE9 tests is ridiculous.

 

[g-t-o]

This article is terrible. I love how there's a Firefox 4 final build link ON YOUR OWN SITE IN THE NEWS and it's not included in the test. Way to drop the ball.