Web Browser Grand Prix 3: IE9 Enters The Race

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

phuzi0n

Distinguished
Mar 21, 2011
8
0
18,510

Mozilla said it would be out officially around 7AM PST so you've still got another hour or so. That's only an approximate time so don't go freaking out if it takes a little while longer.

If you bothered to read any of the comments on this article or even the news on this site, you would have seen that the builds are already available because they get distributed to all the mirror servers in advance.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/mozilla-firefox-final-4.0-download,12427.html
 
E

ericburnby

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
636
0
18,980
^ I won't be freaking out. I use IE and could care less about FF. It's interesting listening to all the FF whiners who are going ballistic over this article. Boo-f$&@&ng-hoo. You sound just like the Apple haters whenever some good news about Apple is posted. I wonder what you'll say when IE9 lays the smackdown on FF4? What other "excuses" are you going to have?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Opera has explained the reasoning behind it's memory management, "issues". Opera readily frees up memory when the OS makes requests for that memory. It keeps the memory for itself purely to make itself faster but returns the memory when another app needs it.
It is possible to make Opera perform similar to other browser via a simple settings change.

Read http://my.opera.com/mitchman2/blog/show.dml/167116 for further info.

There was an interview with an Opera employee who explained Operas memory usage very well, but I am struggling to find it. If found I will post.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Firefox 4 came out today. This article is now pointless. Start over.
 
A

adamt19

Distinguished
Mar 22, 2011
10
0
18,510
If this was a "test IE9 immediately as soon as it's ready" effort, could you REALLY not wait 1-2 days to include FF4 into the mix?

This ENTIRE roundup is useless to me, and I fear: many others, because we're looking at a version of FF here that most of us probably haven't been using for months as it is.

I have to also admit - this decision is curious, from where I sit. And I understand "we only test final products". I don't understand is why you couldn't wait a day or two to include Mozilla's next final product..
 
K

kurtextrem

Distinguished
Mar 22, 2011
1
0
18,510
Oh i lol'd so hard. Chrome and Safari both using Webkit Engine (Chrome has a more up-to-date webkit), so why the hell should Safari in CSS3 "Winner" and Chrome "weak"?!

All Browser startup very slow, except Chrome.
 
E

ericburnby

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2010
636
0
18,980
[citation][nom]Toms a sell-out[/nom]ericburnby, your average IE user.'Nuff said.[/citation]

ericburnby, an embedded systems software engineer owning haters since 2001.

Let me know if you want to discuss the techical aspects of software engineering some day. Feel free to use as many big words as you can, 'cuz I'm pretty sure I'll understand them all.
 
N

natmaster

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2006
32
0
18,530
[citation][nom]ericburnby[/nom]So, ummmm, it's almost 9:00AM EST and I went to firefox.com to download and try FF4. Where is it? On the main page they still only list 3.6 for download. Doesn't look lke it's avaiable for download as everyone says. Or perhaps I don't know the secret handshake to find where it it.All you FF4 whiners can STFU. Who the hell do you think you are that the entire world should hold up and wait to test IE9 vs other broswers just because your favorite isn't out yet? What makes your rights more important than mine? There are a lot of users who want to see how IE9 does (me included). Why the f%$k should I have to wait when IE9 is out NOW?And to the guy who posted about Crysis - you're an idiot. Crysis is a single product that many hardcore gamers are eagerly awaiting (because Crysis is well known for visuals and taxing your graphics card). There aren't 5 companies making Crysis which would require testing each version to declare which Crysis was champ. Your comparison is completely invalid.Every publication industry does what Tom's did. Anyone into cars? How many reviews have you seen where your favorite car didn't get included in a road test because it wasn't out yet? I see it happen all the time and has been for the last 25 or so years I've been reading car mags.Another example is the iPad 2. Customers want to know how it works. Why should magazines wait until all the competitor tablets are out before doing any testing? People want information NOW, when the product is out.If reviewers only waited until every company had their stuff available you'd never see any reviews done, since there's always a newer version coming out from someone.[/citation]
Goto bing, type in firefox. Click first link.

Here ya go: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/fx/

Now you know how to use the internet!
 
B

back_by_demand

Splendid
BANNED
Jul 16, 2009
4,821
0
22,780
After 10 whole pages of rabid fanboism, I can honestly say that it doesn't matter what you do or say people just don't care about facts they just want to believe what they believe.

The Firefox fans are obviously the worst done by here, but the rules are clear, full releases not betas or RCs.

I would suggest to all the rabid fanbois to download IE9 and use it for 1 week, if you still hate it then go back to your other browser - I certainly intened to use FF4 for a week when it is released and if I decided it is better I will switch, if not then back to IE9 for me happy that I have given it an honest appraisal.

But a final word to all those who pour hatred on Microsoft and clearly haven't used one of their browsers since IE6 need to just calm down, breathe deep and STFU.
 
E

econopacker

Distinguished
Mar 22, 2011
1
0
18,510
Guys, let's give Tom's a break. They did qualify their decision to push through with WBGP3. Although it clearly wasn't the prudent one, which i'm sure they realize now, since they'll have be hard at work soon putting FF4 through its pace, rushing to update a new article. Mozilla fanboys, I think all the scathing comments and pressure is punishment enough. I agree with most of them. They got the point.

Just wondering, if it so happens that FF4 beats out IE9, which I'm having second thoughts about now, will the "Tom's Hardware Approved" stamp be taken away from IE9 and given to FF4 or will they both get it?

ericburnby, embedded systems software engineer
ericburnby, owning haters since 2001
ericburnby, knows big words
ericburnby, can't figure out how to download FF4
 
M

mcshasta

Distinguished
Sep 11, 2009
24
0
18,510
Just dl'd ff4. They owe Opera money or at least some recognition lol.
Pretty sure the first task assigned to mainstream browser developers is to look at Opera and see how they can make it work.

Pretty pathetic Mozilla.........
 
elkein

elkein

Distinguished
Mar 8, 2010
110
0
18,690
To be sure in the last 24 hours, Mozilla updated their page to show FF4 as their new standard, somehow I didn't have trouble finding it before. I also have to say FF4 is pretty underwhelming on my old xp laptop where it could compete against chrome. Mind you that is entirely the laptops fault. With a million downloads they have like .116% of the market...
 
adamovera

adamovera

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2008
608
1
18,980
RE: The IE9 Kraken Score -
First off, thanks to everyone who pointed out the Kraken discrepancy. It doesn't appear there was any gaming going on, and it was a simple decimal place snafu after all. The IE score was input one decimal place to the left on the chart spreadsheet. The real score of approx 14,000, not 1,400, was in the original data spreadsheet and the chart has been corrected. The update should now be live. All apologies.
 
G

Guest

Guest
The results should be weighted. Getting almost the same score on sunspider should basically count as a tie. And negligible startup time differences should not count as much as memory usage or javascript performance. That's silly.
A better way to test memory use should be used. As stated, opera caches aggressively, which is a good thing. Maybe see how many tabs you can open before you start swapping?
Also running the same tests on an average laptop or netbook would be a valuable addition.
 
adamovera

adamovera

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2008
608
1
18,980
[citation][nom]gaspump[/nom]The results should be weighted. Getting almost the same score on sunspider should basically count as a tie. And negligible startup time differences should not count as much as memory usage or javascript performance. That's silly.A better way to test memory use should be used. As stated, opera caches aggressively, which is a good thing. Maybe see how many tabs you can open before you start swapping? Also running the same tests on an average laptop or netbook would be a valuable addition.[/citation]
We're constantly looking for a better way to weight the scores. The placement tables have been expanded upon each time since WBGP1. Remember this is a grand prix, so if one browser came in a few milliseconds ahead of another after averaging multiple runs, a placing does exist. The memory tests may be updated or expanded for WBGP4 to accommodate Opera. I wanted to do a low-end system edition of WBGP at some point. Obviously, the wolves (or foxes) are at the door demanding an FF4 WBGP ASAP, so that will have to wait. Thanks for the suggestions.
 
J

JovanE

Distinguished
Mar 21, 2011
5
0
18,510
Hi All,
First one big apologize for my previous "illiterate" post, but considering that it was written around 2:30 AM anything is :)
Then lets go back to this review.
So, Firefox 4 full release was behind us, and even Google Chrome has new beta 11.0.696.16 but we don't see any change in this review except for correction of that blatant error in Kraken test.
I am still at the point that IE9 is not bed at all but IT IS NOT the best eider. I also spent some time today testing Firefox 4 and Chrome 11 in all tests included in this review and I still think based on results that Chrome and Firefox 4 have the edge over IE9. Another thing that was not taken seriously in to account and tested in this review is performance of those web browsers in WebGL applications. So I conducted my little research based on particles WebGL test from khronos.org demo repository (https://cvs.khronos.org/svn/repos/registry/trunk/public/webgl/sdk/demos/google/particles/index.html)

And this is what I get:
1. Firefox 4 - 55.6 fps
2. Chrome 11(Beta) - 62.5 fps (even FRAPS activates so I can conclude that Chrome is using 3d surfaces)
3. IE 9 - 0 - FAILS because it is currently not supporting WebGL.

Conclusion, You can draw by yourself it obvious :)

Jovan Ivkovic
 
adamovera

adamovera

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2008
608
1
18,980
@JovanE:
I not sure how many more times we can say that the WBGP is for final products only. Chrome 11 beta will never be included, nor FF4 RC. If there is enough interest in prelim results from browsers still in the oven, that's something we can talk about for the future - Everyone, please opine on this. But the main branch of the WBGP series is a test for final products, period.
That WebGL test has been in the queue of benchmarks to add to the WBGP for awhile. When more than one browser supports it (so we can make a comparison), it will be introduced.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Couldn't you have waited just one day for if the "rumour" about firefox's 4 release was true?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom