#WEB BROWSER BENCHMARK 2009 MAC OS X#
#WEB BROWSER BENCHMARK 2009 CODE#

IMO it has what it needs it is open source, it is very fast, and has a clean codebase.įirefox 3 is a hell of alot better then before in terms of resource use, but it is like comparing a mammoth to a hippo, just cause the hippo is smaller it doesn’t mean its not still big. My money is on webkit for the browser wars 2.0.

#WEB BROWSER BENCHMARK 2009 CODE#

It seems that it is not hard to code for a particular browser, but it’s much harder to code for “all” browsers, especially if you’re requiring things like interactivity… You can do much stuff with it without requiring nonstandard extensions. I do always applaud web developers who do great work by using standardized means, e. But why care, “The ‘Internet Explorer’ is the Internet!” 🙂 Well, that’s what “professional developers” usually call “optimized for …”. It’s stupid programming to require any particular browser. While I won’t say that some sites have a legit reason to force the use of IE in my opinion most do not. Hmmm… even if Webkit itself would not be used, an engine conforming to Webkit’s abilities would be a good idea.Īnd lastly. Not because it’s better, but just so every browser has the same rendering foundation. My last thought is that I wish they all used webkit. Maybe that’s the reason why I’m not interested in it anymore. IE is generally the only one that ever gives me any problems. That’s why it’s my most important reference browser, allthough I do prefer Opera and Safari for everyday use. 🙂 But it’s zjr ztuth for better browsers, too I, for example, would not like to abandon Opera allthough I found speed and easyness of use have decreased since version 7 of this great piece of work.įirefox is open source, works across more than one or two platforms, and is generally tested against many websites for compatibility. It’s hard to convince somebody to change, even if his favourite browser is the king of malware. Things like memory consumption, rendering speed or even standard compliance does not matter as long as “everything works”.

I think most users do use the browser that comes with their OS. With all things said I doubt the average person is going to notice a huge performance difference between any of those browsers. Interesting comparison, but as you mentioned, it won’t have a significant effect on the actual browser landscape out there.

Safari and Opera, however, are more likely to exhibit incompatibilities.Īs with all benchmarks we link to on OSNews: do with it as you please. No browser used less memory to open multiple sites than the Beta 5 version of Firefox 3, and only a few sites failed to display correctly. Firefox 3, due in June, promises very good performance and efficient memory usage. Overall, and taking the performance of the beta versions into consideration, the browser performance rankings are as follows: Firefox and Safari in a clear lead ahead of Opera and finally Internet Explorer.

#WEB BROWSER BENCHMARK 2009 MAC OS X#

The suites were loaded off local webservers, to Windows Vista SP1 and Mac OS X 10.5.2 Leopard machines. ZDnet used the iBench and SunSpider benchmark suites the former tests performance of HTML, XML, and JavaScript, while the latter deals solely with JavaScript. This puts increasing pressure on web browsers to be really really good pieces of software, and as such, ZDnet has a 7-page comparison of the world’s major web browsers, comparing Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, and Safari. He also wrote the first web browser, confusingly named WorldWideWeb – the world of web browsers has come a long way since then, more or less turning into a platform of their own. The first webpage was served off a NeXTcube at CERN, Switzerland, developed by Tim Berners-Lee.

Web browser benchmark 2009