On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 11:35 +0800, Leon Sha wrote: > So you mean in firefox 2, the youtube works well?
Well, it is still pretty crappy, but it is better than Firefox 3.0. I've noticed the issue on heavily graphic/large html pages. Matthew > Kaiwai Gardiner ??????: > > On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 19:40 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > > >> On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Sorry to hijack this thread but the performance of Firefox 3.0beta5 > >>> has been painful to say the least - I haven't seen the same sort of > >>> performance issues as I did with 2.0.14 - oh, and for some reason > >>> Flash seems to be a major lag creating performance killer - or is > >>> that just normal for Flash on *NIX? > >>> > >> What sort of performace problems are you seeing? Is it possible that > >> since this is Beta software it has many internal diagnostics and > >> validation logic enabled in order to try to find any inconsistencies? > >> If so, that would make it slower. > >> > >> The other issue is of course that almost every major software release > >> is slower than the one that came before. The number of necessary > >> shared libraries tends to multiply like Gerbils since everyone wants > >> their small contribution (requiring another huge library) to be > >> included. Some might call this the "Microsoft domino effect". > >> > >> If you can create a debug build, I expect that 'spot' would be able to > >> identify the offending code which makes Mozilla slow. It was spot-on > >> for my own application. > >> > > > > More along the lines of, when YouTube loads, the animation is very > > jaggy; when videos play, the video play back (even will fully > > downloaded) is jaggy and out of sink. > > > > I'm wondering if it is my graphics card, because I have enough memory > > (2.5GB) and the CPU should be more than powerful enoug (3.2Ghz P4). > > > > Matthew > > > > _______________________________________________ > > desktop-discuss mailing list > > desktop-discuss at opensolaris.org > > > >
