Ian Hickson wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, JTK wrote:
> >
> > Except 20MB and 8 times slower rendering.
>
> Well, 10MB and 4 times, but who can blame you for exaggerating.
>
Touche, mon ami. The difference between IE's memory usage and
Mathuzilla's is in fact not ~20MB (that's Maozilla's total usage), I
apologize for the mistake and any confusion it may have caused.
Maozilla in fact uses about twice as much memory as IE, so I should have
in fact said something more along the lines of ~10MB (actually the last
time I looked it was more like ~12MB, but what's two megabytes compared
to the factor of two difference?).
As for the "4 times", it was stated by somebody in .performance only a
week or so ago to be ~8 times slower. I have no way to directly compare
myself, so I can only repeat what I've heard from others.
> I refer people who want to know the accurate numbers to the
> n.p.mozilla.performance newsgroup.
>
Well that's the rub, ain't it Hixie? There really are no official,
reproducable numbers in .performance or anywhere else as to Maozilla's
performance in relation to either its predecessor or IE, is there?
Where's the charts and graphs showing Mathuzilla's progress on rendering
time, memory hoggage, etc, compared to these other browsers?
Let me guess: behind a firewall.
> --
> Ian Hickson )\ _. - ._.) fL
> Netscape, Standards Compliance QA /. `- ' ( `--'
> +1 650 937 6593 `- , ) - > ) \
> irc.mozilla.org:Hixie _________________________ (.' \) (.' -' __________
