Re: Recent comments on rendering speed
Bill Davidsen wrote: Robert Kaiser wrote: 3) You are free to work on speeding up JS in Mozilla even more, the code is all open and contributors are always welcome. Even if someone were to port webkit to SM, I can't imagine you breaking with FF and actually competing with it on features. This has nothing at all to do with WebKit, as WebKit is no JS engine, also Gecko is no JS engine. This is about things like V8 vs. SpiderMonkey vs. TraceMonkey vs. whatever. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Recent comments on rendering speed
Robert Kaiser wrote: Bill Davidsen wrote: I saw these today: http://www.infoworld.com/article/09/02/26/Safari_4_rivals_Google_Chrome_in_JavaScript_race_1.html?source=NLC-DAILY&cgd=2009-02-26 http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9128512 and I do think that there are people who will choose a browser based on rendering speed. 1) JS execution is not rendering speed. Rendering a website takes more than just JS - actually, for most websites, JS isn't the main factor in rendering speed at all. 2) SunSpider numbers are benchmarks that concentrate on running lots of JS commands over and over again in tight loops. Real-World JS is usually not doing that, so it's comparing apples with oranges. Both are fruit and somewhat sphere-shaped and still they are completely different. The problem I see is that "usually" is changing as people write more stuff in js rather than CGI.It has the multiple advantages of (a) better response to the user, (b) less load and security issue on the server, and (c) allowing the possibility of keeping user data only on the user computer. With all the new rules about data security, that (c) is important. 3) You are free to work on speeding up JS in Mozilla even more, the code is all open and contributors are always welcome. Even if someone were to port webkit to SM, I can't imagine you breaking with FF and actually competing with it on features. 4) SeaMonkey 2 will ship with the same TraceMonkey-enabled JS engine as Firefox 3.1, and the current versions are still far from optimized. As long as seamonkey chooses to follow firefox it will stand in the FF shadow. Webkit is open source and could have been used instead, giving SM a significant performance advantage over FF. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Recent comments on rendering speed
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote: Bill Davidsen wrote: and I do think that there are people who will choose a browser based on rendering speed. that might be so, but there are people who will base their decissions on what they like, not what someone else will tell them. Then again, whats a few seconds. So what if SM is a few seconds slower than safari. The importance of js performance is mainly related to more applications being written in js. So while "render" speed may make you think of displaying a more-or-less static web page, it's going to be more important as the browser becomes the computer for some significant applications. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Recent comments on rendering speed
Bill Davidsen wrote: I saw these today: http://www.infoworld.com/article/09/02/26/Safari_4_rivals_Google_Chrome_in_JavaScript_race_1.html?source=NLC-DAILY&cgd=2009-02-26 http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9128512 and I do think that there are people who will choose a browser based on rendering speed. 1) JS execution is not rendering speed. Rendering a website takes more than just JS - actually, for most websites, JS isn't the main factor in rendering speed at all. 2) SunSpider numbers are benchmarks that concentrate on running lots of JS commands over and over again in tight loops. Real-World JS is usually not doing that, so it's comparing apples with oranges. Both are fruit and somewhat sphere-shaped and still they are completely different. 3) You are free to work on speeding up JS in Mozilla even more, the code is all open and contributors are always welcome. 4) SeaMonkey 2 will ship with the same TraceMonkey-enabled JS engine as Firefox 3.1, and the current versions are still far from optimized. Robert Kaiser ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Recent comments on rendering speed
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote: Then again, whats a few seconds. So what if SM is a few seconds slower than safari. Those seconds add up quickly. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Recent comments on rendering speed
Bill Davidsen wrote: >I saw these today: >http://www.infoworld.com/article/09/02/26/Safari_4_rivals_Google_Chrome_in_JavaScript_race_1.html?source=NLC-DAILY&cgd=2009-02-26 >http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9128512 > >and I do think that there are people who will choose a browser >based on rendering speed. And as more applications are written in JS >I suppose "rendering" is evolving into "application program execution" >instead. > >Based on some minimal testing by friends >(I have neither Mac nor Windows) and a little of my own >(running Chrome under WINE) I have to say that the figures of 3x faster >seem to be at least "in the ballpark" correct, >and browsers based on the Webkit code seem to benefit. NoScript will yield *really* fast rendering speeds. (Most of what is served via .js is crap.) Only when Chrome has extensions (first and foremost: AdBlock) does it becomes a player. ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Re: Recent comments on rendering speed
Bill Davidsen wrote: and I do think that there are people who will choose a browser based on rendering speed. that might be so, but there are people who will base their decissions on what they like, not what someone else will tell them. Then again, whats a few seconds. So what if SM is a few seconds slower than safari. -- *IMPORTANT*: Sorry folks, but I cannot provide email help Emails to me may become public Notice: This posting is protected under the Free Speech Laws, which applies everywhere in the FREE world, except for some strange reason, not to the mozilla.org newsgroup servers, where your posting may get you banned. Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon: http://melaman2.com/cartoons/singles/mp3/p-potamus.mp3 http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
Recent comments on rendering speed
I saw these today: http://www.infoworld.com/article/09/02/26/Safari_4_rivals_Google_Chrome_in_JavaScript_race_1.html?source=NLC-DAILY&cgd=2009-02-26 http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9128512 and I do think that there are people who will choose a browser based on rendering speed. And as more applications are written in JS I suppose "rendering" is evolving into "application program execution" instead. Based on some minimal testing by friends (I have neither Mac nor Windows) and a little of my own (running Chrome under WINE) I have to say that the figures of 3x faster seem to be at least "in the ballpark" correct, and browsers based on the Webkit code seem to benefit. FYI only, thought this would be of interest. -- Bill Davidsen "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot ___ support-seamonkey mailing list support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
