Chrome vs Edge vs Firefox

Puppy related raves and general interest that doesn't fit anywhere else
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Flash
Official Dog Handler
Posts: 13071
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 16:04
Location: Arizona USA

Chrome vs Edge vs Firefox

#1 Post by Flash »

Chrome vs Edge vs Firefox: Is Microsoft's browser really faster?
Do Microsoft's claims that Edge is faster and safer than the competition stand up?
By Nick Heath | September 13, 2018
Microsoft is testing the idea of warning users they're installing an inferior browser after they download Chrome and Firefox.

But to what extent should you believe Microsoft's claims that its Edge browser is both "safer" and "faster" than the competition?

TechRepublic put recent versions of Chrome, Edge and Firefox browsers to the test.

Testing the browsers
The following benchmarks measure how efficiently each browser handles JavaScript, the defacto scripting language of the web. JavaScript is at the core of the modern web, with heavy pages loading in tens of scripts that in turn fetch more JavaScript. If your browser is slow at JavaScript, it's slow full-stop.

Newer tests, such as Ares-6, attempt to measure the performance of some of JavaScript's newest features, such as training a simple machine-learning model implemented in JavaScript.

That said, these benchmarks have their limitations when it comes to measuring real-world performance, with some such as Google's Octane 2.0 no longer being updated, so should only be taken as a general guide to speed....
He doesn't test the newest version of Firefox: Quantum.

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#2 Post by mikeb »

Hmmm ....google seem to be offering copious amounts of javascript which have the affect of making pages that are chrome centric...ie an old version of chrome works but a new version of firefox does not on one of my banks for example.
Its obviously a stratergy as microsoft did to try and dominate the web as microsoft did with their activex frontpage pages...most of the code is superfluous to the page function and indeed you can reproduce much using standard javascript as I have...I did so making html5 players. It also vastly increases web bandwidth which encourages such as contracts for mobile phones users etc.
How much microsoft is connected is had to say. Their browsers seem to continue to use the same integrated methods that provided virus hell in the 98/XP days but in terms of speed they have dlls that run on native operating system code which does give a speed advantage.
In terms of the exclusion...google add a function to their apis.... but until other browser makers know of it, it will cause a non functional page or a browser crash.... if Edge works where chrome does and firefox does not then they must be given these new functions to cater for where Mozilla do not...hence the delay to a working release for firefox.
Bear in mind Edge is Windows only.... which has always been the purpose of Microsoft including a browser. (ps removing it used to be the way to stop viruses but those weaknesses were mostly removed around the time of Vista)

If the subject seems messy thats because it has more to do with corporate gain, monopolies and politics than technology.

just my observations
mike

User avatar
Burn_IT
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sat 12 Aug 2006, 19:25
Location: Tamworth UK

#3 Post by Burn_IT »

Speed is not the only, nor, necessarily, the best, reason for choosing one browser over another.
I choose mine for the look and feel, which I fully admit, is not what one is "supposed" to do???

I will be quite cross when I am forced to conform to how the people who know best think I have to view things.

Change for change sake is unproductive.
"Just think of it as leaving early to avoid the rush" - T Pratchett

User avatar
Mike Walsh
Posts: 6351
Joined: Sat 28 Jun 2014, 12:42
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

#4 Post by Mike Walsh »

@ Mike:-
mikeb wrote:Hmmm ....google seem to be offering copious amounts of javascript which have the affect of making pages that are chrome centric...ie an old version of chrome works but a new version of firefox does not on one of my banks for example.
Now that I have to agree with.

How else do you explain my being able to still connect to my bank using Chrome 26 (only 43 major releases out of date, like).....yet the last but one version of FireFox gets the cold shoulder..???

Definitely some serious back-scratching going on there somewhere.

(I keep getting 'reminders' when I use Chrome 26 in Lucid - the newest version of Chrome that'll condescend to run on there - that 'this browser will soon be unsupported'. I've been getting that for nigh on 3 years...!!) :lol:

Crazy.


T'other Mike. :wink:
Last edited by Mike Walsh on Tue 18 Sep 2018, 09:54, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
rufwoof
Posts: 3690
Joined: Mon 24 Feb 2014, 17:47

#5 Post by rufwoof »

It's noticeable how google sites do seem to cripple other browsers by introducing delays - I very much suspect intentionally. Outside of that if a web site is prohibitive such as captcha's/whatever or just simple poor design ... then I soon redirect my business/interest elsewhere. If my banks web site started not working with my choice of (latest/recent) browser, then I'd stop working with that bank to instead use another.
[size=75]( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) :wq[/size]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=1028256#1028256][size=75]Fatdog multi-session usb[/url][/size]
[size=75][url=https://hashbang.sh]echo url|sed -e 's/^/(c/' -e 's/$/ hashbang.sh)/'|sh[/url][/size]

User avatar
8Geee
Posts: 2181
Joined: Mon 12 May 2008, 11:29
Location: N.E. USA

#6 Post by 8Geee »

Google sites (and their 3rd-party minions) do indeed slow other browsers down. The bloat/bandwidth usage is large, and very inefficient, at the co$t to the end-user (bandwidth fees by your friendly wi-fi ISP). One of the glaring incidents is the google-type reCaptcha mentioned in another thread.

About the only thing google, apple, and microsoft don't have is their own port for common and secure traffic as opposed to the standard 80 and 443. And not for nothing, they should... to allieviate the congestion on the standard ports. Sort of like switching channels on the television/CATV.

Regards
8Geee
Linux user #498913 "Some people need to reimagine their thinking."
"Zuckerberg: a large city inhabited by mentally challenged people."

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#7 Post by mikeb »

I did change banks because of their web fascism :)

Have been looking at domain blocking to cut the bandwidth...ie the google data harvesting sources and facebook for example...seems to help without losing functionality. The /etc/hosts file is a neat way of doing it and can be used on windows too.
less clutter = faster browsing
mike

Post Reply