Which replacement for Internet Explorer?

One of the best features of Firefox is the handling of Cookies, selecting 'keep until I close Firefox' will delete all spy & tracking cookies except the ones you type in 'exceptions'
in here you put all your forum log ins etc. Spyware is almost non existent for me since I enabled this
 
Everyone will have their own choices about which webbrowser to use.

The best thing you can do is download all the major ones & see which one you like/feel comfortable using :)

Personally for me I use Chrome.
 
Bear in mind it's JavaScript, not Java. The latter's run in a plugin and the former's used all over the web (including here).
TraceMonkey isn't the new JS engine it was going to be but rather an alteration of the existing one (with tweaks along the way) to store compiled versions of JS. There's some really detailed stuff about how it works here.

BillytheImpaler said:
Bah, I'm far too lazy to reformat the results: http://billytheimpaler.googlepages.com/JavaSunSpiderbrowsertest.xls

:D
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I get this (updated since the last time I posted about this):

sunspider.png


The oddest part of your results are Opera being so close to Firefox 3 - when I try it, Opera's miles behind (and I can reproduce it till the cows come home).

If you're looking for benchmarks, Dromaeo uses things like the Prototype and jQuery frameworks to do DOM manipulation so they're not all JS based.
V8 is Google's benchmark. It runs well on Webkit and less well on everything else (TM doesn't speed it up so much because it's recursion-heavy).
 
MarcLister said:
Opera 9.63 and Firefox 3.0.6?
Click to expand...

Look at the chart :p
9.60 (7404.44ms) and the 10 preview (b1229, 6692.16ms), and 3.0.6 (5377.12ms). When you take it into betas the gap gets bigger still (the 2008 nightly I posted results for should be near enough beta 2 and gets 1966.88ms).

Edit: Just updated to 9.63, first run at SunSpider gave me 7471.4ms.
 
tolien said:
Look at the chart :p
9.60 (7404.44ms) and the 10 preview (b1229, 6692.16ms), and 3.0.6 (5377.12ms). When you take it into betas the gap gets bigger still (the 2008 nightly I posted results for should be near enough beta 2 and gets 1966.88ms).
Click to expand...
I did. Too many colours for me and I got confused.com. :(
 
tolien said:
Yeah, it's a bit crappy - the items in the legend run in the same order as the bars. :)
Click to expand...
Ah sweet, thanks.

So 9.63 is slower than 9.60 you think? According to your results.

Looks like Chrome really is the fastest and has made impressive strides to be faster from an earlier build, going by your figures. :)
 
Point me too an every day site were i can see the difference between one of these super browsers compared to IE ?
 
Last edited:
MarcLister said:
So 9.63 is slower than 9.60 you think? According to your results.
Click to expand...

If I ran it a few times (the values on those charts are averages of 5 runs), I'd expect the difference is tiny.

Looks like Chrome really is the fastest and has made impressive strides to be faster from an earlier build, going by your figures. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, latest Chrome dev build is the one to beat, with Firefox 3.2ish (which right now, as far as JS goes, is mostly patches baking before being put into 3.1) and Webkit nightlies closing in.
If I CBA I'd try IE7 and 8, but this machine still has IE6 on it (and SunSpider * 5 runs I'd be dead before it finished).

.one. said:
Point me too an every day site were i can see the difference between one of these super browsers compared to IE ?
Click to expand...

Er, Gmail? AFAIK there's no actual benchmark built into Gmail, but most people report that it feels faster than IE7 at least.
Most of the benefit of making JS faster is that you can do more with it in the future - it shouldn't be a surprise that most developers won't bother doing something if it locks up the majority browser for minutes and takes ages to do anything useful. Some of the folks at Mozilla have shown off a JS image editor that goes from unusable in 3.0 to actually quite nice in 3.1.
 
Just downloaded IE8 RC. Last time I used it I liked it but it was still Beta and kept crashing. IE8 with IE Pro is really nice, and is now my main browser again :)
 
Good JS performance is really important because it's only through JS that a web page (as opposed to a web site) can be made interactive. Pretty much any site which allows you to change the content or appearance of a page after it's loaded achieves this using JS. For example, Digg's threaded comment system works using JS, and it's much faster on a decent browser. Sites like GMail will work much better too.

But the true value of it is in the future - sites are only going to get more interactive and use more complicated JS. If IE continues to be so much slower than the competition then the next generation of web content is going to cause it major problems as we move away from web sites and towards web applications.
 
I used to be a FF fan but I found FF3 to be very unstable on my machine. Since then I've switched to Chrome. It's a bit rough around the edges but the core browsing experience is great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom