| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
IE8 beats Firefox, Chrome, Opera, and Safari in battery life | |
|
||
| Time: 19:11 EST/00:11 GMT | News Source: Ars Technica | Posted By: Andre Da Costa | ||
|
When you think about benchmarking a browser, you typically consider speed, as well as CPU and memory usage. What about battery life, though? Laptop sales are outpacing desktop sales after all, so it only makes sense to choose software based on battery life, in addition to other factors and criteria. AnandTech tested a Gateway laptop with an AMD processor, a Gateway laptop with an Intel processor, and the Asus Eee PC netbook to compare battery life while running Internet Explorer 8, Firefox + AdBlock, Chrome 2, Firefox 3.5.2., Opera 9.64, Opera 10.0b3, and Safari 4. The two Gateways were running Windows Vista, while the Eee PC was running Windows XP SP3. Simple webpages were tested, as well as ones with Flash. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 462 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:43:53 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 12071 (203.210.68.145) at 9/14/2009 7:32:03 PM |
|
I liked one of the comments made:
""Battery consumption" is somewhere around #900 on my list of Reasons To Prefer A Particular Browser. "Having Features I Like" and "Not Sucking" are way up there" Seriously... isn't the bigger issue here that you can only browse for a maximum of 175 minutes (227 using intel)? We're talking under 3 hours in most cases. We need more research into improving battery life! And of course Chrome, Firefox and Safari don't last as long... they load the content faster than IE so the javascript/flash/etc is running for longer based on how the test was performed :) |
| #2 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/15/2009 7:55:49 AM |
| #1: You know they threw every test they could to find something that IE8 was better at, and this is the best they can do. |
| #3 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 9/15/2009 5:07:12 PM |
|
#1--pretty funny stuff. I use a mix of IE8 and Firefox, but I'd say 90% is IE8. The javascript performance is definitely not as good, but I like the way it handles tabs, and finally it contains a good recovery mechanism (recovering both tabs and windows). I also appreciate the process isolation--one tab crashing doesn't take out the entire browser (interesting about how the "browser as an OS" debate has restarted--browsers pre-IE8 (and Chrome) operate similar to how an app could take out Windows 9x itself). I like some of the extensions for Firefox, but I can't say I really load it down with much (usually I don't even install Flash, so it often becomes the "Flash-y browser" vs. the "Flash-less browser"). I never liked Chrome much... there are a handful of features that I found myself missing too much to try it full-time. Not that you asked for my opinion, but... yeah. I don't find IE8 lacking, other than that the javascript rendering feels sluggish on sites that use it heavily.
Still... lacking a true enterprise-grade, fully-supported managing AND updating mechanism is a big stumbling block for all non-IE browsers. |
| #4 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 9/15/2009 6:11:37 PM |
|
#3: Let's not forget Windows authentication. That's a big plus in my book. This post was edited by rxcall on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 at 18:12. |
| #5 By 12071 (87.236.64.42) at 9/15/2009 9:12:43 PM |
|
#3 "Still... lacking a true enterprise-grade, fully-supported managing AND updating mechanism is a big stumbling block for all non-IE browsers. "
I hear what you're saying but I'm not in charge of that at work so my response to this is that I simply don't care. Those features are at about the same level as "battery consumption"! I have Firefox, Chrome and IE8 installed both at home and at work - I've never had any issue with updates on any of them - even with Automatic Updates turned to manual. I don't need to play management bingo with my browser, I just need it to do the job. Firefox has by far the best developer tools available, Chrome is just an absolute joy to use anytime you're doing anything with javascript and IE ... well it's just not as capable, not as fast and nowhere near as compliant as the rest - it's just irrelevant to me. |
| #6 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/16/2009 8:22:51 AM |
| Chrome has always seemed awkward the two times I've tried to use it. As for IE, I can't use a browser that needs to think about it for 2-3 seconds just to open a new tab. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 462 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:43:53 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
