Firefox 3.5RC2 Performance In Windows Vs. Linux
pizzutz writes "Andy Lawrence has posted a Javascript speed comparison for the recently released Firefox 3.5RC2 between Linux (Ubuntu 9.04) and Windows(XP SP3) using the SunSpider benchmark test. Firefox 3.5 will include the new Tracemonkey Javascript engine. The Windows build edges out Linux by just under 15%, though the Linux build is still twice as fast as the current 3.0.11 version which ships with Jaunty."
Firefox isn't slower because of ubuntu, it's slower because the microsoft's C compiler is better than gcc.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
This proves that, um, Windows,er, Linux is....um...what the fuck does this prove again?
And why the fuck should I care if there's a 15% difference in performance of Firefox between those two OSes? I use my particular OS for reason that have nothing to do with how well Firefox runs on it.
That 15% could very well be measured in hours when the Slashtard coders get through with their Web 2.0 abominization of Slashdot.
Putting the blame all on Firefox when there's no doubt a certain amount of performance penalty that comes with a Linux's less good compiler is just lame. How about telling the linux tool makers to build tools that output faster and smaller code instead of demanding that app developers solve those problems? Finally, what "linux" build was this? Did it use profile guided optimization and other performance features of Mozilla's official Windows build system? If not, you're comparing apples to oranges.
Actually, it probably does say something about the superiority of the Windows compiler and potentially other Windows tools.
A very large chunk of Firefox's developers have Linux as their primary platform. Linux Firefox absolutely doesn't get crap treatment from Firefox developers. You're obviously not familiar with the comparative qualities of the compilers on different platforms or you would asking "why do the Linux compilers get beat so badly by the Windows compilers."
I am SHOCKED and AMAZED that a compiler specifically implemented for x86 (with assistance from Intel) produces more efficient x86 machine code than a compiler that is based on a general purpose architecture with just a back-end code generator for x86. Next you'll be telling me that a Swiss army knife isn't as good for skinning animals as a Bowie knife and that an amphibious vehicle is neither as fast on land as a Ferrari nor as fast in the water as a cigarette boat!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Can gcc compile Firefox for Windows, so that we can more confidently apportion blame?
You know all that stuff that's running in the background. Well, it's running in the background, which means that most of it should be swapped out and it shouldn't wake up very often to do stuff.
Are there around some tests about other open source software that could help us understand the problem ? We can find some on open office : http://www.oooninja.com/2009/03/multiplatform-benchmark-30.html Or Tomcat : http://mediakey.dk/~cc/tomcat-performance-linux-faster-than-windows/ But that does not seem to gie a clear understanding of what's happening.
Actually, in most cases one would be better off with a Swiss Army type knife than a Bowie knife. Even on a large animal, parts of the skinning process are delicate and take a light touch, and the smaller blades are better at that. And then get to smaller animals - may as well just beat that rabbit with a rock as use a Ka-Bar. In addition, the saw blade of a SA knife is handy for cutting cartilage, etc.
A Bowie knife is a fighting knife, made more for killing and rough work. It will do other things, but not that well. That being said, when the meteor hits because DOD "blocked" the satellite information, and I have to choose 1 knife, it would be the Ka-Bar or similar. Why? Because I want to stay alive to have the opportunity to skin rabbits with my poor tool, and whipping out a Swiss Army knife will only make a zombie laugh.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
It's /. and it's sorry assed javascript, not firefox.
I went to preferences and chose 'classic view' to end this assclown behavior. That also ended the funny bars showing up in the middle of replies, the friend/foe icons plastered on top of comments, and other asshattery that was going on here also.
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
They also have an easier job. MSVC doesn't need to address as many architectures as GCC does. IIRC, there is no MSVC for s/390
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
I am shocked and amazed that the company which destroyed all competing commercial compilers by hiring their best developers away now has a really good compiler.
The horrible fonts were what drove me away from Ubuntu after I installed it recently, hoping to use it as my primary desktop. I'm sure you've managed to fix up your fonts somehow, but let me tell you, a default ubuntu install (from the 8.x series, haven't tried more recent) produced such an eyeball searing ugliness in FireFox that it almost single handedly convinced me that Ubuntu wasn't ready yet (for me). The fact that a few searches with Google reveal hundreds of various ways to improve the fonts actually makes it even worse.
Since you'll undoubtably deny this having not witnessed it yourself, just search on google and see the thousands of perplexed newbies being driven away from linux by the fonts you think are so beautiful:
http://www.google.com/search?q=ubuntu+firefox+ugly+font
Just because you can justify Linux's inferiority in this one area doesn't mean that we don't need to improve it.
Well, I guess the only reason to not compile with ICC is that "0h N0es! iNtel is t3h unfr33!" because every piece of literature I'v ever read suggests ICC produces slightly larger binaries which are greatly faster when compared to GCCs output. In fact, for this reason I seem to remember a whole bunch of guides from the olden days on Gentoo for how to install ICC.
And thus, the lesson we have learned is that when you have the engineers who designed the architecture on hand, you can write a kickass compiler.
Many of the rendering engine parameters can be set in Firefox's preferences. Firefox prefs are stored as a js file. Swiftfox makes a different set of trade-offs in these parameters than the Mozilla engineers. You're free to take your pick, but I'm goin' with the Mozilla engineers.