Re:We need to go in the other direction
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
From Vista post: You know what, it appears it's different in XP and Vista. At work my experience was that the tabs didn't touch the top. In Vista, they do. Could someone test again in XP as I don't have any XP machines at home.
Re:We need to go in the other direction
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 1
Tabs aren't "obeying" Fitt's law, even when you maximize the browser they don't touch the screen edge to give them the magical infinite height property that Apple touts with OSX's menu bar.
I'm not dismissing Fitt's law, just saying that Google wasn't designing for it.
Re:Tab-per-process not so good for memory?
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I tested it, and with only iGoogle, a digg article, and this page open as tabs in both Firefox and Chrome, they had about the same memory usage. Firefox had 70MB, Chrome had 80MB. (I use Firefox 3.0.1.)
I opened up my user profile on Slashdot and ten articles I had recently commented on in both Chrome and Firefox. Firefox became unusable as it started processing the JS and it finished much more slowly. When the dust had settled, Chrome was using 180MB and Firefox 220MB.
I went to Digg.com and loaded all of the top hits then. Chrome's memory usage spiked much more quickly, dual core machine and all. Chrome started using a lot more than Firefox. 388MB for Chrome, 284MB for Firefox.
Then I killed all the Digg tabs on both. Chrome went to 186MB, Firefox went to 260MB.
Then I killed all the Slashdot pages I added after those first three tabs (iGoogle, Digg, Slashdot pages.) Chrome is down to 80MB, Firefox is down to 180MB. After about ten seconds though, the Firefox number went to 130MB.
Seems to be staying there for the time being. If I kill all the tabs in both browsers except for about:config in Firefox and about:memory in Chrome, I get 30MB usage in Chrome and 110MB usage in Firefox.
You're forgetting video cards and other hardware devices that have their own memory which overlay on top of your address space. If that address space happens to also correspond to physical memory, then yes, you are "losing" memory. In the case of a machine with two 1GB video cards and no PAE, you're losing over 2GB of physical memory capacity.
I for one say, thank fucking god, allah and the wicka priestesses, etc. and welcome to our new memory conscious, crash-proof browser overlords.
I am so damn tired of one tab slowing down everything in Firefox to a crawl because it was considered too hard to multithread firefox, let alone some more resilient measure that might protect me from crashing my entire browser because of a single bad Adobe plugin or whatever.
It should be noted that with high concentrations of various chemicals, just because the % concentration is 1500 times higher does not mean the "strength" is 1500 times higher. 85% phosphoric acid is incredibly dangerous, vastly moreso than accidentally spilling 1500 times the volume of coke on your skin (1mL versus 1.5L.) Though 1mL of 85% phosphoric acid wouldn't kill you, it'll do a lot more damage than 1.5L of coke.
Bill had a surprising amount of support from women when he was running for President, does that mean he's secretly a woman? That women were voting for him/her because of his/her gender?
Or is it just because Hillary really does have the support of a lot of women and you need to find more data to start asking why?
Actually, what you said supported him exactly. He said he suspected it was a temporary issue. Turns out, on the re-test involving a drive that didn't exist on the initial test, it was shown to be a temporary issue. A flash drive beat every other drive in every metric except capacity.
So... he was right. You were right. Everyone can go to sleep happy.
Loading software into RAM or storing it on disk should fall under fair use, perhaps the Glider folks just had poor counsel and failed to argue that so long as they (the Glider folks) weren't distributing Blizzard's code anywhere, the end user could do so either manually or programmatically and it'd be fair use.
Does my CPU need to ask permission to page memory to disk? No. It's fair use.
Don't buy into journalists and others grasping at straws here. They couldn't find anything different about the pool, so they start reaching for things that would be obvious to anyone who watched swimming four years ago or has ever seen a swimming event. Extra lanes? Common. Wave-dissipating buoy lines? Common. Extra depth? Eh, not so much, but I know my school's pool is more than 2 meters in depth and it's considered OK.
I think what you're seeing is natural, both the sportsmen and women are better than ever, and the swimsuits are better than ever. Result: world records falling left and right.
I'd like to see the NBC and other groups congratulate Phelps rather than talk about fluff stories like how it's such a fast pool. If it's so fast, and it's not that Phelps is simply the fastest swimmer, then, well, all the other swimmers should be racing for first rather than second.
This clearly falls under the commerce clause, as unregulated spectrum falls under a tragedy of the commons: he who shouts loudest is heard best, to the detriment of everyone else.
We can't very well allow any corporation with a many-megawatt transmitter to drown out everyone else and damn the consequences. Likewise, our broadcast television, cell-phone and wireless internet infrastructure would never work if people and corporations were permitted to just use whatever spectrum they wanted at whatever output levels they liked.
Let's just go ahead and admit that you crashed it, because when X goes down, 99% of programs will just halt immediately losing all of your saved work. I've never had X go down and then, like when Windows Vista's window manager goes down, have everything working just fine. Seriously, I encountered what must be a rare bug in Bioshock because I alt-tabbed into a maximized window, moved the mouse, and the display driver crashed. Windows brought it back online and informed me of that, and everything (including Bioshock) was running.
An equivalent error on a Linux box would at least take down the system, and lesser errors would usually kill X and thus make me lose all my work.
Slashdot Mirror
From Vista post: You know what, it appears it's different in XP and Vista. At work my experience was that the tabs didn't touch the top. In Vista, they do. Could someone test again in XP as I don't have any XP machines at home.
Tabs aren't "obeying" Fitt's law, even when you maximize the browser they don't touch the screen edge to give them the magical infinite height property that Apple touts with OSX's menu bar.
I'm not dismissing Fitt's law, just saying that Google wasn't designing for it.
I tested it, and with only iGoogle, a digg article, and this page open as tabs in both Firefox and Chrome, they had about the same memory usage. Firefox had 70MB, Chrome had 80MB. (I use Firefox 3.0.1.)
I opened up my user profile on Slashdot and ten articles I had recently commented on in both Chrome and Firefox. Firefox became unusable as it started processing the JS and it finished much more slowly. When the dust had settled, Chrome was using 180MB and Firefox 220MB.
I went to Digg.com and loaded all of the top hits then. Chrome's memory usage spiked much more quickly, dual core machine and all. Chrome started using a lot more than Firefox. 388MB for Chrome, 284MB for Firefox.
Then I killed all the Digg tabs on both. Chrome went to 186MB, Firefox went to 260MB.
Then I killed all the Slashdot pages I added after those first three tabs (iGoogle, Digg, Slashdot pages.) Chrome is down to 80MB, Firefox is down to 180MB. After about ten seconds though, the Firefox number went to 130MB.
Seems to be staying there for the time being. If I kill all the tabs in both browsers except for about:config in Firefox and about:memory in Chrome, I get 30MB usage in Chrome and 110MB usage in Firefox.
You're forgetting video cards and other hardware devices that have their own memory which overlay on top of your address space. If that address space happens to also correspond to physical memory, then yes, you are "losing" memory. In the case of a machine with two 1GB video cards and no PAE, you're losing over 2GB of physical memory capacity.
Do you know what trolling is? Because what is and is not a beta is entirely semantics, but whether or not you're a troll is far more obvious.
You actually want to read the book more after seeing that video?
You must be the one getting invited to all these market demographic studies. Did they ask you about Crystal Pepsi too?
You forgot to reverse the polarity.
I for one say, thank fucking god, allah and the wicka priestesses, etc. and welcome to our new memory conscious, crash-proof browser overlords.
I am so damn tired of one tab slowing down everything in Firefox to a crawl because it was considered too hard to multithread firefox, let alone some more resilient measure that might protect me from crashing my entire browser because of a single bad Adobe plugin or whatever.
We accidentally triggered one of the exploits we've heard so much about.
It should be noted that with high concentrations of various chemicals, just because the % concentration is 1500 times higher does not mean the "strength" is 1500 times higher. 85% phosphoric acid is incredibly dangerous, vastly moreso than accidentally spilling 1500 times the volume of coke on your skin (1mL versus 1.5L.) Though 1mL of 85% phosphoric acid wouldn't kill you, it'll do a lot more damage than 1.5L of coke.
Bill had a surprising amount of support from women when he was running for President, does that mean he's secretly a woman? That women were voting for him/her because of his/her gender?
Or is it just because Hillary really does have the support of a lot of women and you need to find more data to start asking why?
Actually, what you said supported him exactly. He said he suspected it was a temporary issue. Turns out, on the re-test involving a drive that didn't exist on the initial test, it was shown to be a temporary issue. A flash drive beat every other drive in every metric except capacity.
So... he was right. You were right. Everyone can go to sleep happy.
Loading software into RAM or storing it on disk should fall under fair use, perhaps the Glider folks just had poor counsel and failed to argue that so long as they (the Glider folks) weren't distributing Blizzard's code anywhere, the end user could do so either manually or programmatically and it'd be fair use.
Does my CPU need to ask permission to page memory to disk? No. It's fair use.
Did you not see the bit right after where you bolded text? ... double-precision float...
Safari marks itself to be installed -every single damn time-. I have to uncheck the box every time.
Yeah that pisses me off.
The villain asked for a kryptonite gun when he meant he wanted kryptonite bullets.
But how will we fund it?! Damn!
Have you ever had to spell out a model, serial or license number over the phone?
You don't even need to add your own distortions.
I enabled the object in Firefox 3.0.1 with NoScript 1.7.8, Flash version is 9.0r124, and yes, it did set my clipboard.
Don't buy into journalists and others grasping at straws here. They couldn't find anything different about the pool, so they start reaching for things that would be obvious to anyone who watched swimming four years ago or has ever seen a swimming event. Extra lanes? Common. Wave-dissipating buoy lines? Common. Extra depth? Eh, not so much, but I know my school's pool is more than 2 meters in depth and it's considered OK.
I think what you're seeing is natural, both the sportsmen and women are better than ever, and the swimsuits are better than ever. Result: world records falling left and right.
I'd like to see the NBC and other groups congratulate Phelps rather than talk about fluff stories like how it's such a fast pool. If it's so fast, and it's not that Phelps is simply the fastest swimmer, then, well, all the other swimmers should be racing for first rather than second.
If the hardware stack is open source, good luck with that requirement.
This clearly falls under the commerce clause, as unregulated spectrum falls under a tragedy of the commons: he who shouts loudest is heard best, to the detriment of everyone else.
We can't very well allow any corporation with a many-megawatt transmitter to drown out everyone else and damn the consequences. Likewise, our broadcast television, cell-phone and wireless internet infrastructure would never work if people and corporations were permitted to just use whatever spectrum they wanted at whatever output levels they liked.
Holy cow, 7e1022 kg? So that's where the universe's missing mass is!
Hint: Slashdot will always mess up superscripts, so either do 7E22 or 7e22, or do 7x10^22 or 7*10^22. The 'e' notation takes the place of 'x10^'.
I bet if an Omega Man event happens, the last one still gets spam.
I Am Legend would have been a lot less exciting if instead of zombie-people it were zombie-computers though.
Let's just go ahead and admit that you crashed it, because when X goes down, 99% of programs will just halt immediately losing all of your saved work. I've never had X go down and then, like when Windows Vista's window manager goes down, have everything working just fine. Seriously, I encountered what must be a rare bug in Bioshock because I alt-tabbed into a maximized window, moved the mouse, and the display driver crashed. Windows brought it back online and informed me of that, and everything (including Bioshock) was running.
An equivalent error on a Linux box would at least take down the system, and lesser errors would usually kill X and thus make me lose all my work.