SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" and KDE4Town.
Posts: 9,094
Original Poster
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by burgler09
I use Google Chrome and love it. Maybe it's in my head but I feel that it is a lot faster than all of the other browsers.
Came in dead last every time I tested it.
Please read post #1 in this thread and use the link therein provided and see how it compares to other browsers you use.
Came in dead last every time I tested it.
Please read post #1 in this thread and use the link therein provided and see how it compares to other browsers you use.
When someone claims that a browser is faster that doesn't mean that it magically increases your bandwidth limit, it means that the browser is rendering faster and feels in general snappier, something that can be easily explained by Chrom{e,ium}'s much better multithreading.
FWIW, I also made that test, with Firefox 24ESR and Chromium 32 (from AlienBob) and Chromium was slightly faster downloading, but slightly slower uploading. So your test (as mine) can only count as anecdotal evidence.
Anyways, what counts for me is not rendering speed, but functionality. As long as there isn't a Chrom{e,ium} plugin with the same functionality as Pentadactyl or Vimperator (no, Vrome and Vimium don't come even close) I won't switch.
I endorse Alien Bob's Chromium package. It feels fast, it works great, it's stable, and it has perfect compatbility with LQ. And, of course, after you install his chromium-pepperflash-plugin package, it has the best Flash player.
Regarding cwizardone's speedtest.net results: I will resist the temptation to dismiss them as coincidence, but I also don't think that they have enough enough data to prove anything. If I were to do my own tests, I would do one identical test every day for two weeks, and then average the results.
Like TobiSGD, I'm a user of pentadactyl, and it does not seem like there is a real alternative for Chrom^(e ium). (I also like NoScript and RequestPolicy.)
What I noticed: on my Thinkpad T60 (with an Intel Core Duo + Intel graphics), some YouTube videos were very choppy with PepperFlash. The solution was to install and use Alien BOB's great pipelight packages: with these, I can play those videos fine, though pipelight takes some time to load the first time. (Unfortunately, Google wants to drop npapi support, which pipelight uses, so the future of it on using it with Chrom^(e ium) is uncertain; this is what I found regarding this issue on pipelight's launchpad site: https://answers.launchpad.net/pipeli...uestion/241737.)
edit: Oh, one addon I liked was Google Dictionary. I did not find something similar for Firefox.
Like TobiSGD, I'm a user of pentadactyl, and it does not seem like there is a real alternative for Chrom^(e ium). (I also like NoScript and RequestPolicy.)
Same with me (all three extensions). There's not substitute on Chromium unfortunately.
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" and KDE4Town.
Posts: 9,094
Original Poster
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dugan
...Regarding cwizardone's speedtest.net results: I will resist the temptation to dismiss them as coincidence, but I also don't think that they have enough enough data to prove anything. If I were to do my own tests, I would do one identical test every day for two weeks, and then average the results...
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" and KDE4Town.
Posts: 9,094
Original Poster
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD
Because there is no point in it. No browser will magically increase your bandwidth limit.
Well, you keep saying that, and that is obvious, that is, if you are running the same test on the same connection one wouldn't expect the bandwidth to change, but some browsers seem, no, are, better, i.e., faster at retrieving the data and displaying it (painting the page, so to speak). So what is one browser doing that it can display the transmitted data faster than another?
Well, you keep saying that, and that is obvious, that is, if you are running the same test on the same connection one wouldn't expect the bandwidth to change, but some browsers seem, no, are, better, i.e., faster at retrieving the data and displaying it (painting the page, so to speak). So what is one browser doing that it can display the transmitted data faster than another?
In the case of Chrome versus Firefox it is caused by using a different render engine (Webkit/Blink vs. Gecko) and having better support for multi-threading.
* sigh. Alien Bob's Chromium package is stabler than Chrome was, but it still locks up in VirtualBox. I suspect that this is actually VirtualBox's fault; Chrome and Chromium are GPU accelerated, and VirtualBox's OpenGL virtualization is horrible.
* sigh. Alien Bob's Chromium package is stabler than Chrome was, but it still locks up in VirtualBox. I suspect that this is actually VirtualBox's fault; Chrome and Chromium are GPU accelerated, and VirtualBox's OpenGL virtualization is horrible.
You could try adding commandline parameters that disable the GPU rendering functions. Perhaps that makes Chromium behave better in VirtualBox. For instance, in the file "/etc/default/chromium" add these to the CHROMIUM_FLAGS variable:
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.