Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting

Dylan Parry wrote:

 > As an authority on the subject, Charles Sweeney proclaimed:
 >
  >> For test purposes it has 1,600 checkboxes on it. In Firefox it takes
  >> about five seconds to refresh the page. In Internet Explorer it's
  >> about one second.
 >
 > I'd suggest that the reason for this could be because Internet
 > Explorer is using check boxes which are part of the underlying
 > operating system, whereas the check boxes for Firefox are individual
 > elements that Firefox has to draw one by one. I don't know if this is
 > correct, but it could be an explanation.

Sounds logical anyway!

 > Also, why did you feel the need to put each sentence in a new
 > paragraph?

He he he he! I noticed that. They are actually very short paragraphs!

Not a bad habit. For press releases, printers and the like, double-
spacing (to use the old type writing term) is preferred. I think it's to
leave room for comments etc.

--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">http://CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

Dylan Parry wrote:

 > As an authority on the subject, Charles Sweeney proclaimed:
 >
  >> For test purposes it has 1,600 checkboxes on it. In Firefox it takes
  >> about five seconds to refresh the page. In Internet Explorer it's
  >> about one second.
 >
 > I'd suggest that the reason for this could be because Internet
 > Explorer is using check boxes which are part of the underlying
 > operating system, whereas the check boxes for Firefox are individual
 > elements that Firefox has to draw one by one. I don't know if this is
 > correct, but it could be an explanation.

Sounds logical anyway!

 > Also, why did you feel the need to put each sentence in a new
 > paragraph?

He he he he! I noticed that. They are actually very short paragraphs!

Not a bad habit. For press releases, printers and the like, double-
spacing (to use the old type-writing term) is preferred. I think it's to
leave room for comments etc.

--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">http://CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

Dylan Parry wrote:

 > I'd suggest that the reason for this could be because Internet Explorer is
 > using check boxes which are part of the underlying operating system,
 > whereas the check boxes for Firefox are individual elements that Firefox
 > has to draw one by one.

I don't know about Firefox on Windows, but I'm 90% sure that Firefox draws
its own widgets on Linux.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact" target="_blank">http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

"Charles Sweeney" <me.RemoveThis@charlessweeney.com> wrote in message
news:Xns957AB181C8B17mecharlessweeneycom@130.133.1.4...
 > Just noticed something interesting.
 >
 > I'm working on a script just now.
 >
 > For test purposes it has 1,600 checkboxes on it.
 >
 > In Firefox it takes about five seconds to refresh the page.
 >
 > In Internet Explorer it's about one second.
 >
 > The delay in Firefox only became noticable when I added the checkboxes.
 >
 > This is on my local machine, so I don't have a URL.


May be related:

Firefox uses 16MB of RAM on my machine.
IE6 uses 5MB.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

Gordon Hudson wrote:

 >
 > "Charles Sweeney" <me.RemoveThis@charlessweeney.com> wrote in message
 > news:Xns957AB181C8B17mecharlessweeneycom@130.133.1.4...
  >> Just noticed something interesting.
  >>
  >> I'm working on a script just now.
  >>
  >> For test purposes it has 1,600 checkboxes on it.
  >>
  >> In Firefox it takes about five seconds to refresh the page.
  >>
  >> In Internet Explorer it's about one second.
  >>
  >> The delay in Firefox only became noticable when I added the checkboxes.
  >>
  >> This is on my local machine, so I don't have a URL.
 >
 >
 > May be related:
 >
 > Firefox uses 16MB of RAM on my machine.
 > IE6 uses 5MB.

Interesting. Just checked. Firefox is using 30MB, IE 15MB. A lot higher
than yours or Mir's, don't know why.

Xnews is using 25MB.

My machine is 512MB ram, AMD Athlon 2200+ (1.8GHZ), 80GB hard disk, Windows
XP.

--
Charles Sweeney
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://CharlesSweeney.com" target="_blank">http://CharlesSweeney.com</a><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

Gordon Hudson wrote:
 > "Charles Sweeney" <me.DeleteThis@charlessweeney.com> wrote in message
 > news:Xns957AB181C8B17mecharlessweeneycom@130.133.1.4...
 >
  >>Just noticed something interesting.
  >>
  >>I'm working on a script just now.
  >>
  >>For test purposes it has 1,600 checkboxes on it.
  >>
  >>In Firefox it takes about five seconds to refresh the page.
  >>
  >>In Internet Explorer it's about one second.
  >>
  >>The delay in Firefox only became noticable when I added the checkboxes.
  >>
  >>This is on my local machine, so I don't have a URL.
 >
 >
 >
 > May be related:
 >
 > Firefox uses 16MB of RAM on my machine.
 > IE6 uses 5MB.
 >
 >

What a strange machine you have.

Okay I have 6 copies of FireFox running (I need different windows). Some
of them have multiple tabs open. A single istances of FireFox.exe is
listed in Task Manager - 22Mb.

I have 4 copies of IE running (IE 6) all with different pages in them
(for testing). EACH copy of IE has a separete copy of iexplore.exe
listed in Task Manager, each 12Mb. That makes IE more than twice the
size of FireFox. IE relies on the OS to draw much of it's UI. FifeFox is
completely self contained.


--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.dhnewmedia.com" target="_blank">http://www.dhnewmedia.com</a> #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

In alt.www.webmaster SpaceGirl said:

 > A single istances of FireFox.exe is listed in Task Manager - 22Mb.
i get:

1 x FF0.9.3 == 18mb
6 x FF0.9.3 == 20mb

 > I have 4 copies of IE running (IE 6) all with different pages in them
 > (for testing). EACH copy of IE has a separete copy of iexplore.exe
 > listed in Task Manager, each 12Mb.

1 x IE6sp2 == 12mb
6 x IE6sp2 == 75mb

1 x opera7.54 == 7mb

--
i t ' s t h e l i t t l e v o i c e s<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

brucie wrote:
 > In alt.www.webmaster SpaceGirl said:
 >
 >
  >>A single istances of FireFox.exe is listed in Task Manager - 22Mb.
 >
 > i get:
 >
 > 1 x FF0.9.3 == 18mb
 > 6 x FF0.9.3 == 20mb
 >
 >
  >>I have 4 copies of IE running (IE 6) all with different pages in them
  >>(for testing). EACH copy of IE has a separete copy of iexplore.exe
  >>listed in Task Manager, each 12Mb.
 >
 >
 > 1 x IE6sp2 == 12mb
 > 6 x IE6sp2 == 75mb
 >
 > 1 x opera7.54 == 7mb
 >

Opera always has been super efficient... I think it is written very
platform-specific, where as FF tries to use a common codebase regardless
of the platform. That means a LOT of bloat. I'm running IE 6 SP2 and
FF1.0 btw.

*flicks her hands free of techie stuff*

Now! I have to think about what to wear to the Alien Vs. Pred premier
tonight I was thinking of getting REALLY gothed up!

--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.dhnewmedia.com" target="_blank">http://www.dhnewmedia.com</a> #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 22:50:50 +1000, brucie <shit DeleteThis @usenetshit.info> wrote:

 > 1 x FF0.9.3 == 18mb
 > 6 x FF0.9.3 == 20mb
 >
 > 1 x IE6sp2 == 12mb
 > 6 x IE6sp2 == 75mb
 >
 > 1 x opera7.54 == 7mb

I assume, for Opera, that's just the browser being used. I'm using Opera
right now as my newsreader, RSS reader, mail reader, web browser, and IRC
client. With two IRC tabs open, one mail tab and three HTTP tabs (plus
this compose tab), I'm sitting at 35MB.

Grey

--
The technical axiom that nothing is impossible sinisterly implies the
pitfall corollory that nothing is ridiculous.
- <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.greywyvern.com" target="_blank">http://www.greywyvern.com</a> - Orca Knowledgebase: Completely CSS styleable
Knowledgebase/FAQ system<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

As an authority on the subject, SpaceGirl proclaimed:

 > Now! I have to think about what to wear to the Alien Vs. Pred premier
 > tonight I was thinking of getting REALLY gothed up!

Nah. You need to wear your pyjamas. Also take a pillow and a mug of hot
chocolate. Favourite teddy-bear might be a good idea too

--
Dylan Parry
<a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://webpageworkshop.co.uk" target="_blank">http://webpageworkshop.co.uk</a> - FREE Web tutorials and references<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:04:47 +0100, SpaceGirl
<NOtheSpaceGirlSPAM.RemoveThis@subhuman.net> wrote:

 > brucie wrote:
  >> In alt.www.webmaster SpaceGirl said:
  >>
   >>> A single istances of FireFox.exe is listed in Task Manager - 22Mb.
  >> i get:
  >> 1 x FF0.9.3 == 18mb
  >> 6 x FF0.9.3 == 20mb
   >>> I have 4 copies of IE running (IE 6) all with different pages in them
   >>> (for testing). EACH copy of IE has a separete copy of iexplore.exe
   >>> listed in Task Manager, each 12Mb.
  >> 1 x IE6sp2 == 12mb
  >> 6 x IE6sp2 == 75mb
  >> 1 x opera7.54 == 7mb
  >>
 >
 > Opera always has been super efficient... I think it is written very
 > platform-specific, where as FF tries to use a common codebase regardless
 > of the platform.

O_o

Opera 7.54 (the latest version) is available for Windows, Linux, FreeBSD,
Solaris and Mac. AFAIK (and I chat with the devs quite often) they build
the code entirely platform independent, and then use a proprietary
translation script to modify the code for these five OSes automatically.
The different platform builds are often released at the same time, or at
least within days of each other.

The last time I checked, the only OSes supported by FireFox "officially"
were Windows, Linux and Mac.

Grey

--
The technical axiom that nothing is impossible sinisterly implies the
pitfall corollory that nothing is ridiculous.
- <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.greywyvern.com" target="_blank">http://www.greywyvern.com</a> - Orca Knowledgebase: Completely CSS styleable
Knowledgebase/FAQ system<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

GreyWyvern wrote:
 > On Thu, 07 Oct 2004 14:04:47 +0100, SpaceGirl
 > <NOtheSpaceGirlSPAM DeleteThis @subhuman.net> wrote:
 >
  >> brucie wrote:
  >>
   >>> In alt.www.webmaster SpaceGirl said:
   >>>
   >>>> A single istances of FireFox.exe is listed in Task Manager - 22Mb.
   >>>
   >>> i get:
   >>> 1 x FF0.9.3 == 18mb
   >>> 6 x FF0.9.3 == 20mb
   >>>
   >>>> I have 4 copies of IE running (IE 6) all with different pages in
   >>>> them (for testing). EACH copy of IE has a separete copy of
   >>>> iexplore.exe listed in Task Manager, each 12Mb.
   >>>
   >>> 1 x IE6sp2 == 12mb
   >>> 6 x IE6sp2 == 75mb
   >>> 1 x opera7.54 == 7mb
   >>>
  >>
  >> Opera always has been super efficient... I think it is written very
  >> platform-specific, where as FF tries to use a common codebase
  >> regardless of the platform.
 >
 >
 > O_o
 >
 > Opera 7.54 (the latest version) is available for Windows, Linux,
 > FreeBSD, Solaris and Mac. AFAIK (and I chat with the devs quite often)
 > they build the code entirely platform independent, and then use a
 > proprietary translation script to modify the code for these five OSes
 > automatically. The different platform builds are often released at the
 > same time, or at least within days of each other.
 >
 > The last time I checked, the only OSes supported by FireFox
 > "officially" were Windows, Linux and Mac.
 >
 > Grey
 >

I guess there's no excuse then!

I'd happily use Op if it didn't try emulate IE quite so much :/ And it
were free. Hmm actually maybe I'd pay for it, but I dont quite like it's
rendering.

--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.dhnewmedia.com" target="_blank">http://www.dhnewmedia.com</a> #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting 

Dylan Parry wrote:
 > As an authority on the subject, SpaceGirl proclaimed:
 >
 >
  >>Now! I have to think about what to wear to the Alien Vs. Pred premier
  >>tonight I was thinking of getting REALLY gothed up!
 >
 >
 > Nah. You need to wear your pyjamas. Also take a pillow and a mug of hot
 > chocolate. Favourite teddy-bear might be a good idea too
 >

And a good book? I've heard it's not very good. I will get a chance to
meet Anderson (the director) and some of the cast. If it is crap, I wont
hide it

--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ <a style='text-decoration: underline;' href="http://www.dhnewmedia.com" target="_blank">http://www.dhnewmedia.com</a> #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Firefox versus Internet Explorer - interesting