![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
> "Blarrrrrgh, MS sucks! IE sucks and all improvements are just playing
> catch-up to other browsers!"
> "Uh, IE8 loads pages faster than Firefox."
> "It doesn't matter, it's not *that* much faster, and besides, everyone has
> broadband now so nobody cares! Rewrrrrr."
I don't understand why or how a web browser could significantly add any time
to how long it takes to show a web page. Surely, 99% of the time is spend
waiting for the content, and 1% spent arranging the page and rendering it?
If pages loaded with FF repeatedly take 0.5 seconds longer to load than IE8,
then it seems like there are some serious bottlenecks in the FF engine...
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
scott wrote:
> I don't understand why or how a web browser could significantly add any
> time to how long it takes to show a web page. Surely, 99% of the time
> is spend waiting for the content, and 1% spent arranging the page and
> rendering it?
Unless it's heavy in Javascript or CSS or something that's going to make it
take a long time. Or unless the browser tries to refresh the
partially-loaded page too often.
Look at the sort of things gmail or facebook does in the browser and you'll
get an idea.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
unable to read this, even at arm's length."
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
"Darren New" <dne### [at] san rr com> wrote in message
news:49c7b866$1@news.povray.org...
> scott wrote:
>> I don't understand why or how a web browser could significantly add any
>> time to how long it takes to show a web page. Surely, 99% of the time is
>> spend waiting for the content, and 1% spent arranging the page and
>> rendering it?
>
> Unless it's heavy in Javascript or CSS or something that's going to make
> it take a long time. Or unless the browser tries to refresh the
> partially-loaded page too often.
I must say that if a page takes a long time to load due to heavy Javascript
I often end up closing the browser because it makes me nervous. Especially
if it looks like a simple page but I can hear my computer grinding away at
it, makes me wonder what exactly is going on in the background.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |