beerbaron23's comments

Errrr Android ART is a VM and no you can't write games in C/C++ on Android. While technically it can be done it's pretty much impossible to get it off the ground and running because of the VM in place.

There is a website that lists the games people have created to try it successfully, they give links to couple of them which made it into the Android store and basically you can tell by all the feedback that the game won't load. You can try to run the games too and see if you're lucky, I wasn't....

Objective-C is very quite fast, several notches faster then Java apps

Same engine but it is tweaked heavily to run lighter and they have a nice power saving mode as well.

Watch out for Opera's add block, it works through a proxy to compress data, thus they know your every move online too...

If saving battery life is your goal then run Safari, nothing can touch it. Although Opera does now have a mobile energy saving mode you should check out.

But they are tracking and spying on their users and using strong arming tactics to keep the "Chrome" branding. Firefox has been faster and uses less resources for a good while now and Opera is at least offering Mobile mode to say power while on battery (Even though it's powered by the Blink engine).

An what Chrome is giving out is "Tier1" search results only fed to their browser (Thus search results are more accurate using Chrome.... and now Google Earth is "Chrome Only" which uses WebGL and the latest tests show Firefox is still over 3x as fast with WebGL content then Chrome.

Electron is HORRIBLE, enabling people to write apps in Javascript while using all your PC"s resources is insane. "Etcher" a program written in electron who's sole purpose is simply an "ISO USB Writer" comes with a payload of 180mb's on disk and over 200MB's of RAM and runs like an old dog with cancer... along with the other electron apps. This could have been written with something we had for decades with little overhead and small payload, it's called Python...

Yeah, some users created a channel on Soulseek and it's now the biggest channel on it.

Correct, Montréal is already way way ahead of Toronto on the AI front. Google and Microsoft already invested heavily into Montréal. M$ donated 7 million to UdeM and McGill as well.

Well the OS's do manage memory differently and would expain the high OSX memory usage.

OSX soaks up most of your ram at all times and will put programs in the background into a sleep state. When they are woken up everything is transitioned smoothly like it was already running as it's state is in ram. The OS will also free up ram if it's needed by a newly launched program. Hence when judging the available memory on OSX you look at "Memory Pressure" and not available ram.

I live right near OVH in Quebec, most of the data center was retro-fitted inside an abandoned factory. It's also apparently the biggest data center in the world and features it's own hydro-electricity station (although I'm not sure if that still holds true). Amazon AWS is moving in there too. They have a little youtube clip of the project!

https://youtu.be/f4NgsUiCJ8c

Would this apply to thalassemia too?

I did, the solution was to uninstall signal, install it again. Then head to the app section in android and make sure the notification permissions are enabled

I ran your box benchmark at 1000 boxes and all browsers were able to sustain 60fps quite easily on my system.

Firefox, Chromium, Chrome, Safari and Opera on OSX

I guess the difference between Windows, Linux and OSX builds come with their own special quirks that break it for a percentage of people.

Have you given the Developers edition of Firefox a go? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/

Yah and that's why I included 3 very real world heavy benchmarks that run random multiple real world usage patterns for extended periods of time. An those were the benchmarks that Firefox pulled a head of the pack by a large margin. The basic Java Benchmarks like Sunspider and Ocatane that useless tech sites use to compare the browsers test nothing more then the Java engines of the browsers, pushing numbers while omitting the browsers respected renderers completely.

If we are comparing Chromiums V8 Java engine vs Firefox's Spidermonkey then Chromiums V8 is faster, but would you even be able to tell the difference?

Now day to day usability I am forced to use Firefox because I'm a tab whore and constantly run 80 tabs at all times. When I try doing that with other browsers they choke within an hour to up-to 2 days. Firefox allows me to run ~80 tabs with up-times approaching 2 months regularly. But that's the way I use my browser, other people would care about other features more.

Now of coarse different builds on different OS's you will run into different problems. On my Debian stable box, Firefox doesn't play nice and I'm forced to use Chromium, but on Ubuntu, Firefox performs solid. Now the main reason Firefox is running like ass on some systems is due to having old extensions installed, which forces Firefox to drop HW acceleration and fall back into compatibility mode. The Problem on my Debian box is that Firefox is not loading the WebGL2 drivers (gives me a bad driver error), thus HW acceleration is broken and it runs like ass.

You can confirm this on your install by typing in "about:support" in the address bar. If you are running 51.0.1 you can see if Electrolysis is enabled by looking at the line "Multiprocess Windows 1/1 (Enabled by user)" if yours reports "0/1 (Disabled)" then a shitty extension is forcing it in compatibility mode. You can manually force it on and type "about:performance" to see what extension is the culprit.

Also in "about:support" take a look at the Graphics table, your Compositing should be OpenGL and your WebGL renders should be the name of your GPU without a reported error. You can also "refresh" Firefox at the top right of the page, but if you can't get HW acceleration in FF then use Chromium of coarse, but if you can solve the problem quickly you will have another powerful tool to tackle the web and I'd like to know how it Performs in Arch.

Plus, since you are working with WebGL content it would be great to get Firefox working, cause at the moment Firefox is almost 4x as fast as Chromium on WebGL2 Unity3D.

But when they roll out their Servo Renderer late this year everyone will be singing a different tune. Firefox is already faster then Chrome with the Electrolysis update, but Servo is rendering completely on the GPU. I just tested the the dev build of Servo and it's so fast it almost kicked my dick off!

Servo has been in Dev for 5 years, so if google isn't working on something to compete with that, Firefox is going to completely dominate the web for years.

in about:support is your GPU composting enabled under graphics? I would recommend to refresh Firefox on that screen as well. Also you can check "about:performance" to see which extension is fucking you over.

I would recommend using adblock plus instead, as it is many leagues faster than UBlock Origin in Firefox since version 48 I believe (They optimized their code with Mozilla a couple months ago). Just make sure you go into the adblock plus filter preferences and uncheck "Allow some non-intrusive advertising" problem solved.

If your a power tab user, then Firefox is the only browser that can keep up with the 80 or so tabs I always have running, other browsers will will halt to a crawl if I attempted that, either immediately or within a couple days. Firefox allows me to power tab my way through a couple months before I have to restart it, it's just that good.

But there are people that experience the opposite and it's usually due to a shitty extension they have installed. Firefox will fall back to software and disable HW acceleration if an extension is coded like dogwood. In that case the user should check in "about:support" to make sure their GPU HW composting is enabled, that's usually the culprit. "about:performance" will list the extension that's causing the performance issue. Another issue is that Firefox has a hard time rendering Facebook in comparison to other browsers, since most people have Facebook loaded at all times it would for sure give them the illusion that Firefox is slow. I am still looking for a solution for that issue...

I'm betting it's your addon's/extensions/plugins causing the problem. A bad extension can bring Firefox down to it's knee's just like anything else programmed by Auntie Thelma.

Download Firefox 51.0.1 then in the URL box type "about:support" then look for the line that says "Multiprocess Windows - 1/1 (Enabled by User)" that indicates whether electrolysis is enabled. If it says "0/1 disabled" you will have to manually enable it.

Next you want to check to make sure your WebGL, WebGL2 and GPU rendering is accelerated under Graphics. If that's all good and your GPU is listed, go scroll up to the top right and click "Refresh Firefox"

when you restart it, go back into "about:support" and make sure everything is loading fine. Then you can head over to test it out http://beta.unity3d.com/jonas/WebGLBenchmark/ and then you should behold the power! Firefox should benchmark and run websites very noticeably faster than other browsers. The only exception is Firefox's inability to render forum list heavy sites (It chokes on them), so all other browsers will out perform it on Facebook, Flickr and 500px for the time being until that gets fixed. In fact if you are a heavy Facebook user, Safari performs the best with it, and if your on Windows then Opera gives the best Facebook performance. You can also type in "about:performance" to get a rundown if any plugins are fucking you around.

Also if you want to get to the root of the problem, when you install Firefox 51.0.1 in the URL bar type "about:support"

It will list HW acceleration info. You want to make sure electrolysis is running, in the line "Multiprocess Windows: 1/1 (Enabled by user)" should be enabled by default, if it says 0/1 it not active and you will have to manually turn it on.

You can also see if the WebGL renderer is loading properly. On my Debian box it says WebGL2 creation failed (drivers), which would explain my poor performance on that box.

It's worth a shot since Firefox's WebGL rendering is 4x faster then other browsers, it's worth your time taking a quick check.

> it is impossible to recommend Firefox in any case, because it performs so poorly compared to Chrome ...

See that's some odd misinformation that's been spread around since Chrome first was released, it was the fastest browser at the time. Well since then, Chrome and Firefox have been going back and forth on which is the fastest. At this moment Firefox is a good margin faster than Chrome since their Electrolysis update.

So yah, I'm not sure why all this "Firefox is super slow" keeps getting passed around without anything to back it up. In fact for WebGL Firefox is over 3 times faster than Chrome, so if anything Chrome is actually the old slow dog.

Current benchmark for proof: https://www.dropbox.com/s/58doo8csebp9l62/Bench.pdf?dl=0

Linux is another beast, on my Ubuntu box Firefox gives similar performance to OSX. But on my Debian stable box Chromium plays a lot better with it and the Firefox build feels like it has a gremlin in it haha.