Welp, most of the time it's not a full-on puke, but more of a hitch.Inkmonkey said:Great Orange Orangutans! I'm pretty much exclusive to Safari now. Haven't had any problems with websites "puking."
It's funny because I have the opposite opinion. Maybe it has something to do with the speed of the computer. I have a 3.5 year old iBook, and Safari runs noticeable faster than Firefox. Perhaps when I get my PowerMac, Firefox will become a more attractive option.bousozoku said:I use Firefox most of the time and it works much better than anything else for me. I find Safari useful only when the website doesn't work well with Firefox. The speed and ease of use with Firefox just seems to fit me better. It seems to support the Macintosh philosophy better than anything else, including Safari.
You have to access a 64-bit website to see the difference. Duh!MacsRgr8 said:
Hmmm...maybe it's designed to devote one processor to each tab. As long as you run only two tabs. Just think of what it'll be like when macosrumors' quad-core PM's come out! *decides to shut up now*stoid said:Not sure that a browser really needs the whole G5 optimiztion, though I could be wrong.
What is idle, really? Turn off your animated .gif files. Thunderbird uses a lot of the same base code and takes around 2 percent, as does Firefox when it's not displaying animation.AmigoMac said:nice browser, faster than camino, right now and IMO... but it's taking 14% CPU when idle
Have you tried it?stoid said:You have to access a 64-bit website to see the difference. Duh!
Not sure that a browser really needs the whole G5 optimiztion, though I could be wrong.