Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google Chrome Causing Freezing and Crashing on New Mac Notebooks

faroZ06 said:
Flash in Chrome is more CPU-intensive than Flash on other browsers. It just uses more for some reason. Disabling Flash will sure use less CPU, but that is not an option if you want to view Flash. Oh, and it sometimes randomly pauses YouTube videos for some reason (on my computer, my brother's, my friend's, and others).
Click to expand...

Provide evidence. Otherwise, I'm calling BS on your claim here. Flash is Flash.

faroZ06 said:
And you call that low RAM usage??? I don't think I've ever used that much RAM in Safari before.
Click to expand...

You've never looked at it before then. Not uncommon for Safari to balloun much higher than that. Even Firefox.

At this point though, I think I'll just ignore anything from you. You're obviously non-technical from all the discussion we've had in the past, and you can't really back up any of your claims nor do you understand the concepts behind them.
 
KnightWRX said:
Provide evidence. Otherwise, I'm calling BS on your claim here. Flash is Flash.



You've never looked at it before then. Not uncommon for Safari to balloun much higher than that. Even Firefox.

At this point though, I think I'll just ignore anything from you. You're obviously non-technical from all the discussion we've had in the past, and you can't really back up any of your claims nor do you understand the concepts behind them.
Click to expand...

First of all, not all Flash is equal. Chrome provides its own Flash plugin, unlike other browsers.

I also just tried a test where I opened the same tabs on Safari and Chrome with no extensions, and Chrome used more than double the RAM. And in my experience, Firefox has used more RAM than Safari but less than Chrome.
 
spazzcat said:
Apple isn't going to take the time to test third party software, that isn't their job. That is Googles job once the new hardware come out. Apple will test their stuff and that is it. And even if they did test it, they aren't going to call Google and say hey we have this new system coming out and you need to fix this this and this.
Click to expand...

Lol so Apple will release hardware that hasn't been tested to work on standard browsers? I suppose it won't matter then if there is an issue with the graphics driver or a hardware issue it's someone else's fault.
So according to your theory all of Apples hardware (and software?) is tested in real world working conditions to test for unexpected problems..but of course only using Apple software that must cover every possibility right? They probably never test the Macbook with Office, Photoshop, Adobe Acrobat, Autocad, no they are sure to work fine, they probably don't even test iPhoto with camera's or printers.
Of course they test and fix their hardware and of course they don't fix others software but they DO test it to make sure if there is an error it's not their fault!
 
KnightWRX said:
Provide evidence. Otherwise, I'm calling BS on your claim here. Flash is Flash.



You've never looked at it before then. Not uncommon for Safari to balloun much higher than that. Even Firefox.

At this point though, I think I'll just ignore anything from you. You're obviously non-technical from all the discussion we've had in the past, and you can't really back up any of your claims nor do you understand the concepts behind them.
Click to expand...

Chrome is much efficient in terms of memory usage. On Windows, I still experience the age-old Firefox memory dump issue. I closed the app, went on Task Manager and Firefox is still running, devouring on my RAM.
 
faroZ06 said:
First of all, not all Flash is equal. Chrome provides its own Flash plugin, unlike other browsers.
Click to expand...

*facepalm*.

Chrome Bundles the Flash player, the same one you get from Adobe. It is Adobe's code, it is the same version you get on their website. It is just bundled with Chrome.

So no, just no. All Flash is equal in terms of CPU usage. Flash is Flash. Unless you're using a non-Adobe implementation like Gnash. But Google just takes Adobe Flash Player and bundles it. End of story.

Now, either provide evidence of your claim of more "CPU usage" or admit you're wrong and leave it at that.
 
boomish said:
Lol so Apple will release hardware that hasn't been tested to work on standard browsers? I suppose it won't matter then if there is an issue with the graphics driver or a hardware issue it's someone else's fault.
So according to your theory all of Apples hardware (and software?) is tested in real world working conditions to test for unexpected problems..but of course only using Apple software that must cover every possibility right? They probably never test the Macbook with Office, Photoshop, Adobe Acrobat, Autocad, no they are sure to work fine, they probably don't even test iPhoto with camera's or printers.
Of course they test and fix their hardware and of course they don't fix others software but they DO test it to make sure if there is an error it's not their fault!
Click to expand...

Why would Apple care if Googles software works?
 
KnightWRX said:
Uh ? I don't think you understand exactly what is at issue here. Chrome does not do "low-level video hardware access" that should crash your OS. It runs from userspace and accesses hardware through exposed userspace APIs (namely OpenGL).

Adobe did finally get a userspace API to use video decoding hardware, the VDA framework.

If Apple writes its kernel drivers and exposes APIs, it better damn well make sure that input coming from userspace is validated and sanitized before being executed on the hardware or fed into kernel structures.
Click to expand...

Am I wrong in understanding that the source of the kernel panic is in the Flash code embedded in Chrome? Doesn't that have access to the low-level APIs that Apple used to deny external developers access to?
 
John.B said:
Am I wrong in understanding that the source of the kernel panic is in the Flash code embedded in Chrome? Doesn't that have access to the low-level APIs that Apple used to deny external developers access to?
Click to expand...

No, the source of the KP is the graphic driver and Flash has only access to the same API's that all the other programs
 
John.B said:
Am I wrong in understanding that the source of the kernel panic is in the Flash code embedded in Chrome? Doesn't that have access to the low-level APIs that Apple used to deny external developers access to?
Click to expand...

Yes, you're wrong and what you're talking about is the VDA framework. If input fed into VDA crashes your OS, the problem lies with Apple, not the person feeding the "malicious" input.

That's how security flaws happen. It's up to the OS vendor to make sure his code doesn't allow userspace programs to bring down the entire system.

----------
John.B said:
I think you might be mistaken: http://gizmodo.com/5523597/why-flash-on-mac-is-about-to-get-much-less-terrible
Click to expand...

The VDA framework was released with Snow Leopard 10.6.3. It's not exclusive to Flash at all. It's openly documented and usable by anyone :

http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#technotes/tn2267/_index.html

And again, if a userspace application feeds bad input into the framework, the result should be the framework simply raises an exception and returns failure conditions to the application, not a kernel panic bringing the whole system down.

The fact that there's a bug in Chrome that causes a leak is one thing. At most, it should crash Chrome. That this leak causes the Kernel to panic is an Apple problem, one that can potentially be exploited to gain privilege escalation or write DoS attacks against OS X.

----------
subsonix said:
Exactly, there are two bugs here. Both parties has some debugging and patching to do..
Click to expand...

One just happens to be more critical. Except people don't discuss that part, nope, let's bash Google over bugs in Chrome instead!
 
John.B said:
I get your point, Aiden, but people in Microsoft houses shouldn't throw stones.
Click to expand...

I think that if this situation (an app triggering an operating system bug that causes a system crash) had occurred on Windows, most of us in the "Microsoft house" would be yelling at Redmond.

The Apple fans, however, seem to be ignoring the defect in the OS and pointing their fingers at the app.
 
spazzcat said:
Why would Apple care if Googles software works?
Click to expand...

They know their hardware is compatible with lots of software, Google is just one they test. Why would they not? Who would buy a laptop that doesn't work on lots of software..
 
IE is not the market leading browser anymore...

MacRumors said:
First launched in September 2008, Chrome has steadily gained in overall popularity among desktop Internet browsers and is currently running neck-and-neck with Firefox for the second position behind Microsoft's Internet Explorer.
Click to expand...

Actually, IE is not the top dog anymore... it hasn't been since December of 2008...
http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

That website they quoted is full of it... It's Chrome at 39%, FF at 35%, IE (all versions included) at 18% and the rest under 5%...
 
Zealous said:
Actually, IE is not the top dog anymore... it hasn't been since December of 2008...
http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

That website they quoted is full of it... It's Chrome at 39%, FF at 35%, IE (all versions included) at 18% and the rest under 5%...
Click to expand...

Just going to point out that is the stats usage for people hitting w3schools. From the bottom of the page

W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to the browser that comes preinstalled with their computer, and do not seek out other browser alternatives
Click to expand...

Just figured I would point out that key part of the information. It really throws off numbers and people going there are generally very far from your normal people.
 
Zealous said:
Actually, IE is not the top dog anymore... it hasn't been since December of 2008...
http://w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

That website they quoted is full of it... It's Chrome at 39%, FF at 35%, IE (all versions included) at 18% and the rest under 5%...
Click to expand...

I don't think W3's log files are representative for the typical user, and neither do they.

W3school said:
W3Schools is a website for people with an interest for web technologies. These people are more interested in using alternative browsers than the average user. The average user tends to the browser that comes preinstalled with their computer, and do not seek out other browser alternatives.

These facts indicate that the browser figures above are not 100% realistic. Other web sites have statistics showing that Internet Explorer is a more popular browser.
Click to expand...
 
Rodimus Prime said:
Just going to point out that is the stats usage for people hitting w3schools. From the bottom of the page



Just figured I would point out that key part of the information. It really throws off numbers and people going there are generally very far from your normal people.
Click to expand...

:-/ Dang - You're right. It also says "(The statistics above are extracted from W3Schools' log-files, but we are also monitoring other sources around the Internet to assure the quality of these figures)." Further down the page so I'd argue that they are more accurate then you might think... but possibly not. -.- I hate IE.. I wish everyone would just install something else already! haha
 
Zealous said:
:-/ Dang - You're right. It also says "(The statistics above are extracted from W3Schools' log-files, but we are also monitoring other sources around the Internet to assure the quality of these figures)." Further down the page so I'd argue that they are more accurate then you might think... but possibly not. -.- I hate IE.. I wish everyone would just install something else already! haha
Click to expand...

All they really are doing by comparing to other sources is to make sure their trends line up but they know full out and well that they are far from normal people.
 
This is an outdated link to something discussed on Tom's Hardware that went a little into Flash performance across a few (now dated) browsers so the numbers are just a historic reference now and not to be considered updated/current data. So historically speaking, Chrome appears, at least back then, that Flash CPU usage is on par with some of the lowest to include Safari and Firefox/IE8 have had higher instances of CPU usage.

Source: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/adobe-flash-10.1-performance-hardware-acceleration,2805-7.html

Playback: YouTube 1080p on Asus UL20A
Aero Enabled, Hardware Acceleration Enabled
CPU Usage: Windowed
IE8 32-bit: 8.0.7600.1685 35%
Firefox: 3.6.12 49%
Opera: 10.63 (build 3516) 25%
Chrome: 8.0.552.215 28%
Safari: 5.0.3 26%

==========

Playback: YouTube 1080p on Asus UL20A
Aero Enabled, Hardware Acceleration Enabled
Fullscreen
IE8 32-bit: 8.0.7600.1685
CPU Usage: 52%
27.0 FPS
Firefox: 3.6.12 CPU Usage: 60%
27.8 FPS
Opera: 10.63 (build 3516) CPU Usage: 37%
15.5 FPS
Chrome: 8.0.552.215 CPU Usage: 39%
14.0 FPS
Safari: 5.0.3 CPU Usage: 39%
13.8 FPS

During that time, the one thing I can pretty much state is that Firefox appears to have the highest CPU usage among the rest.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back