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

Safari 4.0.1 vs Firefox 3.5

michael.lauden

michael.lauden

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Dec 25, 2008
2,326
1
was expecting Firefox to do a lot better.

ran these benchmarks on my MacBook... only thing running was the browser for each test... didn't fair to well IMO. Thus.. the reason i stick with Safari

sfri41vsfox35.png
 
Yay!
A new Firefox v. Safari thread!

Ok... I get it... new versions for both and benchmarks
I suppose it does warrant a new discussion

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif
 
I have tried both and I have to say, Safari 4.0.1 is better by far. Safari 4.0 was kinda iffy, but once they released 4.0.1, it changed everything! Safari 4.0.1 is not question about it better than Firefox 3.5
 
celticpride678 said:
I have tried both and I have to say, Safari 4.0.1 is better by far. Safari 4.0 was kinda iffy, but once they released 4.0.1, it changed everything! Safari 4.0.1 is not question about it better than Firefox 3.5
Click to expand...

Never fear... Clevin will be along shortly to set you straight ;)

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif
 
i really don't know how to comment on a bunch of numbers with no knowledge of the construction of the test behind it. It can mean a lot, it can also mean nothing.

I would not be surprised if any individual find one or the other browser fits their needs better. I just happen to think more people will find firefox fits their needs better than safari.

if somebody has to find a test that rationalize their choice of a browser, I am just gonna feel sorry for that. You use whatever you like for whatever reason, no need to convince anybody else about your choice, and trust others will try both and find their own choice.

Im not anti discussion of browsers, I just dont know what help would it bring by throwing out a bunch of numbers with no source, no insight about how those number are obtained, and no explanation about what it means for normal users.
 
MacDawg said:
Never fear... Clevin will be along shortly to set you straight ;)

Woof, Woof - Dawg
pawprint.gif
Click to expand...
With a record like yours, can you PM the PowerBall numbers to me?

Back to the topic, Safari 4.0.1 can achieve an Acid3 test score of 100. The best that I've gotten out of Firefox 3.5 is 93. I suppose that You-Know-Who will claim that this also means nothing.
 
MisterMe said:
With a record like yours, can you PM the PowerBall numbers to me?

Back to the topic, Safari 4.0.1 can achieve an Acid3 test score of 100. The best that I've gotten out of Firefox 3.5 is 93. I suppose that You-Know-Who will claim that this also means nothing.
Click to expand...

you know who suggests you to read acid3 developer Ian Hickson's website and figure out how much acid 3 means for yourself. :p

and since you Mr. seems is defending the OP's graph, would Mr. care to explain what that test is testing? and what the numbers means for users?
 
michael.lauden said:
http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper/index.action
Click to expand...

aha, another js performance test. isn't legendary sunspider enough? I say it loud now that firefox's jit js is not fully optimized as of now, but the difference is small enough among all browsers.

numbers need to be put into prospective. Browsers now execute js so fast, that the tests have to run each function more than a million times to produce measurable difference, in real life, you dont run functions that many times at all.

If you think a real world difference of less than 0.01 ms is important enough, good for you. But I don't. Twice as fast sounds nice, but twice of zero is still zero. Firefox's awesome bar or text entry remembrance (two out of numerous examples) easily save users 1000x more time than that js speed difference that nobody can tell.
 
yeah so even though it's better! it's not!

firefox is a clunky application IMO, i saw my activity running the benchmarks for safari in the 30-100% zone for safari

and in the 50-135% for firefox.

it is nice though, especially with the myriad of plug ins available
 
For me, Firefox doesn't 'fit' OS X as neatly as Safari. It doesn't handle RSS the way I like it (and I can't find an add-on that would improve that). Also not super impressed with the overall feel either.
The best way I can describe the feel of Firefox is 'a supercharged Vauxhall - rattles as it runs and the brakes are likely not to stop you.' :eek:
 
MacAndy74 said:
For me, Firefox doesn't 'fit' OS X as neatly as Safari. It doesn't handle RSS the way I like it (and I can't find an add-on that would improve that). Also not super impressed with the overall feel either.
The best way I can describe the feel of Firefox is 'a supercharged Vauxhall - rattles as it runs and the brakes are likely not to stop you.' :eek:
Click to expand...

i agree. i found that to be true with Camino and Sunrise too. of course they weren't on par with Safari IMO anyways. The only time i recommended Firefox was to my family on their old PC's... most of the spyware/malware/viruses/bots you name it were installed under IE... so naturally using Firefox would cut the boot time of the browser from ~10-15 seconds to ~5-10.

that all changed when Safari 4 came out. Opens just as fast as it does on OS X and responds well too.
 
MacAndy74 said:
For me, Firefox doesn't 'fit' OS X as neatly as Safari.
Click to expand...

Ah the typical Mac fan response. It's not "Mac enough" so it sucks. It's not by Apple so it sucks. :rolleyes:

Some of us actually choose to judge applications by their merits, not their heritage. Safari is virtually uncustomizeable and that's its biggest flaw, not how fast it is. The interface is more or less written in stone and if you don't like something about it, too bad. But I keep forgetting most Mac users LIKE that. After all, why have it your way when you can have it the McDonald's way?

I like that when I use Firefox, I can get the same great features and even the same great style looks (I like the Noia Extreme theme) when I use Windows, Linux and yes even my two Macs. It's seamless between platforms. Until Safari 4.0, it looked like garbage on a Windows machine and it still does not run natively in Linux because Apple doesn't give a crap about supporting all three platforms. I will occasionally use Safari 4.0.1, but most of the time I still used Firefox 3.0.x. So if Firefox 3.5 is faster than 3.0.x, I'm sure I'll continue to use it because it has the best interface options...namely it does what *I* want it to do, not what Apple wants it to do.
 
I like the speed of safari but..

FFox has certain greasemonkey scripts that work ONLY in ffox due to coding and forces me to use FFox. The customizability of FFOX makes it my productivity much better.

FFOX is no means a slow browswer but it is just not as fast as safari.
 
Dear Clevin,

I know that admitting you're wrong about something isn't easy, but let's face facts. Acid3 doesn't test for everything, but it does test for web standard compliance. Not EVERY web standard, but most. SunSpider tests for Java. Maybe not a 1:1 ratio of the brower's Java performance but most. If you do the preschool math, we can assume most means 90%. If Safari won by 10% of less, then I'd say Firefox might be an equal. But if Safari wins by > 10%, I'd have to say Safari wins overall. I know you like Firefox and that a browser isn't all about speed or Java. But for people that aren't biased, Safari is the superior browser. This isn't some lunacy claimed by a biased person, just a open-minded person comparing two browsers.

In the end, a WEB BROWSER is supposed to browse the web. If you want to shove the fact that FF has lots and lots of plugins up my nose, go right ahead. But plugins don't browse the web. They are extra stuff that goes ontop of a browser. Safari clearly loads pages faster and renders them much better. Look at the drop down menus in FF and Safari. FF's style is a bit 'flat' and not as beautifully rendered as Safari.

Thanks,
Snow Leopard

P.S. I'm using Firefox to type this so it's not like I hate it.
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    305.4 KB · Views: 329
MagnusVonMagnum said:
Ah the typical Mac fan response. It's not "Mac enough" so it sucks. It's not by Apple so it sucks. :rolleyes:

Some of us actually choose to judge applications by their merits, not their heritage. Safari is virtually uncustomizeable and that's its biggest flaw, not how fast it is. The interface is more or less written in stone and if you don't like something about it, too bad. But I keep forgetting most Mac users LIKE that. After all, why have it your way when you can have it the McDonald's way?

I like that when I use Firefox, I can get the same great features and even the same great style looks (I like the Noia Extreme theme) when I use Windows, Linux and yes even my two Macs. It's seamless between platforms. Until Safari 4.0, it looked like garbage on a Windows machine and it still does not run natively in Linux because Apple doesn't give a crap about supporting all three platforms. I will occasionally use Safari 4.0.1, but most of the time I still used Firefox 3.0.x. So if Firefox 3.5 is faster than 3.0.x, I'm sure I'll continue to use it because it has the best interface options...namely it does what *I* want it to do, not what Apple wants it to do.
Click to expand...

Well at least some of us think of a Mac as a system, not as a face that users can do plastic surgery all over. I agree FF has plugins, but I (like 90% of the internet using population) don't care about plugins. So I get a shoddier UI, or an ad blocker. A web browser is supposed to browse the web, which Safari clearly does faster than FF. I thought this was a browser war, not a browser plugin ability war.
 
Even if Safari is a bit faster, the add-ons for firefox make up for it 10 fold. I would take add-ons over a tiny bit of speed any day.
 
I am a big Firefox fan, but I am currently using Safari. Safari is definitely a bit snappier - as in "just-faster-enough-to-notice-a-difference" - than Firefox. However, the only reason I am using Safari is because of Glims, the best plugin/hack/whatever-the-hell-it-is, for Safari. Ever. I was so surprised when they had the capability for Google Previews! And now that SafariBlock supports the EasyList, Safari basically has AdBlock Plus too.

For me, Firefox doesn't 'fit' OS X as neatly as Safari.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's an "automatic" Apple fan response. I love Firefox, but it just doesn't have those little zippy-dos animations that Safari has and thus feels a little less polished. An example would be pulling the tabs from the tabs bar. Some people appreciate little things like that.

I kinda really feel bad that I'm using Safari after being a Firefox-er for so long. Guess I can't enjoy the snazzy new logo they made for 3.5 in my dock either =/.
 
Safari 4 is definitely faster than FireFox 3.5. I am using both. With some web sites, Firefox is very jerky when scrolling with the trackpad. On the contrary, Safari is way smoother.

One thing is missing from Safari is the three finger swipe up for top of the page and swipe down for bottom of the page. Some times, it's quite handy with these two gestures.
 
michael.lauden said:
was expecting Firefox to do a lot better.

ran these benchmarks on my MacBook... only thing running was the browser for each test... didn't fair to well IMO. Thus.. the reason i stick with Safari

sfri41vsfox35.png
Click to expand...

Hah, yeah I just ran the test on my Safari 4.0.1 and Firefox 3.5 and Safari got 3877, while FF only got 1662.
 
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