I would recommend Opera. It is smaller than firefox, faster, more efficient (from my experience at least; it's certainly not less efficient), is just as if not more standards compliant, and still manages to pack in more features out of the box.
I would recommend Opera. It is smaller than firefox, faster, more efficient (from my experience at least; it's certainly not less efficient), is just as if not more standards compliant, and still manages to pack in more features out of the box.
Opera is decent, and has a smaller memory footprint, that's true. (A friend on mine actually refuses Firefox in favour of Opera on his grandfather box.) But I do wonder how them Opera users survive without all the great plugins
Code:#include <stdio.h> void J(char*a){int f,i=0,c='1';for(;a[i]!='0';++i)if(i==81){ puts(a);return;}for(;c<='9';++c){for(f=0;f<9;++f)if(a[i-i%27+i%9 /3*3+f/3*9+f%3]==c||a[i%9+f*9]==c||a[i-i%9+f]==c)goto e;a[i]=c;J(a);a[i] ='0';e:;}}int main(int c,char**v){int t=0;if(c>1){for(;v[1][ t];++t);if(t==81){J(v[1]);return 0;}}puts("sudoku [0-9]{81}");return 1;}
It's because Opera has so many more features to begin with, most of which require plugins in firefox (see http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2005/...fox-extensions and http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2005/...-extensions-ii )
Sorry, but Opera doesn't quiet fit in the lightweight browser category. Certainly not in the 10-15 Mb footprint one.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
A fresh Opera 9.02 install takes up a little more than 5 megabytes (5.33 on my disk, to be exact).
I think Mario is talking about the runtime memory usage. I mean, disk space is cheap these days...
It's possible to tweak Firefox to stop caching pages, multi-pipeline downloads etc. and there's this nifty addition to the config that has Firefox strip down to sometimes < 10MB of memory usage when minimized. If you have a decent amount of runtime memory for Firefox saaay 30+ MB this could be the way to go.
Wow, I didn't know it has a built-in XHTML debugger, download accelerator, music player, FTP client, GMail virtual drive client, HTTP header viewer, world map plotter... Opera must be waay more bloated than I thought!It's because Opera has so many more features to begin with
You could try hack the Firefox source to make it cache stuff to disk or something, heh. Or refuse to cache certain stuff at all. It will probably save 80% on memory usage... and increase CPU/bandwidth usage by 5+XWell it's your choice. Can't you upgrade the RAM chip or something? Granted, notebook stuff ain't cheap, but this would seem to me a worthy investment if you're intent on extending the useful life of your computer as long as you can.
Code:#include <stdio.h> void J(char*a){int f,i=0,c='1';for(;a[i]!='0';++i)if(i==81){ puts(a);return;}for(;c<='9';++c){for(f=0;f<9;++f)if(a[i-i%27+i%9 /3*3+f/3*9+f%3]==c||a[i%9+f*9]==c||a[i-i%9+f]==c)goto e;a[i]=c;J(a);a[i] ='0';e:;}}int main(int c,char**v){int t=0;if(c>1){for(;v[1][ t];++t);if(t==81){J(v[1]);return 0;}}puts("sudoku [0-9]{81}");return 1;}
Well not everyone in the world needs a bajillion features in the browser; I wasn't aware a 'world map plotter' was so incredibly essential in software meant to browse the internet.
And on the topic of bloat/efficiency, I've always found firefox to be much more of a memory/cpu hog than Opera. When my laptop was still clogged with dust, for instance (long story; point is it ran slow and overheated easily), Opera was the only browser that didn't start to freeze up to the point of unusability in < 5 minutes, hence why I switched in the first place (I seriously was an avid firefox user until I simply couldn't not use it any more).
I'm not saying firefox is a bad browser, it would just be one of my last choices on a slow/old computer.
Last edited by SirNot; 12-19-2006 at 03:07 PM.
> And on the topic of bloat/efficiency, I've always found firefox to be much more of a memory/cpu hog than Opera.
You found wrong.
Both Opera and Firefox uses roughly the same amount of memory. So stop your little browser war, already. That's not the purpose of this thread and I have little to no patience for that kind of peep talk. Sheesh! How many years listening to this crap, now?
I wanted a low end browser to run along side other open applications on an aged laptop with 500 Mb of RAM. Disk space was not a concern. Memory usage was. And I found one.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
You're lucky... Think I should get a try to it... 'cause the previous choice - K-Meleon could not bit the Explorer in one window browsing (That's what I'm doing most of the time on my home laptop with 256M memory)...an aged laptop with 500 Mb of RAM
All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection,
except for the problem of too many layers of indirection.
– David J. Wheeler
Whoa! Damn. I recently (to me) upgraded from my PC from 128 to 3xx.Originally Posted by vart
I guess that video editing seems a bit foolish.
7. It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.
40. There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.*
