Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Tue 24 May 2016, 10:01
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Browsers and Internet
How to compare one browser versus another in your PUPPY
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
Page 1 of 1 [12 Posts]  
Author Message
gcmartin


Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 6319
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Tue 09 Jul 2013, 17:38    Post subject:  How to compare one browser versus another in your PUPPY  

This thread is a request for insights of a tool for Puppy Linux's browser measurement.

On far to many occasions in the past in Puppyland, there have been browser concerns raised to Puppy development and, sometimes, by development. Much of the discussion is along the lines of personal preferences.Sometimes its along the lines of download size, sometimes its about processor use, sometimes about RAM use, sometimes about memory use (yes, RAM and memory are distinct), sometimes about the time to start to the desktop when first used, sometimes ... and so on and so on.

To provide both developers and users a good manner of measurement, we need some way of looking at browsers better than the sometimes emotional methods we've used in the past.

So I ask
  • Can anyone of this community suggest or provide a recommendation of a UTILITY we can use to compare browser operations in any given PUPPY? OR,
  • is there a way to use an existing Puppy utility to get measurement information on browser impact on the system?
  • And, What should the criterion be for the decision process for an OOTB browser solution in a stock-standard PUP (in other words, does measurements weigh in the process of having a browser in PUPs)?
This could have high value in giving impartial insights to browser operations on the 32bit and 64bit distros used in Puppyland.

_________________
Get ACTIVE Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
3 Different Puppy Search Engines or use DogPile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
jabu2

Joined: 07 Apr 2008
Posts: 46
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Tue 09 Jul 2013, 22:08    Post subject:  

GCM - your posts are usually interesting, so I read this one.

Browsers are also interesting, being (or becoming) close to the meaning of life (i.e. part of the operating system, as defined).

However, your questions are straw-men. They assume problems where none exist; indeed the problems could be opportunities.

You ask: Can anyone of this community suggest or provide a recommendation of a UTILITY we can use to compare browser operations in any given PUPPY?

Probably yes; but ultimately any such utilities will be restrictive, probably give invalid results, and possibly stultify development. The magic bullet theory rarely works.


or is there a way to use an existing Puppy utility to get measurement information on browser impact on the system?

Is "impact on the system" in any way related to "browser operations" in a user-functional sense ? These terms are ambiguous, and probably my understanding of them could be quite different to others?

And, What should the criterion be for the decision process for an OOTB browser solution in a stock-standard PUP (in other words, does measurements weigh in the process of having a browser in PUPs)?

"in other words", probably not, or at least not worth bothering about (those probably invalid measurements). Life is too short to stuff a mushroom.

Surely we have OOTB solutions already for browser choices. And choices may depend on many variables, ultimately coming down to user's choice, which again depends on more variables, including why a user is using Puppy?

More seriously, when google- firefox- opera- change stuff nearly every week, why try and measure something (anything? what? why?) which may change sooner than the weather?

If we give 'em all a go, evolution will sort out the problem?

The criterion/criteria is "does it work?, for this user?, at this time?, (on whatever Puppy she is using, on whatever machine/device).

I am using Opera - it must be Thursday Laughing

ATVB (all the very best)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Pelo


Joined: 10 Sep 2011
Posts: 7729
Location: Mer méditerrannée (1 kms°)

PostPosted: Sat 10 Aug 2013, 01:30    Post subject: Keep on old browsers versions !  

Keep on old browsers versions ! If your old version runs well, keep it !
I don't understand why Firefox is issuing so many updates. Firefox is used on Windows. There perhaps is the explanation, for security reasons.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger 
Pelo


Joined: 10 Sep 2011
Posts: 7729
Location: Mer méditerrannée (1 kms°)

PostPosted: Wed 16 Mar 2016, 05:32    Post subject: Upload of your videos on 'YOU TUBE"  

choice of old versions quickpet for old browsers.
And old browser does not mean it is unserviceable. You will only miss security and perhaps uploading abilities.
As the quickpet includes them, these browsers are supposed to run well in all Puppies.
Main criteria is size of the package, Your Ram , and what the browser will be used for.
To upload videos on You Tube, you need a recent one, Firefox will not disappoint You Tube, netsurf, hum... Palemoon last version is ok.

_________________
Puppy breizland bagadoù (Britain) para Olympic Games del Brazil !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger 
ETP


Joined: 19 Oct 2010
Posts: 852
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu 17 Mar 2016, 05:38    Post subject: How to compare one browser versus another in your PUPPY  

Hi gc,

Almost 3 years since you posed this question but here is the current de facto benchmarker:

https://chromium.github.io/octane/

Results on same PC.

BROWSER: _________________________________________________________OCTANE 2.0 SCORE:

Google Chrome Version 49.0.2623.87 (64-bit) DLNA Werewolf64 V2_____________27523

Firefox 45.0 (64-bit) DLNA Werewolf64 V2_________________________________26819

Google Chrome Version 49.0.2623.87m (64-bit) Windows 10__________________25129

_________________
Regards ETP



Kennels
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
gcmartin


Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 6319
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Thu 17 Mar 2016, 16:19    Post subject:  

Thanks for this utility. I have several systems that I run and I find my numbers differ across systems; Intels/AMDs/TVs(ARMs). Excepting for one (TV), they each have several browsers. My Chrome/Chromium/Firefox/SeaMonkey all give differing numbers yet they are reasonably close too.

Over the years, in observation, community objections to various browsers have reduced and seemingly are gravitating to personal choice, rather than emotional concerns.

I like this tool and think I will use it to build a local DB for my PCs, their OSes, and the browsers which run within each.

_________________
Get ACTIVE Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
3 Different Puppy Search Engines or use DogPile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 1468
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Mon 21 Mar 2016, 10:32    Post subject:  

Hi, ETP.

What's the 'Octane' score supposed to represent? I've run it in SlimJet 8.0.4.0 in Win XP (the 'portable' version), and it 'only' returns a score of 8904...

Is that 'good or 'bad' ? And what, if anything, can you do about it?


Mike. Wink

_________________
If the advice given has helped you, please have the courtesy to post back & say 'Thanks!' Wink Laughing
----------------------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
bark_bark_bark

Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Posts: 1613
Location: Wisconsin USA

PostPosted: Mon 21 Mar 2016, 16:34    Post subject:  

Mike Walsh wrote:
Hi, ETP.

What's the 'Octane' score supposed to represent? I've run it in SlimJet 8.0.4.0 in Win XP (the 'portable' version), and it 'only' returns a score of 8904...

Is that 'good or 'bad' ? And what, if anything, can you do about it?


Mike. Wink


I really would take any of those score seriously. Benchmark software has a limitation of not being able to represent performance on real world usage.

_________________
If you think there is something wrong with homosexuality, then you're a blind sheep.
A site that everybody should look at: http://questioncopyright.org/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 1468
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Tue 22 Mar 2016, 07:59    Post subject:  

Oh, I don't take anything like that too seriously. Was just curious as to what it actually represents.


Mike. Wink

_________________
If the advice given has helped you, please have the courtesy to post back & say 'Thanks!' Wink Laughing
----------------------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ETP


Joined: 19 Oct 2010
Posts: 852
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu 24 Mar 2016, 04:37    Post subject:  

Hi Mike Walsh & bark_bark_bark,

Over the years there have been a lot of browser benchmarking packages & developer suites to test various aspects of performance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browser_speed_test

The point about the tests frequently not representing real world performance is a valid one.
In the case of Google's Octane 2.0 it does attempt to test real-world code.

https://developers.google.com/octane/benchmark#the-test-suite-in-detail

The results I posted above do match my subjective findings which gives me some faith in it.

Chrome/Chromium were at one time well ahead of the game but since versions 39 & 42 have lost
some of their former snappiness. Firefox has steadily improved.

At the end of the day what matters is for any particular OS on any given kit:
How responsive does any particular browser feel?
How smoothly does it render and scroll?

There are just so many variables here. Puppy with the same version of Chrome does feel quicker than Windows 10. Smile Smile

_________________
Regards ETP



Kennels
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Mike Walsh


Joined: 28 Jun 2014
Posts: 1468
Location: King's Lynn, UK.

PostPosted: Thu 24 Mar 2016, 07:43    Post subject:  

Hi, ETP.

ETP wrote:
Chrome/Chromium were at one time well ahead of the game but since versions 39 & 42 have lost
some of their former snappiness. Firefox has steadily improved.

At the end of the day what matters is for any particular OS on any given kit:
How responsive does any particular browser feel?
How smoothly does it render and scroll?

There are just so many variables here. Puppy with the same version of Chrome does feel quicker than Windows 10. Smile Smile


I must agree with you there, about them losing their 'snappiness'. I put it down to the increasing levels of sandboxing myself.

For quite a while I ran Chromium 36.0.1985.143, and kept the PepperFlash module (libpepflashplayer.so) up-to-date. I dare say it'll still run now, but I was simply getting fed up with the constant nagging to upgrade.

It was so smooth & responsive, and very lightweight. Then I started using Chrome proper, having found out ways to make it run in the Slackos.

Now, of course, 32-bit Chrome is officially dead; as of yesterday, you can no longer download it from the official Chrome site. It's 64-bit or nothing. So I've finally made the move to 64-bit Pups; Tahrpup64, which runs very nicely.

I've always been able to run 64-bit Pups, just haven't wanted to; the 32-bit Puppies simply fly on this big old Compaq desktop of mine...

I'd be curious to know if there was a 64-bit version of Chromium 36.0.1985.143; I wouldn't mind re-installing it again.


Mike. Wink

_________________
If the advice given has helped you, please have the courtesy to post back & say 'Thanks!' Wink Laughing
----------------------------------------------------

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
ETP


Joined: 19 Oct 2010
Posts: 852
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu 24 Mar 2016, 17:51    Post subject:  

Hi Mike,

Quote:
I'd be curious to know if there was a 64-bit version of Chromium 36.0.1985.143; I wouldn't mind re-installing it again.


Many of the Apps & extensions now require that you be running a very recent version. If you want to experiment I would
suggest that you do so on another copy of your target Pup. You may have to sort out missing dependencies as well as
persuading it to run as root. Rather you than me! I would just wait for Chrome/Chromium to improve again which it is
starting to do. (new stable release today)
If you are dead set on experimenting this may work on a 64-bit Ubuntu based pup.
https://launchpad.net/~canonical-chromium-builds/+archive/ubuntu/stage/+build/6279804
(2nd item (40.9 MiB) on Built files list)

_________________
Regards ETP



Kennels
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 1 [12 Posts]  
Post new topic   Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Advanced Topics » Additional Software (PETs, n' stuff) » Browsers and Internet
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0609s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0048s) ][ GZIP on ]