| Exclusive Deal | While supplies last, save 40% off over 40 iPhone 5 and iPhone 4/4S cases and chargers as well as Samsung S III cases at Kensington.com. Use coupon code 'SAVE40%' at checkout to receive this exclusive discount. |
Infoworld's Neil McAllister discusses some of the used by Konqueror."
Comments
If apple through in with the Firefox lot on OS X. Though I like Safari, it sucks that Firefox is a bit weak on OS X, when Firefox is so much better designed and more capable. Apple should still make Safari, but I'd just like to see them use Firefox' renderer, or work with the Firefox people on getting gecko working better on OS X.
While it surprised us greatly that Apple went with KHTML instead of the Gecko-engine at the start it has proven to be a wise descision later on. With WebCore so far advanced (yes, very much so over even Gecko) it would be suicide to change engines now.
recently in these forums someone (I think it was referencing security issues) explained the speed issue succinctly. I paraphrase; Windows is simply a command line shell that allows applications to run at that same level. Apple's system is involved in everything an application does. That is a speed hurdle I welcome and am glad that will never be overcome. I marvel at this constant reference to the "need for speed". Can anyone explain how their quality of life is dramatically increased when a page loads a second or two faster or if they can even see the difference between 100fps and 120 fps in UT? As a integrator since the 80's I have done many productivity studies and the correlation between increased software speed and time recouped is largely imaginary.
clarification cheers…
Why does not a someone with editorial power read up on this story so they can change the wording to be correct?
WebCore is a BRANCH of the khtml project. The suggestion was to change the development branch of the project to the branch that Apple has created and uses for their development. WebCore is not a separate, unrelated source base.
As repeatedly stated incorrectly on the web and again here, it appears Apple is telling the khtml folks to drop their stuff and go with an Apple technology. Again, it is just a different development path of the same project--not at all like suggesting the khtml project should switch to gecko.
Just because a command is invoked through some kind of launch system and that command/application is fully self-contained, and allowed to work at the highest level possible on ONE ARCHITECTURE; DOES NOT mean that a command performing the same function, yet dependent upon other parts of an operating system and with controlled 'activity levels' on A DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURE will 'won't ever be as fast.'
I agree that it's nice to have security services, niceness of commands, flexible plugin architectures, and multi-application communication through Mac OS X. I also think it is just wild speculation to claim that browsing on a Mac will never be as quick as it is on a pc. I would also take a hit in speed for security w/o thinking twice if it meant having the peace of mind one gains from using a Macintosh. Add in the extra hours cleaning your XP system and you could even argue that browsing on Mac OS X is much faster that on a windows machine.
OR
Network Headlines
Most Popular
MacNN Sponsor
Recent Reviews
MaxUpgrades MaxConnect for 2006-2008 Mac Pro
Nobody outside of Cupertino's privileged bunch knows the future of the Mac Pro line for sure. Despite Apple's reluctance to tell us wh ...
Brother HL-3170CDW LED Printer
We've mentioned before that we are far from a paperless society. For now, at least, there are tasks that require a piece of paper for ...
HTC One
It is hard to overstate just how critically important the HTC One is to the Taiwanese company’s fortunes. Despite its alarming decline ...
Most Commented
Popular News
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
so much behind the scenes
...does this explain java & page loading speed issues compared to ie pc?