16 ms·

Opera with an ad blocker vs Edge without it doesn't seem like an ubiased test.

by amq 10y ago

rubber_duck 10y ago
And they say "Opera Developer (39.0.2248.0)" - which is presumably a dev build of the browser. Like it would be fine if they say "in next version we will retake the top" or whatever but don't try to dispute their results by providing something they had no way of measuring.
- Quai 10y ago
  The developer stream is public, and so is the exact build they used[1]. [1] http://get.opera.com/pub/opera-developer/39.0.2248.0/ http://get.opera.com/pub/opera-developer/39.0.2248.0/
  - xiphias 10y ago
    I wouldn't switch to an unstable browser just to improve battery life. It just shows that they're not really trying to get a fair test. I'm running ad blocker in Chrome and it works perfectly. I'd be interested if they could improve on that significantly, but I trust Google more in creating a stable software.
    - takeda 10y ago
      I think you are unaware how marketing works (the whole power saving competition from both Microsoft and Opera is just marketing). Essentially they did some power saving improvements and want to create a bit of noise about it to increase their popularity. It's kind of same as how Apple, Google etc announce new features/products before you even can use them.
bitmapbrother 10y ago
At least Opera was transparent about the details of their test. Was Microsoft?
theseatoms 10y ago
It doesn't. But there's no reason anyone should be running a browser without an ad-blocker in the first place. Edge should have a lightweight ad-blocker built-in by default.
- cordite 10y ago
  How would that fair with Bing's ad network?
  - tremon 10y ago
    How is that the user's problem?
    - cordite 10y ago
      Microsoft adding an ad-blocker by default, while also owning an ad service seems to be a set of conflicting interests.
    - niftich 10y ago
      It's not, but it's Microsoft's problem. The reason Edge exists is to try to win back market share from Chrome. The reason Chrome exists is to perpetuate the Google ecosystem by making Google offerings cross-platform, but more importantly Chrome-platform -- not just Google ads. But you're right, Microsoft will have to decide which one is more important: driving ad eyeballs to Microsoft properties at the expense of Google properties -- or -- decreasing the share of users using Chrome and by proxy, the attractiveness of Google's integrated cloud email/drive/docs offerings.
- ebbv 10y ago
  Considering Microsoft recently added ads to the Windows 10 login screen, I wouldn't hold my breath on Edge coming with an ad blocker out of the box. EDIT: Downvotes? Really this is factually accurate: http://lifehacker.com/windows-10-is-showing-ads-on-your-lockscreen-heres-how-1760984834 http://lifehacker.com/windows-10-is-showing-ads-on-your-lock...
guroot 10y ago
Even with the ad blocker being a feature in opera out of the box? They were trying to show that opera can achieve better battery performance based on it's features and optimizations. Does that not include the ad-blocker?
- bialpio 10y ago
  In that case you might as well browse different websites because using adblocker makes your browser render different content.
  - feld 10y ago
    Microsoft is welcome to include a native content blocker in their rendering engine
    - zeta0134 10y ago
      While I applaud their work and appreciate that there is an extension framework at all, I seriously doubt this will happen unless they plan to also redesign their home pages to remove the ads. I just loaded up MSN.com and scrolled down the page. I count 3 ads total: one gigantic banner at the very top of the page before all of the content, and two smaller panners that pop into place as you scroll. These are served by AdChoices. When I turn my ad blocker back on, these all disappear, and the site loads much faster. I think if Microsoft were to release a default ad-blocker, they would need to re-code their own website to use native advertising rather than a third-party network. I believe this to be an excellent practice, but I just don't see Microsoft going this route. I'd love to be pleasantly surprised though.
      - a1a 10y ago
        I assume they would implement a white-list allowing "some non-intrusive adds" similar to Adblock.
    - sbov 10y ago
      Sure, but then my browser with native procrastination protection will beat the pants off both: when you type in a url it just renders "get back to work, maggot." It even works without a network connection.
bradbeattie 10y ago
Perhaps the fairest approach would be to compare results across the different browsers with the presence or absence of various adblockers: * Edge (no adblocker) * Opera (default adblocker) * Opera (adblocker disabled) * Chrome (no adblocker) * Chrome (uBlock Origin) Otherwise you're just lying through omission to make your product seem better.
- giancarlostoro 10y ago
  I wish they had done this instead of just said "look ours is faster when we enable adblocker on one browser but don't use it on another."

Opera with an ad blocker vs Edge without it doesn't seem like an ubiased test.

by amq 10y ago

Opera with an ad blocker vs Edge without it doesn't seem like an ubiased test.

And they say "Opera Developer (39.0.2248.0)" - which is presumably a dev build of the browser. Like it would be fine if they say "in next version we will retake the top" or whatever but don't try to dispute their results by providing something they had no way of measuring.

Quai 10y ago
The developer stream is public, and so is the exact build they used[1]. [1] http://get.opera.com/pub/opera-developer/39.0.2248.0/ http://get.opera.com/pub/opera-developer/39.0.2248.0/
- xiphias 10y ago
  I wouldn't switch to an unstable browser just to improve battery life. It just shows that they're not really trying to get a fair test. I'm running ad blocker in Chrome and it works perfectly. I'd be interested if they could improve on that significantly, but I trust Google more in creating a stable software.
  - takeda 10y ago
    I think you are unaware how marketing works (the whole power saving competition from both Microsoft and Opera is just marketing). Essentially they did some power saving improvements and want to create a bit of noise about it to increase their popularity. It's kind of same as how Apple, Google etc announce new features/products before you even can use them.

bitmapbrother 10y ago

At least Opera was transparent about the details of their test. Was Microsoft?

theseatoms 10y ago

It doesn't. But there's no reason anyone should be running a browser without an ad-blocker in the first place. Edge should have a lightweight ad-blocker built-in by default.

cordite 10y ago
How would that fair with Bing's ad network?
- tremon 10y ago
  How is that the user's problem?
  - cordite 10y ago
    Microsoft adding an ad-blocker by default, while also owning an ad service seems to be a set of conflicting interests.
  - niftich 10y ago
    It's not, but it's Microsoft's problem. The reason Edge exists is to try to win back market share from Chrome. The reason Chrome exists is to perpetuate the Google ecosystem by making Google offerings cross-platform, but more importantly Chrome-platform -- not just Google ads. But you're right, Microsoft will have to decide which one is more important: driving ad eyeballs to Microsoft properties at the expense of Google properties -- or -- decreasing the share of users using Chrome and by proxy, the attractiveness of Google's integrated cloud email/drive/docs offerings.
ebbv 10y ago
Considering Microsoft recently added ads to the Windows 10 login screen, I wouldn't hold my breath on Edge coming with an ad blocker out of the box. EDIT: Downvotes? Really this is factually accurate: http://lifehacker.com/windows-10-is-showing-ads-on-your-lockscreen-heres-how-1760984834 http://lifehacker.com/windows-10-is-showing-ads-on-your-lock...

guroot 10y ago

Even with the ad blocker being a feature in opera out of the box? They were trying to show that opera can achieve better battery performance based on it's features and optimizations. Does that not include the ad-blocker?

bialpio 10y ago
In that case you might as well browse different websites because using adblocker makes your browser render different content.
- feld 10y ago
  Microsoft is welcome to include a native content blocker in their rendering engine
  - zeta0134 10y ago
    While I applaud their work and appreciate that there is an extension framework at all, I seriously doubt this will happen unless they plan to also redesign their home pages to remove the ads. I just loaded up MSN.com and scrolled down the page. I count 3 ads total: one gigantic banner at the very top of the page before all of the content, and two smaller panners that pop into place as you scroll. These are served by AdChoices. When I turn my ad blocker back on, these all disappear, and the site loads much faster. I think if Microsoft were to release a default ad-blocker, they would need to re-code their own website to use native advertising rather than a third-party network. I believe this to be an excellent practice, but I just don't see Microsoft going this route. I'd love to be pleasantly surprised though.
    - a1a 10y ago
      I assume they would implement a white-list allowing "some non-intrusive adds" similar to Adblock.
  - sbov 10y ago
    Sure, but then my browser with native procrastination protection will beat the pants off both: when you type in a url it just renders "get back to work, maggot." It even works without a network connection.

bradbeattie 10y ago

Perhaps the fairest approach would be to compare results across the different browsers with the presence or absence of various adblockers: * Edge (no adblocker) * Opera (default adblocker) * Opera (adblocker disabled) * Chrome (no adblocker) * Chrome (uBlock Origin) Otherwise you're just lying through omission to make your product seem better.

giancarlostoro 10y ago
I wish they had done this instead of just said "look ours is faster when we enable adblocker on one browser but don't use it on another."