> I'd also bet that Chrome was faster at painting pages than Firefox, so it wasn't just a JS engine advantge. That may very well have been true, but if Chrome

> I'd also bet that Chrome was faster at painting pages than Firefox, so it wasn't just a JS engine advantge. That may very well have been true, but if Chrome spends 10 cycles rendering the page and 100 cycles executing malware, and Firefox spends 20 cycles rendering the page and zero cycles executing malware, Chrome still loses despite being being twice as fast at the only thing that matters.