4 ms·
> So still not in stable and Chrome has had it for what? 4 years now? Chrome is a much newer browser. At the time Chrome was released, it was the only browser
by chimeracoder 12y ago
> So still not in stable and Chrome has had it for what? 4 years now?
Chrome is a much newer browser. At the time Chrome was released, it was the only browser with this design, because it's much easier to do when starting from scratch. Chrome benefited greatly simply from observing the design decisions of Firefox, IE, etc. that had had several years to play out by that point.
In ten years (assuming Chrome is still around then), it will also have similarly antiquated design decisions that make sense to us now, but will be frustrating and obsolescent a decade from now. It doesn't mean that Chrome won't be able to keep up at all with these changes eventually; it just means that it's not great to compare a brand-new browser with one that's been around (and used!)[0] for a long time.
Electrolysis (the name for the project) took much longer in Firefox because they had to essentially retrofit an existing browser that hadn't been designed this way from the start.
[0] If Firefox hadn't had significant market share, it could have made this change much more rapidly without fear of breaking things for existing users. But of course, making sure the browser remains stable for its millions of users is a top priority as well, alongside developing these new features.
- joshstrange 12y agoIIRC Chrome did not have this feature day 1, they added it after the fact. That's not to say they didn't plan for it but still.... Also "Chrome benefited greatly simply from observing the design decisions of Firefox, IE, " Yes and Firefox benefited from observing the browsers before it, so what? > "In ten years (assuming Chrome is still around then), it will also have similarly antiquated design decisions that make sense to us now," You can't say that with any certainty whatsoever maybe Chrome will fair better than FF has or maybe we will see a re-write of Chrome's core to deal with future changes. As I said elsewhere in this thread I will use the browser I deem best at the current point in time. Right now, for me, that browser is Chrome (I couldn't care less which browser has been around longer). As for "it just means that it's not great to compare a brand-new browser with one that's been around (and used!)[0] for a long time" this is so wrong.... of course I can compare the two, they both do the same thing at the end of the day (provide a portal to the internet). When FF came out (and in it's heyday) no one said "You can't compare FF to IE, FF is a brand new browser" No, instead they/we all switched to FF because it was BETTER. Now, at least IMHO, Chrome is BETTER and so I've switched again. If that changes I will switch yet again.
- dblohm7 12y agoI don't think people are taking issue with the fact that you switched; they're taking issue with your indirect suggestion that Mozilla is taking too long to implement multiprocess.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- arthurfm 12y ago> At the time Chrome was released, it was the only browser with this design Not true. Beta 1 (and subsequent releases) of Internet Explorer 8 [1] included process isolation [2][3][4] before Google released the first public beta of Chrome on 2 September 2008 [5]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_8#Release_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_8#Release_his... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_8#Performance_and_stability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_8#Performance... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_isolation#Web_browsers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Process_isolation#Web_browsers [4] http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftIE8AndGoogleChromeProcessesAreTheNewThreads.aspx http://www.hanselman.com/blog/MicrosoftIE8AndGoogleChromePro... [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Public_release http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome#Public_release