4 ms·

> significantly less power This is the big issue for most people, I think. I would love to use Chrome, but when I do, (a) thighs burn to a crisp if my machine

by dmd 11y ago

> significantly less power This is the big issue for most people, I think. I would love to use Chrome, but when I do, (a) thighs burn to a crisp if my machine is on my lap directly and (b) the battery depletes, literally, 1.5x as fast.

leephillips 11y ago
I've noticed this using Chrome on Ubuntu. Is Firefox the best alternative, (is it significantly more efficient?) or can you suggest something else?
- Vexs 11y ago
  Chromium has a bit less bloat than chrome, but less features correspondingly. Aside from that, firefox seems to be the big contender.
- snuxoll 11y ago
  Epiphany works pretty well for me, I've been forced to customize the User-Agent string to that of Chrome to make certain things like Outlook Web App treat it like a Real Browser(TM), on occasion I have to use Firefox still (Plex doesn't work in epiphany) but overall it works fine. I should note that Epiphany is the only Linux web browser that seems to interact with touch screens correctly, drag-to-scroll works wonderfully on my XPS 13 meanwhile Chrome and Firefox just keep trying to highlight text.
  - samdroid 11y ago
    Epiphany is also based upon GtkWebKit, which is a Gtk port of the same engine that runs Safari.
chii 11y ago
why is that? does safari use some undocumented api, or that chrome sucks up more computing power in the name of rendering speed/responsiveness?
- exelius 11y ago
  It's the latter. From what I've noticed, Chrome engages the dedicated GPU to speed up rendering. This by itself will cause a spike in power usage.
  - mkj 11y ago
    Yet Safari must be doing something with the GPU too, it scrolls quicker. I guess there's just more incentive to optimise a platform for Apple.
- jordanthoms 11y ago
  I think it's just a lack of optimization for battery usage on OSX Chrome. Google seems to have recently realized it is an issue though and is making progress on improving things: https://plus.google.com/+PeterKasting/posts/GpL63A1K2TF https://plus.google.com/+PeterKasting/posts/GpL63A1K2TF

by dmd 11y ago

leephillips 11y ago

I've noticed this using Chrome on Ubuntu. Is Firefox the best alternative, (is it significantly more efficient?) or can you suggest something else?

Vexs 11y ago
Chromium has a bit less bloat than chrome, but less features correspondingly. Aside from that, firefox seems to be the big contender.
snuxoll 11y ago
Epiphany works pretty well for me, I've been forced to customize the User-Agent string to that of Chrome to make certain things like Outlook Web App treat it like a Real Browser(TM), on occasion I have to use Firefox still (Plex doesn't work in epiphany) but overall it works fine. I should note that Epiphany is the only Linux web browser that seems to interact with touch screens correctly, drag-to-scroll works wonderfully on my XPS 13 meanwhile Chrome and Firefox just keep trying to highlight text.
- samdroid 11y ago
  Epiphany is also based upon GtkWebKit, which is a Gtk port of the same engine that runs Safari.

chii 11y ago

why is that? does safari use some undocumented api, or that chrome sucks up more computing power in the name of rendering speed/responsiveness?

exelius 11y ago
It's the latter. From what I've noticed, Chrome engages the dedicated GPU to speed up rendering. This by itself will cause a spike in power usage.
- mkj 11y ago
  Yet Safari must be doing something with the GPU too, it scrolls quicker. I guess there's just more incentive to optimise a platform for Apple.
jordanthoms 11y ago
I think it's just a lack of optimization for battery usage on OSX Chrome. Google seems to have recently realized it is an issue though and is making progress on improving things: https://plus.google.com/+PeterKasting/posts/GpL63A1K2TF https://plus.google.com/+PeterKasting/posts/GpL63A1K2TF