I built a web based application in php to upload dvd vob files to a
server via the browser. The only browser that makes this project a non
failure is chrome. Forget trying to upload 4+ gigs with Internet
Explorer. It can not handle the memory addressing. Firefox fails 90%
of the time. However chrome always gets the 4 gigs over the web
interface.

Chrome, an actual browser that doesnt need compatibility buttons, and
also can handle moving 4+gigs with the browser. Chrome is kick ass.

On Jun 22, 12:21 am, PhistucK <[email protected]> wrote:
> Really? the statistics show that many people are using the app mode?Or did
> you mean web apps, as in web application websites?
>
> ☆PhistucK
>
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 21:03, Mike Belshe <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I  assume he's not a benchmark pro, but he did a decent job already.  We
> > can nitpick his sampling methodology - but it won't change the result.  He
> > is correct that many procs is far more memory consuming than single proc,
> > and we already knew this.
> > This is a tradeoff we made consciously and deliberately.  When firefox
> > crashes, all tabs go down.  When firefox memory is compromised (security),
> > all tabs are compromised.  In chrome, we don't have those problems, but
> > instead use more RAM.  Further, Chrome is also able to implement per-tab
> > prioritization, so that background tabs don't make foreground tabs go slow.
> >  Firefox can't do that.
> > Lastly, lets bring the test back to reality.  People don't visit 150 random
> > home pages.  They may have 20-30 tabs open, but many are applications, with
> > cookies, javascript state and much more than just the "home page".  When
> > apps are in use, the memory gap between chrome and FF shrinks a lot.
>
> > Mike
>
> > On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Dan Kegel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Mike Belshe<[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > First off - kudos to the author for posting the source and steps to
> >> > reproduce!  Most don't do that!
>
> >> > Second, the author is basically right.  Since he's running on Vista, its
> >> a
> >> > bit hard to tell whether his stats included shared memory or not; using
> >> the
> >> > default memory statistic ("Memory (Private Working Set)") is actually a
> >> > pretty good measure to just sum.  But he doesn't say which measurement
> >> he
> >> > used.
>
> >> Wait, why doesn't his program itself do the summing?
> >> (I don't see it in there.)
> >> Wouldn't that get rid of the ambiguity?
> >> How hard would it be to add that and repost?
> >> - Dan

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to