This is my test report. Win Xp64 bit
ff
Prototype 140
MooTools 135
jquery 441
opera
Prototype 72
MooTools 80
jquery 183
IE6
Prototype 1556
MooTools 1104
jquery 1001
safari
Prototype 409
MooTools 48
jquery 175
On Dec 11, 7:10 pm, Sharique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pls have a look
This is possible. We get trolls all the time on our forums.
I'd like to point out, however, that all the other links that you guys
referred him to have old performance results. We didn't advertise it,
but since the release of 1.2b we updated the Slickspeed to reflect
1.2b.
All the claims that
On 12 joulu, 05:02, Rick Faircloth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen way too many sites that don't properly optimize images
and end up with a 400 KB image trying to download that could easily
be optimized to 20 KB and maintain image quality... figure up the
difference in performance speed
On Dec 12, 2007 10:44 AM, Suni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I find disturbing is that it was when ui.jquery.com first
launched when people already brought this up, since the frontpage
loaded so slowly, yet it has not been fixed - a job that would require
maybe less than a minute to do.
I
: [jQuery] Re: Performance of jquery
Hi Rick,
Every so often, someone just mysteriously posts a message almost exactly
like the one that you saw today and it's usually a brand new user to the
list. It's been happening on a frequent basis and is assuredly link
bait.
So I want you
I ask that nobody respond to this as this is obvious spam/link bait.
Rey...
Sharique wrote:
Pls have a look at this test.
http://mootools.net/slickspeed/
Performance of JQuery of quite low as compare to other java script
libraries.
--
Sharique
maybe it depends on your browser and/or pc, it seems fastest when I run the
test...
-ark
- Original Message -
From: Sharique [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: jQuery (English) jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:10 AM
Subject: [jQuery] Performance of jquery
|
| Pls
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rey
Bango
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:36 AM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: Performance of jquery
I ask that nobody respond to this as this is obvious spam/link bait.
Rey...
Sharique wrote:
Pls have a look
3:22 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: Performance of jquery
Importance: Low
maybe it depends on your browser and/or pc, it seems fastest when I run
the test...
-ark
- Original Message -
From: Sharique [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: jQuery (English) jquery-en@googlegroups.com
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 3:22 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: Performance of jquery
Importance: Low
maybe it depends on your browser and/or pc, it seems fastest when I run
the test...
-ark
- Original Message
Hi,
IE7
Prototype: 2199 ms
Mootools: 1546 ms
jQuery: 1336 ms
FF2
Prototype: 326 ms
Mootools: 390 ms
jQuery: 1092 ms
SAFARI3
Prototype: 896 ms
Mootools: 279 ms
jQuery: 452 ms
To complete the values:
Konqueror
Prototype: only Errors
Mootools: only Errors
jQuery: 699 ms
With
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 5:02 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: Performance of jquery
Hi Rick,
Every so often, someone just mysteriously posts a message almost exactly
like the one that you saw today and it's usually a brand new user to the
list. It's been
12 matches
Mail list logo
