From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mh7aA-0001VH-Ew for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:57:59 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4C0C6E08FB for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:07:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC6CE0B14 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:19:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E391A679B6 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:19:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -3.021 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.021 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.422, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1fX8OTV6m97U for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:19:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E656796E for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:19:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1Mg4Lx-0003az-QW for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:18:57 +0200 Received: from athedsl-381660.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.42.218]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:18:57 +0200 Received: from realnc by athedsl-381660.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:18:57 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Why does emerge want to downgrade firefox/xul-runner? Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:18:34 +0300 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <58965d8a0908251419l312f1887xd16e6501cd05e87b@mail.gmail.com> <58965d8a0908251501n29e6bb07q3eb3414cb25397c8@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-381660.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090815 Thunderbird/3.0b3 In-Reply-To: <58965d8a0908251501n29e6bb07q3eb3414cb25397c8@mail.gmail.com> Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 588e328a-fb8f-44d1-a12d-09a810c82033 X-Archives-Hash: e16a2b77fd0e95e5764ffa3678c74d8d On 08/26/2009 01:01 AM, Paul Hartman wrote: >[...] > I can't remember the reason, but it's a common complaint that Mozilla > products are slower in general on Linux (I even saw an article > claiming the windows version of FF running in WINE can outperform the > native Linux version of FF on the same machine) and I'm certainly one > who has experienced that. I did test it and Firefox for Windows beats the hell out of the Linux version in every test. You can search for "javascript benchmark", "firefox benchmark" and stuff like that and take all tests you find. Windows Firefox is always faster. Even running it in Wine under Linux (though slower than native Windows) is much faster than the Linux version. Firefox would never get away with this kind of performance with Windows users and it would never become so popular as it is now. Sometimes we just have to face the fact that for Mozilla, we're second-class citizens when compared to Windows users.