Recommended Posts

Believe it or not, IE7. Firefox is cool once your get FireTune to optimise it but I've found IE7 to be blazing fast and be very secure.

Problem with FireFox is it freezes whenever your try doing to many things at once. IE7 stays near and clear of whatever you're doing. Plus the popup blocker(in my experience) works better.

ditto (Y)

To clarify. IE6 loads fastest on windows XP, this is because it's integrated of course. Opera loads second fastest, firefox is the slowest.

Once the app is open, IE6 is the slowest, firefox is ok, but this is when Opera really excels. When Opera says it has instant back/forward, it really does. Not some half a second delay like firefox, but truely instant.

Is opera really the fastest. Or do people just like to use it alot?

On my computer (I tried IE6, IE7, FF and Opera) it's really the fastest not only opening up and closing (only takes about 30mb of ram while FF took 100MB or more :( ), but also loading websites

Define "fastest browser". Do you mean loading/rendering of pages or loading of the browser? It all depends on how you configure the browser and the loading of pages depends on your internet connection and the server that you get the pages from. It's proven true to me that pages that reside on servers nearer to you gets loaded faster than those servers far away.

I say IE becasuse it's fast to load but Firefox because it seems to oad pages faster than IE.

I refuse to even try Opera these days. Long story, though. Suffice to say I don't trust them nor have I ever found anything of use in their previous versions.

Both Firefox and IE (32-bit and 64-bit) start up instantly on my system, so no difference there.

It's hard for me to say one is faster than the other. Generally I don't notice any difference except that Firefox (1.51) still does its insanely annoying "piece-by-piece" rendering. So usually it gets something on the screen faster, but it flashes and moves everything around before it's done. Whereas IE might take a second longer to start drawing but is finished immediately. Seeing as I'm on broadband, the latter is greatly preferred.

I use Maxthon for my daily browsing needs. Performance really isn't a factor in that decision.

ie 6 sp2 x64 > ie 7 b2 preview 32 > opera 9 > opera 8 > ie 6 sp2 32 > firefox, and I don't know about safari.

The 64-bit version of IE 6 isn't going to be noticeably faster than the 32-bit version.

What you do probably notice is that it starts and responds faster because it almost certainly has no BHOs loaded, whereas I'm betting your 32-bit version has a dozen or so.

The differences are fractions of seconds, or in some extreme cases a few seconds, but there isn't enough of a difference for me to chose the browser I use based on speed. Now if you have a browser that takes like 25+ additional seconds to load even simple sites that's a different story, but that's not what the differences are these days.

I'm not just saying that cause I'm a Firefox user/fan either, wouldn't make any difference if Firefox was obviously faster I would say the same thing.

To prove my point a little more: I use some extensions that cost me slight time in the rendering of pages. Only a little, but adds functions or protections enough that I think it's worth it.

It's hard for me to say one is faster than the other. Generally I don't notice any difference except that Firefox (1.51) still does its insanely annoying "piece-by-piece" rendering. So usually it gets something on the screen faster, but it flashes and moves everything around before it's done. Whereas IE might take a second longer to start drawing but is finished immediately. Seeing as I'm on broadband, the latter is greatly preferred.

Yes that can be annoying but avoided by increasing "nglayout.initialpaint.delay" value. Default is 250ms but many "tweak" guides and presets in "tuning" programs will advice 0ms. Try 500, 750 - IE is probably like 1000+. Good explanation of it here http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/asa/archives/007164.html

1. Wrong forum.

2. We been threw this thousands of times

3. I say - check my old posts in Web browser forum

Yes, you are right on the fact that we have been over this a million times but I am asking this at a time when IE7 just came out, new versions of Firefox and Opera also came out...and for new users to see these opinions.

Believe it or not, IE7. Firefox is cool once your get FireTune to optimise it but I've found IE7 to be blazing fast and be very secure.

Problem with FireFox is it freezes whenever your try doing to many things at once. IE7 stays near and clear of whatever you're doing. Plus the popup blocker(in my experience) works better.

Yes, IE7 is fast, but I just dont like the way its setup and they dont really let you customize it too much? Or maybe I am wrong... but I dont see anything like firefox?s extensions or anything like that.

Is opera really the fastest. Or do people just like to use it alot?

People def. do NOT use it alot. I would say the number one browser used is IE, then Firefox and then MAYBE opera...

Internet Explorer because it's integrated.

You def. need to learn a bit more about how things work. Just because its integrated into windows doesnt mean it is faster ONLINE, it might be faster at LAUNCHING...but thats about all.---

oh yea, does that say that Lynx is the fastest. You are wrong. Download opera, disable anything but text downloading (no java, no images) and see who wins then.

Opera's the fastest as far as I can see. Plus it's a pleasure to use. I used to use FF (and still do sometimes) but now I can't wait for Opera 9. I haven't used IE in years due to all the security risks. Even if they have managed to patch a few things up, it'll still always be a dangerous browser in my mind.

The fastest browser for simply surfing the net is a no brainer. It's Opera and ANYONE that says different, is flat out lying!! I don't care what your machine specs are. Now, as far as loading and any other extracirricular activiites, it may not be so obvious, but I'd still say Opera.

Opera's the fastest as far as I can see. Plus it's a pleasure to use. I used to use FF (and still do sometimes) but now I can't wait for Opera 9. I haven't used IE in years due to all the security risks. Even if they have managed to patch a few things up, it'll still always be a dangerous browser in my mind.

Opera 9 beta works excellent. I'm using it for weeks now, and it's very stable for everyday use. Rarely crashes.

The fastest browser for simply surfing the net is a no brainer. It's Opera and ANYONE that says different, is flat out lying!! I don't care what your machine specs are. Now, as far as loading and any other extracirricular activiites, it may not be so obvious, but I'd still say Opera.

I totally agree. Although I think the speeds are quite the same for normal websites. Opera just is better when it comes to opening allot of pages, with the sublime download/mousegestures and tabbed browsing package.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • If I ever get that issue I will let you know how I fix it
    • As I've been usually saying lately - we all can thank "AI" for this.
    • Friday Windows 11 preview builds are here. Insiders in the Experimental (formerly Dev) and Beta Channel can download builds 26300.8697 and 26220.8690. My Windows11 device on the Preview Channel just got 26220.8728. My guess is this build is a nightly update from 26220.8690.
    • Traffic has a surprisingly unexpected impact on your surroundings by Sayan Sen Image by Radik 2707 via Pexels A collaborative study by researchers from several Israeli institutions found that everyday pollution from traffic and industrial activity measurably changed the atmospheric electric field over the Tel Aviv metropolitan area, providing new evidence of how human activity can influence the lower atmosphere. The research was led by Dr. Roy Yaniv of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Gertner Institute at Sheba Medical Center, Dr. Assaf Hochman of the Fredy & Nadine Herrmann Institute of Earth Sciences at the Hebrew University, and Prof. Yoav Yair of Reichman University. The study also involved Itay Froomer, a student from Hadera High School and the Israeli Museum of Medicine and Science (Technoda), who carried out the work as part of the Ministry of Education's 5-unit physics research track. The researchers focused on the atmospheric electric field under fair-weather conditions. Even in the absence of storms, a weak electric field naturally exists between Earth's surface and the atmosphere. One of the main ways scientists measure this field is through the Potential Gradient (PG), which is the inverse of the vertical component of the electric field. PG is a key part of the global electric circuit, a planet-wide system of electrical currents maintained by thunderstorms and electrified clouds around the world. Scientists have long known that the atmospheric electric field can be influenced by factors ranging from large-scale atmospheric processes to local weather conditions such as dust, fog and clouds. Human-made pollution is also known to play a role, but understanding exactly how urban emissions affect the electric field close to the ground has remained an area of ongoing research. To investigate this relationship, the team analyzed measurements from a newly installed electric field mill, an instrument used to continuously monitor the strength of the atmospheric electric field. The instrument was installed at the Center for Technological Education (Roter House) in Holon and became operational in August 2024. It was funded by Israel's Ministry of Education and the Holon municipality. The electric field mill forms part of a broader monitoring network that includes nearby meteorological stations and air-quality monitoring sites. This allowed researchers to compare electric field measurements with detailed weather data and pollution records to better understand what was driving changes in the Potential Gradient. The study focused on two major urban pollutants: fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), both commonly produced by vehicle traffic and industrial activity. PM2.5 refers to microscopic airborne particles small enough to remain suspended in the atmosphere for extended periods, while NOx is a group of gases released during fuel combustion. Researchers examined daily, weekly and seasonal patterns in the atmospheric electric field and compared them with changes in pollutant concentrations. Their analysis revealed a clear relationship between NOx levels and changes in the Potential Gradient, particularly during morning and evening rush hours when traffic emissions were at their highest. “What we observe is a direct physical link between emission peaks and electrical variability,” explained Dr. Roy Yaniv. “NOx reduces atmospheric conductivity very quickly, so the electric field responds almost instantaneously during traffic rush hours.” Atmospheric conductivity describes how easily electrical charges move through the air. According to the researchers, nitrogen oxides rapidly alter this conductivity, causing a near-immediate response in the electric field. PM2.5, however, was associated with a delayed response. The researchers attributed this difference to the particles' longer atmospheric residence time, meaning they remain in the atmosphere for longer periods, as well as their different microphysical interactions with surrounding air and atmospheric components. The study also identified a pronounced "weekend effect." In Israel, traffic volumes and some industrial activity decline significantly on Fridays and Saturdays. During these periods, concentrations of both NOx and PM2.5 dropped, and corresponding changes were observed in the atmospheric electric field. “The weekend signal demonstrates just how sensitive the electric field is to changes in human activity,” the researchers noted. “When emissions decline, the electrical environment adjusts at once, providing a high-resolution indicator of urban atmospheric conditions.” The findings showed that pollution levels can influence not only the chemical composition of the atmosphere but also its electrical properties. Researchers said the results strengthened the case for using atmospheric electricity as an additional tool for environmental monitoring, particularly in densely populated urban areas where anthropogenic, or human-caused, influences are most pronounced. The study also pointed to potential public health applications. By combining air-quality measurements with observations of atmospheric electricity, researchers said they could gain a more complete picture of how urban atmospheric conditions change over time. “Integrating air-quality data with electric-field measurements gives us a clearer picture of how the lower atmosphere evolves moment by moment,” the researchers added. “It’s a framework that can support both scientific insight and practical environmental decision-making.” Beyond the scientific findings, the project highlighted a collaboration between universities, public institutions and secondary education. Researchers said the work demonstrated how students could take part in real-world environmental research while contributing to studies of air quality, atmospheric processes and their potential effects on society. Source: Hebrew University, ScienceDirect This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      AMV earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      540
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      186
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      80
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      77
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!