mike | Shared With: Everyone - Sep 03 2008 | chrome, javascript, google, benchmarks, performanceSome detailed benchmarks of the popular JavaScript engines (including Chrome).
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Sep 02 2008 | google, javascript, performance, chromeEven this challenging Javascript app that uses the <canvas> tag works well (and faster) on Google Chrome.
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Jul 29 2008 | html, parser, benchmarks, performance, python
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Jul 19 2008 | firefox, firebug, add-ons, performance, bugs
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Jul 19 2008 | firebug, debugging, performance, gmailGMail is severely degraded when running Firebug 1.2.0b6 (for Firefox 3). It's much more confusing as to how to disable Firebug completely for particular domains. I'm using Google Apps for domains, and editing a mail message is just about unusable if I have Firebug enabled in the browser.
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Jun 26 2008 | python, profile, performance, programming
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Apr 29 2008 | display, nvidia, rotated, pivot, performance
Does nVideo REALLY offer hardware acceleration for rotated displays? I want dual monitors, with one rotated, but in the past I've notice really poor performance of the display in rotated mode.
The claim here is:
Quoted: Now, with NVRotate, you can rotate any display 90, 180 or 270 degrees for maximum flexibility with no limitations or performance penalties.
But I think that's BS unless they do this with hardware acceleration. I've seen recent forum posts complain that even with high end adaptors, rotated display performance is choppy.
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Feb 16 2008 | firefox, algorithms, strings, javascript, performance
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Aug 19 2007 | javascript, performance, web development
mike | Shared With: Everyone - Aug 19 2007 | performance, web development, javascript, blue dot
A firefox/firebug extension - gives suggestions for speeding up web page dowloads.
I just ran this across my Blue Dot home page. We get an "F" for the following reasons (BTW - page load time was 5.1s).
- Too many HTTP requests (14 JS files and 49(!) CSS background images)
- Not using a CDN for static content.
- Many Expires headers missing.
- CSS files outside of HEAD?
- Minify JS files
- Mising ETAG's headers (for caching)
Related Content from Around Faves
performance
-
1 FaverViewed: 6 TimesQuoted: <diagnostics performanceCounters="All" />
- huttonj - Aug 01 20081 FaverViewed: 4 Times
- drewsaylor4 - Jul 22 200819 FaversViewed: 5 Times



