Forum Discussion
Must say...
Certainly, many others have spoken to this, but, I feel like saying it (again, maybe, anyway). Nobody better to say it to than, y'all, I reckon.
This is running Edge Dev & or Canary side by side with Edge. Obviously, on the same OS, connection & hardware. The Edge C loads sites quicker and is generally, snappier & more responsive. Albeit, this observation is from no kind of formal lab testing. BUT, the difference is marked enough, drastic & dramatic enough to be instantly & extremely noticeable. Although, I've, always, found Edge performance good, what this Edge C is showing takes that performance MUCH futher, indeed! If it's an accurate indication of what it'll be once it goes live, there's going to be heaps of VERY impressed Users & countless converts to it from other browsers.
And, I'm not too worried about it having the same few things we keep repeating in place & in order by that same time. It is important, critical to please End Users (customers) & give most of them something that not only works well, but, has/does what most of them want and like.
Cheers,
Drew
15 Replies
Drew1903 wrote:Current Edge Chromium Preview loads sites quicker and is generally, snappier & more responsive.
Certainly that's my impression too. What I suspect it caused by is "empty browser" syndrome, compare as Edge Chromium - it likely carries no extra "wait" so far compare to mature Chrome loaded with Google Services. As Edge devs will start getting ads control in, antivirus plugins, Microsoft Services under the hood, we'll likely see gradual performance drop to familiar Chrome level or below it.
Chromium lately uses https://pureinfotech.com/enable-lazy-loading-speed-up-pages-chrome/ feature to speedup webpages load and rendering. In this approach invisible page areas below the edge get picture and frame placeholders first. The flag should be available and enabled by default in Edge Preview.
Chromium also includes https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/09/tab-discarding feature aimed at getting RAM use by numerous open tabs under control. Edge Classic doesn't have a similar mechanism, and in my tests often crashed at medium to heavy multitab browsing on older PCs due to RAM overuse.
Drew1903 "It is important, critical to please End Users (customers) & give most of them something that not only works well, but, has/does what most of them want and like."
That is certainly true, Drew. Based on the trade press, users (consumer users more than business users) have adopted Chrome in such large numbers (what, about 65% of the NA consumer market) because of the perceived speed advantage, and users don't know/care about the resource-use issue.
But for those of us who recommend/specify computers, it means, I think, that we will have to take resource use into consideration.
I've been thinking about this for a week or so, and I'm coming to the realization that going forward minimum requirements for a general use (not gaming) consumer/business laptop are something like i3/i5 processor, 8gb RAM, 128/256 SSD and a 60 Whr 4-cell battery. That puts the price up to around $800-1,000 US.
What are your thoughts?
I'm coming to the realization that going forward minimum requirements for a general use consumer/business laptop are something like i3/i5 processor, 8gb RAM, 128/256 SSD and a 60 Whr 4-cell battery. That puts the price up to around $800-1,000 US.It may be what US computer sales people would like most to think, but... Windows is a world wide OS, Edge browser including. So somewhere in the 3rd word where most PCs come to consumers from a foreign shipload junk and wholesale components clearance rebuild store, folks may disagree with these numbers having no choice but to stick with 10-15 year old CPUs, 1-2 GB of RAM, some old GPU card if any, and anything else they can buy on top at Ebay for pennies import tariffs permitting. Not surprisingly, low pay dwellers comprise solid majority of humans on this planet. And there are some industries in these countries using Windows too on similar PCs and devices. No matter paid for or not they expect OS to work. 😊
tomscharbach
Yes, well, Chrome may be popular, but, you have to 'like' something too, hence, my not using it, lol But, seriously... to your point...
It's a challenge to discuss this stuff based on "the average User". Hell, the average User only uses 10% of the machine's potential. If we consider what I'll consider mid-range & up, the dollar figure you state is, now, already, a minimum. Mostly, I've custom built PCs & sold laptops. What was consider robust a very short time ago is a joke, now. Sometimes I've thought the common-place specs for laptops to be ridiculous. Huge RAM & drives as 'the norm' on retail shelves. We're at the point where nobody flinches over 8G+ RAM or considers less. i3s tend to be lower cost machines, but, the extra is small to have i5s and i5s & i7s being the majority choice. People have accepted, these days, that GOOD, worthwhile, long-term units are $1000 to $2,000 & more. Are big, powerful computers necessary? Not for Windows 10. But, when it comes to what the collective 'we' want to do with computers, now & going forward, strength IS needed. People are doing more, able to do more, they are expecting & demanding more. both in hardware AND software. There are some ok 'puters in the $600 to $800 range, but, usually physically small devices. To continue, when gaming, VR activies, 'all' day use, school work, job work, 'constant communication & streaming... the complextion of the computing landscape has changed heaps at a rapid rate & it ain't gonna to slow down, either. Thus the hardware (levels) taken for granted are bigger & stronger. Evolution, natural progression. However, electronics prices do usually drop sometime, a while, after (new) things 1st appear. TVs a prime example.
What gets sold, that is bought & what people, actually, need are not always mutually exclusive. But, whether it's due to a browser or a tonne of other factors, as well, it's the scenario, now & into the future.
And to repeat, the irony is Win10, itself, is not demanding, at all. There are heaps of instances of it running very nicely on older, not robust at all, machines. It's society & our morphing culture that spawns sophisticated gear. Same as just look @ the speeds IPs are offering, now, too. Times have changed, vastly, recently & fast.
Please, excuse my being long-winded 🥱, in this case. Usually my not being thrilled with typing keeps things short. I should use Dictation more 😄 Are you sorry you asked for my thoughts, yet? 😏🤔
Cheers,
DrewDrew1903 "Are you sorry you asked for my thoughts, yet?"
Not at all.
While we are exchanging thoughts, do you know when Microsoft is going to resolve the issues that led to its announcement that the W10 1903 upgrade will be blocked on computers with attached SD cards and/or USB devices ("An external USB device or SD memory card that is attached to the computer could cause inappropriate drive reassignment on Windows 10-based computers during the installation of the May 2019 update. For this reason, these computers are currently blocked from receiving the May 2019 Update. This generates the error message that is mentioned in the "Symptoms" section if the upgrade is tried again on an affected computer.")?
The reason I ask is that the standard W10 laptop built/issued for school kids in the classroom until just recently were 11" 32gb RAM (it went to 64gb RAM about six months ago). Accordingly, most school computer programs are still using the 32gb models.
Microsoft issued an advisory a few months ago telling people supporting 32gb school laptops to install an SD or external USB in order to provide room for W10 to upgrade. Now, apparently, following that advisory will cause W10 1903 upgrades to be blocked.
I assume that Microsoft will resolve that issue in due time, and it isn't likely to impact school upgrades, because the school computers run on W10 Pro and are on the "wait until ready for business deployment" model. But I'm curious if Microsoft has said anything to Windows Insiders and Microsoft Business Partners about the issue.
If nothing else, the switch from 32gb to 64gb as the minimum spec for computers to be used by 8-year-olds in the classroom is an indication that specifications keep going up and up, as you say.
Drew1903 Metrics come and metrics go. Chrome and Edge (Classic) have battled back and forth in the speed wars, each claiming a small edge (no pun) over the other. Different tests (and normalization methods applied to the tests) yield different results, and both Google and Microsoft claim superiority. It is somewhat horse hockey, because the measured speed advantages that MS and Google are touting back and forth are generally in the 3-5% range, once normalized, and in the past few years, Edge seems to have the performance edge (this time it is a pun).
And yet user experience is that Chrome is much faster in comparison to either Edge. Reviews in the trade press almost always comment on how fast Chrome is in comparison to Edge. Those reviews probably should read "how fast Chrome appears to be in comparison" because the metrics do not support the experience.
I've experienced the same thing you have with respect to Edge Chromium: "Wow, is this fast!"
So I started to think about the question of why I think that when I have no metrics. That led me to think about why Chrome reviewers (and users) think that about Chrome, too.
From what I've read about the issue in the last few days, the difference between Edge and Chrome in percieved performance is the result of the way in which Chromium handles processes. As Chromium opens a website, the browser https://blog.chromium.org/2008/09/multi-process-architecture.html to open various elements of the page, and pages "snap" open since different elements of the page are being processed simultaneously rather than sequentially. Edge, on the other hand, bundles processes, using many fewer processes to open a website, combining similar elements into single processes.
In that single respect (opening web pages) Chromium-based browers (Chromium/Linux, Chrome, Vivaldi and Edge Chromium) are going to appear to be (and probably are, although I haven't seen the metrics testing just that element of browser performance) much faster than Edge (Classic).
But opening multiple processes comes at a price -- Chromium-based browsers are resource hogs.
Run Edge (Classic) and Edge Chromium hard (that is, open lots and lots of websites, in tandem doing the same things, and then check Task Manager for the number of processes that are open. I think that you'll find, as I consistently do when I look at Task Manager in those circumstances. And keep an eye on memory use between the two browsers. I seldom see Edge (Classic) use more than 1gb of memory, and I often see Edge Chromium using 2-3gb during those comparisons.
All the open processes and all that memory use is the reason that Chrome has a reputation as a resource hog, and Edge Chromium is no different in this respect (as we can see for ourselves on Task Manager).
So the speed is there in Edge Chromium, but it comes at a price. Where the rubber hits the road in this respect is when Edge Chromium is running on low-resource computers and when Edge Chromium is running on a laptop.
On low-resource computers (that is, low-end processors and 4gb RAM) heavy Chromium use bogs things down, sooner or later, as multiple processes consume processor resources and high memory use burdens the computers other running processes.
On laptops, Edge Chromium eats up battery resources noticably faster than Edge (Classic). Microsoft used to make much of the Chromium-based disadvantage in the battle between Edge (Classic) and Chrome, claiming that Edge got 35% +/- better battery time than Chrome. Independent testing has confirmed that Chrome drains batteries much quicker than Edge (Classic).
I've noticed lower battery life on both laptops that I'm using to test Edge Chromium. One is a mid-level business laptop (Dell Latitude 7280, i5 8gb) that normally gets 10-12 hours of battery life in ordinary use. The other is a low-end laptop (Dell 3815, AMD 9-9420e, 4gb) that normally gets 4-5 hours.
I use the laptops in predictable ways. I use the 7280 almost every night, browsing here and there for an hour or so, nothing demanding. I use the 3185 on Tuesday and Thursday at the railroad museum where I volunteer, first checking around the museum's networks to see that all is well (or not), and then active/sleep on and off during the day as the need to check something online arises.
There is a noticeable difference between the battery life I obtained when running Edge (Classic) and the battery life I've obtained during the last couple of weeks, running Edge Chromium. Instead of 10-12 on the 7280, I'm getting closer to 8-10, having to recharge more often than I used to. On the 3185, I have to be very judicious about use in order to nurse the computer through the working day, where I didn't have to think about it at all before Edge Chromium.
So its a trade off, Drew. Performance comes at a price. Nothing new.
tomscharbach
Tom,
Yes, that is often the case. I was hoping MS could or would do this and have it not be a resource hog like Chrome (and more safe & secure, too, although that's another discussion). I have never bothered with 'claims' much, even, if allegedly supported by lab testing. I tend to lean more towards real-world use & End User feelings & comments. Much as one will be a fan of performance, there's never enthusiasm for things that are highly resource-demanding. It has just 'seemed' in my wee set-up, that not only Edge C often loads same sites quicker, it 'seems' snappier after opening, too. More a casual observation than, suggesting any benchmark is implied. I do run multiple desktops & several windows & activities most of the time & it doesn't seem to mind. The other reason it seemed meaningful is this is on a vm with only 2G RAM assigned to it.
Good thoughts to kick around, though. 😊👍👍
Cheers,
Drew
