Must say...

[Drew1903]

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

[#2]

@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 creates multiple processes 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.  

[#3]

@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. :smiling_face_with_smiling_eyes::thumbs_up::thumbs_up:

Cheers,
Drew

[#4]

@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?

[#5]

@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 :D  Are you sorry you asked for my thoughts, yet? :smirking_face::thinking_face:

Cheers,
Drew

[#6]

@Drew1903  "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.

[#7]

@tomscharbach 

Tom, you are the 2nd person to recently ask me about this.  There are some 3rd party articles to read about this.  This was the notice from MS regarding Insiders.  The issue was fixed in Build 18877... we are currently on Build 18885.  The interesting aside here is, I, indeed have an external USB drive and I never saw this issue arise with my own Insider Builds.  Possibly because I was on Skip Ahead & may have missed it before we re-merged with Fast track. Also, because, the VM doesn't 'see' host USBs.  We'll soon know how it all is sorted.  My thought was, if a concern is known in advance, unplug the exteral before taking the Update rather than, after & re-trying it, after disconnecting the drive.

As for 32 vs 64; Some time ago we felt x86 would soon be fodder for history books & scrapbooks.  There was, even, talk that 128 would become the norm.  I think the latter is a ways off.  But, 32 is riding off into the sunset, just a matter of time; doubt that time will be very long.

Cheers,
Drew

[#8]

@Drew1903  Thanks for the heads up on the SD/USB issue.  I will pass it on to the school IT managers that have asked me about it.  

"But, 32 is riding off into the sunset, just a matter of time; doubt that time will be very long."

I agree.  My personal minimum is 128gb SSD on my laptops.  The problem is that schools have a huge inventory of 32gb eMMc computers for use by the kids, and that inventory will be around for a while.  Most schools have opted for Chromebooks, but Microsoft has aggressively pushed W10 computers with those specs for schools, so quite a number have those as well.  

[#9]

@tomscharbach 

Tom, I just realise I read your other note too fast.  Surprised you didn't catch how things didn't jibe.  I went rattling on about x86 vs x64, geeesh.  That wasn't your topic, at all LOL, oops.  Never should have done Evelyn Woods :D (again, J/K)  I never did take that course.

I'll try to do better (won't be hard).  Small doesn't or isn't, really, going to cut it, anymore.  Which, means I can, still, say its days are fading; even though referring to a different 'it', this time.  (That was convenient :beaming_face_with_smiling_eyes:)

Cheers,
Drew

[#10]

@Drew1903 

"Small doesn't or isn't, really, going to cut it, anymore.  Which, means I can, still, say its days are fading; even though referring to a different 'it', this time. "

When you say (correctly) that "Small doesn't or isn't, really, going to cut it, anymore.", I ask, "Is this headed in the right direction?"

I agree that "My drug of choice is more ..." is the direction that the industry is driving us, but if we follow that direction, we'll end up with a computing environment like Mitt Romney's much-mocked station wagon, loaded up to the point where wheels sag and the dog is tied on top.

As you pointed out earlier, few consumers use 10% of the OS/hardware combo that defines their computing environment, but both Microsoft and manufacturers keep piling on more, to the point where (as you pointed out) that mid-range consumer laptops cost over $1,000 and desktops even more.  Consumers are paying for things that they don't use and probably won't use.

Windows 10 is getting more and more loaded with new features and increasingly resource hungry -- visual effects, few of which add much in the way of functionality for most consumers -- all the while dragging legacy components along behind to accommodate enterprise users. Manufacturers accommodate that insanity by building more and more power into the hardware that they sell to consumers, even though most consumers don't need anywhere near that power.  

At the same time, the computer market is losing share, as fewer and fewer consumers buy into it, preferring smartphones and other mobile devices as their primary computing environment.  Is it any wonder, given where the computer market is going?  Studies show that an enormous percentage of consumers spend 80-90% of their computing time surfing the web, dealing with e-mail, and communicating in simple ways (e.g. texting).  Smartphones and other mobile devices are ideal for that level of use, and powerful desktops/laptops are overkill.

Enterprises aren't buying into the "My drug of choice is more ..." game, either.  I'm retired now, but I spent most of my career in the enterprise, and I can't help but notice that there is a decided split has developed between the business and consumer markets.  Business-oriented desktops/laptops are higher quality, more durable and easier to maintain than consumer desktops/laptops, but specs are lower because the business environment doesn't need all the bling that the consumer market shovels onto consumers.  

At times, the current market is just insane, and the school environment is an example.  The school market is important, both because of the numbers (schools are more and more equipping the kids with laptops for use in the classroom) and because the environment in which kids grow up influences their future choices (that's one of the reasons that Microsoft has put on a push in the school market, now dominated by Chromebooks, and it is also one of the reasons that Microsoft seems to be moving in the direction of developing a Windows Lite version, without all the bling and without the legacy components).  We've now reached the point where the Windows-recommended specs for school-use laptops aren't going to be usable much longer.  It is ridiculous to be at a point where an 8-year-old needs a $1,000+ computer to do basic schoolwork.

We are on a collision course with ourselves within this industry.  We are now at the fender-bender level, but it isn't going to be long before the collision turns into a train wreck.

Let me put this in personal terms.  I use two laptops on a regular basis.  The first is a mid-range Dell Latitude 7280 business computer (i5, 8gb RAM, 128gb SSD, Intel 620 graphics), cost about $1,650 US.  The second is a low-end Dell Inspiron 3185 consumer computer (AMD 9-9420e, 4gb RAM, 128gb SSD, AMD r5 graphics), cost about $400 US.  Why do I have both?  For a simple reason: I use the 3185 in the locomotive shop at the railroad museum where I volunteer, a physical environment that is dirty, and I'm not willing to risk a $1650 US laptop in that environment. 

Mine is but one small (and uncommon) need for a low-end computer.  But I think that my situation is indicative, in the sense that the industry is moving, seemingly faster and faster, in a "My drug of choice is more ..." direction, forcing consumers with low-end needs to buy mid-range desktop/laptops at 3-4 times the price, simply because the low-end computers won't work much longer.  That's not a good thing.

Schools are now in that position.  Microsoft specified Celeron/Pentium 32gb eMMc laptops for school use, and then, as 1809 came along, told schools to add 16gb SD cards to those computers in order to accommodate the upgrade, and now, just a few months later, has informed schools that 1903 is going to "reserve" an additional 7gb of space on the hard drive for future upgrade use.

Microsoft is rapidly abandoning for the school market, leaving the market to Chromebooks, and that is a shame.  I've read the rumors about Windows Lite development, and I hope that Windows does develop that verison of Windows.  It might keep Windows in the low-end market.

[#11]

@Drew1903 "I went rattling on about x86 vs x64, geeesh.  That wasn't your topic, at all LOL, oops."  

Taking this as a segway, when you do suppose that Microsoft is going to stop supporting 32-bit hardware?  I doubt that one has been built in the last decade, and probably longer. 

Support for 32-bit hardware is yet another legacy component that W10 drags around, like SMB 1.0, outdated versions of NET, Internet Explorer and so on.  Linux, for the most part, dropped 32-bit support last year or the year before, as did Apple, and it seems to me that the time has come for Microsoft to do that, too.

[#12]

@tomscharbach 

32 bit going bye bye

I don't know... there was time that I thought it might have happened, by now.

Having read a novel, lol. Isn't Windows10 S such a "stripped down" version for school kids or whomever?

And in regard to,  specifically, Business hardware changing... the biggest (& it's HUGE) chunk of super-fast growing revenue is coming from Cloud.  Discussing the consumer world would be another novel.

Tom, I have some info regarding what you asked me about 1903.  It's, really, not much more or different than, already, publicized 

This cannot be published, I’m telling you in confidence because of the source (my cousin in Redmond). Insiders were told about this, as I told you earlier. It was fixed from Build 18877; we are now on 18885. But, 1903 is 18362. It’s not much more or different than what 3rd party articles say.

"So, there’s an issue with build-to-build upgrades if a USB device is attached.

Apparently it has been fixed for Windows Insider Preview builds in 18877. It’s not clear to me what that means for WIP if a system is currently on 18875 (will it upgrade to 18885 if a USB device is attached or not?). But that has no direct bearing on the 1903 release. (It only has an indirect bearing since problems in 1903 that will need to be serviced first need to get fixed in a Vibranium build and flighted to WIP.)

As for the 1903 release that is still on build 18362. If I read between the lines, it sounds like a servicing fix is in the works. It’s possible that it may get fixed in a 1903 update before 1903 starts getting pushed out broadly, or it may be that the release will initially not get pushed out to some devices but will wait for those devices until the fix is in a 1903 update."

Cheers,
Drew

[#13]

@Drew1903  "It’s possible that it may get fixed in a 1903 update before 1903 starts getting pushed out broadly, or it may be that the release will initially not get pushed out to some devices but will wait for those devices until the fix is in a 1903 update."

The trade press is reporting the later.   Whether they know anything or not, I don't know.

As I think about it, I'm going to suggest to the school IT folks that they do what most enterprises do as a matter of course -- create a clean 1903 disk image with all the school's software and settings, test it carefully, and then install 1903 by wiping the SSD and cloning the disk image onto the computer.  Most probably do that already, and those that don't probably should in any event.

[#14]

---

@Drew1903 wrote:

Apparently it has been fixed for Windows Insider Preview builds in 18877. It’s not clear to me what that means for WIP if a system is currently on 18875 (will it upgrade to 18885 if a USB device is attached or not?).

---

@Drew1903 -- I might be of some help on that one. I had both a Surface Pro 4 and a workstation on 18875. When 18885 was first released, it wouldn't install on either machine. That was between 1 and 2 pm EST. I immediately reported the problem. A few hours later, the new Build installed without difficulties. As to whether I had USB devices connected to my computer, the answer is: numerous but none of them were storage devices.

[#15]

@Drew1903 

---

@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 Lazy Loading 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 Tabs 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.

[#16]

@tomscharbach 

---

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. :smiling_face_with_smiling_eyes: