Another issue is that beefy Mac hardware is quite expensive. I haven’t regretted it since, but that also means there is not much incentive to fixing macOS specific issues anymore. However once I got deeper into the topic I was really eager to completely switch to NixOS to get all of the reproducibility benefits. Me personally, I started using nix on OS X and did my first contributions to nixpkgs via that. It is nice to get desktop apps sorted out, and I look forward to the day when I can manage everything I use with Nix, but I also don’t feel particularly put-out by having to install a few desktop apps this way. I get the attraction of One Config to Rule Them All, but forcing these into Nix smells weird to me (an anti-pattern? reproducibility theater? trying to fit a square peg in a round hole?) Some people use a Nix wrapper to download+install ( or even to run Homebrew), but many of these apps auto-update, or stop working when the client is no longer compatible with a centralized back-end. It doesn’t directly apply to Chromium, but enough of my desktop apps are closed-source and/or Mac-only that I don’t see any near-term escape from needing Homebrew or some other ritual for downloading and installing binaries. Perhaps I’m an outlier, but I haven’t experienced missing desktop apps as a showstopper on macOS. Have any thoughts on this? Let us know down below in the comments or carry the discussion over to our Twitter or Facebook.Many likely newcomers likely will abandon evaluating Nix on Darwin without some of them. That could be Chrome, or it could be Safari, Brave, Firefox, or any of the smaller market-share browsers. Our take on this benchmark-breaking feat by Chrome? Does it really matter? I mean, you should use the browser that gives you the features you want, and that renders the websites you visit often properly. Gone are the days of lightweight websites, and thankfully, so are the days of computers running out of RAM easily. Sure, some of that is on the webpage developers cramming in loads of scripts and features. READ MORE: How to stop your browser from using too much RAM What they don’t mention is resource use, as the most common complaint against Chrome is that it is RAM-hungry. Google says its recent improvements mean that its browser is seven percent faster than Safari. If you want to run the test on your own machine, make sure to turn off all extensions and we found more accurate results in Incognito mode. READ MORE: Google Chrome on desktop now has a better image search option That’s a huge performance difference and is perhaps more testament to Apple’s engineering teams that worked on the M1 chips. I ran the same test on my i9-9900K-powered desktop, using Chrome M99, and got a paltry score of 181. That benchmark simulates using various web apps inside a browser, testing for responsiveness. It got a score of 300 using a ten-core M1 Max chip inside a 64GB MacBook Pro. Google credits this with improvements it made to JavaScript and graphics rendering, with a net 43-percent boost since the M1-version of Chrome was launched.Ĭhrome M99 spanked the competition using Apple’s own Speedometer web benchmark. Google says that version M99 of Chrome runs faster than Safari does.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |