Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Submission + - Chrome beats Firefox on real Kraken benchmark (

spikedLemur writes: Mozilla's official Kraken JavaScript performance benchmark site runs an older Kraken version, which is known to provide incorrect results that inflate Firefox's performance relative to other browsers. Apparently one root cause is bug 599914, originally reported by a Google V8 engineer and fixed four months ago by Mozilla, but still not deployed to the official site. With that bug fixed, Chrome 10 outperforms all other browsers--including Firefox 4--on Mozilla's own benchmark suite. You can verify yourself by checking (which uses a more current Kraken version) or by manually downloading and running the most current Kraken version.

While the outdated official version may be an honest mistake on Mozilla's part, the fact remains that they marketed Firefox 4 very heavily on its improved JavaScript performance. Numerous reviews and tech articles (including posts from ZDNet Hardware 2.0 and CNET Download) specifically referenced the misleading results as an advantage Firefox demonstrated over other browsers. So, it is a bit suspicious that Mozilla hasn't corrected their official benchmark after four months--particularly when doing so would put Chrome 10 out in front of Firefox 4 on their own JavaScript benchmark.

Comment Re:FUD (Score 1) 539

For corporate clients that you don't want on the internet, firewalls which are no less complicated to configure than any NAT setup, can be used.

This statement leads me to believe you've never looked at a corporate firewall policy, much less an actual ruleset. I've seen a few dozen, from medium to large enterprises. And I can't count the number of times I've seen rules that would leave them wide-open were it not for their NAT to a private address space. In all cases this was accidental, as it left some number of internal hosts exposed. However, it had slipped through because of old rules or some typo.

Current routing hardware can handle it just fine.

I'm not so certain of this. However, I'd like to see the information you are basing your assessment on.

A decade ago, the internet was made up of peers.

Yes, and the traffic (and security threats) were trivial compared to now. That's why I'm saying that an IPV6 migration requires very careful consideration.

Slashdot Top Deals

Economists can certainly disappoint you. One said that the economy would turn up by the last quarter. Well, I'm down to mine and it hasn't. -- Robert Orben