MAXTHON > FIREFOX

darkertint · February 28th, 2009, 12:30 AM

For years I have been using the browser Maxthon, and I'm tired of it not being reviewed with other browswers in PC magazines and so on. Since it's based on IE it might be a tad slower if you have an outdated system, but the features make up for it! If you have a fast computer then I don't think there's any performance difference between maxthon and firefox, and you are just left with the extra features. MAXTHON IS THE BEST BROWSER and that's not debatable (just compare features to other browsers)

vass0922 · February 28th, 2009, 12:39 AM

Yes lets compare security of Maxathon with other browsers!

lets see iE requires what 1-2 IE patches a week?
most exploits on the net are written for IE...

and I'm not a huge fan of FF either

**RobRich** · February 28th, 2009, 12:46 AM

Might be a tad bit slower? Now there is an understatement.

Testing has demonstrated IE7 is about 42 times slower in JavaScript processing than Webkit. Even IE8 is about 6 times slower in JavaScript processing than Webkit.

If you want a Firefox comparison, Mozilla Minefield (currently Firefox 3.2 pre-alpha) is only a few percent slower than Webkit.

Internet Explorer is currently so far out of the JavaScript performance game that it is not even funny. Sadly, the JavaScript engine of Opera (my favorite browser) is also currently just about as bad as IE8 for performance, comparatively speaking of course.

darkertint · February 28th, 2009, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vass0922

Yes lets compare security of Maxathon with other browsers!

lets see iE requires what 1-2 IE patches a week?
most exploits on the net are written for IE...

and I'm not a huge fan of FF either

Maxthon is based on IE... it's not IE though - Maxthon did their own patching and like I said I've been using Maxthon for years with no anti virus software or anything like that... and I've never had any problems.

darkertint · February 28th, 2009, 12:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RobRich

Might be a tad bit slower? Now there is an understatement.

Testing has demonstrated IE7 is about 42 times slower in JavaScript processing than Webkit. Even IE8 is about 6 times slower in JavaScript processing than Webkit.

If you want a Firefox comparison, Mozilla Minefield (currently Firefox 3.2 pre-alpha) is only a few percent slower than Webkit.

Internet Explorer is currently so far out of the JavaScript performance game that it is not even funny. Sadly, the JavaScript engine of Opera (my favorite browser) is also currently just about as bad as IE8 for performance, comparatively speaking of course.

Well I'm on a 600mhz laptop with 512mb of RAM - I doubt anybody out there has a much weaker computer then that and I only notice a difference when I have like 10 tabs open. Also, the features that Maxthon have save me more time so it makes up for taking an extra half second to open a new tab. Again I will say Maxthon is based on IE, but it's not IE - hence it doesn't have the problems that IE does. (In fact the new versions of IE steal features from Maxthon

**RobRich** · February 28th, 2009, 12:57 AM

The Microsoft Trident layout engine is not "patched" by Maxthon. AFAIK, Maxthon can apply filters to HTML conventions to block or alter content parsed by the layout engine, but that is not "patching" the MSHTML engine. That is applying content filtering, which you can accomplish with pretty much any modern browser by using a content filter proxy.

**RobRich** · February 28th, 2009, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkertint

Well I'm on a 600mhz laptop with 512mb of RAM - I doubt anybody out there has a much weaker computer then that and I only notice a difference when I have like 10 tabs open. Also, the features that Maxthon have save me more time so it makes up for taking an extra half second to open a new tab.

I am not referencing UI performance. I am talking about the JS engine, which is an important component for the "Web 2.0" era.

It is apparent you have likely not encountered a browser offering a JavaScript engine with native machine code compilation, such as utilized by the Webkit SquirrelFish Extreme, Mozilla TraceMonkey, and Google V8 engines.

Install a copy of Safari 4.0 beta, latest Mozilla Minefield nightly build, or Google Chrome; then use the SunSpider benchmark to realize the difference in JS performance between a highly optimized JS engine versus Microsoft's current JS engine.

SunSpider JavaScript Benchmark

Next, just in case the immense performance disparity if not enough, examine the compatibility of the MSHTL layout engine. For this test, try the industry standard Acid3 tests. Run the tests yourself. Compare results of the MSHTML engine to results delivered by Opera or Webkit, two browsers that have already achieved 100/100 scores in Acid3 testing.

Acid3 Browser Test - The Web Standards Project

Both SunSpider and Acid3 are industry-recognized web browser tests you can do personally with a minimum of effort, and I highly encourage you to try them.

**RobRich** · February 28th, 2009, 01:46 AM

Downclocked my notebook with a single-core Turion processor to only 800MHz. Here are some interesting numbers.

Webkit nightly build r41199 from public SVN. Using Safari 4 beta as the frontend UI.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SunSpider

Total: 3990.2ms +/- 16.0%

Mozilla Minefield nightly build 1.9.2a1pre Gecko/20090226 from public repository. JIT enabled.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SunSpider

Total: 4531.2ms +/- 3.8%

KarmaKiller · February 28th, 2009, 11:30 AM

Thanks for the nice review RR.

**RobRich** · February 28th, 2009, 11:41 AM

Feel lucky I actually waited for IE7 to complete SunSpider.