Based on what we saw in the results of WBGP2: Linux, we really didn't expect the OS X scores to get so close to the best from Windows. So, if you throw Safari 5.1 for OS X into the regular Windows 7 mix, Apple takes or shares second place! It appears that your Mac friends were right afterall, so stop hassling them.Īlso, remember these tests were not conducted on an actual Apple-branded Mac system. The score for Safari 5.1 on OS X is really close to Chrome 13 running on Windows 7, and it might even beat Firefox 6 for Windows.
Pure edge for mac os x mac os x#
Mac OS X Lion is a beauty to behold, and its benefits aren't just skin-deep. Firefox's problems in OS X mirror what it suffers in Windows, with the addition of memory problems found in OS X. Like Chrome, though, its Windows 7 build far out-paces the OS X version. This browser suffers the same issues on OS X as in Windows 7, with the added problems of lowered JavaScript and DOM performance, as well as slower page load times.įirefox 6 is pretty close behind Opera. Opera takes third place on OS X, and its cross-platform scores are really close, earning Opera the distinction of providing a steady experience across multiple platforms. A lack of HTML5 hardware acceleration, hoggish memory usage, and poor reliability hold back Google's browser here.
Pure edge for mac os x windows 10#
And as of Windows 10 the IE browser is being phased out and replaced by the newer Edge browser, that does not support ActiveX in web pages.Chrome takes second place on Lion, though its performance isn't even close to what we saw in Windows 7. As far as I know only Microsoft's own Internet Explorer browser ever supported ActiveX in web pages. It turned out to be a good way ensure that PCs all over the world got infested with malware, because C++ is not the kind of language where it's easy to constrain what the code can do. Again Microsoft is the main player who has attempted this, with their ActiveX technology.
NET message box in standard C++ by way of COM technology as an intermediate layer, and that worked, but with a ridiculous amount of complex non-general support code.Īs another example, using C++ in web pages is very much an impedance mismatch, so to speak.
Pure edge for mac os x how to#
For example, my first questions here on SO concerned how to do a simple. NET-y parts it's just that using only standard C++ the code becomes complex, inefficient and generally impractical. NET is to combine standard C++ parts with more. NET, and indeed one main reason to use C++ with. It's not impossible to use only standard C++ for. NET virtual machine is apparently so at odds with the ideas of C++ that Microsoft has found it necessary to define two different non-standard variants of C++ for it, and offers no way to produce GUI programs for it in pure standard C++. So given that the platform itself is compatible with the basic platform assumptions of the C++ language, and the Mac is, achieving such portability is conceptually very straightforward, although difficult to get perfect.Īs an example of a platform that's not entirely compatible with C++, Microsoft's. With pure standard C++ this is the standard library and the runtime support, but in practice a game, say, will also rely on 3 rd party libraries with platform specific implementations. Regardless of language a multi-platform program relies on some basic support parts that are implemented differently on each platform.
0 kommentar(er)
