Salakhetdinov Shamil
mcp2004 at mail.ru
Sun Feb 3 05:18:37 CST 2013
OK. Суббота, 2 февраля 2013, 17:00 -08:00 от Hans-Christian Andersen <hans.andersen at phulse.com>: >Just as with science, it is important to be as objective as possible and not make any assumptions about what is happening inside the black box. It's not conspiracy theories, its a part of the scientific method. > >- Hans > > >On 2013- 02-02, at 1:55 PM, Salakhetdinov Shamil < mcp2004 at mail.ru > wrote: > >> Hi Hans -- >> >> That sounds as a "conspiracy theory" Russian politics and clerics like and used to use so much here that it makes me laughing as soon as I hear that nonsense from them next time... >> Wouldn't you suppose that reputation would cost a lot more for MS than such a "cheap & dirty tricks"? (Let's leave "walled garden" aside from this context as the testing was done for browsers running in classic Win8 mode.) >> >> Anyway I will try to run tests on a VM - this time separately - Chrome first, then IE or vice versa. >> >> Wouldn't you expect that even in such a context IE will have any advantages? >> What "hidden" API and hardware resources they could use to interpret and run JavaScript? >> I can only imagine they (MS) somehow use OS "kernel" mode, which is unavailable for other browsers, or "talk directly to" HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) but how that "tricks" could help with JavaScript interpretation? (If they (MS) would use that tricks then Chrome, and FireFox and Mozilla engineers would have had already hacked them and used in their own browsers or you'd expect MS Windows has special API available for IE only even for IE running in classic Win7/Win8 mode?) >> >> I doubt anything more than C/C++ "assembly code blocks" and GDI+ and standard multi-threading capabilities are used to accelerate JavaScript processing - and all that "tricks" are available for both IE and Chrome developers... >> >> Thank you. >> >> -- Shamil > >> <<< skipped>>>