when I running one asp.net web site, there is one page is running very slow in IE, but other pages are running ok. It' wired that this page is running ok in firefox. Is there someone know the problem is? thanks!!! I am using Asp.net and js on that page
Is the page JavaScript intensive? JS in IE is notably slower.
In addition to Andy Gaskell answer. IE only can get 2 resources at a time (images, css, js, whatever) , while FF gets 4. So, for the same given page Firefox will be able to download it faster than IE (granted that there is enough bandwidth)
Also, Firefox supports http pipelining wich accelerate things even more if the server supports http 1.1. It's disabled by default because supposedly it can have problems with some old servers, But the truth is I'm using it since Firefox 0.4 and never had an issue.
Related
This is an HTML 5 Canvas application. It's a pretty standard "designer" application where the user adds objects to a layout, moves them around, and edits their properties.
It works very well, but it turns out to have real performance problems in IE 9 on Windows 7. I would appreciate any thoughts!
Operations often take 10 seconds instead of the usual 2 seconds.
Also, after using the application a little while, the browser gives an error message that the host "is not responding", giving options Recover Webpage and X. Once that starts to happen, it happens for every user action including the File menu, and I can only get out of it by editing the URL location text. In particular, it generally happens on any attempt to use the browser's profiler in Developer Tools. This is obviously frustrating, but it may also be a clue. I wondered if there might be pending synchronous AJAX calls, as suggested by this error message, but capturing the network traffic using Developer Tools suggests that all calls are complete.
The problem seems specific to this combination of browser and OS. IE 9 on Windows Server 2008 behaves OK, and so do Firefox and Chrome on Windows 7. The problem is the same for 32-bit or 64-bit IE.
Most of these operations have a server-side component too. For example, adding a text object makes an AJAX call to serve an image for the object. The server API is implemented as a small TurboGears application which uses ImageMagick for the image processing. But rough profiling indicates that nothing unusual is happening on the server side. This suggests that the problem really is in the JavaScript.
The Task Manager shows the browser using CPU of 90% or more when the application is running. This is true for any browser, not just IE 9. This is likely because of the tight rendering loop in the application, so one idea we had was to redraw the canvas less often. Unfortunately this did not seem to help. requestAnimationFrame seems like a good idea, but is not supported in IE 9.
A colleague suggested that using the Google Chrome Frame plug-in might help. It might be an acceptable solution, but I haven't tried it yet.
I found some advice to turn on the Control Panel option "Use software rendering instead of GPU rendering", but that doesn't seem to help.
One thing I have noticed: It seems the canvas is much slower in IE if you start drawing on it when it's not in the document.
So I do document.body.appendChild(canvasEl) before I draw. You can even make the canvas element dislay: none; but at least it should be in the body.
Update: It seems that for Chrome and Firefox, appending the canvas to the body is slower. So if you don't need it to be added to the body, don't add it for Chrome and Firefox.
We're looking for a tool that would allow us to script and run tests across multiple browsers including Chrome, FF 3,4, IE 6,7,8 and during the running allow a human to visually inspect each page / action. This must support javascript so a simple browsershots approach will not work. Something like Selenium Grid may work but I haven't seen anything that would act like a console so that a human could visually inspect each test step. Ideally the answer to this question would be a tool that runs a scripted front-end test and displays those tests on each browser in a grid so that a human could visually inspect the look of each page while the test was testing the html content.
How about Cucumber Sauce?
I've not tried it purely because I do not need to run tests in parallel across multiple browsers or headless. However, I am using Cucumber BDD for almost all my web application testing. Cucumber Sauce looks like it might have solved the parallelism problem so it might work for you.
How about Telerik Test Studio http://www.telerik.com/automated-testing-tools.aspx? It can do FF 3 & 4, IE7, 8, 9 (but not IE6), Chrome and Safari. It literally hooks into the browser and drives it as if a real person was sitting there clicking things and typing text.
A couple months ago I ran into a browser that allowed users to see how different rendering engines displayed their site: Lunascape, and here are its features. As far as it validity, or accuracy goes, I cannot vouch for it (I have never used it); I can link you to a CNET review though: CNET.
So my best idea would be to use lunascape (to allow your tester to see all the engines side-by-side), then script the tests in javascript which is included in every page.
Good luck, and hope this helps.
TestComplete can do this: http://www.automatedqa.com/products/testcomplete/
You can record any interaction with an application and when the tests run you can watch them.
It supports:
Internet Explorer 6—9 support (both 32- and 64-bit versions)
Firefox 3.5—4.0 support
Open source tool Selenium, which supports many browsers and can be run as a simple record / playback tool or from code but the browser compatibility varies a bit depending on which method you choose. Google uses Selenium in a big way these days and there are plenty of good articles such as this one on their testing blog.
Very good question.
The closet tool that i think of will be HP load runner for :
the ability to visually inspect each page while the test is running and inserting break point if needed
Javascript is supported but you might have problem with asynchronous request (ajax)
Since there is alway a but :
Not all browsers are simulated.
Browsers are simulated also ...
The report will print the performance and not what was shown on the page.
The price
I do not think that visual inspection falls into automated test. Automated test is about performance and to detect regression. Visual inspection on the other side is to check if the layout is properly rendered.
Doesn't this testing depend on the size of the site to be tested? If I have a 5-10 page site, I would use some of the tools mentioned above, handle it manually (i.e. walk through the site in each browser on each platform), use browsershots.org, or use a tool within Safari, such as simulating a browser.
If the site is large, then these options become very difficult and time consuming, and my experience is that the best thing to do is make sure that each page is standards compliant, and try different pages in a few browsers.
Hope this helps.
When loading a website (censored), it hangs for a couple of seconds before loading the page (up to a minute on older ones of internet explorer)
In other browsers it works fine.
It's a basic wordpress website with a couple of javascript and stylesheets, nothing to fancy. Firebug doesn't show anything weird in the NET-panel, all files exist.
Also with some other sites using the same plugin (for the properties), the same problem exists. So it should be plugin related, but I can't find why.
Any suggestions?
I loaded up IE9 and it loads quick. However, if you turn on IE9 dev tools, go to network, switch to IE8 standards mode and start capturing, you will see a lot of 404s on images that do not occur when using IE9 standards. This may be the issue. Good luck. – Matt Feb 23 at 16:55
Just to get the question answered, thanks #Matt
I am working in creating a website and I want to check in multiple browsers for Browser Compatibility test automatically by using Automated Test Tool. Do you guys know if there is any software/tool where I can just give a link and it loads the page in multiple browsers?
I've used Browser Shots before and it's ok if you don't mind waiting for an hour or two.
I'd also recommend checking out some of the links on Delicious.
You're looking for litmus, from the people who brought you doctype, part of the League of Justice. 14-day passes to test your layouts in 24 browsers currently cost $39.
I'm a fan of XenoCode's "Spoon Browser Sandbox" myself.
You can use Selenium RC (Selenium 1) or Selenium 2 (WebDriver) for automated test. But You have to record the test using Selenium IDE on Firefox browser and writing some tests on it. Selenium supports FF, Chrome, IE, Safari and Opera.
If the website is publicly visible then there are web based services that you can use such as http://crossbrowsertesting.com/.
If your website is internal only, then you're going to struggle to find support I think. We tried to find one but all we found were services that require a publicly visible website - no good for testing pre-go-live.
Are you talking about a compatible design or compatible JS? Because AJAX functionality is difficult to test with the usual cross-browser tools.
For the latter, look at httpUnit, though I'm not sure it can simulate multiple browsers.
There's Microsoft Expression Web SuperPreview, but I haven't tried it so can't comment on if it's good or not.
Their opening quote makes me laugh though, mainly because of how sucky IE6 is:
About 7 years ago, the browser wars
were over. Internet Explorer had
become the de facto standard, and for
a while, there were very few
compatibility issues in web page
design.
Check it out though, might be worthwhile. Especially if you are a .NET developer, however it might be useful to web developers in general.
Adobe has BrowserLab. It requires an Adobe account (free) and gives you Firefox 2.0 - 3.5 (WinXP, OSX), IE 6-8 (WinXP), Safari 3-4 (OSX) and Chrome 3.0 (WinXP).
Is anyone writing applications specifically to take advantage of google chrome?
Are there any enterprise users who are considering using it as the standard browser?
Yes, I have started to pay very good attention to Google Chrome for my applications. Recent analytics show that between 6%-15% of my users are accessing my applications (varies between 6 to 15 in different applications) on Chrome. And, this number looks on an upward trend.
Thus, I can't really ignore it for testing right now.
As far as taking it as a standard goes, thats a long way off. I still have to test for IE6! :( Though, we have been planning to start using features like Gears (inbuilt in Chrome - downloadable elsewhere) once Chrome crosses the 25% mark. Thats when I believe that we will be looking at Chrome to be our preferred browser. I hope that we have Chrome 1.0+ by then! ;)
I switched to Chrome and haven't looked back except for the occasional site which doesn't work properly, forcing me to load it in Firefox. All my existing web applications work fine on it, and I'm using it for primary testing on my current development project.
I'm not actually targeting chrome, but I have added chrome to my browsers to test sites on. I've found some odd quirks in this product where some plugins cause the browser to hang, or run really slow in some environments, but they are still in beta in active development. But I definately now make sure sites I work on render well in chrome, as well as firefox, latest versions of IE, safari, Konquerer and opera. I usually check out how it looks on lynx as well, that helps me catch "un-alternated text" in images. Yeah, I know that isn't a word, but some people will understand what I'm saying.
Because chrome uses the webkit to render HTML, you can be assured if it works in safari, it'll work under chrome, however it's rendering engine isn't up to scratch quite yet. I think writing applications that take advantage of it is similar to writing iPhone applications, remember chrome is expected to be adopted by android to make it similar to iPhone. That way it pretty much takes advantage of all those iPhone apps.
Would I install it as the browser of choice? not yet - but i'll certainly work on valid web pages that will render across all browsers.
One of our major customers has outlawed Chrome because it installs on the C drive without asking. They deploy a standard image with a small C drive and large D drive so they can easily re-clone the system part of the image on C without destroying the client's personal files on D. Most software allows you to choose the install directory. Anything that violates this is disallowed, and they're a big enough company to have some weight with most vendors.
We have enough headaches trying to support
Firefox
Two versions of IE which have their own iffy bugs
Safari
I'm not sure why we continue to support Safari. Most of our users (corporate) use IE6 or IE7. We try to make sure that things work in both of those.
Maybe not for programming purposes but Chrome w/ Google Reader makes for the most powerful RSS reader. Can handle up to 1500 feeds w/ performance still ok, managing subscriptions still functioning.
I'm using it on my work machine, but that's about it. It's been stable for me, and I like the barebones UI. I'll still switch to Firefox for the web developer extensions however.
I'm liking some of GoogleChrome- the Start page with your 9 most recent is the winner for me. The interface takes a little getting used to, but the speed is impressive, especially with Gmail.
However, it glitches with Java, which rules it out for serious work at the moment. I use FireFox mostly and have Chrome for the "other" websites at work.
I'm considering using GWT on an intranet project and considering suggesting to the users that use Chrome to take advantage of the enhanced Javascript performance. Any AJAX-heavy app would be a great candidate to target Chrome.
At my company, we're not targeting it, but we're definitely paying attention to it. My boss is using it as his primary browser, and I have implemented browser detection for it in our scripts in case we ever to need to target it for some reason.
Chrome has the .png opacity bug where the transparent parts of the .png are a solid color if you try to transition the opacity from 0 to 1. In IE7 the opaque parts are black, and in Chrome, they are white. Today, I decided to go ahead and account for this bug in my JavaScript. I don't really test sites on Chrome that often, but I am actually using it for almost all of my browsing.
I will target Chrome as soon as a stable Linux and OSX client is available.
Targeting Chrome/Chromium right now, I think is like targeting Konqueror web browser. It will get popular, but you should wait to a more stable beta, and/or some Linux and OS X client.
My website statistics shows 3.xx % visitors using Chrome which arrived just few weeks back. And Opera is only 4.xx % which has been around for several years.
Easily you can see that rate at which Chrome is picking up.
You can see how easily Google takes over all areas of your computing world and personal world too.
Since Chrome uses Webkit, it has the same rendering engine and DOM support as Safari (not necessarily the same revision of Webkit though). By testing in Safari, you can generally get by without worrying about Chrome. Any differences you find are probably just bugs that you should file on instead of work around.
However, because Chrome uses a different JS engine, there may be a few incompatibilities with Safari. So, if you're doing anything with JS, you might as well fire up Chrome and see if there's anything obviously wrong.
Generally though, you don't target browsers, you target rendering engines (with their associated DOM support and JS engines).
I am using Google Chrome, so far all the web apps I have work fine in it with no modifications.
No.
Why help Google further build an evil empire? In this particular case it is so obvious that they do not care about users but only obsessed with gathering usage info.
It's not any major player yet