Guest Posted March 9 Posted March 9 (edited) I improved my score by 1 point with Edge + uBlock Origin considering the Feb. 15 test. I am more than satisfied. I did not spend any time on improving the score in Firefox. Edited March 9 by Sampei.Nihira
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 25 Posted March 25 I see that Sampei.Nihira has unfortunately been "ran off the board" by folks probably jabbing his ribs too frequently. Can't say as I blame him, to be honest, sticking around here does at times feel like a "bad decision". At work, we have been "forced" to upgrade to Win11 (kind of surprised it took this long). I use Official Chrome v122 here at work. It always scored Speedometer 2.1 at a 310 to 325 range in Win10. In Win11, the same exact Chrome v122 profile scores 398 to 402. Nothing changed except Win10 upgraded to Win11. Still a far cry from Mac's that I've seen hit 530+. 1
D.Draker Posted March 25 Posted March 25 12 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: At work, we have been "forced" to upgrade to Win11 (kind of surprised it took this long). I use Official Chrome v122 here at work. It always scored Speedometer 2.1 at a 310 to 325 range in Win10. It's odd they forced you to upgrade to the latest OS. at the same time allowing to run a severely outdated browser with one million of vulnerabilities, 14 major versions below the current one. Over a year old, almost 1.5 years old.
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 25 Posted March 25 *Biased* hypocritical exaggerations like that is why I will *never* "follow you*. Unless you yourself run Win11 (maybe even Win10), then STOP RAM-RODDING THE BS ABOUT SOMETHING A YEAR OLD !!! !!! !!! 1
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 25 Posted March 25 47 minutes ago, D.Draker said: one million of vulnerabilities Please put this back in the hole that you pulled it out of. Thanks.
D.Draker Posted March 25 Posted March 25 11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: Please put this back in the hole that you pulled it out of. Thanks. You're expected to be mature on the forum ans stick to the subject. Thanks.
D.Draker Posted March 25 Posted March 25 11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: *Biased* hypocritical exaggerations like that is why I will *never* "follow you*. Unless you yourself run Win11 (maybe even Win10), then STOP RAM-RODDING THE BS ABOUT SOMETHING A YEAR OLD !!! !!! !!! Biased? So, when the "Guest" wrote numerous posts about vulnerabilities, it was OK, when D.Draker started, no? This is what biased is, not the one you say. Google » Chrome » 122 Vulnerabilities: 238 https://www.cvedetails.com/version/1878250/Google-Chrome-122.0.6261.128.html 2
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 25 Posted March 25 (edited) 26 minutes ago, D.Draker said: Vulnerabilities: 238 That I can agree to! A far cry from the one million you cited in your first "bs" post! BUT your computer's "vulnerabilities" DON'T MEAN JACK SH&T TO MOST OF US HERE AT MSFN! The security of your computer only ties so much to your browser, the rest is all tied to your OS. We probably have more XP users here than anything. Do you think they care how "insecure" XP is? REGARDLESS of how often somebody likes you comes along and reminds them of how many years old XP is! Tons of Vista users here also. Do you think they care how "insecure" Vista is? Are they falsely deducing that an "extended kernel" patches these insecurities? Hint - functions are added, vulnerabilities are not patched. Et cetera. You really are *BIASED* and just LOVE to pick fights! The admins allow it, nothing technically "against forum rules". Carry On, Wayward Son. Moving on... "Toodles"... Edited March 25 by NotHereToPlayGames 1
D.Draker Posted March 25 Posted March 25 11 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: That I can agree to! A far cry from the one million you cited in your first "bs" post! BUT your computer's "vulnerabilities" DON'T MEAN JACK SH&T TO MOST OF US HERE AT MSFN! The security of your computer only ties so much to your browser, the rest is all tied to your OS. We probably have more XP users here than anything. Do you think they care how "insecure" XP is? REGARDLESS of how often somebody likes you comes along and reminds them of how many years old XP is! Tons of Vista users here also. Do you think they care how "insecure" Vista is? Are they falsely deducing that an "extended kernel" patches these insecurities? Hint - they do not. Et cetera. You really are *BIASED* and just LOVE to pick fights! The admins allow it, nothing technically "against forum rules". Carry On, Wayward Son. Moving on... "Toodles"... I'll ignore, but quote to make the admins see what you do before you re-edit your post because you simply put words in my mouth. Where did I say XP is not secure? Or Vista? It's a rhetorical question. Do the have this word in your language? And telling, "when the "Guest" (banned account?) wrote numerous posts about "vulnerabilities", it was OK for you, but when D.Draker started, no" - is NOT a "fight", it's a fact. 2
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 25 Posted March 25 We both know who the "guest" is. He was not banned. He *REQUESTED* to no longer be an MSFN Member. Something the admins *WILL NOT ALLOW ME TO DO*, I have requested *multiple times*. YOU, Mr. D.Draker, is the *COMMON DENOMINATOR* in 99% of the BS that goes on here at MSFN. Admins don't care, so I guess I don't either. Or turn all of my posts into "guest" posts as well, I really don't care. YOU, Mr. D.Draker, are allowed to stir up as much sh#t as you feel like. So yeah, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em". My turn to stir some sh#t. Yeah, it's that easy! 1
D.Draker Posted March 25 Posted March 25 13 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: We both know who the "guest" is. He was not banned. He *REQUESTED* to no longer be an MSFN Member. Something the admins *WILL NOT ALLOW ME TO DO*, I have requested *multiple times*. YOU, Mr. D.Draker, is the *COMMON DENOMINATOR* in 99% of the BS that goes on here at MSFN. Admins don't care, so I guess I don't either. Or turn all of my posts into "guest" posts as well, I really don't care. YOU, Mr. D.Draker, are allowed to stir up as much sh#t as you feel like. So yeah, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em". My turn to stir some sh#t. Yeah, it's that easy! D.Draker writes this browser is good, what do you do? Right! You follow D.Draker like a magnet. D.Draker is kind, fair and forgiving. I forgive you, no report will follow your utterly rude post. You follow my every step, and I understand you very well, I'm an interesting man. I've been told many times, I'm a natural born leader, people listen and follow D.Draker, so stop fighting your temptations and accept the fate. 3
AstroSkipper Posted March 25 Posted March 25 2 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: We both know who the "guest" is. He was not banned. He *REQUESTED* to no longer be an MSFN Member. Something the admins *WILL NOT ALLOW ME TO DO*, I have requested *multiple times*. YOU, Mr. D.Draker, is the *COMMON DENOMINATOR* in 99% of the BS that goes on here at MSFN. Admins don't care, so I guess I don't either. Or turn all of my posts into "guest" posts as well, I really don't care. YOU, Mr. D.Draker, are allowed to stir up as much sh#t as you feel like. So yeah, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em". My turn to stir some sh#t. Yeah, it's that easy! Apparently, someone has gone completely wrong in their tone and choice of words. This kind of rhetoric may be the new spirit in your country since February, but you should think carefully about whether you go to this level. Apart from that, fortunately this forum is located in Europe and not in your home country. 5
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 26 Posted March 26 Speedometer 2.1 dropped from 402 to 385 when testing a v134. So I shall stick with v122. To each their own, of course, but I shall take the speed over the hyped-up-security-vulnerabilities any day of the week.
D.Draker Posted March 26 Posted March 26 19 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: Speedometer 2.1 dropped from 402 to 385 when testing a v134. So I shall stick with v122. To each their own, of course, but I shall take the speed over the hyped-up-security-vulnerabilities any day of the week. It'd be important to tell which combination of flags was used. Many testing sites can simply lower the scores if some crap like web-GPU is disabled.
NotHereToPlayGames Posted March 26 Posted March 26 47 minutes ago, D.Draker said: It'd be important to tell which combination of flags was used. Not important. No flag changes whatsoever. This would only come into play for something like Supermium where the developer changes flag defaults. This is not some "enable flag for test #1", "disable flag for test #2".
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now