Microsoft Boasts of Tiny Energy Saving With IE 243
judgecorp writes "Microsoft has sponsored research that indicates that its Internet Explorer browser uses less power than the competition, Firefox and Google (there's no explanation of what causes the difference). However, the difference in power use is not really significant — it's about one Watt when browsing. Browsing for 20 hours at this rate, the IE user would save enough power to make a cup of tea, compared with Firefox and Chrome users. That Microsoft commissioned and published the report seems to indicate a certain desperation to Microsoft's IE marketing efforts."
It adds up (Score:5, Insightful)
...a certain desperation to Microsoft's IE marketing efforts
Not at all. If you run a company with 10,000 PCs then it's a significant saving.
Megawatts worldwide (Score:2, Insightful)
1 Watt is HUGE on mobile! (Score:4, Insightful)
As I type this in Firefox, Lenovo's Power Manager is showing power usage of about 6W. 1W less would be a 17% decrease! With the 9-cell battery currently attached, that's a 2h20m jump in battery life.
Of course, I've already dropped FIrefox's power consumption significantly using Adblock, Noscript and so on, so it's unlikely I'll see a full Watt of improvement by switching to IE, but for others, this could be huge.
Re:It adds up (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is about 5% in power use of the computers only. Which may translate to 1% or less overall savings.
However IE is also slower in rendering pages, causing productivity loss (a few seconds a page of employee time eaten up) which easily costs more than the energy cost saved.
Re:It adds up (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It adds up (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, only if all of them are just browsing the internet all the time. But if they are making real work, maybe the results would not be that good.
You have to consider the source here too ... its Microsoft. It was "sponsored" research, which translates to "rigged" test with rigged results. So it is indeed done for marketing purposes, or why else do it. Probably a simple web page with little css or js. You can't take anything they say at face value.
Re:On the other hand... (Score:2, Insightful)
Have you tried IE 10? Seriously, actually given it a go? Or are you just speaking out of zealotry rather than experience? FF has made some anti-customisation (and thus anti-user) changes lately that are really pissing me off. I think they've gotten a bit big-headed, or they're terrified of Chrome, either way, MS has been working really hard improving their browser and perhaps they do feel justified in feeling unfairly judged and perhaps they can feel desperate - they've put in a tonne of work and everybody keeps dumping on them - without actually giving them a fair go.
Re:It adds up (Score:5, Insightful)
You have to consider the source here too ... its Microsoft. It was "sponsored" research, which translates to "rigged" test with rigged results. So it is indeed done for marketing purposes, or why else do it. Probably a simple web page with little css or js. You can't take anything they say at face value.
I don't think they go as far as rigging the research. What I think they do is pay for thousands of very specific research topics and publish the ones that show them favorably and bury all the others.
If this is the best they could come up with they really are losing the browser war.