You bet. It doesn't seem any faster at anything than Iron though, and I prefer not to have a menu bar to save on screen space. I'm also unsure how quickly it comes out with updates. When Chrome comes out with a new stable version, SRWare usually updates Iron within a few days. At this point I have no idea how quickly NetGate releases updates (could be quick, could be slow, no idea right now).
I've tried Iron and Blackhawk is definitely faster for me. But everyones machines are different and can depend on so many things..extentions etc. Also on this machine I use Open DNS which really speeds things up for me anyway.
@Login
I gather that each tab and extention gets a different process id so that if it fails or gets exploited only that tab will fail and not the browser (thanks for the info Sully)
After using it a little more I've noticed two things. First, it's built on a much older version of Chrome/Chromium than Iron. In the newest version, the settings window opens in it's own browser tab with the URL of chrome://settings/browser, but in BlackHawk, settings opens in it's own window like the older versions of Chrome. Also, for some reason, text on forums such as this one look slightly blurry, whereas they look sharp and crisp in Iron. Speed is subjective and varies from machine to machine as Hazel said, but from my perspective, Iron is a better and more up-to-date browser.
I have noticed the same (about each tab equalling another process) I wonder if it is because it is Chromium based? Perhaps it is sort of sandboxed itself anyway?
In Process Explorer if you right-click on a Blackhawk entry and select properties and then select the security tab, under NT Aurthority it says Deny,Owner which means it is running with reduced rights. Doing the same with the other entry shows that one isn't
I am considering making it my default, I cannot believe it is so fast.
Cannot compare to Chrome or Iron, never used them.
Is this the rights issue you're talking about, Hazel? All I ever looked at before was the resource usage.
Edit: It is just a bunch faster that FF, Opera or ie8, looks like it will soon be the default here.
For me it was no faster than Firefox 5, so I don't know what everyone else is raving about and it was really slow on this forum.
Also with all those blackhawk.exe processes running it was consuming gobs more RAM than Firefox 5 especially since I applied a tweak in Firefox to disable plugin-container.
For me it was no faster than Firefox 5, so I don't know what everyone else is raving about and it was really slow on this forum.
Also with all those blackhawk.exe processes running it was consuming gobs more RAM than Firefox 5 especially since I applied a tweak in Firefox to disable plugin-container.
Well, I'll try anything as long as no reboot is required.
Blackhawk ran faster than ie8 on all sites, but my experience is quite limited, never tried FF 5 nor any of the metallic browsers. Will take a peek at FF 5 if I can install it w/o rebooting.
Well, here is a picture from Process explorer with all 3 browsers running 3 tabs each. Might be that FF 5 (installed) is using a bit more memory than Blackhawk, but I agree that it is really fast. Had not tried it before now.
Poor old ie8 is left in the dust, both by the numbers and the subjective perception of speed.
Just revisited Blackhawk Browser. I was using Google maps, satellite view, and ie8 slowed to a crawl. Started thinking, this computer is faster than this, so I tried the same searches w/ Blackhawk. Much faster. Don't know much about rendering engines, using AJAX, etc., but Blackhawk is a bunch faster for redrawing those maps.
Haven't tried to compare w/ Firefox, but much faster that ie8. Thanks, Hazel. :-)
