[scope]

It's funny how Microsoft conducted the "tests" on Chrome [1] & Firefox [2] and discreetly leave out Safari. Safari is by far a winner when it comes to efficiency. So hats off to MS for their "informative" & "thorough" test(s).

[1] has been known for draining battery, so no surprises there.

[2] which for a couple of releases has become even more unusable. On my MBP (2014, i5, 8GB), takes over 4+ seconds for the bar to activate. Hopefully with the introduction of E10S [3], next releases will be much more perfomant.

[3] https://wiki.mozilla.org/E10s

EDIT: I did not know Safari is no more on Windows. So in that case Edge is the winner for Windows.

[coldtea]

>It's funny how Microsoft conducted the "tests" on Chrome [1] & Firefox [2] and discreetly leave out Safari. Safari is by far a winner when it comes to efficiency. So hats off to MS for their "informative" & "thorough" test(s).

Safari also doesn't run (anymore) on Windows platforms that Microsoft targets, so it's irrelevant to their point.

[MBCook]

Safari doesn't run on Windows (anymore, and it wasn't efficient). Edge doesn't run on OS X.

I think it was fair. They showed browsers on Windows. I just wish more people would realize just how bad Chrome is at power efficiency so that Goigle might pretend to care.

[EpicEng]

So... You think MS should have run all of their tests on macOS?

[CyberFonic]

How about porting Edge to Android and testing on a smartphone?

[EpicEng]

...because they care most about performance on Windows?

[j45]

Co-signed. I had no idea how efficient Safari was.