fleshing out

This commit is contained in:
gorhill 2014-06-26 12:48:32 -04:00
parent 432f58f96c
commit 6f19300dd8

View file

@ -4,15 +4,19 @@ See [Change log](https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Change-log) for latest c
An efficient blocker for Chromium-based browsers. Fast and lean.
Chromium on Linux 64-bit:
![screenshot](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/ss-chromium-2.png)
<p align="center">
Chromium on Linux 64-bit<br>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/ss-chromium-2.png" />
</p>
Opera 22 on Windows 7 32-bit:
![screenshot](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/ss-opera-1.png)
<p align="center">
Opera 22 on Windows 7 32-bit<br>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gorhill/uBlock/master/doc/img/ss-opera-1.png" />
</p>
<sup>The above screenshots were taken after running my
<sup>The above screenshots were taken after visiting many
[reference benchmark](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Comparative-benchmarks-against-widely-used-blockers:-Top-15-Most-Popular-News-Websites)
plus a bit of random browsing. All blockers were active at the same time,
links plus a bit of random browsing. All blockers were active at the same time,
thus they had to deal with exactly the same workload. Before the screenshot was
taken, I left the browser idle for many minutes so as to let the browser's
garbage collector kicks in.</sup>
@ -33,6 +37,8 @@ memory of ABP.
[infamous vim test](https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Adblock-Plus-memory-consumption),
once with only ABP as the active extension, and once with only µBlock as the active extension. (Other
extensions may also add their own memory footprint.)
- "It consumes less memory because it doesn't block as well"
- Actually it blocks more efficiently. See [_benchmark_](#benchmarks) below.
#### Regarding reviews in various web store