Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mozilla Firefox 22 Is Now Available

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mozilla Firefox 22 Is Now Available

    Phoronix: Mozilla Firefox 22 Is Now Available

    Mozilla developers have now uploaded Firefox 22 to the web...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM5NTA

  • #2
    Every time they release a new version, I see "performance improvements". The truth is that firefox performance sucks, it feels slow*, runs slow and crashes often.

    *On a Dual Core 3Ghz processor with 4GB of RAM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Awesome release!

      This will be an awesome release with many long awaited features!
      http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/22.0/releasenotes/

      Flexbox is awesome when writing web applications, its like designing a GUI in GTK+ or other toolkits, you can have hbox and vbox and containers and define them as growable or shrinkable and they auto-adjust.

      WebRTC is awesome, it allows you to do VoIP and webcam chatting over the web, now we can get some competition against Skype.

      asm.js and OdinMonkey are awsome, it makes JavaScript faster.

      Pointer Lock API will be great for games.

      WebGL performance improved! Great for gaming!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by wargames View Post
        Every time they release a new version, I see "performance improvements". The truth is that firefox performance sucks, it feels slow*, runs slow and crashes often.

        *On a Dual Core 3Ghz processor with 4GB of RAM.
        Same here, on a midrange SNB Laptop, 4GB. Firefox feels slower with each release. Example? Filling Text edits with some paragraphs -> selecting can take up to 2 seconds (here), completely freezing the browser. Did not experience this with <19.x (currently running 21.0).

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by wargames View Post
          Every time they release a new version, I see "performance improvements". The truth is that firefox performance sucks, it feels slow*, runs slow and crashes often.

          *On a Dual Core 3Ghz processor with 4GB of RAM.
          have you tried running with a fresh profile or with any pluggins you have disabled?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by BO$$ View Post
            I don't get any of these. Dual core 2 Ghz with 3 GB RAM.
            Amount of cores, frequency or RAM don't mean performance.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by wargames View Post
              Every time they release a new version, I see "performance improvements". The truth is that firefox performance sucks, it feels slow*, runs slow and crashes often.

              *On a Dual Core 3Ghz processor with 4GB of RAM.
              ... compared to what?

              At least its not slow-like-chrome. That bitch is useless-slow.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by wargames View Post
                Every time they release a new version, I see "performance improvements". The truth is that firefox performance sucks, it feels slow*, runs slow and crashes often.

                *On a Dual Core 3Ghz processor with 4GB of RAM.
                I don't have any of these problems with firefox on a 2.5ghz dual core. In fact when it comes to smooth scrolling firefox is the best performing browser I've used (chrome's scrolling is atrocious even with the smooth scroll flag, and chrome's smooth scroll doesn't work at all with the middle click universal scroll, and also doesn't work on certain webpages, its pretty ridiculous for a browser in 2013 to have sich poor scrolling). This is the main reason I take firefox over chrome any day of the week. When it comes to stability, page rendering speed and such I barely notice any difference between firefox and chrome. Chrome's UI is slightly more responsive under load but thats about it. When it comes to memory usage I've found chrome to actually be significantly more memory hungry than firefox (although this doesn't really bother me either way, I have 8gb ram)
                Last edited by bwat47; 06-25-2013, 08:39 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Calinou View Post
                  Amount of cores, frequency or RAM don't mean performance.
                  Yes and no. If a task is single threaded, multiple cores don't matter (I'm not sure if FF is). If you're using a CPU architecture with shorter pipelines than it's previous generation (such as Bulldozer), frequency is less important. If you aren't using all 4GB of RAM, then memory makes little impact - especially in a web browser, where you'll be spending more time waiting for the internet than you would for your memory to clean up.


                  Either way, I'm getting the impression FF is now the new IE. MS seems to be paying a lot more attention to IE now that they realize everyone is blaming them for holding back the internet.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    No, I'd say Chrome is the new IE. it implements things differently than any other browser. There are now these sites that only work right in Chrome and nothing else.

                    Firefox is definitely not holding anything back, it is still much more able than IE10, has better compatibility and usability than either Opera or Safari. True it isn't the speed king anymore, but I don't notice it getting slower at all either.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by schmidtbag View Post
                      Yes and no. If a task is single threaded, multiple cores don't matter (I'm not sure if FF is). If you're using a CPU architecture with shorter pipelines than it's previous generation (such as Bulldozer), frequency is less important. If you aren't using all 4GB of RAM, then memory makes little impact - especially in a web browser, where you'll be spending more time waiting for the internet than you would for your memory to clean up.


                      Either way, I'm getting the impression FF is now the new IE. MS seems to be paying a lot more attention to IE now that they realize everyone is blaming them for holding back the internet.
                      Firefox uses currently 48 threads my system.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by grigi View Post
                        No, I'd say Chrome is the new IE. it implements things differently than any other browser. There are now these sites that only work right in Chrome and nothing else.
                        Well, unless proven otherwise, those sites aren't Chrome-exclusive due to Chrome being an under-developed piece of crap; in other words, it isn't suffering compatibility problems in the way that IE used to. Note that no browser is perfect and all of them have some advantage over the other, but Chrome is in pretty good shape.

                        Firefox is definitely not holding anything back, it is still much more able than IE10, has better compatibility and usability than either Opera or Safari. True it isn't the speed king anymore, but I don't notice it getting slower at all either.
                        True, FF isn't really holding back the internet and in some ways, defines what the internet becomes without actually being the industry standard. I would also agree that it's compatibility is better than Opera and Safari, though I personally like Opera much more. I haven't really used FF as a main browser since the version 3 days, so I can't really comment if it has improved in performance and memory usage.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by grigi View Post
                          No, I'd say Chrome is the new IE. it implements things differently than any other browser. There are now these sites that only work right in Chrome and nothing else.
                          That's an interesting, but flawed observation. Typically, those sites that only work in "chrome" are actually sites that only work in stoogfari. They also work in chrome because it uses the same crappy rendering engine (khtml, or whatever anyone else feels like calling it).

                          Firefox is definitely not holding anything back, it is still much more able than IE10, has better compatibility and usability than either Opera or Safari. True it isn't the speed king anymore, but I don't notice it getting slower at all either.
                          The "ie flaw" that was the cause of it holding back the internet was that it was limited to one flawed platform, and closed source.... pushed by a monopolistic bunch of dimwits, who FORTUNATELY, are well on their way in their move into irrelevance. No, Rome won't fall overnight, but fall it will, and on its way, it is.

                          Firefox is the ONLY web browser that actually works well (performance) in Android. Compared to built-in/chrome, rendering performance is on a whole other plane of existence.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by bwat47 View Post
                            I don't have any of these problems with firefox on a 2.5ghz dual core. In fact when it comes to smooth scrolling firefox is the best performing browser I've used (chrome's scrolling is atrocious even with the smooth scroll flag, and chrome's smooth scroll doesn't work at all with the middle click universal scroll, and also doesn't work on certain webpages, its pretty ridiculous for a browser in 2013 to have sich poor scrolling). This is the main reason I take firefox over chrome any day of the week. When it comes to stability, page rendering speed and such I barely notice any difference between firefox and chrome. Chrome's UI is slightly more responsive under load but thats about it. When it comes to memory usage I've found chrome to actually be significantly more memory hungry than firefox (although this doesn't really bother me either way, I have 8gb ram)
                            Firefox can't even scroll for me, it's so choppy.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
                              ... compared to what?

                              At least its not slow-like-chrome. That bitch is useless-slow.
                              Both Firefox and Chrome work great on my dual core.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X