They announced with Firefox 5 that they were switching to scheduled releases instead of feature ones. That was years ago now... Did you miss that announcement?
Originally Posted by eydee
mozilla gives a shit about optimizing for linux...
imo you just have to use chromium and firefox side by side to see how light years ahead chromium is
not out of the kindness of google's heart, mind you, they just share the same code between their chrome os version and linux version of chromium
why the fuck do distros still keep shipping gayfox by default is beyond me, I hate google as much as everyone else so why can't they fork chromium like they did iceweasel and remove all traces of google's web shop and sync and all that shit?
I do on Ubuntu 12.04, on a Dell XPS laptop. Firefox seems just as fast as Chrome is. Maybe I'm missing something?
Originally Posted by Pallidus
I agree with Pallidus, Firefox is much slower than Chromium. At least try both versions side by side to see the difference. And not with only one tab, it's as absurd as testing "1+1" on a calculator to verify its performance. No, try with twenty tabs, saved session and for at least 2 hours. Their you'll see the difference.
That said, that's the only point where I agree with you Palliadus. The difference between Chromium and Firefox is the same as between open source and free software. I'm tired of the "works better on Chrome" or, even worse, "works only on Chrome". Google is making same moves as Microsoft with IE and I simply hate that. So, that's why Firefox should still be the default browser in distros.
That said, I hope they'll improve their browser responsiveness really soon. There is already the Electrolysis project that will run tabs in processes (it's a start!), but the overall performances must be much better.
that's true, google made street view in gmaps run like shit in ffox and even yt videos that used to play flawlessly require MCE that ffox lacks...
all the more reason for people to fork chromium like they did with iceweasel
Still not seeing it. Possibly you have less than my 8 GB of RAM and you're getting memory swapped out to disk? Or it might be a difference in settings. I have some customized Firefox settings such as HTTP pipelining.
Originally Posted by Creak
What else is there?
I have 4GB of RAM, but since Chromium needs more memory but is still faster, I don't think that's the problem. Moreover, the swap is always at 0 Bytes.
After a few hours (a day?) I noticed that page scrolling was very slow, I had it on G+ for instance. I think content dynamic pages are faster to get this problem.
I'll try tonight to find you web sites where it's obvious (I'm at work here )
It is a sad day in hell when a browser requires 8GB to run a normal session.
Originally Posted by Zan Lynx
It doesn't. In order to be "fair" to this weird claim of extreme "lightyears" speed difference I'm running 92 tabs in Firefox and 92 tabs in Chrome just to see. My daily web comics load actually. I then let them sit for a couple hours, which didn't make a difference.
Originally Posted by curaga
I mentioned the 8 GB of RAM because if you are doing other things with your computer. And you are, right? You don't just sit there looking at 20 tabs of web pages all day long? Well, if you do other things and those use RAM, Linux will probably swap some of the older RAM out. And the amount it swaps varies with how much total RAM you've got.
So yes it makes a difference having 8 GB.
For anyone interested, Firefox is currently using about 1.8 GB with 96 tabs open and Chrome is using 2.9 GB. Interestingly, Chrome claims almost 800 MB of that belogs to Flash. My Firefox may not be slowing down as other's experience because I'm running Flashblock. Not having 92 various spammy Flash ads running no doubt speeds things up.
I'll take a video next time it happens.
Originally Posted by Zan Lynx
In order to make it right, could you give me the commands I should run before, after or in parallel of my capture? I suppose "top" is a must have. I also have a Conky displaying my RAM and swap.