Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Mozilla Unleashes Firefox 31 Web Browser

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eydee View Post
    So they still haven't admitted that this is actually Firefox 5.01... I wonder what Firefox 1867 will be like. We'll see in a few months.
    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?

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    538

    Default

    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?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pallidus View Post
    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
    I do on Ubuntu 12.04, on a Dell XPS laptop. Firefox seems just as fast as Chrome is. Maybe I'm missing something?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    94

    Default

    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.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SuperUserLand
    Posts
    538

    Default

    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

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Creak View Post
    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.
    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.

    Things seem to load the same speed, render pretty much instantly and scroll perfectly. I haven't run Javascript benchmarks. GMail and maps seem to be about the same speed in both browsers.

    What else is there?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    94

    Default

    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 )

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,180

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zan Lynx View Post
    Still not seeing it. Possibly you have less than my 8 GB of RAM
    It is a sad day in hell when a browser requires 8GB to run a normal session.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    It is a sad day in hell when a browser requires 8GB to run a normal session.
    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.

    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.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zan Lynx View Post
    It doesn't. In order to be "fair" to this weird claim of extreme "lightyears" speed difference
    I'll take a video next time it happens.
    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •