Jump to content



Photo
ubuntu chromium default browser

  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#46 ViperAFK

ViperAFK

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 07-March 06
  • Location: Vermont

Posted 06 June 2013 - 19:23

Good. About time. Firefox has been lacking recently. Everytime I've used it I've run into memory leaks. Though I do have to say that with Kali, Iceweasel hasn't been too bad.


In every machine I've used them on chrome consistantly uses far more memory than firefox, especially with many tabs. And recent versions of firefox don't really have the memory leak issues of old, if your firefox is truly "leaking" memory its likely not normal behavior, perhaps an extension and/or plugin issue.


#47 +Karl L.

Karl L.

    xorangekiller

  • Tech Issues Solved: 15
  • Joined: 24-January 09
  • Location: Virginia, USA
  • OS: Debian Testing

Posted 06 June 2013 - 20:02

I hope they use a more up to date version of Chromium. Last time I checked a few months ago the newest version of Chromium in most Linux repositories was 18.x


I'm not sure which distribution you're using, but the version of Chromium in Debian 7 is currently 27.0.1453.93-1~deb7u1, the version in Ubuntu 12.04 is 25.0.1364.160-0ubuntu0.12.04.1, the version in Ubuntu 13.04 is 25.0.1364.160-0ubuntu3, and the stable upstream version is 27.0.1453.94. While the version of Chromium in Ubuntu is a little old, the version in Debian is up-to-date, and neither is anywhere close to as old as you supposed. I'm sure the situation is similar in other GNU/Linux distributions.

In every machine I've used them on chrome consistantly uses far more memory than firefox, especially with many tabs. And recent versions of firefox don't really have the memory leak issues of old, if your firefox is truly "leaking" memory its likely nor normal behavior, perhaps an extension and/or plugin issue.


That has always been my experience as well. I am using Firefox 21 with 7 addons and it consistently uses less memory and CPU time than Chromium 27 without any addons when I have the same pages open, which typically numbers 8 or 9.

#48 Max Norris

Max Norris

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 22
  • Joined: 20-February 11
  • OS: Windows 2012R2, 7, BSD Unix
  • Phone: HTC One (Work) Lumia 1020 (Home)

Posted 06 June 2013 - 21:59

That has always been my experience as well. I am using Firefox 21 with 7 addons and it consistently uses less memory and CPU time than Chromium 27 without any addons when I have the same pages open, which typically numbers 8 or 9.

Same.. Chromium has Firefox beat when it comes to benchmarks (and that gap is narrowing), but when it comes to resource usage, Firefox leaves it in the dust by a very healthy margin. Think the last time I had an actual memory leak was a poorly written addon a year or two back, an actual leak in Firefox itself I think I last saw in version 4. Nowadays with v24 and 18 addons I'm currently at 378MB with four pages open, where a similar setup on Chromium can easily get over a gigabyte.

#49 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 07 June 2013 - 00:49

In every machine I've used them on chrome consistantly uses far more memory than firefox, especially with many tabs.


The use of many Google programs working in the background causes Chrome to use so much memory. I've downloaded an extension called Extension Manager (Switcher) and I have cut off a ton of stuff in Chrome and it's working much lighter and better, both extensions and apps I didn't even realize I had.

#50 +Karl L.

Karl L.

    xorangekiller

  • Tech Issues Solved: 15
  • Joined: 24-January 09
  • Location: Virginia, USA
  • OS: Debian Testing

Posted 07 June 2013 - 02:46

Same.. Chromium has Firefox beat when it comes to benchmarks (and that gap is narrowing), but when it comes to resource usage, Firefox leaves it in the dust by a very healthy margin. Think the last time I had an actual memory leak was a poorly written addon a year or two back, an actual leak in Firefox itself I think I last saw in version 4. Nowadays with v24 and 18 addons I'm currently at 378MB with four pages open, where a similar setup on Chromium can easily get over a gigabyte.


I actually find that Firefox render speed is now about on par with Chromium so long as I have network.http.pipelining enabled in about:config. I understand why Mozilla left this option disabled when it was first introduced, but there are very few instances in 2013 when I am using an Internet connection so slow that pipelining hurts performance. I think it should be enabled by default.

#51 chrisj1968

chrisj1968

    copyrighted!! ©

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 17-June 08
  • Location: United States

Posted 07 June 2013 - 03:00

Sorry I caught on to this issue so late but, Chromium? Why are they defaulting to Chromium instead of Chrome? (scratches head)

#52 +Karl L.

Karl L.

    xorangekiller

  • Tech Issues Solved: 15
  • Joined: 24-January 09
  • Location: Virginia, USA
  • OS: Debian Testing

Posted 07 June 2013 - 03:04

Sorry I caught on to this issue so late but, Chromium? Why are they defaulting to Chromium instead of Chrome? (scratches head)


Chromium is open-source, Chrome is not. Canonical prefers to maintain absolute control over the core software in their distribution.

#53 chrisj1968

chrisj1968

    copyrighted!! ©

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 17-June 08
  • Location: United States

Posted 07 June 2013 - 03:19

Chromium is open-source, Chrome is not. Canonical prefers to maintain absolute control over the core software in their distribution.


ah ok. then I am terribly confused. thanks for clearing that up. Chromium sounds good since it's open source but basically chrome. also some website require chrome and it is recognized as chrome. that's a great benefit

#54 Gerowen

Gerowen

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 28-August 05
  • Location: Hills of Kentucky
  • OS: Ubuntu Linux

Posted 07 June 2013 - 03:51

Firefox's performance on Linux is still sub-par compared to Chrome/Chromium, so this makes sense from that perspective.

#55 Javik

Javik

    #GamerGate

  • Tech Issues Solved: 2
  • Joined: 21-May 12

Posted 07 June 2013 - 13:57

The memory overhead in Chrome is caused by tab process isolation.

#56 vetJames7

James7

    Fixed tentatively

  • Joined: 26-June 04
  • OS: Ubuntu Studio & Mavericks
  • Phone: Samsung Galaxy S3

Posted 10 June 2013 - 11:56

Actually, Opera will be moving to Blink instead. As a browser it definitely has the best implementation of mouse gestures, though I don't find it as good as Chrome.


Thanks I didn't know that.

I think the reason's canonical has listed for switching to be pretty stupid (they are switching to chromium because ubuntu touch uses webkit? yet chrome is moving away from webkit to blink) Doesn't really make much sense.

However I don't particularly care what the default browser is because its easy to install one of your preference.


Did someone say it's because you have the Ubuntu phone and the Firefox phone both coming out and Ubuntu want to distance their brand from Firefox for that reason?