Recommended Posts

I heard of Cyber Fox but the website was sketchy so I gave up. Are the performance gains really worth it?

In my own testing of both Waterfox and Cyberfox against Firefox I didn't notice any differences when it came to the overall speed, page loading, etc. Meaning, your results may vary.

Well you've just gotten lucky, I guess. 

Things that come to mind you can try is updating your GPU drivers, disabling hardware acceleration, minimizing your use of extensions and plugins, disabling PPAPI Flash, etc. Other than that all I do with Chrome and Firefox is I use a clean profile with every new stable milestone release.

Who said FireFox was better? - FireFox user (2004-2012) 

 

Chrome is More Stable and Faster. Feels Much Snappier than FireFox.

Don't believe me? go search for Benchmarks between two and test HTML5 yourself here:

http://beta.html5test.com/ 

 

The people who like Firefox are the one's who still like to live in Past. You know Windows 7 with start menu, Cool looking XP etc.

 

LOL, right... Because running Windows 8.1 and 10 with Firefox makes me (and others) Dinosaurs :laugh: ... Oh you're such a funny guy :rolleyes:

 

I like the options more, like "TRUE" bookmarks separators that according to Google search, they (Google) think are unnecessary, it's much better to use bookmarks with ---------------------- on address/favicon on it to make a separator on Google Chrome :rolleyes: ...

 

And benchmarks??? Yep the majority of them are really important... :rolleyes:  My eyes can distinguish 10 or even 100ms of delay  :pinch: ... Wait I'm positive I saw the 10ms of delay difference when clicking "create post" between Firefox and Chrome, OH MY GOD YOU'RE SO RIGHT...

Id go back to FF if I didnt have so many issues with HTML5 & flash or whatever it is that keeps me from watching videos on Youtube

I like FF better, but switched to Chrome because of this


Who said FireFox was better? - FireFox user (2004-2012) 

 

Chrome is More Stable and Faster. Feels Much Snappier than FireFox.

Don't believe me? go search for Benchmarks between two and test HTML5 yourself here:

http://beta.html5test.com/ 

 

The people who like Firefox are the one's who still like to live in Past. You know Windows 7 with start menu, Cool looking XP etc.

Oh I do love it when people of such profound wisdom decide to grace neowin forum's and enlighten the rest of us.  Especially the fossilized ones who use Windows 7         :rolleyes:

Id go back to FF if I didnt have so many issues with HTML5 & flash or whatever it is that keeps me from watching videos on Youtube

Firefox 36 supports HTML5 video playback on YouTube just fine. Just make sure you go to about:config and set media.mediasource.webm.enabled to true and go to https://www.youtube.com/html5 and request the HTML5 player. All works fine.

Firefox 36 supports HTML5 video playback on YouTube just fine. Just make sure you go to about:config and set media.mediasource.webm.enabled to true and go to https://www.youtube.com/html5 and request the HTML5 player. All works fine.

 

Thank you - I have been waiting for someone to tell me why this is such a PIIA -

I'll do that now

Firefox 36 supports HTML5 video playback on YouTube just fine. Just make sure you go to about:config and set media.mediasource.webm.enabled to true and go to https://www.youtube.com/html5 and request the HTML5 player. All works fine.

Unfortunately that did absolutely nothing.

I still get a black box on every video.  If I goto youtube.com/html5 and select flash - I can watch videos... 

It's completely open source.

Mozilla's values are in the right place, and they are a non-profit.

It's faster than Chrome.

It's more lightweight than Chrome.

Gecko is awesome. I love it! (I develop for the web). It is very representative of how your site will look like in any modern browser. It conforms to the standards exactly.

Addons.

What in the hell? More lightweight?

Faster?

 

L-O-L

Unfortunately that did absolutely nothing.

I still get a black box on every video.  If I goto youtube.com/html5 and select flash - I can watch videos... 

 

Are you sure?  Did you go to about:config and change the value for media.mediasource.webm.enabled as what Boo Berry said?

 

It works on my end since Flash is not installed on my system.

Unfortunately that did absolutely nothing.

I still get a black box on every video.  If I goto youtube.com/html5 and select flash - I can watch videos... 

Are you using any YouTube extensions or userscripts (like YouTube downloaders, YouTube Center, etc.)? If so, disable them and try again. If all else fails I'd backup my bookmarks and do a clean profile and test with no extensions.

Are you sure?  Did you go to about:config and change the value for media.mediasource.webm.enabled as what Boo Berry said?

 

It works on my end since Flash is not installed on my system.

Yes I made the change from False to True in about:config - it used to wrk - dont know what changed it

 

 

Are you using any YouTube extensions or userscripts (like YouTube downloaders, YouTube Center, etc.)? If so, disable them and try again. If all else fails I'd backup my bookmarks and do a clean profile and test with no extensions.

 

I have the YouTube HD addon which automatically plays the highest rez possible... I'll disable that and see.  I dont know what the issue is because I have the same setup on my work laptop and vids play great.... 

I bailed on FF because it was a bloated mess slowly becoming IE6, had to force myself to use Chrome till I realized not having all that FF junk and crap addons was a good thing 

lmao, If anything is becoming like ie6 its chrome, not firefox:

 

AIxYzl9.png

  • Like 3

That is false. I'm using Windows 8.1 with the Start Screen, and I can tell you Firefox just seems to work better than Chrome without a doubt. Plus, Firefox seems to barely crash compared to Chrome, which crashes quite a lot.

That's like your opinion man

Unfortunately that did absolutely nothing.

I still get a black box on every video.  If I goto youtube.com/html5 and select flash - I can watch videos... 

That's why its not enabled by default yet, it works fine for most people but some users get the black screen issue. It works fine here on both my windows 8 desktop and my macbook running osx.

Another example of the crazy flexibility. Looks looks a lot like Chrome out of the box (ish) now.. but can shake it up any way you like. I prefer a more traditional setup, and hell lets throw on a tiled window manager instead having to use tabs that you can't see, just because sometimes I want to see a few things at the same time for giggles. (Scaled way down.) With Chrome it's their way or no way, never mind addons doing anything remotely flexible with their own dialogs/menus/etc.. just can't do it.

 

firefompm.png

 

 

That's why its not enabled by default yet, it works fine for most people but some users get the black screen issue. It works fine here on both my windows 8 desktop and my macbook running osx.

 

Running quite nicely here too, especially since Beta 37.. the one thing that I actually preferred previously in Chrome was video playback on YouTube, but now I get the same in Firefox too.  I can see people preferring Chrome but *shrug* it just doesn't bring anything I need to the table anymore and sacrifices functionality in the process, pass.

That's why its not enabled by default yet, it works fine for most people but some users get the black screen issue. It works fine here on both my windows 8 desktop and my macbook running osx.

 

I always have to be that small %

Also make sure media.mediasource.enabled and media.mediasource.mp4.enabled in about:config is set to true too.

Made all the changes and disabled my YouTube HD addon - still no love.  Guess I'll go back to flash

 

FF has more extensions, mode mods, more themes...just more customization.  I use FF primarily on desktop systems.  On my mobile, I use Chrome since I have no need for all the extensions and such on a mobile device.  Plus, chrome just works better on mobile.  AT least that has been my experience.

 

People comment about the speed of software whether it be a desktop OS, a mobile OS, or browsers.  What I can do with an app means more to me that a little bit of speed increase.

What in the hell? More lightweight?

Faster?

 

L-O-L

Sorry that you're still living in 2007.

Chrome uses around 1.5GB on my computer.

Firefox uses 300MB.

And yes, Firefox loads pages faster for me.

 

 

Guess I'll go back to flash

 

For Firefox HTML5 YouTube videos, I would recommend this addon: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-all-html5/

Ya, Chrome is a ram sucking pig.

Yeah long gone are the days of chrome being 'lightweight'. It does a good job of interface responsiveness and rendering speed, but when it comes to resource usage its pretty much the heaviest browser out there.

 

I switched from chrome to opera on my pc at work that only has 2 gigs of ram, the tab hibernation flag is nifty: 

 

EAS4pz8.png

I use Firefox because neither IE or Chrome have a decent version of Adblock Plus. i wouldn't use chrome because I'm sick of Google's crap lately. IE's bookmark manager sucks. There is no meaningful difference in speed between the three as far as I'm concerned.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2, urges IT admins to prepare for release by Usama Jawad Windows 11 typically follows an annual update cycle, but Microsoft recently broke that tradition a bit by releasing a "26H1" version in the first half of this year as a "scoped" build for select new silicon PCs only. This version was not available for customers using 24H2 and 25H2 builds, as Microsoft is busy preparing version 26H2 for them, confirmed officially for the first time. In a Windows IT Pro blog, Microsoft has urged IT admins to prepare for the upcoming release of Windows 11 version 26H2. The company has confirmed that this will be a small enablement package (eKB) that will simply light up certain disabled features that are already present in the operating system's code base. This means that the "refined" Windows update and deployment experience will be simpler and quicker, with minimal disruptions, as the feature update will simply toggle a few flags rather than performing a complete replacement. Microsoft has explained that this is all possible because the standard Windows 11 releases share the same servicing branch and hence, the same source code. However, this also means that Windows 11 26H1 users won't be able to upgrade to 26H2 as that is a different branch, but this is something we have known for a while now. Similar to previous annual feature updates, Windows 11 26H2 will offer the following support cycles: 24 months of support for Home, Pro, Pro EDU, and Pro for Workstations editions 36 months of support for Enterprise, Education, IoT Enterprise, and Enterprise Multi-session editions Microsoft has not confirmed a concrete release date for Windows 11 26H2, but noted that it is "coming soon". If we go by the ongoing release cadence, we can expect it to begin rolling out in early October 2026. As such, IT admins have been encouraged to begin validating Windows Insider releases in the Experimental Channel, plan rollout rings, and strategize the utilization of their existing deployment tools.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      569
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      79
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    5. 5
      neufuse
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!