updates Meet the browser: Firefox Next

[Anthonyd]

:cry:

Sorry I'm late, but this isn't a surprise at all. Everybody around me is switching from Firefox to Chrome. The main reason about it, is that Firefox is turning into a bloatware (too many bug/crashes). And even myself have many issues (ex: firefox has a memory leak which makes it crash after a while).

I was wondering if the people around this forum are experimenting the same thing too? (I'm talking about the migration to Chrome, not the bugs).

[Oz.]

Sorry I'm late, but this isn't a surprise at all. Everybody around me is switching from Firefox to Chrome. The main reason about it, is that Firefox is turning into a bloatware (too many bug/crashes). And even myself have many issues (ex: firefox has a memory leak which makes it crash after a while).

I was wondering if the people around this forum are experimenting the same thing too? (I'm talking about the migration to Chrome, not the bugs).

Bloatware? you must be high.

I use Firefox Nightly and is running very smooth! No crashes/issues here.

[remixedcat]

I do have to say the RAM usage is a bit high though. It mostly leaks when I'm on FB. LOL.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

RAM usage (on average) is lower than Chrome and IE, which is to be expected since they're multi-process browsers (that adds overhead)

[Anthonyd]

RAM usage (on average) is lower than Chrome and IE, which is to be expected since they're multi-process browsers (that adds overhead)

You know what "memory leak" means, right?

[Detection]

Anyone finding pages / tabs never finish loading with any of the latest Beta / Aurora / Alpha ?

Continuous circle spinning on most tabs, using significant CPU usage on my laptop, I noticed when the temperature of the CPU shot up and stayed there whenever I was using FF

[Pikey]

Sorry I'm late, but this isn't a surprise at all. Everybody around me is switching from Firefox to Chrome. The main reason about it, is that Firefox is turning into a bloatware (too many bug/crashes). And even myself have many issues (ex: firefox has a memory leak which makes it crash after a while).

I was wondering if the people around this forum are experimenting the same thing too? (I'm talking about the migration to Chrome, not the bugs).

No problems here with latest nightly ... running very well.

I must admit I don't always understand this gripe about RAM usage , surely your ram is there to be used , not sitting there idle all the time!

Of course , if a program is misbehaving badly ... fair enough , it needs fixing.

[remixedcat]

RAM usage I'm ok with... Commit Charge usage I'm not. High commit Charge usage thrashes disks and causes more wear and tear.

[Anthonyd]

No problems here with latest nightly ... running very well.

I must admit I don't always understand this gripe about RAM usage , surely your ram is there to be used , not sitting there idle all the time!

Of course , if a program is misbehaving badly ... fair enough , it needs fixing.

Please think about the huge majority who isn't running nightly :)

From what I see, the users mostly complains about how slow and buggy (crashes!) Firefox is.

Yet, nobody answered to my original question :/

[BetaAddict]

Anyone finding pages / tabs never finish loading with any of the latest Beta / Aurora / Alpha ?

Continuous circle spinning on most tabs, using significant CPU usage on my laptop, I noticed when the temperature of the CPU shot up and stayed there whenever I was using FF

Yeah, that's been there for a while now. Pretty sure they might be still trying to figure out what's causing it.

Sorry I'm late, but this isn't a surprise at all. Everybody around me is switching from Firefox to Chrome. The main reason about it, is that Firefox is turning into a bloatware (too many bug/crashes). And even myself have many issues (ex: firefox has a memory leak which makes it crash after a while).

I was wondering if the people around this forum are experimenting the same thing too? (I'm talking about the migration to Chrome, not the bugs).

Please think about the huge majority who isn't running nightly :)

From what I see, the users mostly complains about how slow and buggy (crashes!) Firefox is.

Yet, nobody answered to my original question :/

To answer your original question: No. FF5 on it's own is hardly bloatware and is probably one of the most stable builds I have ever used. There is a >75% chance that the issues (aka bloat) that you and others are experiencing is directly related to or caused by specific addons or the quantity of addons installed. But no crashes to heard of.

Note that I am not denying that FF5 still has a high memory usage as did FF3 and FF4, making IE9 and Chrome a better lightweight candidate for many older computers with low memory and users with low tab overload. With the current performance optimization that they are doing on FF7 Aurora, I'm noticing a 20-30% decrease (100+ MB off the usual 350-500MB) in memory usage with the typical 5 tabs I have open and 18 addons running in the background with no memory leaks or crashes in like forever. Just like with Windows, people are too quick to the blame the main program rather than question their usage of the browser and stuff they installed on it that might be altering the functionality of the base code.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

You know what "memory leak" means, right?

Yes, I know what memory leaks are (I've had them before, when it allocates 2GB in 10 seconds you know you have a leak). But I also know about the overhead with multiple processes, rounding up allocation sizes, memory fragmentation, etc.

[Anthonyd]

Yeah, that's been there for a while now. Pretty sure they might be still trying to figure out what's causing it.

To answer your original question: No. FF5 on it's own is hardly bloatware and is probably one of the most stable builds I have ever used. There is a >75% chance that the issues (aka bloat) that you and others are experiencing is directly related to or caused by specific addons or the quantity of addons installed. But no crashes to heard of.

Note that I am not denying that FF5 still has a high memory usage as did FF3 and FF4, making IE9 and Chrome a better lightweight candidate for many older computers with low memory and users with low tab overload. With the current performance optimization that they are doing on FF7 Aurora, I'm noticing a 20-30% decrease (100+ MB off the usual 350-500MB) in memory usage with the typical 5 tabs I have open and 18 addons running in the background with no memory leaks or crashes in like forever. Just like with Windows, people are too quick to the blame the main program rather than question their usage of the browser and stuff they installed on it that might be altering the functionality of the base code.

IMO it's too easy to bash the addons. I don't see Chrome suffering from those problem, yet it's still supporting user/community addon, right?

Also, I still don't understand why the hardware acceleration is set to ON by default. It is a huge mistake from Mozilla. I'm part of the Mozilla fundation, and made few debug (testday) and at least half of the problems are solved by the removal of the HA. Now you can blame user PC, but not everybody is admin/full ownership of its computer, especially at work.

Yes, I know what memory leaks are (I've had them before, when it allocates 2GB in 10 seconds you know you have a leak). But I also know about the overhead with multiple processes, rounding up allocation sizes, memory fragmentation, etc.

Then why comparing Firefox 5 with Chrome without a decent benchmark ? :) Firefox leaks way too much, too often, and I'm not the only one.

Also I'm using hybrid sleep, which mean that I only reboot my PC twice a month or so. And firefox used to be opened during all this time without any issue until Firefox 4.

I'm just saying that many users (including me) are having a bad experience of Firefox lately (since Firefox 4), and many are switching over Chrome.

[remixedcat]

Some people have complained that it's the UI that is making people switch to Chrome, however I beg to differ and It is mainly memory/resource usage. I hope the Fx will improve in that area. I plan to stick with it though, as I prefer the current Fx 8 nightly (2011.7.31)'s UI and addons. I think it's excellent in every way except the memory footprint.

[BetaAddict]

IMO it's too easy to bash the addons. I don't see Chrome suffering from those problem, yet it's still supporting user/community addon, right?

Also, I still don't understand why the hardware acceleration is set to ON by default. It is a huge mistake from Mozilla. I'm part of the Mozilla fundation, and made few debug (testday) and at least half of the problems are solved by the removal of the HA. Now you can blame user PC, but not everybody is admin/full ownership of its computer, especially at work.

Comparing addons in Chrome and FF is like comparing apples to oranges. The addons capability in Chrome for devs to maneuver is far smaller box than what is allowed with FF, which you can customize the browser down to the pixel. Clear example is adblock: in chrome, adblock only hides the ads after they fully load, whereas in FF the ads are not even loaded and saves bandwidth. Another example is that you will find many popular FF addons like DownloadThemAll are not available with Chrome for this very reason as well. Downside to this level of customizability is there is a greater chance of the addon interfering with FF base code or with another addon that may also utilize the same set of code. The upside is that it gives a browser like Chrome, which prioritizes performance more than anything else, an upper hand for users who have older computers and worried about memory usage. So yes, while it is very easy to blame addons, the communities are very different between the two browsers.

IE9 has hardware acceleration turned on by default, and I don't see why FF should do any different. Like I said, Mozilla is fixing these issues a lot quicker with its rapid developmental cycle. But if you (and others) are impatient, then feel free to use what works best for you. Switching to Chrome will almost definitely mean that you will lose availability of some your favorite addons, which is why I suggest you consider switching to Aurora or Beta releases as you are more tech savvy than the average user.

[Anthonyd]

Comparing addons in Chrome and FF is like comparing apples to oranges. The addons capability in Chrome for devs to maneuver is far smaller box than what is allowed with FF, which you can customize the browser down to the pixel. Clear example is adblock: in chrome, adblock only hides the ads after they fully load, whereas in FF the ads are not even loaded and saves bandwidth. Another example is that you will find many popular FF addons like DownloadThemAll are not available with Chrome for this very reason as well. Downside to this level of customizability is there is a greater chance of the addon interfering with FF base code or with another addon that may also utilize the same set of code. The upside is that it gives a browser like Chrome, which prioritizes performance more than anything else, an upper hand for users who have older computers and worried about memory usage. So yes, while it is very easy to blame addons, the communities are very different between the two browsers.

I understand the differences between Firefox and Chrome as you just explained :) (even if you picked a bad example, because I'm sure that website owner would prefers the Chrome option as it gives them more income).

IE9 has hardware acceleration turned on by default, and I don't see why FF should do any different. Like I said, Mozilla is fixing these issues a lot quicker with its rapid developmental cycle. But if you (and others) are impatient, then feel free to use what works best for you. Switching to Chrome will almost definitely mean that you will lose availability of some your favorite addons, which is why I suggest you consider switching to Aurora or Beta releases as you are more tech savvy than the average user.

It's not about being impatient or not. It's about the qualities of Mozilla releases.

For the lambda user ( ), if Firefox crashes, then they switch to Chrome which basically do the same thing but without the bugs.

IMO, having a major release every 2months is a bad idea. It's nice to have new features but it shouldn't be a major version when possible, and when I look at Firefox 5 & 6 changelog, then I don't see any reason to do a major version.

Addons developers, the ones who makes the strength of firefox against Chrome or IE9, are having more and more difficulties to follow Mozilla release cycle.

So this + the mutliples bugs = Death for Firefox in few years if nothing is done against that. It's the only way to explain the graph posted before where Chrome is literally eating Firefox.

[Samurizer]

I understand the differences between Firefox and Chrome as you just explained :) (even if you picked a bad example, because I'm sure that website owner would prefers the Chrome option as it gives them more income).

If you really understand as much as you claim to, then look through your list of installed add-ons if you want to troubleshoot your memory issues.

It's not about being impatient or not. It's about the qualities of Mozilla releases.

For the lambda user, if Firefox crashes, then they switch to Chrome which basically do the same thing but without the bugs.

I'm sorry, but your logic is completely breaking apart here. How do rapid releases and the quality of each release have anything to do with each other? If anything, rapid release IMPROVES the stability released versions.

Why don't you take a calm down, take a deep breath, and think over what you really want to say instead of just being so desperate to hurl mud at Mozilla?

[ViperAFK]

Comparing addons in Chrome and FF is like comparing apples to oranges. The addons capability in Chrome for devs to maneuver is far smaller box than what is allowed with FF, which you can customize the browser down to the pixel. Clear example is adblock: in chrome, adblock only hides the ads after they fully load, whereas in FF the ads are not even loaded and saves bandwidth. Another example is that you will find many popular FF addons like DownloadThemAll are not available with Chrome for this very reason as well. Downside to this level of customizability is there is a greater chance of the addon interfering with FF base code or with another addon that may also utilize the same set of code. The upside is that it gives a browser like Chrome, which prioritizes performance more than anything else, an upper hand for users who have older computers and worried about memory usage. So yes, while it is very easy to blame addons, the communities are very different between the two browsers.

IE9 has hardware acceleration turned on by default, and I don't see why FF should do any different. Like I said, Mozilla is fixing these issues a lot quicker with its rapid developmental cycle. But if you (and others) are impatient, then feel free to use what works best for you. Switching to Chrome will almost definitely mean that you will lose availability of some your favorite addons, which is why I suggest you consider switching to Aurora or Beta releases as you are more tech savvy than the average user.

Chrome's adblock extension has blocked ads from loading for quite some time now... people really need to stop using that example.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Chrome's adblock extension has blocked ads from loading for quite some time now... people really need to stop using that example.

It's still not going to be that efficient/optimal till this is implemented - http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=60101

[Detection]

Yeah, that's been there for a while now. Pretty sure they might be still trying to figure out what's causing it.

Least Im not the only one, I was beginning to think it was something else with it happening in 3 different builds

[BetaAddict]

Chrome's adblock extension has blocked ads from loading for quite some time now... people really need to stop using that example.

It's still not going to be that efficient/optimal till this is implemented - http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=60101

Guess my argument is still valid...for the time being.

I haven't used Chrome since FF4 beta. So I dunno if adblock has improved during that period or if I just failed to notice when chrome was still my default browser. Either way, I last saw it hiding page elements after they loaded.

Google has financial incentive delay APIs that will allow adblock to work fully. Even when chromium does eventually get the full API, I curious on whether Google will allow the API to run in Chrome.

Even if adblock is not a perfect example anymore, just compare the list of top addons for Chrome and the same for Firefox. Many of the apps in Chrome lack depth compared to FF due to the tighter coding restrictions and the FF version of it is almost always more complete.

[Worthington]

Chrome is nothing more than a toolbar made into a browser. Firefox will always win in people's hearts because it's actually useful for other things besides rendering pages.

That said, let's stop talking about Chrome. It's a baby's browser. This is the adult's browser we're talking about.

[Grinch]

Chrome is nothing more than a toolbar made into a browser. Firefox will always win in people's hearts because it's actually useful for other things besides rendering pages.

That said, let's stop talking about Chrome. It's a baby's browser. This is the adult's browser we're talking about.

How about we stop talking about Browsers as if there is only one that is truly needed? Everyone has their own priorities on a computer and Chrome fits the needs of many, as does Firefox. Deal with it. :)

[remixedcat]

[Worthington]

How about we stop talking about Browsers as if there is only one that is truly needed? Everyone has their own priorities on a computer and Chrome fits the needs of many, as does Firefox. Deal with it. :)

How about you go to the Chrome thread and talk about that baby browser there instead of messing up this thread?

[Brandon H Supervisor]

How about you go to the Chrome thread and talk about that baby browser there instead of messing up this thread?

and how about you grow up and act a little more mature

firefox has it's advantages over chrome but chrome ALSO has advantages over firefox, each major browser is different and each is better in their own way

if you don't like chrome that's fine, it's your opinion but don't go bad mouthing things you don't have a right to bad mouth

now can we please get back to the topic at hand?