Firefox 7.0 is out

Get it here: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.or.../releases/7.0/

They promised drastically improved memory management. So I got rid of MemoryFox add-on. Updated to 7.0. The result?
Every single time I open a tab with a new site, memory consumption goes up (by 50-100MB). I close it - and guess what? It goes down by 0-2MB. I ended up with FF7.0 taking 700MB of RAM with just one tab with XS opened. :(
Very disappointing so far.

Edit: memory usage seems to be going down with time. Takes over a minute to offload a single tab, though. Perhaps that's intended, I don't know. They should definitely accelerate the offloading. MemoryFox (whose creator particpated in FF7.0 [and higher] memory management improvements) still does that a lot faster (and better).

Yeah I got rid of FF from the last update. Still liking Chrome.

Chrome is still easy to get 4GB+ usage ;-)
But FireFox is still poor next to chrome... but... Google has good staff, and alot of it... Hard to compete with.

that's kinda funny imo... chrome always seems to suck up more memory for me. :eek:

Yeah, and here I am just /downgrading/ to 3.6.20 portable as I'm fed up with FF and it's direction and need all my privacy plugins to work correctly. This was a real successful business decision on their part with stupid upgrades. ;)

Aaah yeah not playing this game again. I had enough of memory-hog problems with FF4--it's amazing that they've still not fixed it (reportedly) in FF7.

Ie ftw...

Seems fine to me. Basically just FF6 with some changes under the hood.

--Matt

Switching to Chrome as we speak, FF eats up so much of my memory, and since I did the most recent update I've been getting page redirects like crazy! I used to like FF too.

Meanwhile I'm running 9.0a1 with 24 tabs and 7 addons and I'm at 258 meg memory usage. I don't know why people even bother with the release versions.

Edit: With 131 tabs open it's at 619 meg.

how the hell are you only using 256megs of memory? i don't even think i get that with the default tab opening on install.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Meanwhile I'm running 9.0a1 with 24 tabs and 7 addons and I'm at 258 meg memory usage. I don't know why people even bother with the release versions.

Edit: With 131 tabs open it's at 619 meg.

---

Chrome;
1380MB, 30 tabs, splitted on 3 windows, 6 add-ons..
I dont think the consumption is unreasonable.... Cosnidering I have opened and closed tabs alot... (Screening the market for accomodation in the city of which I study)..

Total system usage;
4.3/8GB, FireFox, and my average use, wont work unfortuantely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IFMU

how the hell are you only using 256megs of memory? i don't even think i get that with the default tab opening on install.........

---

With 9.0a1?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Chrome;
1380MB, 30 tabs, splitted on 3 windows, 6 add-ons..
I dont think the consumption is unreasonable.... Cosnidering I have opened and closed tabs alot... (Screening the market for accomodation in the city of which I study)..

Total system usage;
4.3/8GB, FireFox, and my average use, wont work unfortuantely.

---

Frankly, Ive never cared one bit about memory usage, as long as it's not permanently leaking. I have way more ram than it ever has used. I don't really see what the big deal is.

im seeing 125MB and 9MB for the plug in container with taco running.


why would this make any1 change to chrome, not only is chrome slower, it id thefts, dose not meet HTML5 base standards, and is webkit based with a bunch of exploits (but dont tell google as they dont have bugs until affter they are fixed)

my favourite addons still dont work with 6 and they realesed 7 :(
im going back to 5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HuffPCair

Yeah I got rid of FF from the last update. Still liking Chrome.

---

Been using Chrome before FF went 4.0. Still using Chrome.

Wasn't memory consumption that made me change. FF was slow as hell and a lot of times pages wouldn't render until I restarted FF. Chrome solved all thathat.

Meh, the current nightly 9.0a1 starts acting up at around 200 tabs and 955 megs usage. They've got to work on that, and the panorama thumbnail bug, right this instant! I demand better from my free browser!

FF has been and still is acting normally as far as memory usage. I can think of ONE time in all the years of using firefox that I had it go nuts on memory.

Sometimes I think people load a bajillion addons then blame firefox for the issues :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

With 9.0a1?

---

with any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

FF has been and still is acting normally as far as memory usage. I can think of ONE time in all the years of using firefox that I had it go nuts on memory.

Sometimes I think people load a bajillion addons then blame firefox for the issues :p:

---

i've wondered which addons may cause memory leaks or just huge memory use. can't say for certain it's an add on or ff itself. but i'm constantly at 300meg plus, easy. i can go up over 1 - 1.5 gigs with something running flash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IFMU

with any.

---

I don't know what to say about that. All I'm running is the latest Nightly with Addblock Plus, FoxyProxy, Nightly Tester Tools, NoScript, TrackerBlock, Tab Mix Plus, and UserAgent RG, and an old config I've run for years that's mostly default.

Memory usage with 200 tabs.

I've been using Opera for quite a while now. I love it. I've never been impressed with Firefox. I just don't get what people see in it.

Frankly, I've never got what people see in Opera. Maybe a little more speed on slow machines and that's about it.

Any reason for why FF redirects 1/4 of my searches through google, while chrome or opera don't. No spyware or viruses.

Colour management.

Browsers without it make my eyes bleed :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Frankly, I've never got what people see in Opera. Maybe a little more speed on slow machines and that's about it.

---

Its always been a lot more stable than Fire Fox for me. A lot more stable.

i do have quite a few add-ons and i just recently restarted ff.
actually restarted the os, had a power brown out for a bit earlier. so this is a bit lower than what i'm used to.
:shrug: guess i'll just have to go through and un-install each add-on one by one and see what makes a difference if any has a larger impact than others do. hope that's the case but doubting it.
Attachment 120564

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

Its always been a lot more stable than Fire Fox for me. A lot more stable.

---

It wasn't in my experience. Not to mention I have been running mostly current or near current nightlies for years, besides skipping the first few weeks of nightlies after a version change, yet I haven't had many stability problems at all. And session restore on startup makes living on the bleeding edge a moot point for me. I prefer the deeper customization ability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IFMU

i do have quite a few add-ons and i just recently restarted ff.
[snip]

---

I'll bet it's one of the addons. And that's not really mozilla's fault.
Here's my usage with a more regular number of tabs and the addons I mentioned.

Attachment 120565

i am missing status bar at bottom


Opera i am missing dropdown address bar history

get this
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...status-4-evar/

jeez some ppl have issue's man, i never have these memory problems with firefox....i actually want it to use more memory! so that is i have like 400+tabs open; i dont reach a memory cap and it crashes on me. when ever i open ff, it only takes up about 58mb, 400+ tabs takes about 1 gig.



the only thing i dont like is the http hiding thing, it annoys the crap out of me, i wish i could turn it off.

I ain't touching chrome until it stops lagging on zoomed in pics. This issue has existed for years.

you can in about:config.
browser.urlbar.trimURLs
set to false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FischOderAal

Been using Chrome before FF went 4.0. Still using Chrome.

Wasn't memory consumption that made me change. FF was slow as hell and a lot of times pages wouldn't render until I restarted FF. Chrome solved all thathat.

---

see? uninformed opinions here.

you should know that firefox 4 was a DRASTIC change in speed, becoming speed competitive with chrome 'overnight'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Generic user #2

see? uninformed opinions here.

you should know that firefox 4 was a DRASTIC change in speed, becoming speed competitive with chrome 'overnight'.

---

how is that 'uninformed'? stating how his experience was. that is far from 'uninformed'. maybe mistaken, and stating it was firefox when it could have been an add-on or even just a bad install.
but DRASTICly far from 'uninformed'.

can someone comparsion latest Firefox (example with 20 tbas) again Google with the same open tabs? It will be very useful for me. Thx.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Frankly, I've never got what people see in Opera. Maybe a little more speed on slow machines and that's about it.

---

Its clean. The plugins dont die between versions... as much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

Its clean. The plugins dont die between versions... as much.

---

Maybe but it doesn't have as many plugins either. So you are bound to find more bad ones. I've used my main plugins for a long time across versions without much trouble. All I had to do was disable version checking and they usually work, if not they are usually updated before long. It's even better now because the about:config string doesn't need to be changed for new versions anymore. Just set extensions.checkCompatibility.nightly to false and forget about it.

As for clean, that's a matter of personal taste. Some people want clean and ease of use in exchange for reduced functionality and/or customization. Is that wrong? Not necessarily, the iphone sells well. But others will want the extra features, even if it means clutter, config files, and command lines. I'm glad there are choices available for all kinds of needs/desires.

Chrome is fast but more extensions would be nice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blindbox

I ain't touching chrome until it stops lagging on zoomed in pics. This issue has existed for years.

---

Ye, they need to add a feature or extension of text only zoom cause some zoomed pictures look plain wrong. I've been using Nosquint FF plugin for ages and it does only text zoom that I need :)

I have no idea what you guys do to mess up firefox so much, 6.0.2, 33 tabs, several youtube videos (just opened a crap load of bookmarks and stuff) and it's using 435mb ram

I don't know why someone should use Firefox when the actual version of Opera is so f*****g great

Now that both FF and Chromium support ABP, I have choice. I use FF 6.0.2 in Windows and its slightly laggy compared to Chromium in Linux. I dont care much about memory consumption because I dont run much intensive stuff while I am browsing. And I find Chromium (v12) no good, each tab with an average webpage takes over 60 MB , but thankfully there are no noticeable leaks.
FF 6.0.2 is fine ,as I said it feels slightly less responsive (might be because of the addons I have , esp. Pentadactyl) but I didnt notice any major leaks. If FF 7.0 has leaks that bad, well I wont get it :(

Never checked, or cared about, memory consumption of FireFox. I've maybe had it crash on me once or twice in the last 5 years or so, but I only use a few add-ons (DownThemAll, Omnibar, and Yahoo Mail Notifier). If the devs for your add-ons aren't building in support for newer versions, you should contact them about it. The 3 I use have worked on release day for every release in recent history. I like Opera's speed but it lacks variety in plugin support. I like Chrome's look and feel, but it seems like my CC number gets stolen every time I make a purchase with it (if I'm forced to use it instead of PayPal at any rate).

--Matt

Newsflash, RAM is cheap. Go install 12GB + and stop whining!

They improved memory usage (fixed some of the leak) since FF 7 beta:

Quote:

---

Drastically improved memory use
Added a new rendering backend to speed up Canvas operations on Windows systems
Bookmark and password changes now sync almost instantly when using Firefox Sync
Added support for text-overflow: ellipsis
Added support for the Web Timing specification
Added an opt-in system for users to send performance data back to Mozilla to improve future versions of Firefox. This can be enabled by installing an add-on
Fixed several stability issues

---

I still find FF better for browsing cause of add-ons like NoScript and AdBlock.

^ I like how the opt-in system will be handled via an add-on :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Meanwhile I'm running 9.0a1 with 24 tabs and 7 addons and I'm at 258 meg memory usage. I don't know why people even bother with the release versions.

---

I keep an eye to the commits posted to the mercurial repository from where the nightlies are built (mozilla-central), and in more than one occasion i found a backout of a change that literally broke the whole thing. If it happens that the latest nightly build was made before that backout was committed, you'd be stuck with a broken build until the following day (Unless you deal with it manually).
That's why i don't use nightlies. There's a considerable chance they may not work right, and that's not a good thing for a main browser.

Before this new development scheme i used to run the betas and release candidates for FF3.5 up to FF4, which are built after some QA unlike the nightlies. Nowadays i simply wait for each final release since they are coming every two months or so...

I'm FTP'ing FF 7 now.

I've always liked FF compared to the other broswers out there.

Firefox 7 is using 113mb for me with 1 tab open. Not sure what all the memory fuss is all about. And this is with a few addons installed as well. Anyway, I thought this version was supposed to make each tab/plugin run in a separate process like chrome, but it obviously hasn't been implemented. Does anyone know when that will get implemented? Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinas

Newsflash, RAM is cheap. Go install 12GB + and stop whining!

---

Newsflash;
Post 8GB on laptops with 2 DIMM wont happen anno 2011.

Hmmm, there seems to be a bug with Firefox 7. When I right-click a link and select to open it in a new tab, it opens it in a new windows instead... Anyone else with the same problem?

Edit: Hmm, restarting Firefox fixed the problem. Weird.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Frankly, I've never got what people see in Opera. Maybe a little more speed on slow machines and that's about it.

---

Back when FF was was barley released and IE & Netscape were the most used browser - Opera was an interesting alternative (was even commercial at that time)... and not just then, was among the best for years to come (along with MyE2 - a IE based browser). Firefox got better with version 2 - and cause of extensions, started to gain more popularity than Opera... and when i talk about popularity, I'm referring to those who had more knowledge in terms of PC usage - cause beyond that IE was covering more than 80% of those using a PC (and those were the worst days of IE).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinas

Newsflash, RAM is cheap. Go install 12GB + and stop whining!

---

that's because you know, everyone's made of money..... :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IFMU

that's because you know, everyone's made of money..... :rolleyes:

---

lol don't you know...i crap money, if you want a $50; just let me know....its chilli night!


;p.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by god_43

lol don't you know...i crap money, if you want a $50; just let me know....its chilli night!


;p.

---

lmao if that's the case then gimmie a few bucks, im outta smokes!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boogerlad

you can in about:config.
browser.urlbar.trimURLs
set to false.

---

oh wow thanks ysy!

Chrome is really damn fast !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pontos

I keep an eye to the commits posted to the mercurial repository from where the nightlies are built (mozilla-central), and in more than one occasion i found a backout of a change that literally broke the whole thing. If it happens that the latest nightly build was made before that backout was committed, you'd be stuck with a broken build until the following day (Unless you deal with it manually).
That's why i don't use nightlies. There's a considerable chance they may not work right, and that's not a good thing for a main browser.

Before this new development scheme i used to run the betas and release candidates for FF3.5 up to FF4, which are built after some QA unlike the nightlies. Nowadays i simply wait for each final release since they are coming every two months or so...

---

I certainly don't think auto updating with nightlies is a good idea for everyone. But with a little experimentation it is easy to find a good nightly that actually works better/faster/etc than release versions. It's what my friend has been doing for years, find the "perfect" nightly and stick with it for a few months. I just auto update and roll back manually to a known good ver if something breaks. But I don't have to do that very often at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XSAlliN

Back when FF was was barley released and IE & Netscape were the most used browser - Opera was an interesting alternative (was even commercial at that time)... and not just then, was among the best for years to come (along with MyE2 - a IE based browser). Firefox got better with version 2 - and cause of extensions, started to gain more popularity than Opera... and when i talk about popularity, I'm referring to those who had more knowledge in terms of PC usage - cause beyond that IE was covering more than 80% of those using a PC (and those were the worst days of IE).

---

Sure, FF was rough back then. But I can't really see the point now, since about v3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Sure, FF was rough back then. But I can't really see the point now, since about v3.

---

Even V3 was buggy. FF2 was just a mess. On more than one pc it used to crash on me. I switched to Opera and other than a couple of releases I never had a serious issue. I even preferred IE8 to FF2 and 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

Even V3 was buggy. FF2 was just a mess. On more than one pc it used to crash on me. I switched to Opera and other than a couple of releases I never had a serious issue. I even preferred IE8 to FF2 and 3.

---

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/j...eIfSerious.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/j...eIfSerious.jpg

---

LOL, really.

FF2 and early 3 were rough, but they were never so bad that I got desperate enough to flee to IE, or Opera for that matter. Maybe it was just how I used the browser, but with how unstable people are describing FF I'm inclined to think some of the problems were operator error. Personally, I'd test out new nightlies on a regular basis and when I found a "keeper" I'd run it as my main for a few weeks or months. Often the good nightlies were more stable, faster, and better than the releases in those days.

But those were the old days. Lately I have had zero stability issues with the release versions. I haven't had a stable release crash on me for a really long time (I don't even remember the last time). And the nightlies have gotten to the point where I auto update them and only rollback if there is a problem, which isn't often.

the memory leaks, I can (mostly) handle. What I can't handle is when I have 3 tab groups of 20+ tabs in each, split on 2 physical monitors and then I open a new tab that's a graph and then close the groups before that tab, the entire frickin' "pinned tabs" and previous browser history and tab groups all vanish. It has happened twice to me so far since FF4. The next time it happens, I will simply stop using firefox for ever. There's no excuse for :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing over people's workflow at critical times. Until then, I'll keep the hybrid chrome/ff setup to best utilize each browser.

....

I have no idea what the heck you just complained about.

There is no room for QQ when it comes to free products - especially if you have other alternatives around.... I never liked IE, but i found Netscape to be good alternative for the first years of internet browsing, later i found Opera and was good breath of fresh air having a modern look, changeable skins and modular options - few years latter felt kinda heavy as it had to much bloatware implemented in it and at that time MyIE2 was just what i needed (tried even FF but felt at about the same level with Netscape)... Later, MyE2 was renamed to Maxthon with a new version and that also got some extra bloatware which wasn't up to my taste anymore so i moved back to Opera - but had some problems with certain sites not being displayed right on Opera (being made with IE in mind) and i started trying all available browsers and Firefox seemed to be the best choice - i found extensions that covered options i got used to from MyE2 like adblock and didn't had any problems with the pages i visited (not being displayed correctly). I used FF for next years to come as my main browser, but i also tried/try the alternatives from time to time and can't say i found a better option (definitely not Chrome - which lost my trust after realizing that - they don't care about my privacy).

Dunno but Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 were probably the best firefox browsers for me - in terms of stability and performance. 2 was OK, 3 was very buggy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

....

I have no idea what the heck you just complained about.

---

me neither. sounds complicated though :p:

My Firefox runs so slow... feels like forever waiting for a page to open... :(

Attachment 120599

Just received this in an email from crucial, seems pretty interesting, not sure if the results are biased to convince you to buy more memory as this was the reason for the email I suppose, but good to see the differences in memory consumption.
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Standard...rSeptember11US
Edit: not sure why they're using FF 4 in a last week article..?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

I've been using Opera for quite a while now. I love it. I've never been impressed with Firefox. I just don't get what people see in it.

---

This. Both Chrome and FF have become quite bloated. Not impressed with either one at this point. Palemoon seems more efficient but I still rarely use it. I really have no reason to use anything other than Opera and IE occasionally (stupid activeX) unless I'm working on a website.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antiacid

the memory leaks, I can (mostly) handle. What I can't handle is when I have 3 tab groups of 20+ tabs in each, split on 2 physical monitors and then I open a new tab that's a graph and then close the groups before that tab, the entire frickin' "pinned tabs" and previous browser history and tab groups all vanish. It has happened twice to me so far since FF4. The next time it happens, I will simply stop using firefox for ever. There's no excuse for :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing over people's workflow at critical times. Until then, I'll keep the hybrid chrome/ff setup to best utilize each browser.

---

they call it 'saving your work'. on firefox, they call it session manager.

...and like sparky, i don't actually know what you're talking about. but session manager lets you recover from crashes with your tabs intact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eBoy0

Just received this in an email from crucial, seems pretty interesting, not sure if the results are biased to convince you to buy more memory as this was the reason for the email I suppose, but good to see the differences in memory consumption.
http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Standard...rSeptember11US
Edit: not sure why they're using FF 4 in a last week article..?

---

Not that it's not true - but what they did there is called "Marketing". ^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlawleZ

This. Both Chrome and FF have become quite bloated. Not impressed with either one at this point. Palemoon seems more efficient but I still rarely use it. I really have no reason to use anything other than Opera and IE occasionally (stupid activeX) unless I'm working on a website.

---

Funny you say that, since currently - Opera is Nr. 1 in terms of bloatware wile IE (not really surprising) is the last from this point of view. :)

Another simple test...
A single tab with YouTube video playlist, 90 videos in total (small 240-360p videos, a lot of them only contain a single picture). After 39th video browser takes up 1GB of memory (haven't checked before)...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

....

I have no idea what the heck you just complained about.

---

basically on specific occasions, closing the "main" firefox windows with your pinned tabs and tab groups before closing an alternate firefox window on a 2nd physical monitor that's displaying a live graph (think forex...) will result in EVERYTHING disappearing, including pinned tabs, tab groups and so on. So now, I have to use 2 browsers to do something I used to do with a single one, lest I want to lose days worth of fluid workflow. I even tried reloading backups of the user profile and it simply does not work. Oh, and leaving the browser open with 10-15 tabs during 24 hours with no user activity = tripling of the used memory up to a point where it chokes other applications down. Awesome.

http://techpp.com/2011/09/28/chrome-...nt-comparison/
Published today
I really don't know which browser to go with :(
I use FF on my desktop while Chrome on my laptop, chrome "feels" faster, but that might be because it's a fairly plain install of W7 Home.
Only thing I seem to enjoy about FF is crash feature that recalls all your websites if u kill the process or pc shuts down, which I'm not sure chrome has?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antiacid

I even tried reloading backups of the user profile and it simply does not work. Oh, and leaving the browser open with 10-15 tabs during 24 hours with no user activity = tripling of the used memory up to a point where it chokes other applications down. Awesome.

---

Have you tried this extension: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...on/memory-fox/

100 tabs open - around 350 mb with plugin container...

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/3...ure001i.th.png

http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/5...ure002o.th.png

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/9...ure003j.th.png

... when memory gets refreshed it can drop to 20 mb then shift back to 350 mb but doesn't grow beyond that wile being in idle so can't affect any external application.

Id rather have 1gb+ memory usage than reload everything on every page i visit frequently (wich is most of them)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XSAlliN

Funny you say that, since currently - Opera is Nr. 1 in terms of bloatware wile IE (not really surprising) is the last from this point of view. :)

---

Are you talking about hard drive space which I have more than enough of or system resources? I highly doubt that opera uses more system resources than Firefox, it hasn't in my experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

Are you talking about hard drive space which I have more than enough of or system resources? I highly doubt that opera uses more system resources than Firefox, it hasn't in my experience.

---

I was doubtful too. So on another machine I just tried a fresh install of Opera 11.51 and disabled all the extensions on a FF7 update. Surprise:

Attachment 120609

Test with the latest and greatest web browsers

Opera 11.51, Firefox 7, Internet Explorer 9, and Chrome 14.

http://lifehacker.com/5844150/browse...rer-9-and-more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

I was doubtful too. So on another machine I just tried a fresh install of Opera 11.51 and disabled all the extensions on a FF7 update. Surprise:

---

Whats the surprise system resources are about the same until you start opening up more tabs?

http://i308.photobucket.com/albums/k...TJ/FFsucks.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

Whats the surprise system resources are about the same until you start opening up more tabs?

http://i308.photobucket.com/albums/k...TJ/FFsucks.png

---

I just tried it again. FF starts out with 9 megs less with only one or a few tabs. By 20 tabs it had passed opera by a few megs. The surprise is that opera is more bloated than expected, or that all this whining about FF taking up too much resources is unjustified. Take your pick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

I just tried it again. FF starts out with 9 megs less with only one or a few tabs. By 20 tabs it had passed opera by a few megs. The surprise is that opera is more bloated than expected, or that all this whining about FF taking up too much resources is unjustified. Take your pick.

---

I'm whining about Firefox not being stable. I never had a problem with system resources.

I don't know maybe its better now but I'm not going to find out since I'll never use firefox as my primary browser again.

I hate to derail the thread, but a recent update to Opera 11.51 has improved my memory usage by an incredible amount. I killed Opera (11.50) with memory usage at 2.3GB and later re-opened it, restoring the session. It first updated to 11.51 and then restored the session, topping out at... 446MB O.o Opera has now been run and abused for two days and memory usage has just passed 900MB (I often have four or five windows open, each with up to 100 tabs - hence the high usage).

I tested with Opera 11.51. The difference between Opera and FF7 was insignificant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

I'm whining about Firefox not being stable. I never had a problem with system resources.

I don't know maybe its better now but I'm not going to find out since I'll never use firefox as my primary browser again.

---

Even if all of your old complaints were fixed? Your loss. It is illogical to make a choice of browser based on facts that may not be true in current versions. I'd go with opera or chrome if they surpassed FF in the aspects that are important to me, but they don't so I'll simply check them out again later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Even if all of your old complaints were fixed? Your loss. It is illogical to make a choice of browser based on facts that may not be true in current versions. I'd go with opera or chrome if they surpassed FF in the aspects that are important to me, but they don't so I'll simply check them out again later.

---

Opera works just fine out of the box, and other than a couple of releases over the years has never caused me any issues. I can't say that about Firefox and I'm not about to check back every few months when there are other options out there. Firefox is way over rated.

Of course that's your prerogative. I can understand not wanting to change your browsing environment every few months. But I haven't had crashing problems in years. Refusing to look at competitive products EVER makes about as much sense as "I'm never buying from company X" even if the market situation changes completely.

http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/2...xmemory.th.jpg

Anyone mind explaining me exactly what is going on here?
Because to me, it looks like 1x firefox, with 1 tab, is eating up 850MB, please tell me what you see.... I use the version of which the topic is about, yes ;)

What plugins do you have installed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

http://img607.imageshack.us/img607/2...xmemory.th.jpg

Anyone mind explaining me exactly what is going on here?
Because to me, it looks like 1x firefox, with 1 tab, is eating up 850MB, please tell me what you see.... I use the version of which the topic is about, yes ;)

---

125 processes. what the f :p:

i have no answer for your ff's high memory footprint, but you should definately revise your processes :D even if i'm multitasking like a boss and using loads of programs, i never exceed 70-80 processes.
while doing every day work i'm only at 60 processes.

Just installed FF8. On this page with Xnews in a second tab FF8 is using 267mb plus 32mb for the plugin container. Only addons are adblock and firebug.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

What plugins do you have installed?

---

None

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaZz!

125 processes. what the f :p:

i have no answer for your ff's high memory footprint, but you should definately revise your processes :D even if i'm multitasking like a boss and using loads of programs, i never exceed 70-80 processes.
while doing every day work i'm only at 60 processes.

---

Check IKEA for furniture for 3 rooms (kitchen, bedroom,, living room), Internet options in a certain area, and then the other daily stuff, that is a relatively low count for me, I must admit 2x8GB will be USEFUL for my laptop ;)

EDIT; Each tab in chrome appears as a process.

The new Opera doesn't clear memory after closing tabs :/ This is with three tabs open after closing 137:

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r35/Oj10101/oops.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

None

---

Something is probably wrong with your install or config. You could try renaming or deleting your FF user profile directory to see if it's the old config somehow messing things up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

EDIT; Each tab in chrome appears as a process.

---

This is among the reasons that chrome is the most memory intensive of the current browsers. There really isn't any need for separate processes when separate threads would suffice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

Just installed FF8. On this page with Xnews in a second tab FF8 is using 267mb plus 32mb for the plugin container. Only addons are adblock and firebug.

---

Why 8 and not 9 or 10?

Been using the Aurora Channels for months now. I think I'm up to 9.0a2 and it just keeps getting better and better. Every release seems to become more stable, much quicker and sometimes they add nice features.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

Something is probably wrong with your install or config. You could try renaming or deleting your FF user profile directory to see if it's the old config somehow messing things up.

---

Nope, same on all my machines ;)
There was 7x hotmail tabs open before, closed 6, and waited for clearing mem, but only ~120MB was cleared, you can TWEAK FF, but OUT OF THE BOX, IT SUCKS for daily usage, it is souly optimized to do well in benches that are being performed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

This is among the reasons that chrome is the most memory intensive of the current browsers. There really isn't any need for separate processes when separate threads would suffice.

---

I think it is really nice, makes it so much easier to kill 1 instance when some site has a crappy popup with malware... Without loosing all the data that you have open in the browser...
*Sure, you can get ADD ON / EXTENSION to fix this easily.... But chrome is targeted, just like IE, to be a SOLID product FROM FRESH INSTALLED, not that like FF, that you have to waste alot of time, to customize - making the FF like you have it, takes longer time then doing a linux server..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaZz!

125 processes. what the f :p:

i have no answer for your ff's high memory footprint, but you should definately revise your processes :D even if i'm multitasking like a boss and using loads of programs, i never exceed 70-80 processes.
while doing every day work i'm only at 60 processes.

---

I think I've reached 200 before. I had the whole taskbar full on a 1080p screen. It just happens sometimes, when you run a game, a cad software, word, excel, calc, bunch of notepads (my way of placing notes so that i don't forget) and virtualbox, all at the same time.

I'm at 91 processes at the moment and that's pretty normal.

However, I can confidently say that after I upgraded from 4 GB RAM to 8 GB RAM, I got extra abusive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M.Beier

Nope, same on all my machines ;)
There was 7x hotmail tabs open before, closed 6, and waited for clearing mem, but only ~120MB was cleared, you can TWEAK FF, but OUT OF THE BOX, IT SUCKS for daily usage, it is souly optimized to do well in benches that are being performed.

---

I don't know what the issue is with your FF7. But in my own testing, the review I linked, and every other review I could find (these two: 1, 2) FF7 has less memory usage than Chrome and is about on par with Opera. I only passed what yours is using after opening 200 tabs.

Quote:

---

I think it is really nice, makes it so much easier to kill 1 instance when some site has a crappy popup with malware... Without loosing all the data that you have open in the browser...
*Sure, you can get ADD ON / EXTENSION to fix this easily.... But chrome is targeted, just like IE, to be a SOLID product FROM FRESH INSTALLED, not that like FF, that you have to waste alot of time, to customize - making the FF like you have it, takes longer time then doing a linux server..

---

I just have to LOL at this statement. Do you regularly have problems with crappy sites, malware, losing data, and popups? I don't. I run NoScript and Adblock and have session restore. I don't remember the last time a bad site caused me to lose data, but if I accidentally closed the window or something I can open it right back up and continue right from where I was. Popups? Malware? Your kidding, right?

And of course you can spend more time customizing FF. There is more about it that you can customize. But you don't HAVE to spend a lot of time doing it. I set my config back in FF3 and have hardly touched it since.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solus Corvus

I just have to LOL at this statement.

---

And this is exactly why it is pointless to have a discussion with you :)