Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.146.217.179

Forum Moderators: incrediBILL

Message Too Old, No Replies

Mozilla Claims Firefox Update Reduces Memory Use, For Faster Browsing

     
3:41 pm on Sep 29, 2011 (gmt 0)

Administrator from GB 

WebmasterWorld Administrator engine is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:May 9, 2000
posts:22305
votes: 239


Mozilla Claims Firefox Update Reduces Memory Use, For Faster Browsing [blog.mozilla.com]
Mozilla, a global, non-profit organization dedicated to making the Web better, today released an update to Firefox for Windows, Mac and Linux. Mozilla Firefox provides a speedy Web browsing experience for users and new tools to help developers create faster websites and Web apps.

Firefox manages memory more efficiently to deliver a nimble Web browsing experience. Users will notice Firefox is faster at opening new tabs, clicking on menu items and buttons on websites. Heavy Internet users will enjoy enhanced performance when lots of tabs are open and during long Web browsing sessions that last hours or even days.

1:36 pm on Sept 30, 2011 (gmt 0)

Administrator

WebmasterWorld Administrator coopster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:July 31, 2003
posts:12533
votes: 0


And I received an update alert to 7.01 today ... anybody else get this notification? I don't see it in the changelog yet but other users have been installing it ...
[mozilla.org...]
1:44 pm on Sept 30, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 11, 2004
posts:1062
votes: 0


I saw it, but then again, FF releases an updated version like that about every 7 days, it seems.
2:21 pm on Sept 30, 2011 (gmt 0)

Administrator from GB 

WebmasterWorld Administrator engine is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:May 9, 2000
posts:22305
votes: 239


Yes, it looks like FF 7.01 is the version available. [mozilla.org...]
6:15 pm on Sept 30, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member g1smd is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:July 3, 2002
posts:18903
votes: 0


Seamonkey 2.4 a couple of days ago, is now 2.4.1 already.

Still no support for Live HTTP Headers. Grrr.
8:59 am on Oct 1, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member piatkow is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 5, 2006
posts:3284
votes: 12


Just been prompted to update from 7.0
11:25 am on Oct 1, 2011 (gmt 0)

New User

joined:July 13, 2011
posts:36
votes: 0


Any review for FF 7.01 version?

I am considering myself into updating FF to 7.01 version. But some said that some add-ons are not yet working on this version.
1:39 pm on Oct 1, 2011 (gmt 0)

Administrator

WebmasterWorld Administrator coopster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:July 31, 2003
posts:12533
votes: 0


Still no support for Live HTTP Headers. Grrr.


No issues with any plugins that I use except PageSpeed. And I use Live HTTP Headers in FF 7.01 even though their documentation is not updated:


The version 0.17 is now available. It is compatible with Firefox 4.0 and Seamonkey 2.1.
[livehttpheaders.mozdev.org...]
4:59 pm on Oct 26, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:Apr 30, 2007
posts:1394
votes: 0


Mozilla Claims Firefox Update Reduces Memory Use, For Faster Browsing

You know, I will be grateful if they could properly release memory resources every time you close a tab or a window and recover memory some broken flash or js script just wasted. Right now it's inevitable that after a period of time you have to restart it
8:08 pm on Oct 28, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 29, 2005
posts:6148
votes: 282


I've never had FF crash on me, but I do things a bit differently (and for different reasons).

I close FF at least once every 24 hours. The cache is cleared at least once every 24 hours. I rarely run more than two tabs open at any time (largest number I've ever had open was 10). I run NoScript (so broken flash or js does not bother me). I run BetterPrivacy so that the few flash items I allow will remove the LSOs during FF shutdown. Always clear the download manager history EACH TIME I DOWNLOAD. Always run the latest version. And, as a result, never run into memory waste/hog. The computer is restarted (warm) Thursday and Sunday, and cold start on Tuesday, but otherwise runs 24/7/365, these are for security reasons in addition to making sure ALL my programs run clean. Computers these days are so quick, this does not take that much time out of my day.

Just observations that no program can stay up "forever". So why try? What works for me may not work for you, but some of these suggestions might solve some problems folks seem to experience.
10:00 pm on Oct 28, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from GB 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member dstiles is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:May 14, 2008
posts:3092
votes: 2


I run FF on Ubuntu with approx 7 windows totalling about 100 tabs. The only times I close it are FF updates or if Ubuntu requests a re-boot after an update (rare). Works reasonably well though slow first thing in the day because over-night Ubuntu runs a major backup operation, snaffling all the memory. M/C is not a high-spec one.

My wife runs FF on Windows 2000 (as I used to) with about a dozen tabs in a single window; sometimes two windows with another half-dozen tabs. Quite low-spec machine but she has no problems with FF and only reboots when new FF or something else upsets the OS - about every few weeks, say.

I must say I like this new form textarea-field re-sizing. It's simplified larger postings quite a bit, easier to see what I've written. :)
1:25 pm on Oct 29, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:Apr 30, 2007
posts:1394
votes: 0


I run NoScript (so broken flash or js does not bother me)

Yes, but you do set the exceptions for "some" sites you visit isn't it? Unless you want see comics and blank pages throughout surfing.

Since my last post in the thread, the FF mem allocation is up by another 200K. I have enough resources to handle it for a couple of more weeks I would think, although there is no warning when the browser is about to crash due to memory allocation problems.

And I don't only run FF. If I start another memory intense application I have to remember to check memory usage. Of course if I go into launching the task manager I don't go through the close/reopen the FF windows, but kill it instead so it auto-restarts where I left from.
12:59 am on Oct 30, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 29, 2005
posts:6148
votes: 282


Yes, but you do set the exceptions for "some" sites you visit isn't it? Unless you want see comics and blank pages throughout surfing.


Made me look at my exceptions list. 5 partial (just the domain, no thirds) and 1 with a SINGLE third party allowed. Don't seem to miss much. :)

Browser UPTIME in WEEKS?... (why?)
9:48 am on Oct 30, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

joined:Apr 30, 2007
posts:1394
votes: 0


Cuz the browser has way more usability and gradually replaces O/S operations and depends what you do. Just the number of sites/logons that I keep active I need 10-15 minutes (over time) to get back to where I was, after I restart it. And it's not the 2 vs 20 active tabs or windows open, that causes the memory problem, just one script is enough to waste the memory.

And as of the noscript is pretty good for casual surfing and does it's job. But if you set temporary exceptions you need to set them again following a restart. When you need to buy something online you gonna need to go over the same process few times with the temporary allow this and that, because of the various redirects to the gateways and noscript refreshes once you flip the active switch. Add to this another 2 extensions (cookies, requestpolicy that have similar options as noscript) and you get the picture of the number of clicks you need to do. It's much worse than rebooting the o/s.

So if FF could properly control memory allocation I would have to restart it only for its updates or for a system reboot.
7:18 pm on Oct 30, 2011 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 29, 2005
posts:6148
votes: 282


Perception is what it is... personally, I'd rather have the inconvenience of issuing a temp allow than deal with security issues later. And if it takes 10-15 minutes to get back to where you started, then that's what it takes, memory leaks or not. (Other things crash computers, too)