Firefox 7 released, scores well in performance tests

Firefox 7 is out, and the release has prompted the folks at Lifehacker to run some performance tests on the current crop of browsers. The latest version of Firefox is pitted against Chrome 14, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.51 in a battery of tests that probes everything from load times to memory usage. Somewhat surprisingly given its history, Firefox 7 has a smaller memory footprint than its competitors when multiple tabs are open.

That said, Firefox isn’t the fastest kid on the block. Opera launches faster than any of the other browsers, and it’s quicker to load a collection of nine tabs and crunch Lifehacker’s CSS tests. Be careful when reading Lifehacker’s graphs, though; the x-axis doesn’t always start at zero, giving the impression of larger gaps in performance. Firefox 7 is still the second-quickest browser overall.

I just installed Firefox 7, and the ugly font rendering of the last release seems to be somewhat improved. Whether the browser feels fast enough to tear me away from Chrome for the bulk of my web surfing remains to be seen, however.

Comments closed
    • mutarasector
    • 8 years ago

    After doing some testing on FF7, it does indeed appear that Mozilla has done a lot to squash memory leaks. FF7 seems to require a smaller memory footprint with multiple tabs open than its predecessors. I’ve been running it on a 10yr. old P4 system w/positively ancient PC133 memory for testing, and surprisingly, its noticeably faster loading even on that system.

    • Krogoth
    • 8 years ago

    I still don’t understand why people make such a big deal with internet browsers.

    They have become so homogenized that the only noticeable difference between the major players is the layout of their UI.

    It has been this way since 2005. One of the players pushes out a new feature and other just copy it on their next version. Rinse, rise and repeat.

    I swear, internet browser fanboys are among the most obnoxious technological based fans. They managed to beat the most rabid Nvidiots and AMDtards.

    The vast majority just use what is loaded with their system and be done with it.

      • A_Pickle
      • 8 years ago

      Eh, the rendering engine somewhat matters between broswers as well… but between that and UI, there’s little difference.

        • indeego
        • 8 years ago

        How can one claim there is no difference between IE and it’s lack of customizability and the other 3+ browsers that allow vastly more customizing via plug-ins/add-ons/etc?

        Or if you are a worker drone and your job function is to work with a web page that works in one browser but not the other three? We have no less than 4 critical LOB websites that do not work at all unless you use IE, and the fact of the matter is we need to make money, are we going to ditch that revenue because of lack of functionality?

        Internet browsers are CRITICAL, they shape the Internet (or at least the web) itself. We would not have the same web without Mozilla or Chrome or IE. It is ridiculous that someone would say browsers don’t matter, it’s like saying Office formats like PDF/A or DOCX don’t matter in the business world.

          • Krogoth
          • 8 years ago

          Blame your applications, on their lack of compatibility.

          I didn’t argue that browsers weren’t important, but rather they are becoming shadows of themselves.

          You can’t go wrong with any of the major players, unless you got an application coded specifically for a certain platform.

          Arguing over performance/rendering differences is just another epenis contest where only the fanboys get all worked up.

      • ShadowEyez
      • 8 years ago

      Even the UI’s are starting to merge. The difference is in the underlying engines and their advanced javascript/HTML 5/CSS techniques.

    • indeego
    • 8 years ago

    7.0.1 is out already. Nice one Mozilla!

    • Bensam123
    • 8 years ago

    Still rocking Opera since back when you had to pay for it. It’s sorta interesting how Chrome took off so fast and Firefox has been around as long as Opera, yet Opera never caught on. There never really has been anything wrong with it besides some web pages not being compatible, but that happens with other browsers too. It’s packed with quite a few features as well. I guess it’ll still remain the diamond for those of us that have found it.

    That said, I do have Chrome on my laptop and Firefox on my server for a good selection though.

    • odizzido
    • 8 years ago

    New memory management seems worse for me? I am sitting at a little over 700mb taken up with just seven tabs open over three windows.

    100mb per tab?….awful.

    • squeeb
    • 8 years ago

    FF is great, but I’ve transitioned to Chrome and am quite happy with it.

    • crose
    • 8 years ago

    Memory usage is a non-issue in modern computers with 4GB+ as long as it doesn’t leak memory. I would even like it if it uses a lot of RAM if that speeds things up.

      • PeterD
      • 8 years ago

      I thought 64K should be enough for everybody. 🙂

        • Rakhmaninov3
        • 8 years ago

        There’s no reason anybody will ever need more than 64K of ram!

      • adisor19
      • 8 years ago

      With over 35 tabs open, mt FF takes between 800 to 1000GB of RAM on my 4GB laptop. Without an SSD, this is actually quite a considerable burden when i happen to also lunch a VM in the background..

      Adi

      • Anonymous Coward
      • 8 years ago

      I’ve got 4GB on my work machine and its always swapping when I run FF6 along side a VM, a few instances of visual studio, an SQL admin client, maybe some office programs, random other crap. 4GB goes away in no time. Need to ask the boss for another 4GB.

        • PeterD
        • 8 years ago

        … and, of course, the christmas tree.

      • odizzido
      • 8 years ago

      I have 8 gigs of ram and I have run out :\ It’s an issue for me

    • esgreat
    • 8 years ago

    I use Firefox. However I actually like the browsing experience in Chrome/Opera. The only that that’s stopping me is the lack of native “Zoom text only” feature. I wonder why nobody wants to implement it.

      • LoneWolf15
      • 8 years ago

      I continue to be torn between FF and Chrome.

      I hate Chrome’s install procedures, which fly in the face of best practices. The main installation residesin the user profile not Program Files, unless you download the enterprise .msi, and it doesn’t require administrator privileges to install, which causes the sysadmin in me to be frustrated. There are a few odd, quirky bugs that I think need work as well.

      On the other hand, Chrome has the best print preview feature of any browser out there. Pages render quickly. There is a working beta of Adblock Plus, which I wouldn’t regularly use a browser without. Chrome handles PDFs and a lot of rich media content well, and has behaved stably for me.

      I still like Firefox a lot, but I think it’s really losing ground to Chrome, and that Mozilla really needs to get on its toes. I am still pained by the lack of good development of an enterprise version of Firefox, with a possible central management option. It would be a huge boost for them if they put some time into it, IMO.

    • dashbarron
    • 8 years ago

    I have 100-250 tabs open at any one time with FF 6. The longer it runs the more memory it eats from my system, and lately I’ve had to restart it just to gain back half the memory. I’m not sure if Windows’ funky cacheing system has anything to do with it but it noticeably lags down my system where before I never had issues.

    I’m not blind to the elephant in the room either.

      • Mourmain
      • 8 years ago

      Dude!… 100-250?…. Duuude.

      That is just not healthy. How can you even find a tab when you have that many? You should really try to get that handled.

        • RtFusion
        • 8 years ago

        I’ve had over 100 tabs open in Chrome before, not a big surprise to me.

      • bthylafh
      • 8 years ago

      If you’ve got that many tabs open at once, the fact you’re running out of memory isn’t Firefox’s fault.

      I don’t know what the real fix for your workflow is here, but sheesh. Bookmark what you’re not going to read right away and close those tabs until later.

      • PeterD
      • 8 years ago

      100-250 tabs??????
      You must be an addict.

      • adisor19
      • 8 years ago

      I bow before thee. I thought i was pretty hard core with 35+ tabs open.. guess i was wrong.

      Adi

      • squeeb
      • 8 years ago

      Def not healthy, but I’m sure there are support groups.

    • crazybus
    • 8 years ago

    Is GDI fallback rendering for small pt size Arial,Consolas,Courier New,Microsoft Sans Serif,Segoe UI,Tahoma,Trebuchet MS,Verdana working for other people?

    I haven’t played around too much but Verdana still looks extra bold vs. GDI.

    • flip-mode
    • 8 years ago

    The comment count that is guaranteed to accompany every browser news post always amazes me.

    As soon as everyone realizes that Chrome is the way, the truth, and the light, we can stop having all of these silly comments. [spoiler<]sarcasm[/spoiler<]

      • kvndoom
      • 8 years ago

      It pales in comparison to any article about Apple.

        • PeterD
        • 8 years ago

        By the way, where can I find an article about Apple around here? I like a good rant from time to time.

    • ronch
    • 8 years ago

    I use Opera, but when I upgraded to version 11.50, the bar which says ‘File’, etc. looked broken. Installing 11.50 directly after fresh reformat didn’t solve it, so I’m back to using Opera 11.10, a pity since later versions could be faster and contain bug or security fixes. Running Win7 64-bit. Anyone else had this?

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      what bar that says ‘file’? the opera bar?

        • ronch
        • 8 years ago

        The Menu Bar. I use it in earlier versions, but in 11.50 it doesn’t look quite right.

      • ShadowTiger
      • 8 years ago

      I’m running 11.50, and i have the “menu bar” turned off. However, when I turn it back on, it works fine… Vista 64-bit.

    • Welch
    • 8 years ago

    Im a google fan and still can’t wrap my head around Google Chrome’s following… just plain don’t like the layout.

    Opera, although I love the “Speed Dial” like feature the browser always felt faster but didn’t render some things for me. I’ve been trying to use the mobile version on my Motorola Atrix and it will sometimes act like it loads a page but instead it just refreshes the current one. I have to send the new page request again, sometimes up to 3 or 4 times…. not cool. Plus streaming videos on it was horrible.

    Firefox has been my browser of choice since the early Beta releases of it. The tabbing (which I recall them either being the first or one of them to do it) the downloads management kicks the hell out of the little small tab that pops up on Chrome. Its plenty fast enough, never have to complain about load times of pages or the browser… it just freaking works. The mobile version on the other hand of FF was completely useless, more so than the Opera mobile.

    IE9 – Don’t get me started… I liked the idea of 9 when it came out, things were much faster but then suddenly when loading pages like a samsung security system portal, the video refused to play even after the download of the plugins. Firefox in comparison didn’t even require a download and just worked, on multiple computers. Also noted that about 3 other functions of websites on IE9 failed where they worked on IE8

    Fun fact about Firefox though… and this was explained to me yesterday (I believe before the 7.0 FF release)… The military used to allow Firefox on their networks. Due to the updates being so fast Firefox has been removed from the military’s accepted software list. This is because any “Full Version” release has to go through heavy scrutiny before being accepted, and then any subsequent updates to that same main version number (Example: 4.01 to 4.05) is allowed by default. Since Mozilla has updated from 4-7 so fast they can’t keep up :|. Interesting fact I thought.

      • indeego
      • 8 years ago

      Makes absolute sense.

      It also is a wake-up call not to develop websites (internal or external) out of spec because the online world moves too fast. The browsers of today might not be ready for the security threats of tomorrow, supported or not. Look at IE6, it is insecure according to most security researchers even though Microsoft “supports” it.

        • axeman
        • 8 years ago

        Yeah, but the culture of keeping old crap around forever runs deep. If we spent x dollars on this, we should never have to pay anymore to fix or replace it, because it was expensive dontcha know? Doesn’t matter that it was half assed from day one, and will never quite work right, but it’s an INVESTMENT DAMMIT! Sure it opens you up to a bunch of security problems, but that’s never cost anyone anything.

      • atryus28
      • 8 years ago

      Many large companies are dumping or warning that they will dump FF if they keep this stupid strategy up. The company I work for (quite large) and many others had a conference call with FF reps warning them that we (and the others) would be dropping support for them if they stay on this fast track system. FF is about to be stuck strictly at the home user level and market share will drop quite a bit for them.

        • Farting Bob
        • 8 years ago

        Itsa amazing how dumb people act when you change the version numbering scheme. Seriously, if they called versions 5, 6 and 7 along the lines of 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 then nobody would bitch, even though the code is exactly the bloody same. Businesses like yours are used to the way things used to be, slow moving and with years of notification. Now that browser development is moving at pace some people are getting angry because thats just not how it was done back in the day!

          • axeman
          • 8 years ago

          Yep, where I work, they’re insisting on staying at 3.6 because the two applications we actually need it for might break, oh noes! No one seems concerned Mozilla hasn’t really said how long they’ll keep issuing security fixes for the 3.6 branch. Oracle hasn’t “certified” some application server against Firefox 4.0+ yet! The horror! At the rate they work, they’ll never be able to certify against any browser ever again, because by the time they do, the browser will be outdated by security patches. Nevermind we could test something for ourselves, but no… We can support obsolete stuff because they’re too cheap, but we can’t support newer stuff because it’s “not supported by the vendor”. Neither is half the other shit we have from 1993, either? WTF? The fact that the Firefox versions keep changing is making their head explode, even though the changes are far fewer than say, IE6 to IE8, and somehow they’re okay with that. What was this about?

          TLDR; Opera is still for weiners.

            • Wirko
            • 8 years ago

            Oracle! Who cares about them! They may have thousands of developers but they only managed to advance the database version counter from 7 to 11 in … like fifteen years! They will be out of business as soon as Firefox catches up with them – at version 12, in a year or so.

          • faramir
          • 8 years ago

          So why not call them 4.x ?

          Certain extensions stopped working simply due to version number change.

      • StuffMaster
      • 8 years ago

      I think Opera might’ve been first with tabbing. Mozilla followed suit, long before Firefox ever came out though.

        • bthylafh
        • 8 years ago

        Opera was first, yes.

        It also used to have a multiple-document interface, meaning that you’d have the main Opera window and inside that you’d have multiple windows each showing a web page. It was very Windows 3.1. This was back in the Opera 3.x days, and I believe tabs started with v4.

        • axeman
        • 8 years ago

        Yeah, but until Mozilla became a real contender, Opera’s free version was adware. Never forget. Never forgive. Never trust anyone, especially the Dutch.

          • l33t-g4m3r
          • 8 years ago

          Opera had to fund themselves somehow. I don’t blame them, since you had the option to purchase the product without ads.

          • bthylafh
          • 8 years ago

          Programmers have to eat.

          I bought Opera twice, maybe three times (starting with version 3.2 for Win95), before Mozilla became good enough. It was /that much better/ than Netscape 4 and IE 3-6.

          PS: Opera are Norwegian.

            • destroy.all.monsters
            • 8 years ago

            NORWAY THE COUNTRY OF EVIL.

            Or at least Black Metal.

      • travbrad
      • 8 years ago

      [i<]Chrome is like totally faster IE is for newbs Firefox haz extensions Opera is for the cool kids[/i<] Someone was going to say all these things, might as well get it out of the way. 🙂

      • destroy.all.monsters
      • 8 years ago

      I like Chrome because you can kill (or it will kill) processes without taking the whole browser down. I tend to have a ridiculous number of tabs open and Firefox has major memory leaks. It’s also faster.

      With notscripts, adblock and/or iron’s adblock.ini it’s about as good privacy wise as Firefox (at least provided you’re using SRWare’s Iron and not Google’s phone home browser).

    • Chrispy_
    • 8 years ago

    Nobody is being fooled; Firefox 7 is [i<]in fact[/i<] Firefox 4.3 Firefox 3 had a 3-year lifespan Firefox 4 was realeased 6 months ago and we've had a new version every couple of months These are just security point releases being rebadged as completely new versions just to soak up some free attention from the media.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 8 years ago

      Sure, but to be fair the new versions have been breaking a lot more extensions than point releases. :p

      • Farting Bob
      • 8 years ago

      Lack of cosmetic changes doesnt mean alot isnt going on under the hood.
      Anyway, why do you care about version numbering? 7 or 4.3, both are exactly the same.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 8 years ago

        It breaks extensions faster.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 8 years ago

      It’s just a number. It’s all relative anyway.

        • axeman
        • 8 years ago

        Blame Chrome and Opera I think, they had to find a way to jump up the version numbers so as to not look outdated. But seriously, in help..about.. it tells you what update channel you’re on? Seriously, they have to exactly copy even Chrome’s lingo?

          • Antimatter
          • 8 years ago

          Opera uses a new version number every 12 months or so. Chrome’s been out for 3 years and they’re on version 14.

      • axeman
      • 8 years ago

      These guys are not to be trusted. First they give me 3.3 branded as 3.6, now 4.3 branded as 7.0? I don’t know what’s real any more.

    • Sam125
    • 8 years ago

    I’m glad I switched from FF4 to Opera starting at 11. Aside from a few webpage hiccups, it’s been smooth sailing and it’s amazing how so many ideas that were first implemented in Opera are copied by Firefox and Chrome.

      • PeterD
      • 8 years ago

      The problem is that Opera lacks a quality approach. Lots of good ideas, but lots of things don’t work very well in Opera. I never liked the way they treat RSS, for instance.

        • Bensam123
        • 8 years ago

        I’ve never seen any quality issues in Opera besides websites sometimes not being compatible and you have to load it in IE… It’s always had a very clean interface that was very well thought out and still remained unique from other web browser even though FF/IE are closing in on Chrome and they’re all sorta mutating into exactly the same thing.

          • indeego
          • 8 years ago

          – The extensions system is a mess.

          – Preference system is a mess. Preferences are powerful but there is no rhyme or reason to its layout. I just wanted four of the same tabs to load every startup, I shouldn’t have to go into the help system and forums to do something so simple.

          – It doesn’t follow proper Windows Profile guidelines (or didn’t in the past, not sure about lately).

          – It is very “new user” unfriendly. I would guess this is why it never caught on. Novice through most advanced users on first use get overloaded with information using this browser. There is such a thing as “doing too much,” when people just want to [i<]browse the web.[/i<] As I've mentioned, I did like the speed of the browser, but it took me too long to get it to look and act the way I require.

            • Bensam123
            • 8 years ago

            The first option in the preferences is how you want it to start up… I don’t think the preferences are any more confusing then FFs.

            Opera is very powerful, but when you first install it, it looks almost identical to Chrome unless you start opening up those additional features. When was the last time you used Opera?

            • indeego
            • 8 years ago

            About a year ago. IIRC the only way to start the browser was to use “tab sessions” (wtf is that) and set a Tab session as my startup. I don’t think there was a way to Alt+Home shortcut to bring it back up either. There was an annoying sidebar on the left. The help system was zero help.

            When I looked for info on using a certain blocking technique we’re not allowed to discuss here, there were no modern instructions and there were silly .ini files to edit to get it to work. There was no auto-update functionality from easylist like FF/Chrome.

            I just attempted to download it right now and it peaked at 34 KB/sec, meaning a ~5 minute download. I have literally not seen those speeds since dialup. I’m on a 100/100 fiber line, so color me still quite unimpressed.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            what?!?! content blocking is stupid easy. right click, and go to content blocking. the click what you never want to see again, and click done. it’s simple. it’s been that way for 2+ years.

    • format_C
    • 8 years ago

    11secs for a cold start of IE9? On what prehistoric setup?!

      • indeego
      • 8 years ago

      My IE9 is instant. As in, I click it and it has loaded the homepage before I have moved my mouse away from the icon. Firefox is about a second to load the interface and another 3 to load all tabs.

      Lifehacker should at least publish the specs of the machine. It is readily apparent they aren’t using a SSD.

        • codedivine
        • 8 years ago

        Removed.

          • cheesyking
          • 8 years ago

          It does sound a bit dodgy but is it also possible you’re seeing the effects of supafetch / having IE already in your file cache / something like that?

        • yogibbear
        • 8 years ago

        I don’t have an SSD and my PC is 4 yrs old and both HDD’s are practically full (2 x 1TB WD caviar blacks) and IE loads in < 1.2 secs

        • Stargazer
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]Lifehacker should at least publish the specs of the machine. It is readily apparent they aren't using a SSD.[/quote<] It's not very detailed, but according to their "How we test" page (linked from the article), they're using "a more powerful desktop machine, with an i7 processor overclocked to 3.8 GHz and 6GB of RAM.".

      • oMa
      • 8 years ago

      COLD start. IE9 is allways preloaded in vista/w7. (prefetch/superfetch)

    • raddude9
    • 8 years ago

    I’m still waiting for the:
    “When I were a lad we only got one Firefox point release a year…. if we were lucky”
    comment.

      • PeterD
      • 8 years ago

      Ok than, here you go:

      When I were a lad we only got one Firefox point release a year…. if we were lucky.
      It didn’t mean we were unhappy, you know.

        • PeterD
        • 8 years ago

        Well, that was fast -1…

          • Meadows
          • 8 years ago

          Courtesy of yours truly, because you made a grammar error with “than”.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 8 years ago

            You could have just offered a correction instead of abusing the voting system.

            • Peldor
            • 8 years ago

            The voting system likes it rough.

            • axeman
            • 8 years ago

            I like it when the voting system abuses me.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 8 years ago

            I could easily downvote every post on this thread if I wanted, since there is nothing stopping me, aside from my own conscience. Do we really need such a system? Some people might find it fun, or be indifferent, while others find it annoying. I find it all of the above. Voting is stupid and irrelevant until some sort of limitation is instated.

            • lycium
            • 8 years ago

            should i call the waaambulance?

            • lilbuddhaman
            • 8 years ago

            Minuses for everyone in this thread.

            • NeelyCam
            • 8 years ago

            Pluses for everyone in this thread.

            • dpaus
            • 8 years ago

            [sulk]I thought my post was quite witty, and I didn’t get a plus….[/sulk]

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            I gave you one! <3

            • dpaus
            • 8 years ago

            Ah, you’re over the helicopter joke! Thanks 🙂

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            what helicopter joke? what story was that one?

            • dpaus
            • 8 years ago

            I you didn’t see it, uhhhhh….. Never mind 🙂

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            nope.. link me! were you bad!?

            • dpaus
            • 8 years ago

            Well, not… bad, just…. um….

            Never mind – go check the comments in the ‘Asus teases October 11 ultrabook launch’ thread

            • NeelyCam
            • 8 years ago

            Don’t tell him where it is..! Let him sweat a bit

            • NeelyCam
            • 8 years ago

            FYI – West Coast Choppers aren’t that well known for their avionics.

            • PeterD
            • 8 years ago

            Sorry, I’ll give you one.

            • NeelyCam
            • 8 years ago

            So you’re sulking because of that? Check out how I got -1 for “Pluses for everyone” but buddha got no minuses for “Minuses for everyone”.

            Equality? I think not.

            • PeterD
            • 8 years ago

            The advantage of the voting system is, that it saves you the trouble of writing a comment saying that you like a comment – or that you don’t like it.

      • dpaus
      • 8 years ago

      “A Firefox release every year?!? Luxury!! Why, we had to live in an old IE6 box, boot up at 4am every morning just to clear the cache, and then struggle for 20 hours straight just to get cascading style sheets to load. And when we were done, we had to manually clear out the browsing history and then change our password before our dear old Dad beat us all with a memory stick for revealing our credentials on-line. We’d have killed to have a copy of Firefox!”

        • BearThing
        • 8 years ago

        At least you had IE6. We had to boot into DOS at twelve o’clock at night just to reconfigure our AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files, copy WordStar docs onto 5 1/4″ floppies to make room on our 40MB MFM hard drive, then connect to the local Junior College BBS with our 2400bps modem to download the file list. Then we’d fetch Doom .WADs for 29 hours until dear old dad got home and put us to sleep by soldering discrete 256K RAM chips on our heads.

          • bthylafh
          • 8 years ago

          Luxury.

          We used to /dream/ of having hard drives and modems.

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            dream all you want. in my day, dreaming wasn’t allowed until you finished your 16 hour shift on the factory floor. at that point, hard drives weren’t on your mind, it was a break from the lashings, and a chance to eat.

            • PeterD
            • 8 years ago

            Okay, where’s that guy who used stones and silex tools when you need him?

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 8 years ago

            Awesome.

            • anubis44
            • 8 years ago

            Right.

            We used to have to configure punch cards on a PDP-8 at 10pm, half an hour before we went to work at Silicon Valley, drink a cup of sulfuric acid for breakfast, pay for permission to sort the out-of-order operands and configure a second register, program in FORTRAN for 6 pence for 74 years, and when we got home, our mum and our dad would electrocute us with an unshielded transformer and dance about on our graves singing hallelujah.

            And you try and tell the young people of today that, and they WON’T BELIEVE YOU! They WON’T!!

            ———-
            I wonder how many out there got the whole Monty Python 4 Yorkshiremen skit component of this…

          • PeterD
          • 8 years ago

          DOS? I had to use a mechanical typewriter.

            • Anonymous Coward
            • 8 years ago

            Perhaps you executed the binaries with pencil and paper.

            • anubis44
            • 8 years ago

            Mechanical typewriter! Hell, at least you had an alpha-numeric keyboard. I had to program a Charles Babbage difference engine manually without a keyboard!

    • glacius555
    • 8 years ago

    Memory footprint is till rubbish, Firefox 3 was so much better, before it all went downhill..

      • raddude9
      • 8 years ago

      you did look at the link yea?
      So if you think that having a better memory footprint than all the other browsers (although on a par with Opera) is still “Rubbish”, what do you think about the other browsers?

        • stdRaichu
        • 8 years ago

        I’ve been using the 7.0 betas for the last couple of months, and whilst the memory usage is generally lower, it still has a nasty habit of chewing a metric arseload of MB’s if you leave it running for more than a few days. So I now have to restart it every 4 days instead of every 2…

        Still using opera as my main browser, just can’t use it at work cos it doesn’t play ball with the proxy.

          • GTVic
          • 8 years ago

          I don’t know any application, much less all of Windows that performs well when you leave it running for days. They all have bugs and restarting most applications on a daily basis at least is SOP for getting the most out of your computer.

            • stdRaichu
            • 8 years ago

            Every other program that I run for days at a time (including opera, which is open all the time between reboots so it’s effectively running for weeks or months at a time on windows/linux machines) doesn’t have a problem with it, it’s only firefox. Restarting applications every few hours went out of the window with 9x.

        • glacius555
        • 8 years ago

        First, a bit about other browsers:

        If R&D was only about being marginally better than competition, I don’t think the word progress would have it’s current meaning. Although this should be more than ironic, coming from someone who works in pharma industry.

        I don’t care about other browsers, or even this one for that matter, I simply choose what gets the job done.

        I typically have 40-50 tabs open at the same time, and usually same websites too. Firefox 6 and 7 use app. 600 MB or more memory, which is still fine for so many tabs, I guess.

        But consider this, I still haven’t upgraded from Firefox 3 on my other machine, on purpose, and I’ve NEVER seen it use more than 400 MB.

        But then again, given that I still have a lot of free memory and RAM is as cheap as sand in Sahara, my complaint may be a negligible one.

        Still, “we’re working hard on memory footprint, the optimizations will be in Firefox 7” should not be just a statement..

      • JMccovery
      • 8 years ago

      For me, while leaving FF open with multiple (20+) tabs causes memory usage to hit 300-400MBs, it is the Flash Player plugin that still causes memory usage to skyrocket up to 3GBs! (Imagine having more than 600MB out of 2GB system memory used by Flash alone… I am so glad that I now have 8GB of ram…)

        • glacius555
        • 8 years ago

        I usually kill the flash plugin, it then restarts and uses less memory..

    • bthylafh
    • 8 years ago

    The download link goes to the UK-English build; this might be a slight problem since I assume most of TR’s readership is American.

      • Steel
      • 8 years ago

      Yeah, he got me with that one. Guess I should know better to go to the main page before downloading.

      • Meadows
      • 8 years ago

      Yeah, they’ll [b<][i<]never[/i<][/b<] be able to read our language.

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        WHAT? YOU’RE BRITISH?!?!?!

      • Dissonance
      • 8 years ago

      Must be my Canadian IP. Then again, that British download link is associated with [url<]http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/new/,[/url<] which I would have assumed was the US English site.

    • sweatshopking
    • 8 years ago

    good ol opera…
    waiting for the peeps to say “chrome is faster!” or “firefox is better cause it’s open!!”

      • LaChupacabra
      • 8 years ago

      I have been using Opera for a 6 or 7 years. It’s always been very stable and great with memory management. Everyone should at least give it a shot to see how good it really is.

      • indeego
      • 8 years ago

      Firefox is better because it has better extensions (i.e. browse the web the way you want) than any browser.

        • OneArmedScissor
        • 8 years ago

        My dad could beat up your dad!

          • indeego
          • 8 years ago

          Almost certainly. I might even encourage it.

        • no51
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]Firefox is better because it has better extensions (i.e. browse the web the way you want) than any browser.[/quote<] But Opera already does that for me [i<]without[/i<] extensions. My only gripe with it is with tab grouping. I want middle clicked links to open next to the active tab, and I want ctrl-t tabs to open at the end at the end of the tab list. As far as I know only chrome and ie does this, and ie9 does it better.

          • stdRaichu
          • 8 years ago

          What you want is “open new tab next to active”, no? IIRC it’s been in there since the 9.x series.

          [url<]http://help.opera.com/Linux/11.00/en/tabs.html[/url<]

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 8 years ago

            It sounds like he wants different behavior based on if he uses his mouse or keyboard.

            • no51
            • 8 years ago

            Not necessarily. I use mouse gestures heavily and right hold + drag down opens a new tab.

            • no51
            • 8 years ago

            I know of this, but this opens EVERY tab next to active AFAIK. I want clicked links to open next to active window and new tabs to open at the end of the tab list (or to the far right).

          • indeego
          • 8 years ago

          Opera does not and never has had the functionality of noscript or greasemonkey or ****ock without serious effort on the part of the user.

          Note that I really liked Opera and Chrome’s speed, but I couldn’t get 100% of the features I need out of a browser from either.

          **** – [sub<]get your mind out of the gutter.[/sub<]

            • no51
            • 8 years ago

            Allow me to reiterate:
            [quote<][quote<]Firefox is better because it has better extensions (i.e. [b<]browse the web the way you want[/b<]) than any browser.[/quote<] But Opera already does that for [b<]me[/b<] [i<]without[/i<] extensions. [/quote<] What works for you does not necessarily work for me. This would be an example of "another person's features are another person's bloat."

            • sweatshopking
            • 8 years ago

            I would agree, except it would point out that opera comes first in most of the tests, so if that’s bloat, what exactly is making the other browsers so much slower?

          • Stargazer
          • 8 years ago

          [quote<]I want middle clicked links to open next to the active tab, and I want ctrl-t tabs to open at the end at the end of the tab list. As far as I know only chrome and ie does this, and ie9 does it better.[/quote<] This is the default behavior of Firefox. Personally this behavior bugs me, so I have to manually disable it on new installs. If it's not enabled on your system, you can open about:config and set browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent to True (or right-click it and choose Reset). Typing a few letters of the name into the Filter box on the about:config page should make it easy to find.

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 8 years ago

      I like opera because it’s fast, but compatibility and stability are lacking compared to the other browsers. Firefox would be my favorite if it would improve it’s speed. I’ll have to try out this new version.

      • bhassel
      • 8 years ago

      But Firefox [i<]is[/i<] better because it is open 🙂

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This