Firefox 27.0

FF 27? Holy crab.

Why even bother with version numbers at this stage. What's the big features that warranted going from 26.x to 27? What revolutionary stuffs is in the pipe for 28, which will be arriving the week after next?
 
Firefox are just using full numbers now for each full release, not just for major feature set changes. Google have been doing the same thing with Chrome since forever, they just automatically update and don't bother with "releases" per se.

Has their Metro version gotten any better? As of a few months ago it was still quite buggy and unusable for most things I did.
 
May anyone please tell me, what is the memory footprint with a single or two tabs open with this latest release? Does it use lots of RAM?
 
The number of tabs don't matter as much these days, it's how long, and what, you've been browsing afaik.

Mine has been open for 14 hours and I have four tabs open and my memory usage is less than 400 MB. If I open two more, Salon and /., it goes up around 10 MB. Salon is a busy page though.

I'll post an update after I close 27.0 and just open one tab.

Edit/Update: 212 MB after just coming here and checking for new posts and then User CP to find my post. I open Salon up in another tab and it goes up to 258 MB. I should mention that I have Firefox set to delete everything after a session. Previously, when I opened up Salon it probably only went around 10 MB because the page was in my cache.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hovering around 260MB with B3D + another forum. *shrug* I've got 3 add-ons for download managing and pop-ups.
 
A smidgeon over 600MB here with 6 tabs open, including eBay, Amazon, Gmail, B3D and 2 other sites. For reference, I keep FF open pretty much all the time and suspend the laptop rather than powering off so I'd expect the memory usage to be pretty high.

FF 27 seems much better to me than 26 which was very buggy and a real memory hog at times.
 
I copied that in opera and got 72,024kb (working set)

Does Opera use any other processes?

Huh, I was reading an article just now and it inspired me to paste "about:memory" (without the quotation marks) in my address bar. I clicked on "Measure" and, wow, that was geeky!

A newer article: http://blog.mid.as/2013/11/13/best-web-browser-internet-explorer-11-firefox-25-opera-17-safari-5/

Maybe my plug-ins are memory hogs? I'll disable and see if there's a big difference.

Edit/Update: I should have said "add-ons" and by disabling the extensions for Adblock Plus and HTTPS-Everywhere I got start-up memory down to around 53 MB. I won't bother uninstalling Flash and Silverlight plug-ins, I left them active for this test. As I'm typing this Task Manager says I'm using about 86 MB of memory in Firefox.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FF 27? Holy crab.

Why even bother with version numbers at this stage. What's the big features that warranted going from 26.x to 27? What revolutionary stuffs is in the pipe for 28, which will be arriving the week after next?

The top "feature" is security updates, meaning versions 25 and 26 don't get any ; the security update is version n+1.
You can get Firefox ESR though, which does have security updates for a given version, you upgrade every 7 versions (i.e. Firefox 10 ESR, 17 ESR and 24 ESR)

Otherwise, if you're peeved by that sort of thing your only option is Internet Explorer. It is now "the" corporate/enterprise desktop for when everything needs to be certified and deployed after monthes of intensive tests. One nice thing to say would be the Windows admins absolutely need consistency in the browser's behavior and stability in the sense of stuff not randomly changing weekly ; lives, precious deadlines or the future of the company can be at stake. One nasty way to say it is they're afraid their crappy horribly written thrown together intranet apps will break at browser n+1 and they need to cover their ass.

Regarding Firefox, it's now the application layer of an operating system too (it's an oversimplification maybe)
 
be aware I use an old version of opera 12.15 as I dont like the new version
Really dangerous oftentimes to use old browsers these days. Like spinning the barrel and pulling the trigger. Usually there's just a click, and sometimes a bang...

Anyhow, what you peeps say about the new in-browser advertising system they're making for FF? I think it's good. Great, actually. Now I never need to consider installing/using FF ever again!
 
Opera SW is committed to still deliver security patches for branch 12. Being a low-market share browser anyway, risks are minimal i would say.

I'm struggling as well with newer Opera versions as well since they are re-skinned Chrome variants and I profoundly hate Chrome.
 
My Firefox process is using 2 GB RAM with 4 windows open and maybe 100 tabs open spread over the windows. Seems like I would benefit from an x64-version. :)
 
I once ran an x64 Firefox on my PC, with 3GB RAM and 2GB swap (that was from a live USB, swap was two partitions on two different hard drives). It was thus able to take over every system resource. (I have a bit of a tab hoarding problem but sometimes the sites are extremely heavy). Linux behaves "interestingly" when you run out of swap, I'll maybe call it "meta-swapping". The mouse cursor gets freezing but somehow it still works. Killing plugin-container is useful when you manage to do it.

So, Firefox 32bit is almost a feature. Note that 32bit Chromium is able to use all my memory and swap, and does it earlier.
My bro has a PC with crazy RAM, 32GB (a store once fucked up on pricing). He loads about a 100 tabs or two and then, Chrome is using 10GB memory.
 
Really dangerous oftentimes to use old browsers these days. Like spinning the barrel and pulling the trigger. Usually there's just a click, and sometimes a bang...

Anyhow, what you peeps say about the new in-browser advertising system they're making for FF? I think it's good. Great, actually. Now I never need to consider installing/using FF ever again!

There was already advertisment/branding : the bundled search engines.
The new "feature" is most certainly harmless, on the new-tab "speedial" you will have a few default picture links, in principle no javascript should be running. Then you either ignore the stuff until it's replaced by other pages, or delete them (it's one left-click on the top right of picture), or configure the "dial" away, or use an alternate build (iceweasel on linux, palemoon on windows), or..

It's still a bit evil, but on the other hand Chrome wants to trick you into getting a Google account. Yeah right, like I want to login to my browser.
 
Back
Top