Firefox 9 (Aurora) With Type Inference Now for Download

[Guest]

Mozilla has just released the developer version of Firefox 9, which will include a boost for JavaScript performance.

Firefox 9 (Aurora) With Type Inference Now for Download : Read more

 

[acadia11]

They need to focus a release on cleaning up it's memory footprint, firefox has become a freaking hog.

 

[cmadrid]

I think that was Firefox 7..

 

[borden5]

firefox developers on crack .....

 

[evilaaron11]

why all the hate towards firefox? you see a positive headline and everyone's quick to chastise FF developers. Firefox is twice the browser Chrome will ever be.

 

[Zeh]

There's too much downtime on my plugins with so many upgrades.
I still prefer Firefox over Chrome, but I admit I'm frequently using both at the same time.

 

[Guest]

I have to admit, I don't like this new version numbering system. I suspect that development of all mozilla apps have't changed regardless of the numbering system. Before, I knew exactly, that f.e. thunderbird 3xx was a stable version, and 3.1.x was sth to expect in the future. Am I minority at it?

Was it simple politics behind that change? If it is only to imitate "rapid developement" of chrome, then well...

 

[cmadrid]

I guess you haven't used 7 then.. it uses the least memory for multiple tabs

 

[Guest]

^^I'm using around 15 tabs and it use less then 500 mb ram.

 

[MasterMace]

acadia, you should check Tom's Browser Grand Prix. Firefox won the memory show down, by a friggin lot.

Not sure if this image goes through, here's the link to the site.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/firefox-7-web-browser,3037-14.html

40 tab usage (mb):
Firefox - 475
Safari - 730
Opera - 853
Chrome - 1,057
IE - 1,375

 

[MasterMace]

The only complaint I can see about firefox is how long it holds onto the memory it uses.

 

[billybobser]

number system go against any common sense whatsoever.

It's the kind employed by a child just learning about version numbers.

How are you supposed to tell compatibility between versions?

3.1-3.2 would infer some compatibility and UI stability. 3.1-4.0 would infer a large change (ui+compatibility issues)

Now it's a new version every bugfix.

 

[xenol]

[citation][nom]MasterMace[/nom]acadia, you should check Tom's Browser Grand Prix. Firefox won the memory show down, by a friggin lot.[/citation]

Except it plays third place when releasing its memory back to the OS. And in my case, it doesn't really do that. But I might have my undo close tab thing to blame.

 

[Usersname]

I'll stick with Safari... Still the most stable and feature rich without overkill.

 

[kaisellgren]

[citation][nom]cmadrid[/nom]I think that was Firefox 7..[/citation]
Nope. Firefox 7 improved memory handling, introduced Azure graphics API for faster rendering, and contained general performance improvements (more like bug fixes causing performance issues).

Firefox 9, however, introduces Type Inference. It's a program that is a combination of static and dynamic analysis of code. It tries to find out, cleverly, what type some stack slots, arguments and local variables are for certain and then it can safely skip some things like boxing (afaik).

 

[cookoy]

i'm satisfied with FF7 speed right now for my browsing needs. So i'll wait till Dec 20 when FF9 is officially released. In the meantime they can improve it and fix all the bugs. People who open 40 tabs and complain about memory usage are nuts.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]MasterMace[/nom]acadia, you should check Tom's Browser Grand Prix. Firefox won the memory show down, by a friggin lot.Not sure if this image goes through, here's the link to the site.http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 37-14.html40 tab usage (mb):Firefox - 475Safari - 730Opera - 853Chrome - 1,057IE - 1,375[/citation]
Does the same test show memory use for 3 or 4 tabs open, seeing as 40 tabs open simultaniously is not an accurate reflection of actual customer use?

How many times have you ever had 40 tabs open at once?

Answer number 1 - NEVER
Answer number 2 - With 12Gb of RAM on my system I can stand the memory usage

 

[Guest]

add booleans which you need to about:config,

and all of your extensions will come alive (restart to activate) 1 sec later.

extensions.checkCompatibility.6.0
extensions.checkCompatibility.7.0
extensions.checkCompatibility.8.0
extensions.checkCompatibility.9.0

 

[gavjof]

How many times have you ever had 40 tabs open at once?

Quite a lot actually. Thanks to Session Manager and Panorama I keep open a great deal of tabs until I've read them, or followed up on them.
One such example: if I'm going to buy anything online I do a massive amount of research first. This includes comparison sites, reviews, benchmarks and competitor brands - all this sits nicely in it's own tab group in FF7 and remains quick snappy on my 4+ year old dual core. FF6 had some issues but I'm pleased with #7

 

[Mike-TH]

I hate the new numbering system, and I hate not being able to disable addon version checking - the addons work perfectly well, but FF refuses to let them do so. The addon devs would have to edit their addons every week or two at the rate FF is increasing it's version numbers.

Someone high up in FF needs to be fired.

 

[cmadrid]

I should have 'replied' to the guy above my initial post.. I was responding to him saying they need to improve memory useage

[citation][nom]kaisellgren[/nom]Nope. Firefox 7 improved memory handling, introduced Azure graphics API for faster rendering, and contained general performance improvements (more like bug fixes causing performance issues).Firefox 9, however, introduces Type Inference. It's a program that is a combination of static and dynamic analysis of code. It tries to find out, cleverly, what type some stack slots, arguments and local variables are for certain and then it can safely skip some things like boxing (afaik).[/citation]

 

[cmadrid]

The new version numbering system is pretty silly.. they should just come out with Firefox 9000 so they have the biggest number for sure!

 

[caveman22]

[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]They need to focus a release on cleaning up it's memory footprint, firefox has become a freaking hog.[/citation]

I'm running 25 tabs across 2 windows and using just over 600k.

Don't know what you're talking about.

 

[apple_120]

The new firefox numbering scheme helps reduce browser tracking (fingerprinting) and so is a good thing.

As far as the actual numbers themselves, the quality of the browser has nothing to do with numbers. Get over it. Firefox has always released new updates every 6 weeks, it just now the include features as well as security updates. The new numbering scheme just shows that no particular release is more or less significant than any other.

@back_by_demand: If you only go to facebook then yeah, you dont need more tabs. But some of use use our browser simultaneously for work/school/relaxation/information/news/research and so on. Quite a number of people I know have 70+ tabs at any one time. Compared to firefox, chrome is a toy browser. It simply cannot handle heavy work loads.

@mike-th: get the addon "Add-on Compatibility Reporter" as it will check of your addons are truly incompatible. Most are compatible but are marked as not. This functionality will be included with firefox 9 and so will no longer be a problem by the end of the year. =)

 

[chrisg683]

[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]They need to focus a release on cleaning up it's memory footprint, firefox has become a freaking hog.[/citation]

Have you even tried FF7 or later, or even looked at the Tom's browser roundup? FF kicked some serious butt in the Memory category.