Firefox 9 (Aurora) With Type Inference Now for Download

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm happy with Chrome and the fact that its backed by a multi-billion dollar company that knows what their customers want.

Mozilla was nice back when IE, safari (lol), and Opera were the other alternatives.

IMHO IE 9 is superior to FF. Most companies(especially foreign sites) are built for the use of IE.. for example every try to open a korean game site with a browser other than IE? have fun with that.
 
I found Tom's browser test a bit fail, so FF7 "winning" is a bit meaningless. See a better browser test here: http://lifehacker.com/5844150/browser-speed-tests-firefox-7-%20%20hrome-14-internet-explorer-9-and-more

Some browsers retain memory after closing tabs for a reason (cache, allows rapid reopening of closed or previously used tabs) so that specific bunch of memory tests Tom's did are meaningless.

Browsers like Chrome and Firefox are constantly improving their javascript and page load times, but ~95% of the time browsers perform those tasks instantly. The real question perhaps should be this: How responsive is FF9's UI? Does it remain as snappish as Opera, for example, if both have 20 tabs open, for a time period longer than an hour? What about 50 tabs?
 
[citation][nom]Pherule[/nom]I found Tom's browser test a bit fail, so FF7 "winning" is a bit meaningless. See a better browser test here: http://lifehacker.com/5844150/brow [...] 9-and-moreSome browsers retain memory after closing tabs for a reason (cache, allows rapid reopening of closed or previously used tabs) so that specific bunch of memory tests Tom's did are meaningless.Browsers like Chrome and Firefox are constantly improving their javascript and page load times, but ~95% of the time browsers perform those tasks instantly. The real question perhaps should be this: How responsive is FF9's UI? Does it remain as snappish as Opera, for example, if both have 20 tabs open, for a time period longer than an hour? What about 50 tabs?[/citation]

And that's the reason I've always felt those test results do not reflect reality. Beacuse whatever u do, Opera is still the fastest one around - at cold start, opening and maintaing tabs.
 
[citation][nom]gotrek[/nom]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...[/citation]
Yeah, it's just made Firefox's version numbering completely pointless really, they might as well just use the date instead of a version number, at least it would have some meaning rather than just arbitrary digits.

Firefox 7 would actually be Firefox 4.3 if they had stuck with a sane change significance way of labelling releases like they did before, which essentially lets you know you're using version 4, and that it's had 3 reasonably significant updates since the initial release. Using version 7.0 implies that Firefox has been completely overhauled or practically rewritten from scratch three times since version 4.0, which is obviously horseshit.
 
[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]They need to focus a release on cleaning up it's memory footprint, firefox has become a freaking hog.[/citation]
You need to know your s**t before you make silly comments. Have you heard about Firefox 7? Yeah, it's out now...
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]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 - NEVERAnswer number 2 - With 12Gb of RAM on my system I can stand the memory usage[/citation]

I frequently get more than 40 tabs open just from normal use. I don't think it is all that uncommon. I only have 4GB of ram and I don't have any trouble with FF sucking up too much ram.
 
I actually use both Chrome and FF about 50/50. I prefer Chrome's interface and it does 'feel' faster but it uses a ton of memory. That said, FF does tend to never let memory go when I close tabs. As for stability, I'd say they're pretty even. I tend to get more Flash crashes in Chrome, but I think that's just because I generally use Chrome for Flash since its seems to run faster.

Oh, and FF is hands down the best browser for web development.
 
[citation][nom]cichy69[/nom]so.. there will be no firefox 8?i think i need to keep up with the tech world ;p[/citation]
There will be but its a fairly insignificant build.

I personally like that they no longer have to wait for a particular Major release to include a finished piece of code, Means we get stuff as its made rather than waiting for the next major release just because they want it to be big, Which also means releases no longer have to be delayed just because one small feature wasn't quite ready yet.
 
[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]
They might want to look a little closer. I've got 2 tabs open in Firefox 7 and it's already eating 200mb. I've got the exact same 2 tabs open in IE....and it's eating less than 75mb. Based on memory usage with 2 tabs open, I'd expect to see Firefox 7 using roughly 4GB with 40 tabs open, though I'd expect 1.4GB of ram to be consumed by IE with that same 40 tabs. Of course, for me....40 tabs open at once never happens, but it does appear that someone is simply trying far too hard to bash IE....or make Firefox look better than it is. Out of curiosity, I fired up Chrome....loaded the exact same 2 tabs.....and, 187mb used (or 3.9GB with 40 tabs open). Appears someone should stop posting false "results" in articles....
 
It's funny to watch the FF haters carry on about non-existant problems.

Memory consumption, you say? It's not even true, but so what if it is? If you've got 40 tabs open, and it's using 1GB of memory, you need to either:

Spend $40 upgrading your RAM, or

Close some tabs


Firefox is still the best browser for it's extensions, and the fact that it doesn't contribute to Microsoft's or Google's epic what-u-r-browsing databases.
 
[citation][nom]lucky015[/nom]There will be but its a fairly insignificant build.I personally like that they no longer have to wait for a particular Major release to include a finished piece of code, Means we get stuff as its made rather than waiting for the next major release just because they want it to be big, Which also means releases no longer have to be delayed just because one small feature wasn't quite ready yet.[/citation]

Yeah, because changing the font in "ff7" warranted a major release number. Its still 4.3, nothing more.

Opera 11.51 with 20 tabs open (typical, as I default to 12 standard ones) = 500mb. I opened 10 extra (30) memory jumps to 900mb. The at 40 tabs (which is nuts) hits 1.2GB of memory.

Tired of stupid version numbers? Want to use the User Interface the ff4~4.3(aka 7) has copied? Imagine tab grouping - its great. Try Opera! Been around since 1995. First browser with TAB interface built in, for Windows.
 
[citation][nom]Zeh[/nom]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.[/citation]

chrome - multimedia
ff - almost everything else
opera - text docs while playing games

that all said, if a ff plugin works for 4 it works 99% of the time in 8 without any modifications. you can force plugins to work, if you want to go that route, and its great.

[citation][nom]fordry06[/nom]I frequently get more than 40 tabs open just from normal use. I don't think it is all that uncommon. I only have 4GB of ram and I don't have any trouble with FF sucking up too much ram.[/citation]

firefox is only a ram hog when one of two things happen.
you only use a few tabs, as its high than
and if you use allot of tabs, and close them out, ff tends to never give all the resources back for some reason, causing me to restart it every day or so, depending on how i use it.

[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]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 - NEVERAnswer number 2 - With 12Gb of RAM on my system I can stand the memory usage[/citation]

i commonly have over 250 tabs open. my parents are use to not having tabs, so they barely have more than 9 open.

back on ff 3.5 when i was told how many tabs i had open on crashes, it was usually in the 700 range.

granted my useage... is insane... but 40 tabs insnt hard to see someone keeping all their bookmarks open at once, to open the browser and see them all at once... i do that with chrome to some extent.
 
[citation][nom]madjimms[/nom]Youtube freezes CONSTANTLY while switching videos. Firefox 6 FAIL! (how is 9 coming out before 8?)[/citation]
Whoops, I meant 7.0.1
 
[citation][nom]acadia11[/nom]They need to focus a release on cleaning up it's memory footprint, firefox has become a freaking hog.[/citation]

Use MemoryFox then, smart guy. A simple Google search would have yielded this information. If you have issues with RAM and don't have enough, use the tool made to deal with that problem. Or buy more RAM.
 
When in the world will Mozilla make Firefox be able to take advantage of more than 1 CPU? When I tell FF8 to restore 25 tabs, the firefox.exe process is begged close to 50% CPU usage (1 full core 100% utilized), and this is on a very beefy internet connection. I have done many tests and have concluded that Firefox's rendering engine cannot use more than 1 CPU, which is retarded because Google Chrome does! Up to 1 core per tab.
 
[citation][nom]danwat1234[/nom]When in the world will Mozilla make Firefox be able to take advantage of more than 1 CPU? When I tell FF8 to restore 25 tabs, the firefox.exe process is begged close to 50% CPU usage (1 full core 100% utilized), and this is on a very beefy internet connection. I have done many tests and have concluded that Firefox's rendering engine cannot use more than 1 CPU, which is retarded because Google Chrome does! Up to 1 core per tab.[/citation]

no chrome doesn't. chrome takes each window and makes it a separate process.

i would rather never have a web browser multi core, because constantly with every browser, there is one tab that hangs, and sucks 100% of one core, do i really want it sucking 100% of all 4?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom