At last my prayers have been answered. In version 20 of Firefox In addition to private browsing by tabs, we will have a new feature in the browser, which is that it will first load the style sheets and scripts, to later load the images when we access a page or website.
This is not new to me, since this same feature seems to me to be the one that implements Opera, and that is the reason why it makes the Norwegian browser one of the fastest on the market.
I always wanted that Firefox did this, I even looked for extensions to achieve this goal but to no avail. According to the news that I read in this site, Ehsan Akhagi developed from Mozilla wrote:
“I don't know what our heuristic looks like in load priorities, but it seems to me that images (at least the ones that do not affect layout) should have a lower priority compared to stylesheets and scripts so that we can be able to get something faster on screen. "
And now is it that they notice? ¬¬
Preliminary tests done by the developer of Mozilla, Patrick McManus, shows some promising results. Using the popular social media site Pinterest As an example, the wait time to get something to appear on the screen was reduced from 3,4 seconds to 1,6 seconds.
Source: InternetNews
I thought that all browsers did that already, is that ... it is logical ... Load the simplest first and the heaviest last .__.
And ... why in Firefox 20 and not before?
Who knows
And of course, like every "new version" of firefox, it will consume less memory.
The day will come when we open firefox and it will be like plugging in a ram tablet.
This is good news. I've been waiting for something like this for a long time. I'm glad it's finally here. The truth is that it is common sense. It didn't take that long.
For me, Firefox is Windows Internet Explorer, at least on my computer you can't ask for half as much as Chrome, for example. Opera had to abandon it because it did magic with my bookmarks, more than half disappeared, but it also worked much better than Firefox.
May I know what version of Firefox you are using? Look to compare Firefox with IExplorer .. uff. 😀
HAHAHA, well, I have passed it, but it is true that I am much worse than Chrome. And I have it updated, 17.0.1. By the way I correct: I meant that for me it is the Internet Explorer of Linux, I use it to download Chrome and little else.
What exactly do you mean "you're doing worse"?
Well, I am not very focused on these issues and I do not know if it is RAM or CPU consumption or I know, but it feels much heavier than Chrome, for example when I enter a website with many links and I open 3 or 4 by clicking + ctrl to open them in the background and visit them later with Chrome I have no problems but Firefox makes it much slower and even many times it almost crashes. And if that page is YouTube and what I open in the background is another video, it is already exaggerated.
RAM consumption I already tell you that no, Chrome consumes more.
You say you notice it heavier, but have you ever measured the time it takes for Firefox to open a tab and have you compared it on equal terms with Chrome?
Firefox only loads the full pages when you go to the corresponding tab.
What do you get to hang Firefox? What machine do you have? It's funny because I don't notice any of this you say on any of my machines.
http://i.imgur.com/l89Dl.jpg
With a few small tweaks in the configuration firefox goes as fast as chromium and without consuming as much ram. If you don't want to fiddle with about: config there is the fasterfox extension that automatically configures firefox to run much faster. Anyway, I don't know why firefox works better on windows than on linux.
unfortunately it is true, in windows firefox is looser, faster. I suppose it is due to the configuration of the binaries (in my case iceweasel for debian). Maybe compiling it would optimize it, but still that doesn't explain why the binary for windows (both in xp and 7) is better built. Is the free browser more compatible with the windows kernel? what a joke right?
Dear Rúben, I allow myself to contradict you, but Mozilla Firefox has improved a lot in terms of performance, I've been using Archlinux for about a year, I have Opera, Chrome, and my Firefox browser installed (the benefits it offers are not offered by any other browser) In all this time I had used the Nouveau graphics drivers (Arch removed the nvidia-173 drivers), and the performance of Chrome and Opera (handling few tabs) was slightly higher on my PC, than Firefox, in this version 17.0.1 I felt improvement, my computer is a P4 to 3.06 without HT, 2 GB DDR RAM, and a GForce 5200 graphics which just a few days ago I was able to install the nvidia-173xx drivers from AUR (Thanks Natrio), IS AMAZED !!!, the performance Firefox has been great, watching videos, pages loaded with images, and with many tabs open, a shulada! Chrome and Opera are left behind. No Switch to Firefox.
Well, what do you want me to say, I would like to agree with you but it is not like that. Unfortunately it doesn't work as well on my computer as it does on yours.
Firefox fans will always come out to contradict and say that Firefox is the eighth wonder, how come you come to say that he is not god on earth. And as their failures are increasingly difficult to be unknown they can no longer deny them outright so instead now they tell you that it may have been true but to try the latest version that for a while here it was fixed and He threw an improvement that now is the wonder they always said.
You have to run away from that browser like the plague, it is the only one I have seen that its users behave like members of a sect, they are blind to flaws and fools and liars to convert anyone at all costs.
Note that still after 9 years and 20 versions they do not know how the business works and have to look at others to find out the obvious of how things are done is ridiculous.
That for 8 years and 17 versions (according to them they have already fixed it, according to) it has been a poor browser and poorly designed is another thing that is unforgivable. Lest you be crazy, I mean to have been forever a browser with leaks, horrendous loading times and constant crashes for emptying memory to show that it consumes little; problems that they always denied until they started to lose. Currently they say they no longer have them but who knows if it is a new stage of denial.
For less than that, fans have sentenced IE to death for life, which today is far superior to Firefox.
From fasterfox, it literally sucks; its improvement is nothing more than a placebo and incidentally, this extension is a typical culprit for profile damage.
And something that I forgot to say at the end, if I have to tune Firefox and fix it ME so that it works well then that is the last confession that Firefox is bad and its creators are not able to make a product that works that the user has to compose it.
Luckily there are plenty of options, that is to say all the others except Firefox, which are made by competent people and not by pseudo amateurs who apparently all they know is to indoctrinate users and spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year.
GOD!!! My eyes are burning 😀
Speaking of fanaticism and indoctrination ... and you come here to carry out this aggressive smear campaign.
I do not know the other users of Firefox, but I have never denied their flaws, it is more I have always highlighted them, so that they are known and fixed as soon as possible.
And now that it has always been a poor and mediocrely designed browser, or even to say that IE is far superior ... it reeks of past trauma and "doctrinal" hatred that pulls back.
Fans:
Are you a web developer? Firefox is not the eighth wonder but Chrome is not, much less Opera than if we are talking about errors, it has # 1.
Poor browser? Please, IExplorer, Opera, they render the sites as they please. But Firefox? If since he left he is the only one who has respected the W3C.
But seeing your comment (where it says that IExplorer is superior) and that you come from Windows, I was not expecting anything else.
Sorry, but why are your eyes burning?
Nor do I know what it has to do with whether or not I am a web developer, I suspect that you are going to answer some topic.
Please tell me about errors that I do mention errors that I criticize and that cannot be denied by the way; to hint that the others are # 1 in failures and show nothing, is to sit back and throw FUD. Hopefully they are flaws that overcome the permanent deficiency and mediocrity of Firefox so that they are # 1.
Let me explain, it is a poor browser because its code is deficient. Hang up, have leaks, be slow to die, hang up again, not to mention being outright featureless until you've copied Chrome and Opera; all those characteristics of its entire history for 20 versions and 9 years; they are things that speak of poorly made software, rather than being A MONUMENT of poorly made software.
When I see that you say that IE and Opera render as they please I realize that you only know about topics, any objective proof? Surely you ignore that it is natural that sites made for Firefox, work perfectly in Firefox and not in the others.
Just as Firefox, like the rest, has respected the W3C when it suits him yes and when it does not suit him no, like the others; He is not the saint of the W3C, neither the first nor the one who most respects him, before that place was occupied by IE by the way.
And you forgive me if I offend you, although the offended one could be me, your last line is nothing more than an adhoniem of quite a lack of intellectuality. The fact that I use a system does not make me adept at everything that comes from it, at least those of us who use Windows are not like that, another thing is those who use Linux and Mac who will believe that all thieves are according to their condition. I can tell you the same, that since you are Linux, whatever MS is will be poop, IE will suck and the "free" Firefox must be defended with jihads.
The funniest thing is that for Mozilla Windows has always been more important than Linux, but apparently linuxers like not to have dignity and to bank what it pays them badly.
Too bad IE weighs you nowadays it is far superior to Firefox, IE9 and not to mention 10. The mere fact of not having leaks, or hanging up, or not finding out at the last minute how things are done; places it way above.
If you were right, why do all linux distros come with firefox by default? Or are you insinuating that all the great software developers don't know that firefox is bad, or that you know more than all those developers? By God, you have to get off the smoke horse a bit ...
But that Sandeses speaks, I see that he has a recalcitrant way of vituperating against Firefox. I am not an expert far from it, I am a normal user. but at first glance I can see that the Mozilla browser (with everything and its delay in starting in latest versions, it should be noted that this has improved a lot) is superior, I use IE since version 2, or 3 (it was running javascript I don't remember which) in windows 3.11. I don't even talk about security flaws and IE's way of working there is much on the net. And now, as much as I remember, those mentioned Firefox crashes are actually nothing, except for me, no and when I started using firefox I had pIII with 256 ram I got to use it with firefox 3.6, and as I said the benefits that the browser offers are enough for me.
And I have never used any plugin to optimize it, just in version 4 I started to touch the about: config, and in a subtle way.
At work I use Windows Vista SP 1 (I have no other option), with IE 9, it takes longer to start than firefox, and in IE I open more than 6 tabs and that is a desperation for me, it takes longer to load the pages, the Simple fact of changing tabs takes. Oh and in order to install it, I force myself to install SP1, as well as version 10 I think it forgot its ancestors. Remember Firefox has never required anything of me.
The thing about my eyes burning is obviously a joke. I ask you if you are a web developer because, if you were, would you know the advantages it has Firefox above the rest, among other things for its tools for this type of user.
What mistakes are you talking about? Right now I am using Firefox 17.0.1 After using the previous versions and even betas and I have never crashed the browser or anything like that, and I am writing to you from a netbook, which we all know does not have the most advanced hardware. Since version 15 Firefox has improved so much, but so much, that sometimes I doubt that Chrome has more market share, which I also remind you, Google has marketing campaigns everywhere, Mozilla does not.
Have you checked the source code of Firefox how to say it is deficient? Could you point out any deficiency in your code? And when I speak of iExplorer y Opera, I mean that many sites that look perfectly on Firefox y Chrome, in these browsers they do not work. I give you a simple example, compare how the carousel of some sites looks in Firefox e iExplorer, in any of its versions.
See if iExplorer is better than Firefox, that web developers if they do not use frameworks like Bootstrap, they have to make special stylesheets so that iExplorer I managed to show the site well, because contrary to what you say (and you should know a bit of history in terms of browsers), it does not fully respect the W3C standards as it always insisted on using its own.
For your information, I use Windows in my work at the same time as Linux (which I use in my home, my work and even in the bathroom if necessary), therefore, I know what each of these operating systems gives. I could tell you the same thing that you say to me: Windows it suffers crashes, it is slow, it consumes too much ram, therefore it has poor code. And about that Mozilla he cares more Windows which LinuxIt may be, but we all know why. I say, you know, don't you?
Excuse me, but I've been using Firefox for years, and the truth is that, even with its flaws, I have to look back a lot to remember the last hang up.
Slow to die ??! But what are we talking about?
You also say that Firefox is featureless compared to Opera and Chrome. I do not know the others, but I do not miss anything from Opera in Firefox (nothing that I really use I mean), and in Chrome for example I miss an integrated RSS reader like the one that Firefox has, I know there are extensions for Chrome for such case, but I have already verified that they in no way work like the built-in in Firefox.
For the record, I do not share an opinion with @ fans, I do not think Firefox is that bad, I just said that Chrome works better for me. In fact, I forgot to say that apart from using it to download Chrome, I also use it to watch the league matches on Direct Red on weekends, I get the impression that for that it does work better than Chrome.
I didn't mean for this to end like this. Sorry 😉
Excellent news, better late ...
For the record, although the Chrome logo appears, I only use Firefox and Chromium 😉
In Firefox the porn looks better and it is safer and anonymous to navigate those seas.
Nothing more to add.
Hahahaha trolling here and trolling here. Congratulations mate.
It also has to do with how the page was written, because it is assumed that first the style sheets and scripts from the own server are put, then the page goes and at the end the style sheets and scripts from external servers are put. So that it is loaded in order.
I still hope that firefox will continue reducing resource consumption xD
Firefox rules, testing it on android.
Well, I already have Firefox 20.0 and the truth is that it's faster and shit. Google takes 2 minutes to load and any other website takes at least 10 minutes, on YouTube it doesn't even fit me, so I'm using version 19.2 which is the previous version and it doesn't give this problem.
I get the icon that I am using firefox 20.0 when it is not like this: S