They don't know how much it hurts to have to say that Firefox 9 It is more of the same, especially because of the great appreciation I have always had for what has been my favorite browser for a long time, but things are as they are and that is the reality.
Excited with changes in the way Firefox 9 manages JavaScript I decided to try it (I write from him) and at least I, no matter how much the performance tests tell me otherwise, I still feel slower than Chromium. To top it all, the memory consumption is now higher, as you can see in the following image:
By the time I finished uploading it, already Firefox was consuming me 140 Mb. Usually Chromium / Iron does not exceed 90Mb. Not to mention, the lack of new features in terms of the interface is one of the reasons why I don't understand the accelerated pace of development. It's like they put a patch on it and immediately changed the numbering.
Mozilla is lagging behind. It's tough, but it's true. At this rate, I think I'll have to dust off my old .tar.gz de Firefox 4 o Firefox 3. Too bad they don't have good support for HTML5 y CSS3. In the meantime, I'll keep using the browser Google. 🙁
In general, I do not agree. Regarding RAM consumption, it is proven that Firefox is the browser that consumes the least RAM. In the case of Chrome we must count all the processes that run separately; If we have 2 tabs, two processes plus the central one run. Even with the extensions.
When we take into account the amount of RAM that Chromium / Chrome consumes it is quite surprising.
Regarding the interface, I do not think we will see news until version 10 or 11 since the operation of the interface has been improved from the JavaScript engine, which allows substantial improvements that are noticeable in SunSpider (it is the fastest) and improvements in Kraken and V8 that average 30% compared to Firefox 8. Once these functions have maturity, there I do believe that a change could be made, but I do not think that it needs such a big face lift, although it is a matter of taste.
It is true that Firefox does not have the same support for HTML5 as Chrome; but if it supports the standards that are being used so far. Let's not forget that the HTML5 implementation is not finished, and many blame Apple for putting their patents first.
Finally, we must not forget that the new Firefox launch system implies the launch of gradual improvements, we will not see a change as substantial as it was Firefox 3 to 4.
regards
You have every right to disagree, but when I write an article of this type, I always try to speak on a solid basis. I am not an expert in benchmarking, but according to my System monitor, Firefox consumes more than Chromium, although less than Opera.
About face lift, I don't mean very big things. Something that I have always criticized is the unified menu of Firefox, or it has an absence of icons, or there are too many, but it does not end with convincing me. I mean those little details above all things.
Yes, the unified menu looks prettier than it is. At least the way it was implemented is not very functional, losing basic options.
It amazes me that the most awarded functions of Chrome (Sandbox and independent processes) do not appear in your system manager and you do not see the complete information.
EYE, I am not an expert in testing either, but I speak from what I read and I see in my system that it is consistent with what I read. In firefox the about: memory works, I don't know if in Chrome.
My Firefox (beware, still v8.0.1) is consuming about 142MB of RAM right now ... 😀
And yes, in Chrome / Chromium the about: memory
The same thing that is consuming me at the moment Firefox 9.
http://www.muycomputer.com/2011/12/20/rendimiento-firefox-9-vs-chrome-15-vs-ie9-vs-safari-5-vs-opera-11 performance is better!
That can be said by the Benchmark engines, but it doesn't work for me. I speak based on what I see and feel on my computer. JavaScript may be handled more efficiently in Firefox 9, but that's not why it's faster than Chrome / Chromium and it still uses much more RAM.
Logically, you use the browser that makes you feel most comfortable; but that does not imply that Firefox is the one that consumes more RAM or energy.
Likewise, measuring the speed of a browser with the differences in milliseconds that exist is not easy, but with the preload that Opera does, the sensation of speed does not have any, but that is only that in Opera, sensation.
The cover photo should look like this: http://www.beforeyoukillyourcomputer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/get-firefox_med.jpg
Elav, don't you know that Chrome / Chromium consumes as much or more than firefox as far as memory is concerned, add up all the processes that Chrome / Chromium opens so that you stop talking nonsense.
Come on don't make me install Chrome / Chromium just to take pictures and kill the head louse.
You already know that elav does everything possible to go against the sandy, yours and mine
System Monitor tells me otherwise. It may or may not be nonsense, but it is what it tells me. But I tell you more, HTOP that if it shows me all the open processes, it tells me exactly the same thing, for what I tell you, do not make me upload images and stick the louse from my head to yours.
To me, I get the impression that it opens a bit faster and also has better performance with multiple tabs.
And where does that memory go ?: Photos, Videos, CSS and HTML already rendered, navigation databases (the address bar is not so fast for nothing) etc ...
That 140mb is spent is not really strange, in fact, it should spend about 300mb for the amount of things that one usually sees while browsing (the cache is not that it weighs little either).
Also, for a 1 ~ 2gb ram PC that is the norm today, it doesn't seem like a scary thing to spend 300mb on a program that has become as important today as the browser. Now for PCs with less capabilities, I don't say anything ^^ U
Man, when you have a PC with 1Gb of RAM and you only have Firefox open, it doesn't count, but if at the same time you have LibreOffice, Inkscape, Gimp, Thunderbird, Xchat, Pidgin ... as things change 😀
Well, the only alternative I see for your particular case is that you use midori when you have all those apps open. Firefox could wait for when you free up some RAM.
Now, if not, then to expand the memory 😉
I know, I lived it until I could buy a laptop with 3gb of ram.
My point is, all those graphic layers have to come sacrificing something, and that is when the ram is going to be affected (I prefer to sacrifice ram than processor).
I don't use any Chrome * because Firefox actually saves me more laptop battery, and because the font rendering in XulRunner is a thousand times better than Webkit. I use the browser to read, so adding the battery with the fonts, it definitely does not hurt to use firefox: 3
On the desktop I use ... Opera (the xD battery is worth a damn there).
Firefox has been optimized more than everything is in the JavaScript GarbageCollector, and the Cache (I think), so anyway, I don't think it's more of the same, it's just evolving in features and not so much in "minimalist performance". Although I have doubts about the development of mobile FF, how will it be benefiting us desktop users?
Greetings, good polemic ^^
You can also use Lynx, Links elinks.
Yeah man, and I might as well give Courage a good fuck.
Well, I already have it, now I'm using Kubuntu, since I'm in kde FF, it works quite badly for me, it locks, the same is not the case with Rekonq, this version of FF at least opens faster and I notice it with a bit more fluid operation I mean that I do notice a difference in speed.
Here's another who has long lost confidence in Firefox. I used it since before it became final version 1.0…. in the days of the "magnificent" Explorer 6… But they always promise what they don't deliver. I suspect that it should be rewritten from scratch… because if not I can't explain why. Apart from that the news are the responsibility of other browsers and Firefox lags behind. A shame because I was a 100% "backpacker" (Firefox, Thunderbird and Sunbird ... and others) and now I no longer use it, once the extensions I use (few) I have with Chromium, which I don't like "super" either but I even prefer it to Opera, for minimalism (Opera is the milk, but it is loaded with things that I don't use. It should be more modular).
Greetings.
Well, I don't know if I'm a weirdo but I have always consumed more chromium memory than firefox in both Ubuntu, Debian and Arch. Currently chromium with a loaded page is around 240mb and firefox 130mb (through about: memory) I always use both, although mostly chromium because it goes a tad faster (not much more) and the smooth scroll is much more fluid with it. extension. What if firefox consumes me much more cpu than I am not very spare.
Enabling firefox pipelining achieves similar page load times in both browsers. In both I have the same extensions (adblock, flashblock and smooth scroll)
Personally, Firefox hasn't changed anything since 4
High consumption is the same.
I don't see why you should pout Google chrome or Chromium.
I use it and I see it perfectly.
Opera
It lacks but if applied, it may be the best.
In my netbook, the truth is my respects for firefox, since 8. I had stopped using it for Chromium (In partition with Ubuntu) and Chrome (in partition with Win7). I even had it de-installed. When it appeared everywhere that 8 came out, I installed it and noticed that it had better ram memory handling. I mention it because I have 1 and I have compared it in the two SO
Although now I use both, there are some pages that have some type of CSS or javascript (some mod or jquery library for example) that work better in one or the other.