And they're still at it, too: https://areweslimyet.com/
Maybe I'm misreading things but it looks like it's been constantly getting worse since 2012?
The FAQ says:
TP5 loads 100 popular webpages, served from a local webserver.
I don't know if that means the test pages are up-to-date copies of real-world pages or not. On one hand, real-world pages have certainly been getting heavier, and it would bear mentioning if that fact was not reflected in this test. On the other hand the graph becomes really hard to interpret if the test suite isn't a constant.
Instructions for enabling this feature (via about:config) are provided in the author's prior article on the topic: https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/10/mozillas-multi-process-arc...
Please be aware that if you force-enable e10s while using incompatible addons, you'll end up with a very slow browsing experience. http://arewee10syet.com/ has a compatibility list for some of the most popular addons.
Got to love the '401 failed fetching from AMO' add on.
I switched to Firefox from Chrome about 12 months ago. It isn't as good as Chrome, but I was trying to reduce my Google dependencies. It has been mostly fine (except for an annoying OS-X multi-screen bug where it screws up the sizing). I was really looking forward to this feature to help close the gap on Chrome performance. Until August (I think Firefox 48.x), when it became unusable on any site with... something. I'…
I've found Firefox performance to be absolutely awful at work on OS X. I have no issues at all with it at home on Linux, and didn't have any issues in my previous job on OS X either. I'm not sure if it's OS X specific, a change in recent versions, this laptop being underpowered, or the nature of the work I do (a lot of video stuff), but anything JS heavy severely slows down or locks up the browser. And if anything, i…
Any chance you could file bugs, particularly on the JS-related performance issues? I'm looking into some similar things right now, but seemingly JS-centric things seem to have a tendency to actually be from something else. It'd be nice to have something I could solidly blame on JS. If you file a bug with https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Core&comp... and make it block bug 1299643, I'll see it.
“We can learn from the competition,” said Dotzler. “The way they implemented multi-process is RAM-intensive, it can get out of hand. We are learning from them and building an architecture that doesn’t eat all your RAM.” That's the money quote here. I've been waiting for this for a long time actually. Every browser I've tried except Firefox just basically eats all my RAM and other app performance (e.g. compiling stuff…
If you're on Mac, Safari is good in terms of both memory and cpu.
Safari is great, but doesn't have a great solution for vertical or tree-style tabs, which are heavily used in my workflow.
FF is for work, Safari for non-work. Chrome when I need Flash or testing Chrome-only content (some great plugins) - pretty rare.
I switched to Firefox from Chrome about 12 months ago. It isn't as good as Chrome, but I was trying to reduce my Google dependencies. It has been mostly fine (except for an annoying OS-X multi-screen bug where it screws up the sizing). I was really looking forward to this feature to help close the gap on Chrome performance. Until August (I think Firefox 48.x), when it became unusable on any site with... something. I'…
I've found Firefox performance to be absolutely awful at work on OS X. I have no issues at all with it at home on Linux, and didn't have any issues in my previous job on OS X either. I'm not sure if it's OS X specific, a change in recent versions, this laptop being underpowered, or the nature of the work I do (a lot of video stuff), but anything JS heavy severely slows down or locks up the browser. And if anything, i…
It's really hit-or-miss for me too. On my work laptop for example, it would freeze up for multiple seconds with e10s enabled but was fine with it disabled. Then one day everything worked fine. On my home computer FF is just getting slower and slower. I'm not looking for troubleshooting tips here, just mentioning that the experience is very uneven.
“We can learn from the competition,” said Dotzler. “The way they implemented multi-process is RAM-intensive, it can get out of hand. We are learning from them and building an architecture that doesn’t eat all your RAM.” That's the money quote here. I've been waiting for this for a long time actually. Every browser I've tried except Firefox just basically eats all my RAM and other app performance (e.g. compiling stuff…
The thing is, workstation and laptop RAM is so cheap. If your browser is eating an appreciable chunk of your 16 or 32GB of RAM, you need to close some tabs.
a) your security should not rely on process isolation. the javascript engine etc. should be secure in the first place. if you can break out of the JS sandbox you can already attack addon scripts (think password managers) b) hosting some tabs in the same, sandboxed process is still stronger than hosting all of them in the parent process.
So you mean the interpreter should be mathematically proven like SEL4 and generated from the proof? Otherwise I have no idea what "secure in the first place" means.
My point is that defense in depth is not all that great if the breach of the first line already gives you access to the loot.
Does anybody know more about how Mozilla manages experiments? I'd always assumed that all users downloaded an identical binary and got the same behavior. How do they assign 10% of their users to an experimental group? Is it possible that two users will see different functionality when they are both using the same OS and release, say Firefox from the latest version of Ubuntu?
Firefox generates a random number on first run. Users who are selected for the experiment are sent a signed extension from Mozilla that makes browser.tabs.remote.autostart preference return true if they are on the correct release of Firefox.
I'm currently at a little over 1 GB with 8 tabs open. I really wish I had the option to trade off responsiveness for memory usage by being able to mark tabs as "no background activity allowed" so FF could serialize that content to disk when the tab isn't in focus.
There are several addons that do this. I think Suspend Tab is the most popular. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/suspend-tab/