81–90 of 118 posts
When Chrome was new and shiny, I used it for a time. Then, the first time I found myself needing to kill Chrome because it was completely locked up, I found myself staring at a wall of chrome processes in the task list, not knowing which one I needed to kill. At the time, I thought the idea of a separate process for each tab was silly. Though, with Firefox moving towards this model, I guess the engineers at Google we…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shift+Esc brings out Chrome task manager where you can kill individual tabs/pages by name.
Does this work when Chrome is locked up? Usually people go to Task Manager because it's unresponsive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/big_04.html http://www.scottmccloud.com/googlechrome/ In early-mid 2008, I created a comic book for Google explaining the inner workings of their new open source browser Google Chrome. If I'm mixing this up with https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis , that's still 10 years.
Chrome didn't have this until 2018, as the parent link shows. This is not about multi-process architecture. Firefox is < 3 years behind, not 10, not 14.
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/c6f2e67ab40...
Site isolation proved to be the biggest refactor in Chrome's history, and was one of the motivating reasons for the webkit/blink fork. Making site isolation work touched a huge host of features, since handling iframes out of process has a way of making simple things incredibly complicated.
The example I always gave was: imagine how the "find text in page" browser feature would be implemented. With the entire document in-process, it was a simple for loop. With the document and its subframes sharded across multiple processes, it is now a distributed search problem that requires handling of out-of-order results and stitching them into a traversal order. What's more, to achieve Chrome's security goals, you want to avoid introducing functionality that would allow the [presumed-compromised] process of the outer document to query the contents of the inner document via the find in page feature. So you can't simply do this as a peer-to-peer query between the renderer processes; it needs to be coordinated by the main browser process.
Congrats to the Firefox team on this milestone.
This is fantastic work that will greatly improve the security of Firefox; big thanks to those who have worked on it. Is there data on what effect it will have on memory use? One of the primary reasons I use Firefox is that it uses significantly less memory than Chrome, and the entire OS seems to function better as a result (I've seen the most stark difference on macOS). I had been under the impression that most of th…
Does anyone else get ANNOYED by the UI of Mozilla's blog on mobile? Looking at the navbar, the horizontal and vertical alignment is all over the place, the search input has no placeholder or label, background colors are inconsistent, and paddings are just bizarre.
Not to mention the fact the extension ecosystem is still crippled. There's still no user-agent switcher, meaning there are sites I literally cannot access from my phone without installing an old version of Firefox Mobile or go back to using Dolphin Browser. "View Desktop Version" perversely still tells sites you're on a mobile browser.
This is really interesting. Prior to this, Firefox's isolation model was much weaker than Chrome's due to only having a pool of 8 content processes. If I'm reading the technical blog correctly [1], this will move to a process-per-site model without also doing process-per-tab as Chrome does, i.e. if you have several tabs open on the same site, they'd be in the same process. This seems much less resource intensive than…
Complementary to this, one can use the Temporary Containers addon to get isolation of e.g. cookies. I've set it up to run one container per domain, and it works really well. I hope they merge this into Firefox at some point.
I like the idea of containers, and will probably revisit periodically to see if whatever was fubar on my account is resolved (theres none/if any logging, so its hard to really dig in)
This is really interesting. Prior to this, Firefox's isolation model was much weaker than Chrome's due to only having a pool of 8 content processes. If I'm reading the technical blog correctly [1], this will move to a process-per-site model without also doing process-per-tab as Chrome does, i.e. if you have several tabs open on the same site, they'd be in the same process. This seems much less resource intensive than…
> process-per-tab as Chrome does This is a common misconception. Chrome doesn't technically do process-per-tab. Chrome's model can most succinctly be described as process-per-domain, although even then, there are rare instances where two tabs opened on different domains will actually share the same process.
They did advertise Chrome as process-per-tab: https://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/big_04.html, pages 6 and 7 also definitely agree. (I haven’t read all through it again now, but I should also note that the process in the very centre of https://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/big_38.html shows what appears to be two tabs under it, which supports it not necessarily being process-per-tab.)
But either it never actually was, or they abandoned it as impractical even before release (https://stackoverflow.com/q/42804 has answers agreeing it isn’t process-per-tab on the day after the first release). So either Google lied, or they released the comic including a glaring and rather significant factual error (even if it had been true when Scott first drew the pages).
It’s frustrating when parties pull these shenanigans, making big claims around things like security and performance predicated on points that are simply not true, but never retracting those points properly or repudiating them, so that the misconception persists.
When Chrome was new and shiny, I used it for a time. Then, the first time I found myself needing to kill Chrome because it was completely locked up, I found myself staring at a wall of chrome processes in the task list, not knowing which one I needed to kill. At the time, I thought the idea of a separate process for each tab was silly. Though, with Firefox moving towards this model, I guess the engineers at Google we…
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/onetab/
to offload idle tabs. Downside is that it doesnt sync with firefox so anyhing i may need I may need to open in another firefox instance, I just bookmark.
The grouping is nice because it gives me a reference of a time i was doing x research/reading. And what i find is that there really isnt too much that i need to crossover, work stuff stays on my work computer, personal to personal etc.
Offtopic, Mozilla blog articles like the click through more details one aways have the most awesome images. They almost tell the story without a need to read the text. Other one I remember is the one on webassembly [0]. Similar style images. They really allow you to scroll through the post quickly and see if it is interesting to read in detail. [0] https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/08/webassembly-interface-type...
Software is hard. Chrome had this in 2008. Firefox had to be rearchitected 14 years for this.
Browsers are too big and the web is too complex. Engineering failures all around. As engineers, we should not accept this status quo; we should replace it. We need a new web and new software.
https://dustri.org/b/the-web-browser-im-dreaming-of.html
Gemini might be a good replacement for the web: