Ah yes and then when one tab crashes you lose all 100 tabs. Brilliant!
If you read the article carefully, in Chrome when one tab crashes in this situation you only lose ... half your tabs.
Scalability
131–140 of 165 posts
Re: Scalability
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen tab enthusiasts. They are incapable of tracking which tab they already have open and reopen the same one over and over again.
Not really, I have about 100 tabs open at the moment and each one points to a different page. Regarding the "real world usage" for this: Pages I read every day, pages I've opened and intend to read if there's time and pages I read at the moment. Works fine, thanks. Maybe this is also a function of browser capability: If your browser crashes or becomes unusable with many tabs you won't open many.
Please excuse my curiosity. How do you navigate so many tabs? Is it in some way more efficient than reading them in blocks of say 10 or 20?
I am interested in your use case of pages you read every day. I have such pages and I would love to be able to open a specified list of such pages with one click. Is there a way of doing that? Or an add-on for it?
Re: Scalability
#133I recently switched from Firefox to Chrome after their appalling release of Firefox 4 & 5. 5 Is better than 4, but only slightly. In most cases, Chrome out performs Firefox now and it's a shame that I had to switch from Firefox. Although these are real world statistics you encountered, I still think that Firefox needs to buck their ideas up and start releasing more stable versions.
The version in the story is Firefox nightly aka Firefox 8. There are many changes from Firefox 5 to 8. Since they adopted the rapid release, Firefox 8 won't take forever to be stable, but it will still take a few month.
I wish mozilla would make web pages for these new versions. The top search result for "Firefox 8" is the 1.0.8 release notes, followed by a "download free download" link that is definitely not mozilla.com.
Re: Scalability
#134Anyone care to share how their usage patterns lead to having hundreds of tabs open at a single time? How is it even feasible to find a specific tab without doing a time consuming linear search? I rarely have more than 4-5 tabs open at a time, so I'm honestly curious.
I'm guessing people are mostly just using them as a reading queue. (Middle-click everything, then Ctrl+W to advance.) Of course, tabs aren't actually built for this (mostly; I think Apple has realized that people do this, as the newest Safari seems to unload the render state for tabs that have been in the background of a window for a while; everything reflows when you actually switch to the tab.)
I wish Chrome would do that. If it is memory crunched, it seems to swap out the rendered page image, and then it very slowly repaints it when you switch back to that tab.
Re: Scalability
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really, I have about 100 tabs open at the moment and each one points to a different page. Regarding the "real world usage" for this: Pages I read every day, pages I've opened and intend to read if there's time and pages I read at the moment. Works fine, thanks. Maybe this is also a function of browser capability: If your browser crashes or becomes unusable with many tabs you won't open many.
Please excuse my curiosity. How do you navigate so many tabs? Is it in some way more efficient than reading them in blocks of say 10 or 20? I am interested in your use case of pages you read every day. I have such pages and I would love to be able to open a specified list of such pages with one click. Is there a way of doing that? Or an add-on for it?
I use Session Manager. Open all the tabs you use daily, and then save the session and configure Session Manager to open that session on every startup. (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/session-manag...)
Re: Scalability
#136Interesting test, but the real world usability significance of this are minimal. Now, if Firefox auto updates in the background like Chrome, I might consider giving it another chance. When I want to go on the net, I don't want to wait for my browser to update.
Firefox does that in 5, at least as far as I can tell. It also updates addons silently. The only reason I've noticed things were being updated is addons that show a "what's new in this version!" page.
For me (and apparently a large number of people in this thread), I won't consider switching to Chrome until they get more powerful extensions, namely TreeStyleTabs and Vimperator/Pentadactyl. The current stand ins completely pale in comparison.
Re: Scalability
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
200 tabs.. how is that possible? Do you ctrl+click on every possible links on every page?! I'm actually really surprised. I, too, can't stand more than 5-6..
Let's say you're on 4chan and there's a creative thread with a bunch of images. Threads can reach 150 images before they max out. You could use the Linky extension to "Open All Image Links in Tabs" and you would instantly be up over 100 tabs. That's just one use case, but there are certainly many others.
There is a google chrome extension for 4chan that will let you preload all images or open all images inline. It also auto fetches new replys and loads them inline aswell. I am on my phone right now so I can't find what it is called, but IIRC it was the most popular and highest rated 4chan extension.
Re: Scalability
#138Interesting test, but the real world usability significance of this are minimal. Now, if Firefox auto updates in the background like Chrome, I might consider giving it another chance. When I want to go on the net, I don't want to wait for my browser to update.
Chrome doesn't update in the background. It downloads the update in the background, then applies it at startup the next time it starts. It just doesn't tell you it's doing that, so you get a slow startup with no explanation of why. The "tell you" part is the only difference between the workflow for current Firefox updates and Chrome updates, in fact... And yes, Firefox might start doing them silently precisely becaus…
>Chrome doesn't update in the background.
How do you know that? I assumed Chrome did update in the background because it uses Google's Omaha project, which supports updating when the system is idle.
"attempt to update application when the user's machine is idle"
http://omaha.googlecode.com/svn/wiki/OmahaOverview.html#Sche...
Re: Scalability
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another question is how badly that leaks memory?
I currently have 203 tabs open, and firefox has been running for 13 days. It's using 2.1gb of memory. I churn through tabs a lot. Firefox used to have memory problems, but it hasn't been a problem for me in at least a year. 10mb per tab is pretty good, IMO.
Interesting, because I have 5 tabs open (running the latest version of FF), and it's using over half a gig of RAM. It's been running since monday.
Perhaps I need to take another look at my addons, but I only have four (firebug, web developer, ad block, and diigo), so I really doubt they are the cause.
Re: Scalability
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's say you're on 4chan and there's a creative thread with a bunch of images. Threads can reach 150 images before they max out. You could use the Linky extension to "Open All Image Links in Tabs" and you would instantly be up over 100 tabs. That's just one use case, but there are certainly many others.
150 tabs of images isn't the same as 150 tabs of web pages, though.
That's certainly true, but Chrome ostensibly doesn't know that, and spins a new process per tab (or close to it). Creating 150 new processes, even if just to load an image in each, increases memory consumption and processor overhead.