Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
areweslimyet.com
Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
1–10 of 101 posts
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#2Not really.
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#3A nice manifestation of the idea "What we can measure we can fix."
See also: http://arewefastyet.com/
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#4I'll admit that I was expecting a site more like http://hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com.
It's really nice to see that Mozilla is still taking this stuff into consideration. After all, memory has been a point of contention in the community since Firefox 3 or so.
I know the FF detractors are going to come out of the woodwork at any moment, but I feel that reports of Mozilla's death have been greatly exaggerated.
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#5[deleted]
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#6[deleted]
What? People are complaining all the time that programmers become lazier and lazier and make programs more and more bloated as time goes on. Writing efficient programs requires complex tricks. I can't believe someone's complaining about that now.
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#7I'm glad they are doing this because they need to do something about memory usage, but there are some problems with this approach.
-websites change over time. If a site gets redesigned, it'll throw off test results unless they're rerunning the tests on old builds too
-this still doesn't capture how users actually use browsers so could miss some serious leaks. What about clicking around on the same site, opening links from the same site in multiple tabs, leaving a tab open for a week, etc?
Additionally, they keep saying that extensions are a huge source of leaks. I feel their pain because they don't have that much control over them, but they need to come up with some sort of a solution to deal with it, because let's face it, who's going to run FFx without any extensions?
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#8I'm glad they are doing this because they need to do something about memory usage, but there are some problems with this approach. -websites change over time. If a site gets redesigned, it'll throw off test results unless they're rerunning the tests on old builds too -this still doesn't capture how users actually use browsers so could miss some serious leaks. What about clicking around on the same site, opening links…
Extensions should be given an aggressive memory limitation to work with, and a profiler should be made so that extension developers can see what they're using and where it's spent.
Constraints are good things.
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#9I'm glad they are doing this because they need to do something about memory usage, but there are some problems with this approach. -websites change over time. If a site gets redesigned, it'll throw off test results unless they're rerunning the tests on old builds too -this still doesn't capture how users actually use browsers so could miss some serious leaks. What about clicking around on the same site, opening links…
Their FAQ [1] states that they were fetched last year and stored locally for testing. So changing sites shouldn't affect the result. I presume they will switch the set of sites in a few years, statistics don't need to be over 10 years to be useful.
Re: Mozilla: Are We Slim Yet?
#10Not yet, but getting there.
Also the bazillion extension that exist for Firefox are not really helping.
A "task manager" to be able to keep on eye on all extensions memory consumption (and be able to kill the extension from the browser) should really be helpful.