Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 203 posts

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#91

Post by darkarmani »

patrickaljord wrote: post #43
aktau wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, I also noticed that, save for the pages with tons of images, firefox has actually been better than chrome in that respect for the last few releases. Now with this fix, I'm seriously thinking of jumping back. Then I'll finally have my sweet DownThemAll again. Many kudos to the firefox devs, performance and memory-usage is very important, and it seems they realized that before it was too late. Even with my 16GB I'…

isn't 16GB enough to run an extra VM for dev? also, try docker.

Did docker add Windows and Darwin support already? Wow, they are really moving fast.

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#92

Post by [deleted] »

kamjam wrote: post #45
morkbot wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand true, on the other - it isn't that those fixes are some magic, extra smart hackery (at least on the idea level, dunno about the implementation). Don't load an image that user don't see, remove an image that user saw but don't see anymore - those seem as rather obvious solutions.

The great thing about Firefox is that if something is so obvious, you could also contribute to the development effort...

[deleted]

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#93

Post by hrjet »

reidmain wrote: post #25

Is it time to switch back to Firefox from Chrome? I remember when I originally switched around Firefox 3.5.x Chrome was much leaner and faster. Has the pendulum finally swung back the other way?

I use both, simultaneously.

I have 4 different Chromium profiles, and two different firefox profiles, with different levels of privacy / security. Each profile is also linked to a particular context, for example, a tab each for project A, project B, personal, etc.

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#94

Post by devcpp »

Peaker wrote: post #68
aktau wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, I also noticed that, save for the pages with tons of images, firefox has actually been better than chrome in that respect for the last few releases. Now with this fix, I'm seriously thinking of jumping back. Then I'll finally have my sweet DownThemAll again. Many kudos to the firefox devs, performance and memory-usage is very important, and it seems they realized that before it was too late. Even with my 16GB I'…

Last I tried Firefox, pretty recently, it still needed to address some serious issues, when compared to Chrome: * Unresponsiveness due to one tab thrashing * Bad use of screen-space (bookmarks always visible, cannot disappear titlebar like in Chrome [there's only a Windows extension for that], menu-bar takes up another bar of space by default) * Launching firefox has stop-the-world behavior to check/update extensions…

I too wish it had split processes (although I haven't had a freeze in months), but other than that it beats Chrome in every single way. I am not affected by your UI problems, and I install extensions every other week so I'm not bothered.

So, yeah, I guess you didn't really try. Perhaps you're just attached to Chrome.

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#96

Post by dbaupp »

dragonwriter wrote: post #84
dbaupp wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should one use bookmarks rather than many tabs? I have many concurrent projects going, and things I refer to regularly, so I just leave them grouped in my tree of tabs on the sidebar. Much more efficient than digging through nested bookmark menus, or trying to make sure the bookmarks are properly classified. Basically, my tabs are bookmarks, except tabs are integrated into the web-browser better.

So, the problem is that the bookmark UI design is broken.

My bookmark UI isn't broken: putting tree-style tabs in a sidebar is perfect.

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#97

Post by sanskritabelt »

Touche wrote: post #88
showsover wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bookmarks don't save state, which is especially annoying in a time where async calls are used so heavily.

A URL should contain all of the state needed. If it doesn't then it's a poorly designed website.

This, I claim, is ideology.

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#98

Post by FeepingCreature »

Touche wrote: post #88
showsover wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bookmarks don't save state, which is especially annoying in a time where async calls are used so heavily.

A URL should contain all of the state needed. If it doesn't then it's a poorly designed website.

Firefox has to work with the internet as it is, not the internet as we wish it were.

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#99

Post by billiam »

kamjam wrote: post #45
morkbot wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand true, on the other - it isn't that those fixes are some magic, extra smart hackery (at least on the idea level, dunno about the implementation). Don't load an image that user don't see, remove an image that user saw but don't see anymore - those seem as rather obvious solutions.

The great thing about Firefox is that if something is so obvious, you could also contribute to the development effort...

right on. Please spend as much time reading the bug referenced above as you have this thread, and think about the obvious problems/hard solutions proposed, then make a better one! Just keeping a few million WinXP machines from a recycling barge in Bangladesh for another year would be worth the trouble. and hopefully smarter image handling by everybody's browser/phone/whatever will be a long term result.

Re: Firefox fixes save gigabytes of memory on image-heavy pages

#100

Post by shmerl »

syncerr wrote: post #72
shmerl wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never saw a reason to switch to Chrome to begin with. Performance was acceptable for me, while other benefits always made Firefox more useful (privacy with encrypted Sync, better add-ons and etc.). And some time ago, Firefox clearly became a leader in performance as well. All this "jumping to Chrome" was simply a hype thing IMHO, and I generally don't care about hype.

From a developer standpoint, the dev tools in Chrome far exceed those in Firefox. The nightly releases are just starting to compare.

I rarely use those. And there is also Firebug.
Post reply on HN