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

Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

extremetech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 419 posts

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#11

Post by elvis635 »

shpx wrote: post #2

People are using µBlock now for precisely this reason. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/%C2%B5Block-vs.-ABP:-... https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/%C2%B5block/cjpalh... https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

Together with umatrix (https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/) are the best chrome extensions

Since I went back to firefox those are the only extensions I really miss, there is policeman (https://github.com/futpib/policeman/) but it's not as good as them yet

To whoever develop extensions, please don't focus only on chrome, firefox during the last months has become must better that it was before, if developers only consider chrome, people will eventually migrate to it and firefox will die. Even though chromium is open it won't be good for the ecosystem

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#15

Post by elvis635 »

girishso wrote: post #8

I have switched to HTTP Switchboard, works pretty well. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/http-switchboard/m...

You should migrate to umatrix (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/%C2%B5matrix/ogfcm...), http switchboard is not maintained anymore

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#16

Post by zo1 »

From the article:

>"* The main problem, though, is the process by which ABP actually blocks ads. Basically, ABP inserts a massive CSS stylesheet — occupying around 4MB of RAM — into every single webpage that you visit, stripping out the ads.*"

Isn't then the actual problem the way that Adblock+ removes the ads? Why not simply allow an API for a plugin to easily strip content from a site. If there is one already, then ABP should switch to it to reduce memory usage. If not, well then we should look at the actual culprits of this problem which is the browsers.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#17

Post by jacquesm »

He's definitely on to something here, FF with a hundred or so tabs open:

With ABP:

   12961 XXXXXX    20   0 2615960 1.483g  58692 S  45.2  9.5   2:13.00 firefox
Without:

   13098 XXXXXX     20   0 2157212 1.109g  57476 R 142.6  7.1   1:26.25 firefox
Both after a complete stop and start of the browser, restoring every tab by activating it.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#18

Post by zo1 »

neals wrote: post #14

I used to not do Adblock, because you know, ads make the internet go round and all that. But with the "download here"-button ads, there is no way to know what button to press anymore. Now installing Adblock is a requirement.

I got tricked once by one of those while on Sourceforge. Words can not describe how annoyed I was that day.

Re: Adblock Plus is probably the reason Firefox and Chrome are such memory hogs

#19

Post by aluhut »

shpx wrote: post #2

People are using µBlock now for precisely this reason. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/%C2%B5Block-vs.-ABP:-... https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/%C2%B5block/cjpalh... https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

Too bad its's not for Firefox
Post reply on HN