Live data from Hacker News

AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

blog.mozilla.org

101–110 of 270 posts

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#101
post #92

It's 2014. My computer has 12 Gigabytes of RAM. I don't give a shit, as long as i don't have to view those terrible stupid Ads. Advertisers, fix your practises and i will view your Ads again.

One of the best ad-blockers is actually called FlashBlock (not sure this is the name today)

It will remove around 90% of obnoxiousness...

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#103
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people think of a browser as a tool for displaying text and pictures, with maybe a bit of JS code and some CSS effects on the side. That was true in the late 90s, but these days a browser is actually a fully-fledged programming environment that also happens to have some incredibly sophisticated multimedia capabilities: text, images, video, audio, animations, 3d graphics, etc. The most popular websites run quite…

> That was true in the late 90s, but these days a browser is actually a fully-fledged programming environment that also happens to have some incredibly sophisticated multimedia capabilities: text, images, video, audio, animations, 3d graphics, etc. Maybe I just miss the 90s, but I would much rather have the simple content browser than a "full-fledged programming environment", especially since all of that content is c…

If you want Dillo and/or w3m, they're still available!

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#104
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many people think of a browser as a tool for displaying text and pictures, with maybe a bit of JS code and some CSS effects on the side. That was true in the late 90s, but these days a browser is actually a fully-fledged programming environment that also happens to have some incredibly sophisticated multimedia capabilities: text, images, video, audio, animations, 3d graphics, etc. The most popular websites run quite…

> That was true in the late 90s, but these days a browser is actually a fully-fledged programming environment that also happens to have some incredibly sophisticated multimedia capabilities: text, images, video, audio, animations, 3d graphics, etc. Maybe I just miss the 90s, but I would much rather have the simple content browser than a "full-fledged programming environment", especially since all of that content is c…

NetSurf does a pretty good job. It does well at HTML and CSS on most sites and has only very basic JS support.

Another is Dillo, although it doesn't have as good of CSS last I tried (version 3 isn't horrible though).

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chrome has a "star" button right in the address bar, FF and IE have Ctrl+B to create a bookmark. The Classic Theme Restorer add-on for FF allows you restore the star button to the address bar. On FF, Ctrl-D bookmarks the current page, while Ctrl-B opens a list of bookmarks.

I don't get it; I'm on FF 29 without that addon, and I have a star button on the bar (not in the address text input, but on the same bar). What's the point of the addon?

The point is the star button is not in a convenient location in FF 29... I find have to search for the star button now when need to bookmark something. I guess it made to much sense to have right in the address bar so they moved it... The Classic Theme Restorer may be in my near future.

UPDATE: I used the Customize feature to move the star button just to the right of the address bar and that is good enough for me.

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#106
post #11

My primary computer is a laptop from 2008 with a 2.5Ghz Core 2 Duo and other than a 1 second delay in startup I don't notice any performance degradation in general use compared to running without ABP. Currently this machine has been up for 3 days and 17 hours and Firefox has been running the whole time and it is using 303MB with 4 tabs open one of which is the Daily Mail (don't judge!) which is an extremely busy page…

> I only have 4GB RAM I've also seen this in some other comment, so I think it's worth pointing out: if you have a desktop computer then yes, it's ok. However, there are also netbooks and notebooks around with a lot less memory than that. Tablets, while not currently one of Firefox markets, are also commonly seen with less than that. Lots of parents with second-hand computers, too, which haven't been touched in a whi…

In my experience, Firefox uses less memory on systems with less RAM. My laptop only has 2Gb, and Firefox runs fine, even if on my work laptop it can reach 2.5Gb.

And I'm not shy about using tabs either, I often have many dozens open.

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#107
post #3

The first thing people complain about with browsers is probably memory usage. I doubt that many people actually understand what a browser actually does with that memory. I sure don't. 100mb sounds like a lot of memory for a webpage. Where does all this memory go to?

Many people think of a browser as a tool for displaying text and pictures, with maybe a bit of JS code and some CSS effects on the side. That was true in the late 90s, but these days a browser is actually a fully-fledged programming environment that also happens to have some incredibly sophisticated multimedia capabilities: text, images, video, audio, animations, 3d graphics, etc. The most popular websites run quite…

> Many people think of a browser as a tool for displaying text and pictures, with maybe a bit of JS code and some CSS effects on the side. That was true in the late 90s [..]

It still is for many of us who complain about browser (and web content) bloat. We are on the web for text and pictures, primarily. The things we do online hasn't changed much since the 90s. Having sophisticated multimedia capabilities is irrelevant when we're in it for the content that matters.

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#108
post #9

http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/zero/

Interesting, my experience with hosts files has been that they do not block ads nearly as well as ABP. A lot of the ads I see are served from the same host as the content. ABP also blocks things like youtube ads that I don't think can be blocked at the DNS level.

I'd love to move the ad filtering out of my browser though, either into a proxy like privoxy or DNS filtering, if it worked well.

Re: AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage

#110
post #27
post #20

It's not just memory overhead, it is also CPU overhead. One approach is to write the filtering engine from scratch. It is what I did, without looking at ABP's code beforehand in order to ensure a clean slate mind. I didn't get it right the first time, I did spend quite a large amount of time benchmarking, measuring, prototyping, etc. Once I was satisfied I had finally had a solid code base, I went and benchmarked it…

As far as I can tell, HTTPSB is not available for Firefox, please fix! I would love to use something better than ABP (in terms of performance, it does content filtering just fine), but I'm not so desperate to abandon the (warning: subjective content ahead) greatest browser of all times to lower the memory footprint of an ad blocker.

I totally agree with that.

(I did upvote the comment but I want the creator of the extension to know that more people are interested)

Post reply on HN