101–110 of 137 posts
The only thing I want from Firefox is to stop freezing completely when a single tab goes crazy. It just makes the whole experience feel clunky compared to Chrome. Usually it happens with Gmail so maybe there is a conspiracy there to drive adoption for Chrome :p
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A switch on/off in the preferences is needed (because privacy choices must be easy for everyone) and I'd choose "off", but I think this bit from Google may ease the mind of someone here. > It’s important to note that any time Safe Browsing sends data back to Google, such as information about a suspected phishing page or malicious file, the information is only used to flag malicious activity and is never used anywhere…
> the information is only used to flag malicious activity and is never used anywhere else at Google. But does it say the information is anonymized and promptly deleted, and nothing is logged?
"After two weeks, any associated information, such as your IP address, is stripped, and only the URL itself is retained." ( From: http://blog.chromium.org/2012/01/all-about-safe-browsing.htm... )
As a Firefox user, I really think it's poor form on the part of Mozilla to not provide any additional information or re-assurances on their website about the data captured and recorded by Google. Mozilla's slogan on their homepage is "Commited to your privacy and an open web". Being committed to privacy means being open and explicit about the data captured through their browser services, no matter how innocuous the data might seem. It also means presenting that information clearly and making it easy to find. People can then make informed choices about whether they want to use such services.
This is the sort of thing I would have expected them to have said:
"When you download a file from a web page, Firefox checks that the file does not contain a virus or malware before you save it. To check the file is safe to download, Firefox contacts Google to use a service they provide called Safe Browsing. Google checks if the file is harmful or safe, and sends this information back to Firefox (this normally happens in a few seconds). If the file is safe, Firefox will start the download. If the file is harmful, Firefox will block the download and display a warning message.
When Firefox uses the Safe Browsing feature, it needs to send Google information about your download. Google records the following information from Firefox: your IP address, the name of the file you are downloading, the address of the website, and [insert any other data recorded here]. [Also insert a re-assurance that Google does not keep a record of all your downloads against your Google account or against your IP address - assuming this is the case. Also explain how Google uses that info. and how long it's kept for etc.]
[Then finally explain how to switch off this feature if you don't want to use Google's Safe Browsing feature.]"
I want to use Firefox (OS X), and with almost every release I give it a go but it's simply too slow in comparison to Chrome. I'm talking about actions you do multiple times an hour - opening a new tab, closing a tab, rearranging tabs etc. This is with no extensions in use, on a mid-2011 fully specced out macbook air. It's unfortunate but the lag is clear and I can't use it as my primary when I know a better solution…
This seams to be a problem with your machine. I also use a macbook air (End 2013) and dont have this problem (or feel any Lag on Tab-Actions). Even on my old Ubuntu-rig it doesnt have this problem. Either in Firefox or Chrome.
Instead of accepting that Firefox may indeed have performance problem, you immediately discount this possibility, instead blaming it on mr_november's computer.
It's irrelevant that it isn't happening on your laptop that's over 2 years newer than his is. It's irrelevant that it isn't happening on your Ubuntu system. None of that matters.
I don't doubt for a second that he is in fact running into performance problems with Firefox. He isn't alone. Many people report Firefox having worse performance than Chrome does on the same system. I've experienced this, too.
Yet instead of addressing and fixing these very real performance problems that have been brought up time and time again by many users, the Firefox community and developers seem content to deny that they exist, or refuse to consider that it may be a problem with Firefox (like you've done), or point to useless and totally unrealistic benchmarks to suggest it isn't a problem.
But worst of all is how mr_november's comment has been voted down. It's one thing to deny that the problem exists, but it's much worse to try to actively censor those who have merely pointed out a very legitimate and troubling issue.
Firefox has been losing market share for some time now, and this trend will only continue as long as Firefox's performance problems go unaddressed, and the Firefox community mistreats anyone who dares mention that such problems still exist.
Where did the Shadow Dom support go?
Firefox's developer tools are really becoming great. "Copy as CURL" for the network tab was something in chrome that I really missed. Box model view which was super handy is now editable. Console showing stack traces along errors was long due. New Canvas debugger, eyedropper are very handy. Font viewer, responsive design tools, the 3d view (very handy in debugging silly box model issues) and highlight painted area mo…
Also, I'm pretty convinced the dev tools have some sort of memory leak in them. Every 3-5 days I have to restart Firefox or my game runs so slow it's unplayable. I don't think it has to do with my code because I've got no persistent store and refreshing the page doesn't fix it. Restarting the browser always does.
Sometimes the debugger gets confused and puts breakpoints on things I no longer have breakpoints on.
The profiler does not have a very useful view. I can't figure out how to delete reports I've made without closing the dev tools. More importantly, I can't find a convenient way to answer the question, "What are the slowest parts of this code?" I have to do a lot of manual labor expanding deeply nested trees.
As I said, it's pretty good. These are just things I'd like to see improved, not things that drive me crazy. I prefer the dev tools to firebug because firebug takes a relatively long time to start up.
Re: this update, I'm embarrassed to say I didn't know console.error even existed (I don't consider myself a JS expert). I've been using `throw new Error("message")`. Will that show stack traces now, too? I always have to put breakpoints on the line with the throw to figure out the call stack. This can add a lot of time to my debugging if I'm not sure how to reproduce the error.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
4.8ghz quad core, 8gb ram, gtx 580. Firefox is consistently slower on my machine sadly (I've also got 3 script blockers/whitelists in chrome with tons of extensions and still outperforms.)
I recently (this past week) got a brand new MBPr, 16G RAM, etc. FF provides a better experience Chrome, still. So, once again, anecdote and data and all that jazz.
This is about users having bad experiences when using Firefox. Your positive experience in no way negates these bad experiences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm also a bit worried about the privacy implications of this. Especially given that the feature is hidden, and the only two ways to turn it off involve going into about:config, which most people don't even know exists. I wouldn't even know it was doing this if I hadn't read the changelog. Reading the changelog, it also mentions having local and remote blacklists, but how FF chooses which one to use wasn't clear to m…
It seems like the last few updates of Firefox are each hiding yet one more important setting... I think that is what will finally drive me away from Firefox (I've used it since the beginning even if chrome was much faster for a while) ... time to browser shop.
It's a shame that your comment has been voted down, as well. The more that the Firefox community goes out of its way to deny that users are unhappy, or even to censor them like in this case, the harder it will be for Mozilla to remain relevant.
Firefox is pretty much Mozilla's only semi-successful offering at this point, and even its market share has been steadily dropping (it's probably well under 20% by now). If this slide continues, nobody will have any reason to listen to Mozilla. Their influence over the web, already waning, will unfortunately become non-existent.
Did this remove the horrendous Australis UI?