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

Firefox 29

firefox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 517 posts

Re: Firefox 29

#411

Post by azakai »

CyberShadow wrote: post #321
nandhp wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There isn't a feature in Chromium or Google Chrome that Firefox doesn't deliver. Multi-process browsing. It is incredibly annoying when my entire browser locks up because one of the fifty tabs I have open is doing something stupid. That never happened in several years of using Chrome, and it happens several times a day in Firefox.

For the record, Mozilla is working on it: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis You can track the E10s team's progress through their weekly meeting notes: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/E10s-meeting-notes

You can also try it right now on Nightly builds. There's even a menu option ("open new e10s window").

Re: Firefox 29

#412

Post by gkoz »

ozten wrote: post #273
CompuHacker wrote: post #207

Where the hell is my forward button? Why does browser.tabs.onTop not mean anything anymore? Where's my refresh button? On the... right side, inside the Awesome Bar? Why isn't a separate button? Why can't I put the Home button back beside the Back button? Why is the back button permanently part of the Awesome Bar? Why does the Awesome Bar change shape and size to allow the forward button to exist? Why isn't the forwar…

> Where the hell is my forward button? Forward button appears after you click the back button. It is only shown when it could be used. This and many other improvements reduce visual noise based on analysis of how frequently people used different pieces of browser chrome.

To me, disappearing and jumping buttons are much worse visual noise.

Re: Firefox 29

#413

Post by dsrikanth »

one feature that I like is the "Tab Groups" - I can organize my open tabs into groups and only open the group I want. Comes with a tab search functionality too..

Re: Firefox 29

#414

Post by renox »

nullc wrote: post #211
renox wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that you can't remove reliably the suggestions from the Omnibar bar, used an "embarrassing" website in non-anonymous mode? Too bad for you, because your wife can see the suggestion..

Highlight the suggestion and hit delete. This works reliably for me. This was basically the only awesomebar behavior I didn't like, it became much more usable for me after that... not even embarrassing sites: I'd typo a URL and awesomebar would help me typo it forever more. I wish the delete feature were more discoverable, however.

Yes, I've read this tips many times, but it still doesn't work..

Re: Firefox 29

#415

Post by mhitza »

epochwolf wrote: post #46
efdee wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You kind of make it sound as if Apple invented maximized windows... :-)

OS X's full screen apps aren't maximzed windows. If I put Sublime into full screen mode, there's no window, no menu bar. It's a text editor taking up the entire screen. If I were to maximize Sublime on Windows, Linux, or OS X (green button), you still have the chrome from the windowing system and the OS's menu bars. Also, the parent comment makes no claim Apple invented anything, he/she is just drawing a comparison p…

> If I were to maximize Sublime on Windows, Linux, or OS X (green button), you still have the chrome from the windowing system and the OS's menu bars.

Yes, if you maximize. However if you go fullscreen (F11) the chrome disappears.

Re: Firefox 29

#416

Post by electrotype »

One mini complaint about the new customization : It's not possible anymore to place the URL input on the menu bar.

Because of that, I have to display both bars (I like to see the menu).

Otherwise : good job Firefox team!

Re: Firefox 29

#417

Post by nnethercote »

nhebb wrote: post #103

I like it. There are a few changes that I will need to get used to, but in a few weeks I doubt I'll notice the difference. One thing that I think FF doesn't get enough credit for is how efficiently it runs these days. I prefer Chrome's developer tools, but for browsing, FF gets my vote.

> There are a few changes that I will need to get used to, but in a few weeks I doubt I'll notice the difference.

I wish people would take this attitude more often.

Re: Firefox 29

#418

Post by nnethercote »

slacka wrote: post #231
mohamedattahri wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem for me is how memory-hungry this browser is. How can a single tab opened on HN use 500MB?

Firefox's memory usage has ballooned since FF 13. https://areweslimyet.com/ On my 512MB Raspberry Pi, this used to be FF's greatest strenth. Unfortunately the latest versions are getting nearly as bad as chrome. I wish Mozilla would focus on their strengths and put more resources back into their memshrink project.

I guarantee you that FF29's memory usage is better in general than FF13, because it avoids numerous bad cases where old versions that used to cause memory usage to skyrocket. Those cases -- where memory goes up 10x -- are the ones that hurt. In contrast, you're unlikely to notice 20% higher memory usage during normal use.

Re: Firefox 29

#419

Post by sgarrity »

ninkendo wrote: post #159

In the screenshot, they misspelled Mozilla as "Mozila" in the tab title. (At least on OSX... maybe they tailor the screenshot depending on your user agent.)

This was my mistake. Embarrassing. Fixed.

Re: Firefox 29

#420

Post by nusq »

slacka wrote: post #231
mohamedattahri wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem for me is how memory-hungry this browser is. How can a single tab opened on HN use 500MB?

Firefox's memory usage has ballooned since FF 13. https://areweslimyet.com/ On my 512MB Raspberry Pi, this used to be FF's greatest strenth. Unfortunately the latest versions are getting nearly as bad as chrome. I wish Mozilla would focus on their strengths and put more resources back into their memshrink project.

areweslimyet is a tool mainly used to prevent regressions during development and shouldn't be interpreted the way you do.

There are many memory usage improvements made in firefox that don't appear explicitly in the areweslimyet tests, and there are many others, like better memory usage reporting accuracy and new features that do, thus the apparent increase in memory usage throughout the latest versions that you pointed.

Post reply on HN