Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, there is https://weather.gov
It does not seem to support TLS, so: http://weather.gov
Heh, the cert includes their Zabbix instance, but not the bare domain.
https://www.weather.gov but mixed content
Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
51–60 of 236 posts
Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#52Also, if you are not yet using 64-bit Chrome, you really should. It is more stable and avoids internal "out of memory" errors individual tabs can sometimes return. Not the default Chrome for some reason!
It's the default on Mac, not sure on windows.
I think their installer detects what Windows you are on and installs that, now; but I could be wrong.
Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#53Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#54Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#55awesome news then, chrome really needs to improve memory usage, especially when I have lots of tabs open. under firefox I normally had 120 tabs open all the time, and it's fine. with chrome, I dare not to exceed 60 tabs. chrome triggers heavy swap all the time still, which renders the system very sluggish.
I too keep a lot of tabs open. I use OneTab and The Great Suspender chrome extensions to also keep memory usage under control. They've been indispensable tools for the tab hoarders like me.
great, did not know this, I do use clutter-free extension all the time which avoids the same URL on multiple tabs.
Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
120 tabs?! What for?!
Tabs are the new bookmarks.
They're better. If I bookmark something with any service, chances of me ever checking that out again drop to nearly zero.
Tabs, by virtue of being there bugging you, are bookmarks, to-do lists, and task reminders all in one.
Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#57This sounds too good to be true. Are there any downsides to this improvement?
Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#58awesome news then, chrome really needs to improve memory usage, especially when I have lots of tabs open. under firefox I normally had 120 tabs open all the time, and it's fine. with chrome, I dare not to exceed 60 tabs. chrome triggers heavy swap all the time still, which renders the system very sluggish.
This is mainly because Chrome allocates a process for each page whereas FF only allocates a thread. The important factor being that threads share an address space where processes are allocated their own and thus consume more memory. Separate processes are arguably more secure and of one process crashes it does not take down the whole browser but all this comes at a cost. This cost is very apparent with many tabs open.
Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#59They mentioned that weather.com crashed their website. Their website is always extremely slow for me as well. It's ridiculous how poorly designed their website can be for such a simple service.
You can run `curl wttr.in` to get your local weather and 3-day forecast. Or just go to http://wttr.in/
Hmm. "Weather for City: Santa Rosa, Philippines"
That's the wrong Santa Rosa, in the wrong country. There's an interesting bug in there somewhere.
Re: Chrome 55 uses 30% less memory than 54
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
RAM is one of your least power hungry components compared to other parts of your computer, such as what generates heat (CPU/GPU) or produces physical motion (fans or spinning drives).
This makes no sense. RAM generates heat just as CPU does, and RAM also actually does consume a substantial percentage of laptop power. However, said usage isn't related to how much RAM is being used, really; it's a constant usage rate to keep the current RAM state alive.
Well, it makes sense to me: CPU and GPU take in the order of 10 times as much power as RAM. RAM power usage just isn't depending on load, like that of CPU and graphics.