Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Mozilla Firefox 8.0 In The Wild

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    442

    Default

    Wouldn't the version problem vanish if they had a separate version number for extensions?

    E.g.: (using abi for simplicity; pretend it's api if it makes you feel better)
    Extensions compatible with ext abi version 1 work with Firefox versions > 4 and <= 6
    Likewise, ext abi version 2 work with Firefox version > 6 <= 7

    Because it's the browser that will keep track of which abi version works with itself, the burden is lifted from the extension somewhat. They'll still have to make changes when there's a new extension abi break, but for multiple browser versions they otherwise don't have to change anything.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nobu View Post
    Wouldn't the version problem vanish if they had a separate version number for extensions?

    E.g.: (using abi for simplicity; pretend it's api if it makes you feel better)
    Extensions compatible with ext abi version 1 work with Firefox versions > 4 and <= 6
    Likewise, ext abi version 2 work with Firefox version > 6 <= 7

    Because it's the browser that will keep track of which abi version works with itself, the burden is lifted from the extension somewhat. They'll still have to make changes when there's a new extension abi break, but for multiple browser versions they otherwise don't have to change anything.
    That's what the Jetpack API is for. Also, starting with Firefox 10 they will default extensions to be compatible rather than incompatible.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reloaded211 View Post
    Tried FF8 on Archlinux few days ago and quickly reverted back to FF7 after seeing the latest release consuming more than 2 GB of RAM. I suspect hardware acceleration being the main source of such memory leaks though. FF7 with acceleration disabled currently uses 133 MB. I can live without that hardware stuff because even now hwaccel test shows 60+ fps. They probably use XRender for that.
    Yes, it uses XRender for 2D acceleration.

    The 3D acceleration you are talking about is only used for WebGL, which is hardly used on the web. So it's not the cause of your memory leaks, unless you were specifically on some webpage that uses 3D features, which i doubt.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Kansas.
    Posts
    263

    Default

    Also, starting with Firefox 10 they will default extensions to be compatible rather than incompatible.
    That's good.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnonymousCoward View Post
    8 GB. Firefox uses about 2 of those with over 200 tabs. Chrome when I tested it reached that with under 50, and was more sluggish than Firefox. No benchmarks, just my subjective feeling that I was more annoyed using Chrome than Firefox.
    I have a bug filed for Chrome eating tonnes of RAM compared to Firefox. There is no comparison there! Firefox is miles ahead of memory usage compared to Chrome. Chrome is a hog and a leak! Just open gmail and yahoo mail (or any javascript based website which refreshes), and leave it open for 7 days. Don't do anything! Just watch the memory usage of chrome processes (or the task manager view inside the chrome itself) and watch your system crawl!

    Chrome annoys the hell out of me! Every time I have tried to use it. Its the BTRFS of the browsers! Good on paper but never delivering the thing!

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devsk View Post
    I have a bug filed for Chrome eating tonnes of RAM compared to Firefox. There is no comparison there! Firefox is miles ahead of memory usage compared to Chrome. Chrome is a hog and a leak! Just open gmail and yahoo mail (or any javascript based website which refreshes), and leave it open for 7 days. Don't do anything! Just watch the memory usage of chrome processes (or the task manager view inside the chrome itself) and watch your system crawl!

    Chrome annoys the hell out of me! Every time I have tried to use it. Its the BTRFS of the browsers! Good on paper but never delivering the thing!
    I agree its absurd how people still constantly rail on firefox for high memory usage, when every benchmark I've seen (along with my personal usage) show firefox uses the least amount of memory out of all the major browsers. Chrome in particular uses the most for me, it often uses 100+ mb more memory than firefox with the same workload. If you are seeing really high memory usage in firefox its almost always 3 possible things: Extensions/Plugins/ Messed up profile. If you can reproduce that high mem usage on a clean profile with no extensions/plugins than by all means report it. The last memory usage issues I had with firefox were with versions 1.x/2.x. Since firefox 3 its been very good about plugging leaks and has only been getting better.

    Personally I don't really care too much about memory usage, all my systems have at least 4 gigs of ram and I never get close to running out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •