Why I am Dumping Firefox

haven't used FF for ages, been a big CHrome user, but even now i am getting sick of chrome and it just sitting there claiming to load a page or giving that folder error screen, yet i open the site in IE and it loads instantly and fine, and this is on 3 different computers on 2 different ISP's.
 
I would like to use FireFox 4 as my main browser but this new version stopped working with my Alps touchpad scrolling feature. None of the work-arounds I found have worked. I guess it's a known issue and will probably be fixed in an update, so back to Chrome for me.
 
ff can scale text while leaving images at their native sizes. this alone is enough for me to use it exclusively.
 
Since Chrome came out I haven't looked back. And now it has all the extensions I need. Just don't adblock your fave sites like [H]!
 
I went back to the last 3.6.16. As i liked most of my add-ons. But i still can't stop it from auto scrolling to the bottom of the page. You start a page and it goes straight to the bottom. You try to scroll up and it goes back to the bottom.........
 
I have three tabs open, all on the [H] and I'm using 83 MB in Firefox.
I have three tabs open, exact same pages as in Firefox, and I'm using 83 MB in Internet Explorer.

I'm not sure why this guy is having problems but it's running fine for me. FF loads pages five times faster than IE. *shrug*
 
KILLER_K said:
I went back to the last 3.6.16. As i liked most of my add-ons. But i still can't stop it from auto scrolling to the bottom of the page. You start a page and it goes straight to the bottom. You try to scroll up and it goes back to the bottom.........
Click to expand...

guess it was telling you to move on? ;)
 
I kinda feel that firefox is a bit clumpy. Sure it has some good addons. I like the new 4.0. But I use safari 99% of the time. So much faster.
 
Firefox 4 creeps up to 1.1-1.2GB of RAM on my 8GB notebook. I can tell when it's happening, as page scrolls start to get slower.

If I quit it using Task Manager and open it again, restoring all of the same tabs, it usually consumes 1/3-1/4 that at open.

While I like FF4, I do believe there are some real memory issues that Mozilla needs to address. If another browser had as good an ad-blocker as Adblock Plus, I might consider switching.
 
EDIT: It appears that Adblock Plus is now available for Chrome. Guess I missed it.

When I set up my new ThinkPad T420 this week, I think I'll give Chrome a go. As an IT guy, Chrome's (well, the non-.msi version) installation procedure flies in the face of good install/security procedures, but I'm tired of Firefox muching my RAM like a Weight-Watchers member that's fallen off the wagon.
 
AaronP said:
Firefox started having load issues and crashing issues on my various machines. I switched to chrome, and haven't looked back sense.
Click to expand...

I've been using Chrome also, the only issue is the Spell Checker, other than that it's awesome.
 
Author is a typical Chromefag.

Any semi [H] computer pisses 200megs. Plus, as stated, Chromium is a memory hog too. Right now, I'm on Palemoon with three tabs and god knows how many add-ons, pushing 92 megs. Besides, I'd rather have firefox running that, than thirty instances of IE in background apps at 10megs all trying to open/close/crash for any reason under the sun.
 
Yossarian22 said:
Just because you have an i7 doesn't mean you take it up the ass. :p
Sorry, my comment wasn't pejoration of Firefox, as it is the main browser on my desktop. People kept saying FF4, so my initial thought was Final Fantasy IV. Which has no problems with loading speed as far as I'm concerned!
Click to expand...

My apologies. I thought you were referring to the quick startup of Firefox as a "fantasy" :p . To all the people that say that FF takes forever to start up: My Athlon XP 1600 with a 5400RPM HDD and 768MB or RAM loads FF4 up in 6 seconds :cool:.
 
The main concern over FF memory usage should not be how much it's using but when is it using it. If it's using 200MB of ram when the OS is using 800, and you only have 1GB of physical memory installed, that's an issue.
 
I have 8GB ram with page file turned off on windows 7. FF4 starts up in 1-2 sec cold boot. I've never seen FF4 use up more than 1 GB of memory except if I have a few youtube vids open. I've never have it crash on me, the flash player on the other hand did. FF4 looks fine once I disable the new text rending.
 
I like using Firefox only because I don't want to be using IE for school. Firefox works natively with 99% of my school's online resources, so I stick with it vs. 100% chance working of IE, but with the higher chance of malicious things attacking me.

I use Chrome for literally everything else except schoolwork.
 
Who cares, just get more ram. I usually have two windows open with 10+ tabs each, taking ~500+MB of ram.

However compared to 3-4 copies of Visual Studio and several other apps I use at work, it's nothing. I have 8GB of ram in my box at work, and I need more! lol. RAM IS CHEAP, Just get more!!
 
On my Windows computer at work, I use Firefox 4. I don't like Chrome at all on a Windows based system. I don't mind IE9, but I am used to the addons that I use for Firefox and don't see any need to switch.

However, on my home computer running Ubuntu 10.10, I don't like Firefox 3.x at all. I have all sorts of problems with links on my online brokerage account, and some images like forum smilies look like crap. I use Chromium, which works great and has no problems whatsoever, and I really like it. It also seems like a faster browser, though I don't have any hard evidence of that.

So, to recap: On a Windows computer, I like Firefox and dislike Chrome, on a Ubuntu computer I like Chromium and dislike Firefox.

We'll see if my opinion changes with 11.04 I guess.
 
Firefox won me back over with the FF4 beta 12 I believe it was. Chrome is great, I just enjoy the amount of customization I get with Firefox. That and if FF does have memory usage issues, I never notice them; I have 8gb of RAM. I mean really, anyone with at least 4gb of RAM isn't gonna notice FF memory usage, either. My fiancee doesn't on her computer with 4Gb of RAM, and she's a really heavy internet user.
 
I primarily switched to Chrome from Firefox because I like the concept of separate processes per tab. I mean, anything I want to do in my browser could probably be easily handled on one core anyway, but I like the idea, and wonder what the computing landscape might be like wehn all software takes advantage of multiple cores like this.
 
im sticking to FF out of habit. I have accepted that firefox has no longer that lean mean alternative to the bulky IE, but I have got used to the UI, too lazy to see if find similar plugins in other browsers, and unless other browsers have some feature that prints money, I really have no incentive to switch.
 
sp1te said:
how did this make the front page?
Click to expand...

Because the guy who wrote the "article" (if it can be called that) was wrong in many ways. he has since changed his "article" in order to make it fit in his view of how things are instead of reality.
 
I dumped Firefox long ago. I prefer Chrome's interface and minimalistic approach. This is how Firefox started compared to IE and it has grown into almost the same monster it once set out to slay.

I really only use adblock and flashblock so I'm not hurting on extension support.

I refuse to use a browser that leaves dead unused space on the screen like the title bar. If IE9 or Firefox were to have the tabs setup like Chrome I'd be more inclined to give them a try.
 
Hidaglio said:
I refuse to use a browser that leaves dead unused space on the screen like the title bar. If IE9 or Firefox were to have the tabs setup like Chrome I'd be more inclined to give them a try.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean but IE 9 can be setup to look pretty much like Chrome, just tabs and an address/search bar and nothing else and the tabs and address bar can even be on the same row.
 
sp1te said:
how did this make the front page?
Click to expand...

Because it's of enough interest to generate 4 pages of discussion in one day.

The issues I see with Firefox are basically evolutionary ones. Firefox comes from a time when you opened the browser to look up something and when websites were maybe updated a couple of times a day.

It's now in a time where many people leave their systems and browser running 24/7 with dozens of constantly updating sites working within as applications in their own right.

The way it manages tabs and extensions is second to none and make it a very powerful browser. But it is behind the times in it's security, efficiency and stability when compared with chrome.

For me Firefox still wins out because of it's feature set, but if it can't match Chrome for stability and efficiency before Chrome catches up on features it's in danger of becoming irreverent

But in all honesty do we really need both?
 
BigYoSpeck said:
But it is behind the times in it's security, efficiency and stability when compared with chrome.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you can say that Chrome is any more secure than FF unless you're worried about rogue extensions. I'd give it a maybe on efficiency; Chrome uses less memory than FF for me with one or two tabs open but once I start piling tabs in they're both pretty similar. FF is more stable for me than Chrome; I can't even remember the last time FF crashed on me.
 
This motivated me to do a quick test on how the browsers work for what I do. And that, my friends, is the danger of generalizing. FF3.5 was horrible for me--it ate memory for lunch and slowed to a crawl if I left it open for more than a day. Others (such as Joe) say they have never had problems with FF, at least not to the degree that many of the "switchers" like me have.

So what does that mean for me as a user? Run FF4 with a comparable extension-set to Chrome for a week and see what happens. Leave the browser open, open and close dozens of tabs, etc. I'm primarily concerned about memory (4GB isn't that much these days).

From a cold start with the same three pages (Facebook, Google News, FanFiction.net), Chrome used 50MB more. I wonder how this is going to turn out?
 
Bankie said:
My apologies. I thought you were referring to the quick startup of Firefox as a "fantasy" :p . To all the people that say that FF takes forever to start up: My Athlon XP 1600 with a 5400RPM HDD and 768MB or RAM loads FF4 up in 6 seconds :cool:.
Click to expand...

That's why I tongue'd you :p :D

I like Firefox and all the extensions, it's clear that some addons have problems with deallocating memory but I like Chrome on my Thinkpad because it gives me more real estate. I frequently have to switch because there are some sites that Chrome doesn't render properly.

Cool trick is to make pages your icons in your icon toolbar but remove the name and just leave it blank, so the site will be displayed by favicon. ;)
 
Opera anyone? This is the only browser for me aside from having to use 32-bit IE9 for Netflix :(
 
heatlesssun said:
You see a lot of people around here say why would anyone use IE 9, I think a better question for most people would be why not? If you use need or want extensions of course FF and Chrome have much better support for those but beyond that there really isn't that much difference between FF 4, IE 9, and Chrome 152.6 or whatever version number it is at today. Personally I'm not a huge consumer of extensions and choose them sparingly as they can cause plenty of problems but they can be extremely useful. I'm just finding IE 9 to be faster and more stable than the other two on a vast array of hardware from the slowest device I use daily, an HP Slate 500 to the most powerful device I have my sig rig and a lot in between. From what I'm seeing Microsoft made a web great browser for Windows 6.x and tuned it for that platform while making it highly standards compliant, nothing more or less.

It's simply a back to the fundamentals approach for Microsoft and it was the right way to go. Let other people waste their time and resources creating cross platform browsers. Sure there's some money in web browsers but not that much and certainly it makes sense for Microsoft to create the best running browser they can for the latest Windows architecture.

At any rate it's good to have three solid browsers with different strengths and weaknesses, IE 9 is my bread and butter browser and just works but I have the latest versions of Opera, FF and Chrome installed on all of my Windows 7 devices as well if I ever need one of them.
Click to expand...



Same, I love IE9, IE7/8 were fine but IE9 is very very nice. I keep FireFox installed for occasional use, but 99% of my browsing is done in IE9. It just plain works, it has a nice interface, and it is fast+stable+light... not sure what else someone would want except an auto-F5 extension, which is most of the use FireFox gets from me ;).
 
GoldenTiger said:
Same, I love IE9, IE7/8 were fine but IE9 is very very nice. I keep FireFox installed for occasional use, but 99% of my browsing is done in IE9. It just plain works, it has a nice interface, and it is fast+stable+light... not sure what else someone would want except an auto-F5 extension, which is most of the use FireFox gets from me ;).
Click to expand...

Have fun with your virii and malware :p
 
I use IE for one thing and one thing only. Going to a trusted site to download Chrome or Firefox :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top