Firefox, Heal Thyself

http://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2013/05/14/firefox-heal-thyself/

by pilgrim689 • 13 years ago

154 102 13 years ago

blog.mozilla.org

diminoten• 13 years ago

> and your browser can start healing itself

I wonder what some specifics are for this statement.

sp3322• 13 years ago

One way, which is admittedly heavy-handed, is already available. If you go to Help->Troubleshooting Information, there's a button to "Reset Firefox". https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/reset-firefox-easily-fi... Hopefully future releases will automatically detect problems in individual subsystems and give you more fine-grained control.

ubojan• 13 years ago

Yup, this is currently the best and quickest way to fix problems with Firefox. If you set up sync, you can reset browser and reload context (extensions, settings, history, passwords, ...) in a few minutes.

brightghost• 13 years ago

Curious to see this today, as the FF enterprise mailing list has been filled with grumbling this week about FF's inability to auto-update itself or its plugins, and the headaches that causes us IT folk when paired with the auto-quarantining of outdated plugins recently implemented.

slacka• 13 years ago

I just fired up Firefox and did a help->about firefox. Guess what? I'm still on version 17! Despite all their claims about the silent auto-update feature, it doesn't work if you are running as a limited normal user account.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=711475

I don't know if this is what you're talking about, but I'd don't blame the "IT folk". Seriously, what kind of idiot requires their users to run with administrator accounts for their software to function properly? What is this 2005?

DEinspanjer2• 13 years ago

It is still a bit forward looking, but I can give you one quick "for instance":

Using the data that is being collected today, we can analyze poor performance and stability and correlate it with certain extensions and plugins, going down to the level of version and platform specifics. We can then provide better blocklisting based on this data, in addition to providing the user with the tool to see the results for themselves and offer suggestions such as updating an add-on or uninstalling it.

devNoise3• 13 years ago

Will this help them figure out that they need to fix memory leaks?

shocks3• 13 years ago

They're already fixing memory leaks. In fact, Firefox now uses less memory than Chrome.

Let me guess, you're another person who hasn't used Firefox in a few years hasn't bothered to check out the latest versions at all? :)

esrauch• 13 years ago

It is rather unfortunate that there was a couple years there that FF lagged behind Chrome, it is really still having lasting impact on the brand.

That said, the developer tools (both Firebug and the newer native ones) are really just not on par with Chrome now. I know they have people working on it, so I am looking forward to what they come up with.

rexreed• 13 years ago

For me, alas, with 5 windows open and many, many tabs per window, Firefox regularly climbs into the 1 Gig+ memory range. The solution: less windows and tabs, I guess. But I was hoping / expecting the memory profile to change significantly over the past few builds.

And yes, I am using the latest build, I check about:memory regularly, stripped out the unneeded add-ons, but maybe I've just got too much stuff open and those pages have lots of script activity.

Is my usage the issue or is there something that can be improved in my scenario?

devNoise3• 13 years ago

I use Firefox everyday as one of my main browsers. On version 20 right now and expect to be updated to 21 the next time I restart it. I've installed the "Memory Restart" add on, so that memory use stay reasonable. Once the memory size hits 900MB, I see performance decline. Over 1GB and I start to see the Beach Ball of Death. My typical usage is to have 2-3 windows open with 3-6 tabs open in each window.

While I feel Mozilla has tried to address the memory leaks, I still think there is a lot of memory bloat for my usage.

nullc• 13 years ago

Browse over to about:memory

I run nightly and I don't use addons beyond adblock and don't run flash so perhaps my experiences are different, but I haven't had problems with Firefox leaking memory in a couple years. The profiling tools at about:memory may let you see where things are breaking.

yogo2• 13 years ago

Glad you mentioned about:memory. I usually read the changelog when they push out a release but somehow I missed that. This is a very nice breakdown of the memory.

varikin• 13 years ago

The Firefox team has huge initiative to fix memory issue called MemShrink[1]. One of the devs blogs regularly about it[2].

I don't know much about this Health Report and memory leaks, but one the blogs on MemShrink said that to fix memory issues (leaks and memory bloat), they needed to measure what and how Firefox is using memory. There is now an about:memory page the gives a great breakdown, though it is very dev oriented and easy to copy/paste into bugs.

One of the big items that caused memory leaks is plugins. With FF15[3], made a change to find a very common type of leak with plugins that and free that memory.

If you haven't tried seriously FF in the past year, then give it another go. It is much better.

[1] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Performance/MemShrink [2] https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/category/memshrink/ [3] https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2012/07/19/firefox-15-p...

01Michael102• 13 years ago

Guys, maybe we shouldn't be feeding the trolls...

JoeKM2• 13 years ago

You would rather have the statement remain unopposed, as if fact?

fauigerzigerk• 13 years ago

I would really like to learn your criteria for calling someone a troll.

wodenokoto• 13 years ago

No. They already have the lowest memory footprint. They don't need to figure out that they need to fix memory leaks, since they are doing it with great success.

But it will help them identify and fix current and future leaks.

thomasbk• 13 years ago

Part of this is somewhat similar to how Windows 8 measures "Start-up impact" of applications that auto-start, and allows you to disable them with two clicks. (In task manager)

sp3322• 13 years ago

Internet Explorer will even tell you how long each plugin takes to start. You can see the stats in [Gear icon]-> Manage Add-ons. My slowest plugin is actually Google Chrome Frame :p

fooqux• 13 years ago

I'd say that, given the scope of what that plugin is doing, a slow startup is not exactly surprising, and is rather expected.

acjohnson552• 13 years ago

I'm not sure if this applies, but I really hope they provide better tools to identify badly behaving webpages. Sometimes when my CPU or memory are being cranked by Firefox, I really just want to kill the one tab out of 50 that's causing all the problems.

jlgreco2• 13 years ago

It would be great if they could roll such a feature into a convenient UI. Just a magic "Firefox, whatever you are doing.. knock it off" button would be great. It could look at system memory usage and CPU usage, determine if either is high enough that it might cause user distress, and kill whatever tabs are the most likely offenders.

BrianEatWorld• 13 years ago

I like this idea. A bit like the pause buttons on my VMs.

I have this type of issue more with Chrome than Firefox though and it always seems to be related to leaving a tab open with a video for a long time, even if it isn't being played.

DEinspanjer2• 13 years ago

That isn't currently a target area for FHR. Things pertaining to the performance of particular webpages and such are extremely difficult to tease out of the data in a meaningful way. Not to say we will never include something like that in FHR, just not in the first couple of revisions of it.

Have you tried out the about:memory page? It doesn't do CPU, but it is a good way to see what particular pages are hogging memory.

jlgreco2• 13 years ago

> Things pertaining to the performance of particular webpages and such are extremely difficult to tease out of the data in a meaningful way.

It seems to me that you could do this "well enough" if you put each page in its own process and let the OS tell you which are burning the CPU. There could/would be edge-cases where a page causing issues would not appear like it was causing issues, looking at it from that level, but it would sure as hell be a good start.

piyush_soni2• 13 years ago

Is it that Chrome is able to do it just because it's a separate process per tab? (It shows memory consumption by each page.) I try to go to the about:memory page every once in a while, but first that doesn't show information in a very intuitive way, and second, NONE OF the 'GC', 'CC', or the 'Minimize Memory Usage' buttons seem to reduce Firefox's memory usage. Sometimes pressing these buttons actually increases the RAM usage (as seen from the Task Manager on Windows) - which is beyond my understanding. The only way to reclaim the 2 GB of my system RAM firefox has captured is to restart it.

acjohnson552• 13 years ago

I hadn't tried it before. It's interesting and I can see it being helpful in some cases, but it's not immediately easy to parse. I'll probably have to spend some more time with it.

cm3• 13 years ago

That would be nice, but I believe Firefox, Opera and Chrome already detect unresponsive tabs and offer closing such a tab and freeze it until you make a decision. Opera has both opera:cpu and opera:memdebug.

guojh0570• 13 years ago

And in fact, after I updated my Firefox to 21.0, it seems that it took more memory than before. I run it on Mac OSX 10.8.3

Goronmon3• 13 years ago

Funnily enough, Firefox died on my system today and I haven't been able to get it working since.

Just freezes after start up, even in safe mode (well, when it even booted up, which it stopped doing after a couple tries).

vanderZwan2• 13 years ago

On my computer it sometimes doesn't open a window unless I open a second instance of Firefox, and then both suddenly load. Try that maybe?

Goronmon3• 13 years ago

Doesn't really matter if it loads, because it just crashes anyways, haha.

piyush_soni2• 13 years ago

That second 'instance' (it actually keeps only one instance running) might not be helping in bringing up your windows. Try clearing your (startup/local) cache, it might have become really big. I do that whenever my Firefox takes long times to start - if you check in Process Monitor, at that time it is dealing with those cache folders.

rythie• 13 years ago

Your sqlite files might be locked - try either removing or moving them and copying them back.

Goronmon3• 13 years ago

I made a token gesture at fixing the sqlite files, but I don't have the patience to manipulate obscure files in AppData to get a browser to work.

Stuff like this is why Chrome is my primary browser.

hollerith4• 13 years ago

I wish one of the most important tools for publishing and consuming text on the internet weren't so prone to problems as to require a dedicated health-reporting subsystem.

My text editor and my email client don't need dedicated health-reporting subsystems.

option_greek• 13 years ago

You surely must not be using Outlook that suffers from morbid obesity.

scott_s3• 13 years ago

Your text editor and email client aren't also capable of running arbitrary applications. Modern web browsers have more in common with operating systems than with text editors and email clients.

hollerith4• 13 years ago

>Modern web browsers have more in common with operating systems than with text editors and email clients.

That is the core of the problem right there. The need for a new health-reporting system is just a symptom or a consequence.

abecedarius• 13 years ago

Emacs!

jfb• 13 years ago

I use Emacs, so, um. Yeah.

olympus• 13 years ago

It looks like the Mozilla team is doing such great stuff nowadays. I converted to Chrome a few years back and it seemed like Firefox was stagnant. But I think the competition has been good for them, they've been doing lots of neat stuff recently. I'm thinking about switching back, or figuring out a way to use two different browsers.

com2kid8• 13 years ago

My single largest issue with Firefox stability is constantly running into the 32bit memory barrier. Either split tabs out into multiple processes, or enable 64bit support already.

My browser crashes on average twice a day due to running out of memory and FF just giving up. It doesn't even crash gracefully, it just up and quits.

(I frequently have ~100 tabs open, and I am quite thankful that Firefox lets me search across my tabs! Very useful feature)

thefreeman• 13 years ago

I really can't understand how many people consistently talk about having hundreds of tabs open. What are you so afraid of closing a website for? If it's that important, you will remember to go back to it later. Usually, it's not.

Once I get to 10 or 15 tabs I usually end up closing all but one or two just to stay focused.

com2kid8• 13 years ago

> I really can't understand how many people consistently talk about having hundreds of tabs open. What are you so afraid of closing a website for? If it's that important, you will remember to go back to it later. Usually, it's not.

Well the hacker news homepage for instance.

I typically go down and middle click on any story I find interesting, and the comments section to go with it.

This can easily end up with 8-14 tabs open.

Now repeat the same thing for my Reddit frontpage (or just /r/programming!) and I can easily hit another 30 tabs within a couple of minutes.

Every URL someone posts in the comments that seems interesting also gets opened in a new tab. An active discussion easily results in another 5-10 tabs (and remember, that is per discussion thread!).

If one of those tabs goes to Wikipedia, then I'll middle click any links in the Wikipedia article that sound relevant. This can add another 10 tabs easily.

Within 10 minutes of turning on my computer I am now easily up to 50+ tabs.

anonyfuss• 13 years ago

I organize projects on multiple virtual desktops -- I usually have 3-5 personal software/electronic projects going at a time, and I switch between them throughout the week depending on what I feel like focusing on. Add to that 1-2 work work projects, and I'll have between 4-7 activate project desktops at any time.

I do most of my project research and documentation lookup in the browser, which means I might have anywhere from 10-30 tabs of pertinent information corresponding to each project on each virtual desktop, across multiple browser windows.

This is just convenient for me; I never have to swap in application/desktop state, because all my information, files, IDEs, etc are right there, exactly the way that I left them.

That comes out to 210 tabs at the absolute maximum; right now I seem to have around 100 Chrome tab process running. Fortunately, RAM is cheap these days.

keeperofdakeys• 13 years ago

The 64bit version works perfectly on Linux (and I can only assume OSX). There were some bad problems on windows which caused them to ditch the 64bit development, although the fact that plugins are 32bit doesn't help them either.

cpeterso3• 13 years ago

I work at Mozilla and many developers here are 100+ tab users, too. So the use case you describe is not a low priority. <:)

Do you have any Firefox add-ons installed? If you have the patience to identify a misbehaving add-on (by bisecting the add-ons you are running), Mozilla might be able to address the problem in the browser or reach out to the add-on developer.

com2kid8• 13 years ago

My issue is, FF climbs up to 2.5GB of memory usage, then it dies. 100% repro.

My only add-ons are AB+, Reddit Enhancement Suite, and No Redirect. I am 99% sure this was happening before Noredirect, but I'll try disabling that as well. (Super useful though, wow!)

(GreaseMonkey is also installed, but I don't have any scripts loaded in it, disabling it anyway)

Of course if you run into the 32bit memory limit, I don't know if there is much FF can do about it! Right now I am at ~1,5800MB.

Actually this is sort of amusing, the memory usage counts up to 1590, then drops down to 1570, then counts up to 1591, drops to 1571, counts to 1592, drops to 1572, I am watching some stupid web app leak memory in real time.

(Maxed out at 1588 when I started typing, now maxing out at 1606, heh)

All of this is as reported in Windows Task Manager so numbers are wildly inaccurate I assume, still funny. (About:memory is showing the same thing happening!)

Ah the wonders of crappy JS programmers.

Edit: Haven't changed any websites or loaded any new tabs, now it is cycling up to 1630MB. :P

Gmo2• 13 years ago

I have 200+ (sometimes 300+) tabs open, and I never ran in the 32 bits memory limit.

It MUST be an add-on !

com2kid8• 13 years ago

The contents of those tabs might make a difference!

All of my add-ons except for Ad Block Plus are disabled right now, 2.1GB of memory is being used.

I'm sure I could open up 200 tabs of Hacker News without problem. ;)

dredmorbius5• 13 years ago

My observations, using both Firefox (well, Iceweasel 20.0-1~bpo60+1), and Chrome (Chromium 26.0.1410.43-1). In many ways, I prefer Firefox as a browser (better plugins, controls, tabs, too much Google influence already).

My Firefox experience is getting to the point it's virtually unusable, with very, very slow response to any actions (especially new tab / new window functions). We're talking about many seconds, sometimes a minute or more.

While the overall footprint of Firefox is smaller than Chrome, Chrome's sandboxing of tabs gives vastly better user-based memory management: I've got the option of killing off tabs (without closing them) that are using excessive memory, restoring net system responsiveness.

Firefox uses a single process space, and slowness in one tab seems to extend elsewhere (my general observation, not based on analysis).

A larger part of the problem is a combination of how browsers facilitate (or don't) content management and browsing as a task and workflow, and the increasing emphasis on highly-interactive sites.

The lack of such tools, and especially the paucity of bookmarks as a management tool, means that my usual workflow management is:

- Open browser.

- Open lots of tabs. It's not uncommon for me to have 100s of tabs open across multiple browser windows.

For Firefox, Tree Style Tabs at least give some semblance of structure as to how I've traced down some link path. The flat horizontal tabs of Chrome absolutely suck in this regard. Having a better way to navigate the tabspace would help greatly.

What I've recently discovered, and what's radically changing my use of the Web, is Readability (Instapaper and Pocket are similar services). It's amazing. I've written a bit about this at Google+: https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/PhQR421e... https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/fVK7aJuB...

Readability solves three problems:

It renders web pages viewable. Far, far, far too many websites have designs which are overtly hostile to actually reading content (even HN, to some degree). Even those which are readable are far too distracting in the present ad-driven eyeball economy.

It manages my reading list. Rather than opening content in tabs, I append it to my reading list. Readability also offers tags (though limited to 500 per user, a wall I hit 2 days in) to help organize content (Firefox offers these for bookmarks, Chrome does not).

And the reading list is available across different browsers and devices (I'm not usually a fan of sharing personal information, least of all my reading interests, through a service, but in this case the convenience factor wins out).

Both of these factors could be addressed, somewhat, in a browser. I've been agitating for a while for a bifurcation of the browser space. Give me:

1. A browser primarily oriented at CONTENT. Simple, minimal page presentation (along the lined of Readability), focusing principally on core page content. With wide margins, high contrast, and a readable font face, and the ability to manage, organize, prioritize, sort, search, and cross-reference content.

2. A browser that is a highly-interactive application engine. Essentially today's Chrome (this fits with Google's long-term interests at replacing desktop apps).

We've mashed both of these under a single roof, and the fit's getting increasingly awkward.

Some things that would greatly help Firefox (and Chrome for that matter):

You do not need to have every tab loaded, rendered, in active memory and sucking CPU at the same time.

Give priority to the foreground tab. Close out background tabs (on a least-used / highest-footprint basis) and restore them when they're navigated to. The tab-switching hit should be bought back by overall greater browser performance.

Completely redesign bookmarks with thought given to workflow. The absolutely WORST UI attribute in any environment I've encountered across platforms is windows which cannot be resized, and bookmark management windows are horrible in this respect. I need MUCH more space to work with.

Improve responsiveness. One of the most painful aspects is how I interact with bookmarks. I can't open my bookmarks list, left-click a folder, and select "add page here" from a menu. Why not? DO NOT REPLICATE CHROME'S PLACEMENT OF "DELETE FOLDER" IMMEDIATELY ABOVE "ADD PAGE AND FAIL TO PROVIDE A DELETION CONFIRMATION DIALOG FFS!!!!!*

The existing "add page modal dialog is fucking annoying as hell* Half the time I want to refer back to the browser page itself to add information but the modal dialog blocks all browser page input.

Provide a duplicate entry search and reconcilliation.

Emphasize tags. They're present but poorly presented.

Emphasize bookmarks for navigation.

Improve annotation capabilities, including cross-referencing.

Provide a decentralized sharing mechanism. I don't care for SAAS generally on privacy basis, think FreedomBox. A low-overhead means to reference a resource from which I can post/recover my bookmarks from multiple devices and browsers would be useful.

Include a few lines of context from the page. Readability's "expanded* article view is excellent in this regard. Page titles almost always pretty much exactly suck. Though if you do this, provide both expanded and collapsed views.

ALLOW THE BOOKMARKS LIST TO WORK AS WORKFLOWS. "Date added", "date modified", and "last viewed" would be great. An "archive" flag is also useful (promote unarchived bookmarks up, allow viewing archived bookmarks if desired).

Provide the ability to download the bookmarks source in offline-readable format. Readability has the capacity to create ePub and Kindle content. Though it doesn't have a bulk-export tool (this would fucking completely absolutely rock my world).

Look at eBook management tools -- Moon+Reader, Calibre, etc. These are designed with libraries of content in mind. As antipatterns, look at Adobe Reader and PDF management in general (there is none) and avoid their worse mistakes, specifically: no management of archives, no bookmarking, no annotations, fixed-form-factor rendering, craptastic search, no tagging, poor zoom, very awkward in-document navigation, no cross-referencing capabilities.

reubenmorais• 13 years ago

Re. Firefox:

1. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558882

2. This is being worked on. Gecko is a very old and complex codebase, and doing that without breaking every existing addon is hard.

> You do not need to have every tab loaded, rendered, in active memory and sucking CPU at the same time. > Give priority to the foreground tab. Close out background tabs (on a least-used / highest-footprint basis) and restore them when they're navigated to. The tab-switching hit should be bought back by overall greater browser performance.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=675539

> windows which cannot be resized, and bookmark management windows are horrible in this respect

Maybe you're talking about Chrome here? I don't know, Firefox's History window is resizeable.

> Improve responsiveness.

See https://wiki.mozilla.org/Performance/Snappy and point 2 above.

The points re. tags, bookmarks and annotations can and should be implemented as addons.

> Provide a decentralized sharing mechanism F1/Firefox Share was being worked on a while ago. I don't know what happened to the project.

> "Date added", "date modified", and "last viewed" would be great.

We have all of that, in the History window.

> Provide the ability to download the bookmarks source in offline-readable format.

Seems like a great idea for an addon.

Firefox is not library management software, but it's flexible enough that you can turn it into one.

dredmorbius5• 13 years ago

Appreciate the response and links. Nice to see there's some work on this.

Re: #675539 I'd make unload happen _far_ faster. Within a few minutes, most likely, subject to some user testing to see what impacts/effects are shown. Rather than time the unload, I'd suggest limiting use to some number of active tabs (plus "pinned" tabs). Once that limit is exceeded, start unloading.

Resizable windows: the "Bookmark this link" dialog.

The history information isn't associated with bookmarks, and isn't presented with them. And while we're talking about history: Vimperators 'u' "un-close tab" feature is absolutely golden.

The bookmarks download feature is more a "sync", but _not_ to some named web service. I've always distrusted features such as this, especially where the mechanism isn't documented. Could just be me not knowing now the feature works.

Firefox is not library management software Honestly: I'm starting to think it should be. Or that if I found something that was it would replace FF for me (Chrome + Readability largely is given lists, tags, and responsiveness).

seivan• 13 years ago

I find it very odd that a lot of the options to do stuff- in Firefox settings OS X - like getting rid of browser history, runs synchronously on the main thread and thus blocking the UI. Something as SIMPLE as that should not be there.. That being said, I am probably insulting someone by calling it simpel :(

sherr• 13 years ago

Regarding responsiveness in Firefox. Using Debian 7 Linux I've also experienced the browser getting sluggish on occasion, even recently. It is not as bad as it used to be, and generally the browser is still useable, but it is still annoying.

Responsiveness being : it takes too long to a) switch tabs b) open a new tab c) access a menu (e.g. File/Whatever). The UI might take a second or more to respond. I might have 50 tabs open spread over 5-6 windows.

Currently, the browser is running well and I suspect the most recent responsiveness trouble was caused by an add-on (Brief - feed reader) which I have disabled.

But I second the call for a better way to identify badly behaving tabs (CPU as well as RAM) more easily.

Firefox is a great browser and thanks to all who make it.

siamore• 13 years ago

I use firefox with a lot of tabs too, a few things I do are

* if you haven't used it yet look at the barTab lite x addon,

* I also try to use RSS readers for sites I regularly visit

* I use Clearly (I don't know if it's as good as readability but it also allows me to clip to evernote)

dredmorbius5• 13 years ago

I'll look at barTab lite.

I've considered RSS readers. I'm a bit torn between those and other forms of accessing stories of interest. I've yet to find a reader (local client) which really fits my workflow. Though I haven't looked overly hard either.

progrock6• 13 years ago

I've been championing the same issues, or rather bemoaning them on HN repeatedly.

I never see much innovation with the actual browser UIs. The rendering engines get plenty of love, while something like the UI for Firefox has barely changed at all.

I used to have an aging powerpc, and Firefox would bring it to it's knees. But I think I was abusing it. Firebug, Flash, JS and too many tabs were the main culprits. And I have sinced tried to change my habits.

I think tabs are heavily used and abused! I personally believe that they are so popular because the bookmark UIs are so sucky. Most tabs could be replaced by a bookmark.

Tabs bring other problems, resizing the browser window in one tab, effects all the others. Tabs have inconsistant behaviour between different applications. Windows should be left to a window manager IMHO.

Now I try and keep my tabs to a minimum. Two or three. Any page I think I might want to read later I once bookmarked (to one day sort through...), but now I send to readability to read later at my leisure.

My main browser I have configured to make reading on it more pleasurable. I've throw away the page author's styles, and instead opt to use my own font, font size and colour scheme. I block adverts. And block flash. Layouts can suffer, but if I have to, I resort to using another browser. I did have JS turned off completely, but I am finding that increasingly difficult.

In terms of design trends - responsive web pages are quite welcome in my world. I think people will soon hunger for simpler pages and simpler sites. Something that's far easier to use. And I welcome the day that I can actually surf web pages comfortably on my TV when sitting on my arse.

Some sites are still very difficult to use, and the browser UIs could really lend a hand here.

ripperdoc• 13 years ago

An application health dashboard should be standard practice in large software, especially software that supports plugin and interpreting code. I am sure I am not alone to feel that software get sluggish with time, or that certain updates causes a lot of crashes. A dashboard could monitor this and transparently show whether the application is working as intended, and if it's slow, show what's slowing it down. Good initative!

drill_sarge• 13 years ago

I recently switched from Opera to FF (beta channel) because Opera now working on webkit based browser and the current Presto-browser doesn't get any dev love beside security updates. One thing I noticed is the really slow start up time of FF and high memory consumption. Also I have the feeling it gets worse over time because when I start a new profile (even with the same addons) FF feels suddenly much more responsive, starts faster and so on. I hope this stuff can help them improve those issues.

Firefox, Heal Thyself

Related Stories