Firefox 41 will use less memory when running AdBlock Plus

https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2015/07/01/firefox-41-will-use-less-memory-when-running-adblock-plus/

by nnethercote • 11 years ago

247 153 11 years ago

blog.mozilla.org

RRRA• 11 years ago

What about µBlock?

heycam4• 11 years ago

µBlock does not use the same technique of creating a style sheet and inserting it into all loaded documents, so the type of sharing done as part of this work does not help µBlock.

jzelinskie2• 11 years ago

I'm pretty sure it does according to this wikipage[0]. It may not load _all_ the rules into every page, but it definitely does create a stylesheet and inject it into the page.

[0] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Cosmetic-filtering-in...

shmerl3• 11 years ago

14 years old bug fixed. Congratulations! (I'm not sarcastic - it's always good when such bugs are fixed).

heycam4• 11 years ago

Thank you!

kylek• 11 years ago

> Firefox 41 Developer Edition is scheduled to be released in the next day or two.

blinkingled9• 11 years ago

http://vimcolorschemetest.googlecode.com/svn/html/index-c.ht... - the page referenced in the article that shows extreme AdBlock overhead - Chrome just chokes on it for a long time - the tab uses 1.7GB of memory while it is still loading!

With uBlock and FF 38 - the page load completes faster and only about 850MB memory is used in total!

Chrome people should really be doing something about the memory and battery usage on the desktop. It's getting ridiculous.

Also I wonder how things such as OS X's Compressed Memory feature affect this in real life. I mean without the fix, the OS will notice the duplicated, in-memory style sheets and compress them to reduce memory usage and you should not see much of an improvement due to this patch on platforms like OS X that implement memory compression.

(Looking at activity monitor with FF loading the vim color scheme test shows 0MB Compressed Mem for FF - not sure if FF opts out or if there simply isn't enough memory pressure for the OS to start compressing FF's mem.)

taspeotis4• 11 years ago

Chrome just chokes on it for a long time - the tab uses 1.7GB of memory while it is still loading!

Chrome 43.0.2357.130 m (64-bit) on Windows 8.1 here, takes 787.6 MB for me (with uBlock). If I open an Incognito window (i.e. no extensions) it takes 109 MB. Not sure where this discrepancy is coming from. Chrome's responsive the whole time.

http://i.imgur.com/QFG2ryq.png

blinkingled9• 11 years ago

I was testing on OS X - On Windows 8.1 the page kept loading for a while and then the tab crashed - it used 767Mb before crashing. Probably the extensions you are running are different from me as well - I am running uBlock, Privacy Badger, Lastpass and ChromeCast.

Edit: The crash on Windows 8.1 is reproducible for me. Turns out I'm running a 32-bit build on Windows. But that just very likely means the crash is due to it exceeding the 32-bit process address space limit. I've seen it reach 900+Mb but since the reporting is not real time in chrome://memory it's hard to know at what point it crashes.

bitmapbrother6• 11 years ago

The discrepancy is courtesy of the ad blocker extension.

bitmapbrother6• 11 years ago

So you're blaming Chrome because your Ad Block Plus extension crippled and hosed it? Why don't you try running the same test with Ad Block plus disabled and share your results? That page renders in 112MB and scrolls blisteringly fast in Chrome 45 Dev. With Ad Block Plus installed it chokes it.

People need to stop blaming Chrome and start looking at the havoc their extensions are creating. Whenever I hear a Chrome performance or memory story it invariably always ties back to their extensions.

It's clear why Apple controls and limits modifications to their software. It's to prevent situations like these from erupting and giving their product a black eye because some inefficient extension is in over its head.

blinkingled9• 11 years ago

Well, for one I don't have Adblock installed. For two, chrome extensions run in their own process which means the memory usage is reported separately for each tab and extension. So the hosing is completely Chrome's fault - 32-bit version just crashes with the tab in question taking maximum memory.

dethstar• 11 years ago

I can finally go back to ABP!

Firefox used to crash a lot, and freeze a lot back when I was using ABP. ublock has never worked as well for me, I also dislike the element selector. Sometimes I want more than blocked something being displayed, like blocking a script. And ABP allowed that easier, that's something I miss.

unexistance• 11 years ago

yeah, uBlock Origin makes it a tiny little bit hard to undo what you've block, I find it easier by bookmarking the below which opens the settings page & remove the most recent lines you added / blocked

chrome://ublock0/content/dashboard.html

gorhill2• 11 years ago

Sometimes I want more than blocked something being displayed

That's what the logger is for: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/The-logger#creating-f...

a3n3• 11 years ago

Fastmail web interface users + ABP|ABE|uBlock users:

When I have any of these three blockers installed, and then use mail composition on the Fastmail tab, the page jumps around while I type. Eventually the line that I'm typing has scrolled itself down to the bottom of the window, and sometimes even jumps between below the window and just enough above the bottom.

Anyone seen that?

kijin2• 11 years ago

Fastmail user here. Firefox + ABE + EFF Privacy Badger, no problem.

Fastmail's web interface doesn't even have any blockable items once you log in.

a3n3• 11 years ago

Hrmph.

I'm only as far as noticing, uninstalling whichever, going "huh," reinstalling and going "feh."

atonse• 11 years ago

Safari's new approach of using a built in (natively compiled) rules engine to block content seems more and more to be the best option. But it's also the kind of option you'd only see from a vendor who doesn't make any money from ads (Apple... and possibly MS).

EricVi• 11 years ago

What doesn't prevent these vendors to advertise their own products. Or make money by letting others pay. Apple, MS and {{any_big_company}} do everything that generates revenue. Even Mozilla has started to sell data and advertising space in Firefox. I don't care where the spam is coming from. And no Mozilla, I will certainly never book my next holiday trip on booking.com.

Manishearth2• 11 years ago

Advertising space, not data. Nobody is tracking you through the new tab page. Mozilla just populates it with some default ads (which can be removed or replaced with your own new tab customizations)

sergiotapia3• 11 years ago

This is good but do not use Adblock Plus. Use µBlock. Adblock Plus let's through some 'kosher' ads. If that's acceptable to you, all good. If you want no ads whatsoever, use µBlock.

It works out of the box and blocks everything. Uses even less resources that any other alternative.

Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpa...

Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/En-us/firefox/addon/ublock-origin...

redstripe• 11 years ago

Under "filter preferences" there is an option for "Allow some non-intrusive markerting". Is that what you're talking about?

nerdy• 11 years ago

I've unchecked this option since I used AdBlock Plus (years ago, I'm sure) and I've never seen an ad. The closest thing I've seen is "please disable your adblocker" banners.

shmerl3• 11 years ago

You can disable that. The only questionable part is who decides what ads should be allowed when that setting is on. Here I agree, if AdBlock developers are paid for whitelisting, such practice is very questionable. Are they?

sergiotapia3• 11 years ago

What do you think? WINK WINK.

voltagex_• 11 years ago

https://adblockplus.org/en/acceptable-ads#criteria and https://adblockplus.org/en/acceptable-ads-agreements

nugget• 11 years ago

Yes, Adblock Plus' whitelist has been compared many times to a mafia style extortion scheme. Companies pay to let their ads through. By using ABP over other copies of the same open source code (or competitors like uBlock), you are supporting this business model.

abpthrowaway• 11 years ago

They are.

Source: My employer (a major site with Alexa rank <100) contacted ABP asking to have our text-only, clearly-delimited sponsored search results whitelisted. They told us that it wouldn't happen unless we signed an NDA, paid them a share of the revenue difference, and installed a third-party script on our site to allow them to track our users. (We just laughed at them and changed our markup to work around the block.)

ytdht2• 11 years ago

I tried uBlock origin and I didn't find any advantages over adblock plus besides not having to disable an option to block most ads... but either way, noscript is still necessary

nindalf2• 11 years ago

I have a question about NoScript. I run Ghostery which blocks all tracking and analytics js files, preventing most of the tracking I'd like to avoid. What does NoScript offer here? Seems like you'd want to block analytics even if you're browsing a "trusted" site.

dorgo2• 11 years ago

no. noscript is not necessary. ublock can block every javascript until I allow it for a website. I had 3 addons before I started using uBlock: noscript, ABP and request-policy. uBlock replaced them all and is much better. It has a nice clear interface and gives an even biiger amount of control.

mcagl• 11 years ago

NoScript related HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9794895

yAnonymous4• 11 years ago

uBlock Origin is noticably faster, especially on mobile. It also has many more configuration options.

anti-shill• 11 years ago

ublock does not work very well. ...adblock and adblock plus work, but I cannot find anything else that works well...

cvwright• 11 years ago

Can you be more specific? What does ublock do poorly?

I find it works well for me with a minimum of fuss. I even got it to block those awful "Powered by Outbrain" clickbait links that have been showing up on news sites lately.

broodbucket2• 11 years ago

If anyone prefers Adblock Plus over µBlock but wants to get rid of the 'kosher' ads as you say, Adblock Edge is a fork that does just that.

antsar• 11 years ago

This addon has been discontinued

Source: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/adblock-edge/

ljk2• 11 years ago

is there a difference between uBlock and uBlock origin? Everyone has different opinions on which ad blocker is the best one and i'm pretty confused..

__david__• 11 years ago

First there was uBlock. Then the maintainer got tired of it and passed it on to someone else. That next maintainer made some changes in the first couple weeks that made the original guy not happy about the direction he was taking it. So the original guy tried to take it back, but ended up forking it and calling it uBlock Origin.

That's my best recollection, I might have some details wrong. I believe Origin is the favored one right now.

XzetaU8• 11 years ago

uBlock vs. uBlock Origin: Facts

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-vs.-uBlock-Ori...

slacka• 11 years ago

Yes, I like to support sites like reddit that vet their ads to eliminate the obnoxious ones. In an ideal world, I'd like the speed/memory usage of µBlock with the ability to enable the 'kosher' ads. When 41 goes to stable I'll re-enable ABP.

fwn3• 11 years ago

This is rather easy. The ability to enable kosher ads is implemented through an additional filter list you can add in any blocker:

  https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/exceptionrules.txt

bitJericho5• 11 years ago

All ads are obnoxious. Abp charges for the privilege of allowing ads through.

cm21872• 11 years ago

Personally I am less concerned about obnoxious ads than annoyed by ad websites tracking me. And I do not think that there is any "Kosher tracking".

marincounty• 11 years ago

I don't think the average Reddit user knows what an ad blocker is these days? I wouldn't feel guilty blocking their ads? I have a feeling they are making a lot of money?

yAnonymous4• 11 years ago

Disable uBlock for those sites? Takes two clicks. It's better you make the decision than someone who's getting paid to let ads through.

SnaKeZ• 11 years ago

µBlock blocks Google Analytics, what about Adblock Plus?

mp3geek• 11 years ago

The extension doesnt block google analytics, the lists do.

keeperofdakeys• 11 years ago

uBlock and Adblock Plus are built around filter lists of urls (in fact, both use essentially the same lists). So if something is blocked in one but not the other, it's probably a difference in the filter list subscriptions. This is easily configurable in both.

e40• 11 years ago

This is good but do not use Adblock Plus. Use µBlock. Adblock Plus let's through some 'kosher' ads.

I've heard this argument many times. I've used ABP for years and I don't remember ever seeing an ad (except on reddit, where I whitelist them).

Either the ads are so low key that I didn't see them, or they are very rare. Either way, I'm fine with it.

kasabali2• 11 years ago

That's because there have been always a checkbox to disable those 'kosher' and you've probably disabled them many years ago.

That doesn't stop other people from spreading FUD, though.

jasonlotito• 11 years ago

This is good but do not use µBlock. Use µBlock Origin. µBlock's developer lets through some changes the creator of µBlock didn't like. If that's acceptable to you, all good. If you like the original µBlock, use µBlock Origin.

davidgerard• 11 years ago

ABP is very good about this these days, and takes you straight to the option to switch that off if you want it (last time I installed it afresh).

kuschku2• 11 years ago

Also remember that Google paid 30 million € to get some of their ads whitelisted — obviously not a fair selection of "kosher" ads.

on_and_off• 11 years ago

Sigh. Adblock Plus / µBlock are almost as broken as not using them.

I only want to block obnoxious ads. First and foremost, popunder (these should not even exist, I don't see any legitimate use for them) and also popups. Let's add the very aggressive ones (blinking content).

I don't want to block the ads on my favorite blogs and I really don't like the fact that I have to create a custom rule to do so.

partiallypro• 11 years ago

You can disable the "kosher" ads, there's a checkbox in ABP's settings. Pretty simple. Just uncheck "Allow some non-intrusive advertising" http://imgur.com/BWzIEyo

vgeek• 11 years ago

How much did ABP pay Mozilla?

nindalf2• 11 years ago

Conspiracy theorist much? Mozilla knows that a significant portion of their userbase uses ad blockers and complains about the high resource usage. They added a cool feature today that would reduce that usage, resulting in a better experience for their users. But you feel someone needed to pay them?

JohnTHaller• 11 years ago

AdBlock Plus is the most popular Firefox extension by a huge margin, so it makes sense to ensure those users get a good experience: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/extensions/?sort=us...

brokentone• 11 years ago

I'm always shocked at the age of some really important bugs. Large optimization potentials of many public / well used / open source systems have been noted for many years.

jlebar• 11 years ago

Consider that the web has changed a lot over the past 14 years. Back when this bug was filed, it was much less common to have many tabs open, and those tabs would have contained many fewer documents on average. So even if ABP had existed back then, the optimization potential would have been much smaller.

pgeorgi• 11 years ago

Tabs were introduced to Phoenix/Firefox in September 2002, so 14 years ago there were no tabs :-)

Multiple windows, sure, but the win98/2000/xp style of window management wasn't conductive to having 100 open windows, either.

BuckRogers• 11 years ago

Anyone here prefer uBlock over UBlock Origin? I tried both and stuck with Origin since something like this should be relatively easy to reach "feature complete" status, thus go into pure maintenance mode. Either are a big step up from ABP.

fwn3• 11 years ago

If you compare their repo activity, it seems to suggest that the actual development happens at origin.

Origin: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/graphs/contributors

Nonorigin: https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/graphs/contributors

arthurfm• 11 years ago

uBlock Origin does a more thorough job at blocking network connections [1] compared to uBlock since the former disables prefetching and the latter doesn't. [2] uBlock is also missing the per-site switches and strict domain blocking features from Origin. [3]

Personally I can't see any reason to use uBlock over uBlock Origin.

[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/tag/0.9.8.2

[2] https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/releases/tag/0.9.5.0

[3] https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/issues/1306

bane• 11 years ago

I'm a convert to using "the great suspender" in chrome and the amount of memory it consumes for me has dropped dramatically. The tradeoff is waiting for a page to reload when I focus the tab, but it let's me keep dozens of tabs "open" at once, for long periods of time, without annihilating my system memory.

Combined with µBlock and click to activate plugins etc. Chrome almost behaves now.

DiabloD3• 11 years ago

Great Suspender + Spaces (from the same guy) makes Chrome usable again.

aorth• 11 years ago

First, I believe everyone should be using uBlock (Origin) [1] anyways. Second, I'm looking forward to seeing how Firefox's built-in tracking protection will evolve[2]. Also, should be interesting to see how Safari's new blocking framework changes the game.

[1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

[2] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/tracking-protection-fir...

thescrewdriver• 11 years ago

I'm also curious to see how things evolve with the countermeasures: http://www.businessinsider.com/former-google-exec-launches-s... (a terrible idea imho).

nicolas_t• 11 years ago

I would love to have a way to accept kosher ads with ublock origin (but not ads that have been whitelisted by paying ABP). It would be great if there was a transparent community driven ad whitelist.

I want to support content creators but I also do not want to have to deal with the more obnoxious ads (or flash ads or animated ads and so on). I currently support a few creators with patreon but that's only limited to a few.

nitrogen• 11 years ago

Maybe one could write an addon that checks the contrast and other visual features of each ad, then blocks that site or network's ads indefinitely if an ad exceeds the thresholds.

erikb2• 11 years ago

How about non-ad ways to interact with the right communities, like a corresponding subreddit? To me that sounds more reasonable, since that way you increase the communication and your own awareness, but don't support spamming people with information they haven't requested.

ep103• 11 years ago

You're basically describing ABP

erikb2• 11 years ago

It's not clear to me from reading the article, if the headline is correct. From what I understand (non-native speaker) with the mentioned fix ABP uses less memory than last year without that fix. But does it make FF use less RAM in general, compared with FF with fix but without ABP? That's how I understand the headline, ABP makes you save RAM compared to using FF without ABP. But that's not how I understand the article.

nnethercote• 11 years ago

Mmm, I see the ambiguity. It's meant to mean that "the combination of Firefox + AdBlock Plus will use less memory than it did previously", not "Firefox + AdBlock Plus will use less memory than Firefox alone".

The fix will also reduce the memory usage of Firefox when used without AdBlock Plus, but the difference will be small.

tiatia• 11 years ago

1. Why not start with 1 or 2 decent host files? http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm

2. What is bad about ghostery?

anc842• 11 years ago

1. Hosts blocking is very broad. Good tracking-/ad-blocking is granular.

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostery#Criticism

skrowl• 11 years ago

As Chrome gets more and more bloated and slow, I think more and more people will switch (back) to Firefox

mike-cardwell• 11 years ago

I'd wager the majority of Chrome users are simply normal people who had it shoved in their face when using Google web properties with Internet Explorer. These people are not aware of Firefox.

JustSomeNobody• 11 years ago

Has anyone compared memory usage when using a hosts file to block ads?

driverdan• 11 years ago

It's good that this is fixed but why is it taking 14 years to fix bugs?

antgiant2• 11 years ago

Is there a Chrome or Firefox equivalent to IE's "Personalized Tracking Protection List"? In short it tracks the resources loaded by sites you visit and if they show up on more than a configurable number of sites they get blocked. Basically, it only blocks what actually could be tracking you. I would love to have that functionality in Chrome or Firefox, especially if the tracking list could survive a reinstall (IE's cannot).

kasabali2• 11 years ago

AFAIK EFF's Privacy Badger uses a similar mechanism to what you described.

antgiant2• 11 years ago

Perfect! Thank you!

Firefox 41 will use less memory when running AdBlock Plus

Related Stories