Comments on: So what’s bloatware anyway, Part III http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/ Your source for Firefox, Thunderbird, Camino, SeaMonkey news, tips and more. Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:26:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Mumblemouth http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-61117 Mumblemouth Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:12:18 +0000 http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-61117 I'm probably the last person on the planet who DOESN'T use tabs, just individual open windows for my work. (It just really works better for me). Anyhow, I haven't experienced any memory issues with FF3v5b. No that said, I also use iFreeMem to clean up stray memory usage overall. (Ooops! I should mention I'm on Mac 10.4.11 PPC) Firefox seems to cruise along very well all day long. I’m probably the last person on the planet who DOESN’T use tabs, just individual open windows for my work. (It just really works better for me). Anyhow, I haven’t experienced any memory issues with FF3v5b. No that said, I also use iFreeMem to clean up stray memory usage overall. (Ooops! I should mention I’m on Mac 10.4.11 PPC) Firefox seems to cruise along very well all day long.

]]> By: Percy Cabello http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-44560 Percy Cabello Mon, 28 May 2007 13:06:41 +0000 http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-44560 Firefox uses at least a layer more of code than Opera or any other application it is made of XUL, JavaScript, XPCOM and an assorted collection of open languages and libraries. This enables its multiplatform capabilities and extensibility at the same time, but at the same time I am sure it accounts for a large part of its memory usage. Opera on the other hand isn't designed that way and is not extensible. Anyway, it is a fast application that integrates a lot of nice features only available as extensions for Firefox users. Some users like it that way and some others prefer Firefox. To the present and the foreseeable future (Firefox 3) I like Firefox approach but totally understand other people preferences. Firefox uses at least a layer more of code than Opera or any other application it is made of XUL, JavaScript, XPCOM and an assorted collection of open languages and libraries. This enables its multiplatform capabilities and extensibility at the same time, but at the same time I am sure it accounts for a large part of its memory usage.

Opera on the other hand isn’t designed that way and is not extensible. Anyway, it is a fast application that integrates a lot of nice features only available as extensions for Firefox users. Some users like it that way and some others prefer Firefox. To the present and the foreseeable future (Firefox 3) I like Firefox approach but totally understand other people preferences.

]]> By: Bob http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-44556 Bob Mon, 28 May 2007 12:46:06 +0000 http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-44556 I personally hate the menu-less IE7. I have serious issues with the UI and I'm therefore staying away from IE7. I'm not more Firefox than Opera ... I am just "anything not IE". I believe that were it not for both Opera and Firefox, there'd be no IE7 right now, or a planned IE8. As I've said before, I only use two add-ons (IEView and a Canadian dictionary) and after over an hour of my normal usage, I am only sitting at 50MB in use with a peak of 91MB. I'm more than happy with this memory usage. Having said that, if there's a better way (i.e. Opera) then perhaps one of the goals of Firefox 4 should be to reduce memory requirements (maybe through efficiencies) to both speed up start-up and overall usage. [Note: I had written a reply to Percy in his Part II, but it never made it to the site] I personally hate the menu-less IE7. I have serious issues with the UI and I’m therefore staying away from IE7. I’m not more Firefox than Opera … I am just “anything not IE”. I believe that were it not for both Opera and Firefox, there’d be no IE7 right now, or a planned IE8.

As I’ve said before, I only use two add-ons (IEView and a Canadian dictionary) and after over an hour of my normal usage, I am only sitting at 50MB in use with a peak of 91MB. I’m more than happy with this memory usage.

Having said that, if there’s a better way (i.e. Opera) then perhaps one of the goals of Firefox 4 should be to reduce memory requirements (maybe through efficiencies) to both speed up start-up and overall usage.

[Note: I had written a reply to Percy in his Part II, but it never made it to the site]

]]> By: netster007x http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43838 netster007x Sat, 26 May 2007 18:21:26 +0000 http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43838 But how do those people at Opera make a faster, more feature filled browser that uses less memory? There must be more to it than just extensions. Really, I'm amazed that so many people flock to Firefox rather than Opera. Because of that, Firefox has become a standard browser for sites to base development. I use Firefox for two reasons, add-ons and compatibility. I love IE7's menu-less UI. It makes browsers with menus look obselete, and allows one-click bookmarking and others, and reduces redundancy, makes controls more logical and fast, and saves screen space. But the browser is short many basics (download manager...) and lacks a user-friendly add-on manager and database. I use the myfirefox theme and personal menu extensions to make Fx2 a near perfect IE7 mimic. But how do those people at Opera make a faster, more feature filled browser that uses less memory? There must be more to it than just extensions. Really, I’m amazed that so many people flock to Firefox rather than Opera. Because of that, Firefox has become a standard browser for sites to base development. I use Firefox for two reasons, add-ons and compatibility. I love IE7’s menu-less UI. It makes browsers with menus look obselete, and allows one-click bookmarking and others, and reduces redundancy, makes controls more logical and fast, and saves screen space. But the browser is short many basics (download manager…) and lacks a user-friendly add-on manager and database. I use the myfirefox theme and personal menu extensions to make Fx2 a near perfect IE7 mimic.

]]> By: Hi http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43573 Hi Sat, 26 May 2007 01:02:20 +0000 http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43573 Wait, when I start-up Firefox, it sits at about 40-50, then rises to about 80. After about an hour of browsing, it's at 130. And that's with 40+ extensions. Wait, when I start-up Firefox, it sits at about 40-50, then rises to about 80. After about an hour of browsing, it’s at 130. And that’s with 40+ extensions.

]]> By: David Naylor http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43499 David Naylor Fri, 25 May 2007 20:32:28 +0000 http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43499 Interesting test. I've reduced my number of possible undoable tabs, as well as pages cached. Both set to five. Interesting test. I’ve reduced my number of possible undoable tabs, as well as pages cached. Both set to five.

]]> By: So what's bloatware anyway, Part II : Mozilla Links http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43424 So what's bloatware anyway, Part II : Mozilla Links Fri, 25 May 2007 15:39:58 +0000 http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2007/05/so-what%e2%80%99s-bloatware-anyway-part-iii/#comment-43424 [...] Coming next: Part III: Memory issues [...] [...] Coming next: Part III: Memory issues [...]

]]>