PDA

View Full Version : Has Firefox fallen from best browser to the worst?



stimpack
May 10th, 2007, 07:51 PM
I run the 3 main OS, Linux, OS X and Windows. Firefox which was originally designed to be a lightweight fast browser, now appears on all platforms to be the absolute slowest of all browsers, gigantic pauses when loading some pages.

I used to be a Firefox fanboy, now all that is left is gmail compatability and nice extentions.

It is now the bloatiest, slowest browser there is? if you disagree state why please.

Adamant1988
May 10th, 2007, 07:55 PM
Firefox is a gorilla web-browser of sorts. It is big, and it is in no way fast compared to it's lighter cousins, but it also is extremely customizable (although still not to the extent I would like) with extensions. So, it's slow but it offers a ton of functionality..

PrimoTurbo
May 10th, 2007, 08:30 PM
They need to rework it a bit, but I can't use anything else because it has such great extensions.

igknighted
May 10th, 2007, 08:33 PM
The extension system is good... but is poorly implemented. The browser without them should be light and quick, but FF is not. Even without extensions Opera and Konqueror run circles around it. Opera is even more functional than FF with lots of extensions, and even Konqueror has a good tabbed system and easy to use mouse gestures. So until FF steps it up and leans out their code, it will remain #3 among browsers for me.

Steven_Gerrard
May 10th, 2007, 08:47 PM
Opera ftw. I guess I don't need the possible extensions mf provide. Opera is faster...that's important.

mech7
May 10th, 2007, 08:49 PM
FF is very fast with me.. Opera page rendering is a bit faster but can't live without the FF extensions :D

fuscia
May 10th, 2007, 08:57 PM
i never used all that many extensions in firefox, but i found it to be wicked slow. i'm hooked on konqueror now.

FuturePilot
May 10th, 2007, 09:06 PM
I've never found Firefox to be slow. It's even faster on Feisty. Although I've found that it crashes a bit more in Linux than Windows.
I've tried out Swiftfox but I didn't notice any difference at all.

prizrak
May 10th, 2007, 09:21 PM
I really like live bookmarks, other than that I would go for epiphany. I think that XUL Runner is screwing it up :(

Henry Rayker
May 10th, 2007, 09:28 PM
I use loads of extensions. My Firefox feels slow(er than it used to), but I haven't found anything else that has extensions or built-in features to get it to behave in the manner that I'm used to now.

Every once in a while, I get rid of some extensions (if, say, I find that I don't really use them all that much) and I run it without keeping track of a history. That tends to get it a bit quicker.

iPower
May 10th, 2007, 09:31 PM
it's not as bad as msie

ComplexNumber
May 10th, 2007, 09:32 PM
firefox is by far the best browser i've ever used. it works for me, and thats why i continue to use it.
it is slightly on the heavy side, but that pales into insignificance when weighing up all its pros and the fact that it works for me.

starcraft.man
May 10th, 2007, 09:32 PM
I use FF all the time. I understand where your coming from, but I don't think it was ever in FIrefox's mission statement to be "THE Fastest Browser" out there. I mean, they were spawned out of netscape and mozilla, and thus were aiming to make an alternative browser to IE (which, was in all truth crap, 7 isn't much better than 6 too). I think they have succeeded in many respects, they are open source, they can be heavily modified with custom theme packs and a HUGE assortment of extensions, they also innovated a great deal and brought many features that opera forced you to pay for (before going free) to the average user. Not to mention if you find something missing in firefox, someone has either written an extension to add it or will in future (maybe even you).

So while I understand the frustration with it becoming a bit slower, thats the way it is. Your free to choose another more cut down browser. I do wonder however, if the new firefox 3.0 will be speedier, they are changing many things from what I hear.

One side note: maybe you should search the forums for two threads, one was for making internet in general faster, by turning IPv6 off (search "faster google earth") and the other was for tweaking firefox (faster firefox should bring it up. I did both and find pages load to a certain extent faster :)

71CH
May 10th, 2007, 09:35 PM
I just tried using opera and it seems slower than FF. Can I run konqueror on ubuntu?

karellen
May 10th, 2007, 09:36 PM
I have only three extensions: google toolbar, ubuntu forums menu and yahoo easy upload tool and firefox move resonably fast, even if epiphany and opera are a little faster...

jerrylamos
May 10th, 2007, 09:42 PM
Neither Opera nor Konqueror can do AOL Mail so they are non-starters for me. Firefox does fine, limited by the speed of AOL Mail itself. I run on several computers and even in different locations so I use AOL and Yahoo mail.

Cheers, Jerry

ComplexNumber
May 10th, 2007, 09:42 PM
I just tried using opera and it seems slower than FF. Can I run konqueror on ubuntu?yes, but you need the kdelibs to run it.

bailout
May 10th, 2007, 10:18 PM
Firefox hasn't fallen from being the best browser because it never was the best. For some reason it recieved massive hype and due to security fears among windows users it attracted new users who didn't know anything better than explorer and hence thought firefox was great because it had tabs.

For the features it offers ff has always been big. It has just been fashionable because there has been a trend to believe that removing features for no advantage is somehow a good thing. Simply reducing functionality does not make make something small and light. If by simplifying the browser it had truly become small and fast then it would at least have achieved something, but it didn't. So most people then download extensions to get back functionality and make it even bigger. I don't know whether it has improved but when I last tried it there were often conflicts between extensions as they were written by different people and were of variable quality.

Opera has always been better and still is. Of course Opera isn't open source so it won't suit those who think that is essential.

Bungo Pony
May 10th, 2007, 10:25 PM
I've been using Opera for quite some time now. Before I got my new PC (just a few months ago) and installed Ubuntu, I was still running on Win95, believe it or not. Hey, it worked fine and for the longest time, I couldnt' afford a new PC (I still can't). Websites were advancing, and there I was stuck with IE 5.5. Firefox ran like crap on my system, so I gave Opera a try. Lo and behold, it ran. It ran much better when I turned off animated gifs and flash.

I'm still using Opera, and it's still fantastic. It's my first choice in web browsers. I gave Konqueror a quick try, and it's also fairly nice. I've never been fond of Firefox, but I still prefer it to IE.

jrusso2
May 10th, 2007, 10:27 PM
Someone posted a list of things to disable or change in the settings to speed firefox up and that helps a bit.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1299854/posts

CocoAUS
May 10th, 2007, 10:28 PM
On Linux, I can't stand Firefox anymore. Simply switching tabs seems like too much to ask. In Windows, however, Firefox is insanely fast, and with all the extensions, there's nothing to compete with it.

On my Linux-based OS, I stick with Epiphany. It was at first a little difficult to not have everything customized just the way I like it, but in all honesty, the overall experience with Epiphany has been much more satisfying. Besides that, even though I can customize Firefox to my liking on MY computer, using someone else's Firefox always drives me nuts.

maniacmusician
May 10th, 2007, 10:58 PM
i never used all that many extensions in firefox, but i found it to be wicked slow. i'm hooked on konqueror now.
a killer feature in konqueror is the split view feature. It's one of the coolest features I've ever seen. It's being implemented in the next version of yakuake as well

PrimoTurbo
May 10th, 2007, 11:04 PM
Also I noticed Firefox feels a bit slower under Linux in general.

On Windows XP Firefox is faster then IE6, loading pages not startup wise since IE6 is implemented into explorer pretty much.

reacocard
May 10th, 2007, 11:06 PM
Someone posted a list of things to disable or change in the settings to speed firefox up and that helps a bit.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1299854/posts

Or just use fasterfox (http://fasterfox.mozdev.org/). :D

For me, firefox is reasonably quick. Also, it's extremely customizable via it's extension system, so I can have it just how I want it. Ad blocking (http://adblock.mozdev.org/), sidebar (http://firefox.exxile.net/aios/index.php), whatever I want, odds are it's there. This tweaking ability and firefox's decent integration into the OS's native theme (sorry opera) make firefox the best for me.

If you want a really fast browser, try links2. It's amazing.

sudo apt-get install links2
links2 -g

stimpack
May 10th, 2007, 11:33 PM
This is the dilemma , Opera is better, Konqueror is better. But I rely on certain extensions, I rely on google toolbar, things like this. I am in an open source world but I am 'locked in' just like the old days. Nobodys fault, except maybe ****** web standards and lack of a common extension API. But I'm not a happy FF user atm.

maniacmusician
May 10th, 2007, 11:38 PM
This is the dilemma , Opera is better, Konqueror is better. But I rely on certain extensions, I rely on google toolbar, things like this. I am in an open source world but I am 'locked in' just like the old days. Nobodys fault, except maybe ****** web standards and lack of a common extension API. But I'm not a happy FF user atm.
Exact same way for me. I'm getting to a point where I despise firefox, but I don't leave it because of the extensions. It's awful.

Extreme Coder
May 10th, 2007, 11:45 PM
I used Firefox on Windows before I moved to Linux, and it was mighty fast over there. When I am on Linux, the only time I use FireFox is when I'm waiting for Opera/Konqueror(or Epiphany, when I'm on GNOME) to download. Apparently, the FF team seems to take the Linux user base for granted, so there's no special optimization or focus for Linux versions. Opera, with all its functionality is faster than Firefox with no extensions.

Extreme Coder

diatribe
May 10th, 2007, 11:52 PM
Swiftfox is reasonably fast for me, but opera and epiphany both destroy firefox on my system. However, I use epiphany for the most part. As far as firefox vs ie, firefox gets the win.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 12:05 AM
Still by far the best rendering engine, by far. I had to use IE a few days ago and I was struck at how god-awful web pages look and scroll with it.

They need to stop dancing around though, and make some of the most obvious extensions an official part of the browser. For example, how in the world can anyone live without bookmark synchronization?

Ohh, and live bookmarks are terrible. Remove this feature. If you want rss to be integral, find a new system. The entire purpose of RSS is so that you can know what you've read and what you haven't.

Pekay
May 11th, 2007, 12:15 AM
I ended up switching from Firefox to Opera, it has what I used (as extensions sometimes) and it's faster too :p.

helloyo
May 11th, 2007, 12:23 AM
from a web development stand point konqeror's khtml and opera's rendering engine are far better then firefox's.

blackspyder
May 11th, 2007, 12:58 AM
I like FF but I dont use many extensions. I just use BBCodeextra and FasterFox (and IE tab for my Windows computer)

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 01:03 AM
from a web development stand point konqeror's khtml and opera's rendering engine are far better then firefox's.

Not in my experience.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 01:09 AM
from a web development stand point konqeror's khtml and opera's rendering engine are far better then firefox's.
I'll drink to that.

Mozilla has clearly established that Linux is a low priority for them, and they've demonstrated that by leaving it in its sorry, memory hogging, noticeably slow state.

If only Opera were open source and actually had a real extension API instead of their widgets thing, I'd be all over it. At least it's actually resource efficient. Firefox only runs great on my system because I have 2 GBs of RAM and a C2D processor. I have another machine that I've installed Xubuntu on. It's a 600mHz computer with 300 something megabytes of RAM. If I try to run firefox on that, it starts to take over my system. RAM consumption shoots way up, and it uses about 20% of the CPU when I"m not doing anything. It's ridiculous. I've started using epiphany on that computer now, and it runs a lot smoother.

LollYouSuckZor
May 11th, 2007, 01:10 AM
=[ *Cries*

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 01:14 AM
Epiphany is making good progress, it looks like. If it were to add a search bar and bookmark synchronization I'd probably use it.

B. Gates
May 11th, 2007, 01:19 AM
I've been a loyal user of Firefox for many years. I've always hated the limitations of IE6, and IE7, while better, still isn't as functional as Firefox. Opera has not been on my radar, and I have no intention of bothering with it since Firefox works so well... for me.

I use about five extensions, so it's not too bad in that case.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 01:22 AM
Epiphany is making good progress, it looks like. If it were to add a search bar and bookmark synchronization I'd probably use it.
It's good for computers that are low on memory and CPU power. I wouldn't really use it otherwise for the same reason I don't use Opera or Konqueror regularly; I'm too dependent on the extensions of firefox. Cooliris previews are a boon, Download statusbar is great. DownThemAll is essential in some cases. Errorzilla mod and User Agent Switcher can be really useful. ReloadEvery and Ubuntu Forum Menu are excellent as well. I'm getting the urge to go back to Opera for a while just to see what's changed and if I'll like it...

edit: The new speed dial function in Opera is brilliant. Really. It might be worth switching back, just for that.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 01:24 AM
Epiphany has extensions.

http://www.gnome.org/projects/epiphany/extensions

darweth
May 11th, 2007, 01:33 AM
I strongly dislike Firefox. With that said, Firefox is the only browser I use. I have tried a million times to adjust to Epiphany, Opera, or Konqueror (on KDE also) and just cannot. It is not the lack of extensions of features, but browsing on anything but Firefox just feels wrong and perverse. Especially Opera. It also has nothing to do with Opera being closed source. It is just vibes. Firefox might be sucky chunky but it 'feels right' and thus I continue to put up with the heavyness, slowness, brattyness, crashyness, etc. Until other browsers 'feel' like the WWW and emit decent vibes, I am stuck with FF.

BTW --- for all of the Naysayers. Firefox actually WAS intended to be a fast, simple, lightweight browser. Remember that once upon a time the Mozilla Suite was the prime browser offering from Mozilla. Firefox was called other names like Pheonix, Firebird, etc... It started as a fast and light alternative named Pheonix and eventually became the big behemoth it is today.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 01:46 AM
Epiphany has extensions.

http://www.gnome.org/projects/epiphany/extensions
right, but I mean the ones that I use.

timpino
May 11th, 2007, 01:59 AM
Firefox is like the hot girl in your class who got kids when she was 18 and grew fat as a hog. I find FF/IE/Safari to be of equal speed. Opera is my browser of choice since it's wicked fast and has all the functionality I need. Konqueror is also a nice browser, fast and reliable.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 02:05 AM
Firefox is like the hot girl in your class who got kids when she was 18 and grew fat as a hog. I find FF/IE/Safari to be of equal speed. Opera is my browser of choice since it's wicked fast and has all the functionality I need. Konqueror is also a nice browser, fast and reliable.
I do like Opera. I just took another whack at it, and remembered why I stopped using it. It's because I do rely a lot on Google products, and they like to not support Opera. Calendar works fine now, Gmail is alright (the chat acts up sometimes), Docs and Spreadsheets is a real pain, and most of the stuff on my google homepage refuses to work. It's just infuriating since I use these things on a more-or-less daily basis. It's more google's fault than Opera's, really. Of course, I'll always wish that Opera were open source as well...

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 02:35 AM
Out of curiosity, what do people mean when they say firefox is "slow"? Slow at what, exactly?

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 02:51 AM
slow at starting up. Slow at loading pages when there are lots of tabs open. Slow at opening new tabs if lots of tabs are open. Slow response time when you click a menu and wait two seconds for it to appear.

I believe that mostly, it has to do with the lack of XUL optimization in linux.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 02:59 AM
slow at starting up. Slow at loading pages when there are lots of tabs open. Slow at opening new tabs if lots of tabs are open. Slow response time when you click a menu and wait two seconds for it to appear.

I believe that mostly, it has to do with the lack of XUL optimization in linux.

Thanks for the reply. I have noticed that it opens slowly sometimes. I can't figure out why though. I just opened it to test and it took about 2 seconds. but other times I have noticed it take 5 seconds or more. So that's something. I haven't noticed those other problems you mentioned though. How many tabs are you talking about? You know how if you open so many tabs the X stops appearing on all of them - are you talking about that many tabs? Or are you talking about so many tabs that you have to scroll right/left to see them all? I rarely use more than 5 or 6 tabs at once.

By the way, I'm trying out Epiphany right now and loving it. My big problems right now are the lack of a sidebar bookmarks. Also not having any linkbar is sort of annoying. Otherwise I love the clean interface. It sort of looks like evince.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 03:07 AM
Thanks for the reply. I have noticed that it opens slowly sometimes. I can't figure out why though. I just opened it to test and it took about 2 seconds. but other times I have noticed it take 5 seconds or more. So that's something. I haven't noticed those other problems you mentioned though. How many tabs are you talking about? You know how if you open so many tabs the X stops appearing on all of them - are you talking about that many tabs? Or are you talking about so many tabs that you have to scroll right/left to see them all? I rarely use more than 5 or 6 tabs at once.

By the way, I'm trying out Epiphany right now and loving it. My big problems right now are the lack of a sidebar bookmarks. Also not having any linkbar is sort of annoying. Otherwise I love the clean interface. It sort of looks like evince.
well the number of tabs you can have open before it bottlenecks and devours your system depends on the computer. I don't feel the impact on my computer anymore since I just built a new machine. As for how many tabs I have open...that's 13 per window, since that's the most it can hold without having to scroll left and right for tabs. I hate the scrolling thing so I just open a new window.

Right now I have two windows open, each with 13 tabs, and then I have two other windows on which I'm using Google docs and Calendar.

Like I said, it's hard for me to really get my machine to bottleneck and slow down now, but on my old computer, it would happen all the time. It would choke at 9 or 10 tabs, especially if there were multiple windows again.

I guess it was eveb more problematic for me, since I set it to save my windows and tabs when I close and open them again the next time I run it.

aysiu
May 11th, 2007, 03:10 AM
I guess I feel about Firefox the way a lot of failed Ubuntu converters feel about Windows--I'm stuck with it.

I've tried--believe me, I've tried--to use other browsers: Epiphany, Galeon, Dillo, Lynx, Opera, Kazehakase, Seamonkey, Konqueror. Even though Firefox annoys me with its relative sluggishness, it does everything else I want it to do.

Opera comes pretty close, and it's lightning fast, but there are a couple of reasons I can't use Opera. Its tab closing behavior I can't deal with. A lot of times, I keep a tab open that I want to get back to later--much later--but in Opera, if I keep a tab open, every time I close a new tab, Opera will keep bringing the focus back to that one old tab. The other thing is that Opera (probably because its too W3C compliant) doesn't always function well with webpages (especially this one particular webpage I have to use for work a lot).

I recently tried out Seamonkey, and it also was lightning fast, which makes no sense to me. Why would Seamonkey (a browser and email client) be faster than Firefox alone? Faster to start. Faster to use. Unfortunately, Seamonkey's version of the ImgLikeOpera extension (which I've recently fallen in love with) doesn't work on my computer. It also lacks a little search engine bar (instead having a search engine button) and its find-as-you-type will find only the first instance of a word on the page, not any second or third appearances of that word.

It's always those little things.

The inability of some browser to open with keyboard shortcuts an entire bookmark folder. The Control-L shortcut deleting the address bar info instead of highlighting. A lack of a simple Flash-blocking or Javascript-blocking tool. No Bloglines extension integration. When I use another browser for just an hour or so, I realize quickly that I have become hardwired for Firefox.

So I always go back. The sluggishness of Firefox annoys me, but it's not critical, as I use tabs and usually read one page while other pages are loading in the background.

Recently, Galeon has been extremely tempting, though. I may switch permanently to that. Who knows?

Adamant1988
May 11th, 2007, 03:14 AM
Give me konquerer with Google Toolbar and I'll probably be a happy camper :)

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 03:26 AM
well the number of tabs you can have open before it bottlenecks and devours your system depends on the computer. I don't feel the impact on my computer anymore since I just built a new machine. As for how many tabs I have open...that's 13 per window, since that's the most it can hold without having to scroll left and right for tabs. I hate the scrolling thing so I just open a new window.

Right now I have two windows open, each with 13 tabs, and then I have two other windows on which I'm using Google docs and Calendar.

Like I said, it's hard for me to really get my machine to bottleneck and slow down now, but on my old computer, it would happen all the time. It would choke at 9 or 10 tabs, especially if there were multiple windows again.

I guess it was eveb more problematic for me, since I set it to save my windows and tabs when I close and open them again the next time I run it.

wow, bro, what in the world do you need 26 tabs open at the same time for ;) You're not one of those people who look for things to read and never get around to reading them, just like the searching - are ya?

I have to say, I'm loving epiphany right now. Although, I'm not sure that I'm getting a tremendous memory advantage; using 50mb right now and only 2 tabs open. But after testing with 14 tabs open it only increased to 51.6mb so maybe that's something. It looks good once you customize it a bit too.

Sunflower1970
May 11th, 2007, 03:28 AM
On my two P4's both have lots of RAM so running FF is no biggie. Nothing seems sluggish. But, on the PII, I've been trying out vairous browsers to see which is the fastest. I still love Firefox, and have done some tweaks here and there...and have been able to get pages to load a bit faster. I use Opera the most. It's quite fast, which is a surprise on this old computer. I like the Speed Dial option, but it doesn't play nice with my iGoogle homepage. :( If Opera could have a google toolbar, make all my links show up on my google homepage, I'd be more than happy. Or, if FF could be lighter and faster, and have speed dial, I'd even be more thrilled.

I've recently started to use Kazehakase, and although I like it--very fast, and light...it sometimes it seems to stall trying to open a page.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 03:30 AM
On my two P4's both have lots of RAM so running FF is no biggie. Nothing seems sluggish. But, on the PII, I've been trying out vairous browsers to see which is the fastest. I still love Firefox, and have done some tweaks here and there...and have been able to get pages to load a bit faster. I use Opera the most. It's quite fast, which is a surprise on this old computer. I like the Speed Dial option, but it doesn't play nice with my iGoogle homepage. :( If Opera could have a google toolbar, make all my links show up on my google homepage, I'd be more than happy. Or, if FF could be lighter and faster, and have speed dial, I'd even be more thrilled.

I've recently started to use Kazehakase, and although I like it--very fast, and light...it sometimes it seems to stall trying to open a page.
as I mentioned on the last page, the google-opera compatibility problems are really more google's fault than opera. Google tends to code more for Firefox and IE rather than coding correctly.

Whiffle
May 11th, 2007, 03:32 AM
I'm not sure whats going on here... Granted I"m using swiftfox and I have a grand total of about 4 extensions. I just opened up about 10 different tabs and it didn't slow down. Maybe I just have too much RAM, or maybe I'm just way cooler than everyone else, but firefox runs great for me. Granted, if I open up konqueror it hauls butt even more, but firefox feels in no way slow. I guess I just felt like sharing the feeling that I don't feel the same thing as most other people in this thread...

PatrickMay16
May 11th, 2007, 03:34 AM
Firefox 1.5 was the best. But Firefox 2.0 is the worst. I'll keep using Firefox 1.5 until it's too old to be viable, or I'll switch to the version of Firefox which will come after 2.0 if firefox becomes good again. But sadly, it probably will never be as good as it was again.

Whiffle
May 11th, 2007, 03:41 AM
Come to think of it, I'm just curious what everyone has their home page setting set to? I have mine set to about:blank, so whenever I open it up or open a new tab I don't have to wait for a web page to load so I can do my thing, it seems to help.

bionnaki
May 11th, 2007, 03:45 AM
Someone posted a list of things to disable or change in the settings to speed firefox up and that helps a bit.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1299854/posts

yes, those are all over the net. too bad that the "freepers" are annoying rightwing ideologues.

aysiu
May 11th, 2007, 03:46 AM
There's a whole thread about that:
So, what's your homepage? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=360141)

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 03:48 AM
There's a whole thread about that:
So, what's your homepage? (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=360141)

That's not what he was asking. He was asking a performance-related question. That thread is not performance-related.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 03:49 AM
yes, those are all over the net. too bad that the "freepers" are annoying rightwing ideologues.

You can't take advice from people you disagree with politically on things that have nothing to do with politics?

HeyItsMatt
May 11th, 2007, 03:51 AM
I run the 3 main OS, Linux, OS X and Windows. Firefox which was originally designed to be a lightweight fast browser, now appears on all platforms to be the absolute slowest of all browsers, gigantic pauses when loading some pages.

I used to be a Firefox fanboy, now all that is left is gmail compatability and nice extentions.

It is now the bloatiest, slowest browser there is? if you disagree state why please.

After dabbling in web development/design, I can't imagine how any web browser (including Firefox) could ever sink below Internet Explorer. That browser's an absolute nightmare to code for, since basically it's a choice between following web standards to have pages display right in Firefox / other browsers, or code wrong and/or make tons of workarounds for Internet Explorer.

That being said, Firefox does seem really finicky for me on Linux. It crashes when I make it do too much heavy lifting, and it is a little bit slow. Opera is much faster - I would use it but Firefox has this extension called "Rikaichan" that automatically looks up english definitions of Kanji for me just by floating my mouse over them. This is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen, and makes me overlook all the crashes.

bionnaki
May 11th, 2007, 03:55 AM
You can't take advice from people you disagree with politically on things that have nothing to do with politics?

I didnt say that. just said those tips are all over the net. just commenting on how creepy free republic is.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 03:59 AM
I do get lock-ups from time to time in Firefox for odd reasons. By the way, I've heard good things about Kazehakase, so I went to try it. I went into Synaptic to get it... and it need 14 depedencies. 14? Totaling 30mb. No thanks.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 04:02 AM
I do get lock-ups from time to time in Firefox for odd reasons. By the way, I've heard good things about Kazehakase, so I went to try it. I went into Synaptic to get it... and it need 14 depedencies. 14? Totaling 30mb. No thanks.
Firefox has a lot more when installing it on a non-gnome system.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 04:06 AM
Firefox has a lot more when installing it on a non-gnome system.

Yeah, I'd understand that, but Kazehakase is a gnome ap isn't it? and i'm using gnome. It needed a lot of "ruby" related dependencies, whatever that is.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 04:21 AM
Yeah, I'd understand that, but Kazehakase is a gnome ap isn't it? and i'm using gnome. It needed a lot of "ruby" related dependencies, whatever that is.
ruby is a programming language, like how python is a programming language. when you install a python based program like Exaile, you'll have to install a bunch of libpython stuff.

So when you install kazehakase, it'll want to install libruby stuff since it's coded in ruby.

When someone installs firefox, it'll also want to install libwhatever for whatever firefox is coded in. In fact, installing firefox on a plain gnome install actually brings in a lot of dependencies as well. just recently discovered this.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 04:24 AM
ruby must be a rare programming language since i've never ran across a program that needed it before.

maniacmusician
May 11th, 2007, 04:27 AM
ruby must be a rare programming language since i've never ran across a program that needed it before.
I wouldn't say rare...but it's not as popular as python. It has a strong following, almost cult-like. A lot of people love it and won't program in anything else. The objective assessment of it that I gather is that it's pretty good for programming in, but is hard to totally master.

ArtificialSynapse
May 11th, 2007, 04:30 AM
I love firefox, it's always been fast and reliable for me, then again I run liberal specs.

Polygon
May 11th, 2007, 05:44 AM
i used to think it was slow, but now that i only have two extensions (adblock plus and filterset.g updater) firefox runs and loads pretty fast

i like firefox, it handles flash well (unlike opera) and has a ton of extensions, and is rapidly being supported by basically everything.

igknighted
May 11th, 2007, 07:14 AM
i used to think it was slow, but now that i only have two extensions (adblock plus and filterset.g updater) firefox runs and loads pretty fast

i like firefox, it handles flash well (unlike opera) and has a ton of extensions, and is rapidly being supported by basically everything.

The problem with FF is that logic says without extensions, it should be fast. After all, that's the point of extensions, right? Why not build these features into the browser if its going to be slow anyways? Opera (and to a lesser extent konqueror) build these features in, and they come more functional out of the box with greater speed. I would love FF if they would lighten up the default, but until they do it will remain (in my mind) the most over hyped software in recent memory.

brodiepearce
May 11th, 2007, 01:21 PM
For some reason Firefox refuses to open from links on Feisty now. I.e. when there's no browser open, even right clicking on links in Gaim and XChat and selecting Open In Browser does nothing unless Firefox is already running.

Is anyone else having similar issues? I don't know if it's my system specifically but god damn a lot of the software shipped with Feisty is buggy. :(

*edit*
Ok disregard my naivety, Firefox was not set as the default browser. <embarrassed>

B0rsuk
May 11th, 2007, 02:12 PM
I run the 3 main OS, Linux, OS X and Windows. Firefox which was originally designed to be a lightweight fast browser, now appears on all platforms to be the absolute slowest of all browsers, gigantic pauses when loading some pages.

I used to be a Firefox fanboy, now all that is left is gmail compatability and nice extentions.

It is now the bloatiest, slowest browser there is? if you disagree state why please.

My thought exactly. Nothing else remains to be said.

I'm finding myself using Konqueror more and more. It's nice, fast, and still has a lot of features, some of which aren't present in Firefox, at least not by default. And somehow it feels more linux-like. You know, to search in Firefox you press CTRL-F like in just about any windows program. In Konqueror, you press /, as if you were searching for something in a man page.

Konqueror has some very cool features, like formatting man pages. Type
man:chmod in location bar. Or for something different,
locate:.jpg to instantly find all jpg files using indexed search of locate. And unlike console locate, you can easily preview all found images which is very helpful in case of some multimedia.

zugu
May 11th, 2007, 02:31 PM
Epiphany has extensions.

http://www.gnome.org/projects/epiphany/extensions

You do realize those extensions are a joke compared to Firefox's, right? It's as if they were hastily created, because devs were pressured by users to do it.

Jhongy
May 11th, 2007, 03:17 PM
Firefox is fine for me in terms of speed -- a little sluggish, but improved when tweaked.

However, it seems to be increasing in bugginess -- it often crashes, particularly when beginning to write in a web form text box when the page is not fully loaded (I think JS functions that switch focus cause ti to crash if you're typing). I found it increasing in bugginess on Windows, too.

Since it's the poster-child for FOSS software, I think this is a shame and potentially damaging.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 03:25 PM
You do realize those extensions are a joke compared to Firefox's, right? It's as if they were hastily created, because devs were pressured by users to do it.

Not sure what you mean. They all do what they were intended to do, as far as I can tell. There's also 3rd party extensions out there.

dspari1
May 11th, 2007, 03:40 PM
Give me konquerer with Google Toolbar and I'll probably be a happy camper :)

http://kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=15163

(I couldn't find a deb or rpm(for alien), so I had to compile it, attached to this post is a screenshot)

Konqueror has been fast, functional, and has given me the best results in web compatibility than any other browser for Linux. (foxnews.com and abcnews.com flash videos). I usually find that the sites that are incompatible with Konqueror are usually artificial, and a simple change in the browser id(nice feature btw) fixes the issue most of the time.

I don't want to bash Opera because it is a good browser, but I can't use it until they resolve a lot of incompatibility issues with the Flash plugin. I don't know who to put the blame on, but the fact is that Opera has the issues, and the other browsers don't(or has less issues). I simply can't use it until it gets resolved.

zugu
May 11th, 2007, 05:47 PM
Not sure what you mean. They all do what they were intended to do, as far as I can tell. There's also 3rd party extensions out there.

I mean there are fewer extensions for Epiphany than for Firefox and their usability is visibly lower. Also, Epiphany's extension system is not as modularized as it should be.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 05:58 PM
I mean there are fewer extensions for Epiphany than for Firefox and their usability is visibly lower. Also, Epiphany's extension system is not as modularized as it should be.

I like the extensions. I actually love the fact that all I had to do to get adblock was check it in the extension list, no configuring is necessary like it was with firefox. I like the fact that the extensions do precise browser-related things and work well. If you require lots of extension (I only ever ran 3 in firefox) to take care of every thing you do in the browser like social networking and such, this isn't the browser for you. It's a browser just for browsing.

racoq
May 11th, 2007, 06:17 PM
Guys, there has been many mistakes here in this thread.

One of them is that epiphany and others are faster than firefox. I can only talk about epiphany that is the one i have tested. Epiphany is a native gtk application, which should make it faster to load on my xubuntu, than the default firefox, but that is really not true, firefox is faster starting up than epiphany without extensions (and it is not a native gtk application), also epiphany features, seems crippled to me comparing it to firefox, would you expect a speed demon of a full featured browser? If you are not satisfied about firefox speed, use dilo or others, for me firefox is like ubuntu, "just works", and possibly is one of the best open source applications there is (in terms of quality and full featured software) .

for those who are not satisfied, i can say that mozilla is working hard to address some of the mistakes done in this release. Do you guys already tried, Gran paradiso (The upcoming 3.0 version of firefox?). its damn faster than 2.0 version, maybe some of you could grab it here and try it (and contribute by testing, finding bugs, and report bad and slow behaviors, improving its quality)

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/granparadiso/alpha4/

Another thing that i think some guys are bashing without arguments, Mozilla , and firefox, is that mozilla doesn't have responsibility, of pour programmed extensions, that are a memory hog on firefox. All that takes to kill firefox performance is having few bad programmed extensions loaded.

Mateo
May 11th, 2007, 06:21 PM
Another thing that i think some guys are bashing without arguments, Mozilla , and firefox, is that mozilla doesn't have responsibility, of pour programmed extensions, that are a memory hog on firefox. All that takes to kill firefx performance is having few bad programmed extensions loaded.

I agree with most of what you said, but I do think that it's Firefox's fault because much of this could be avoided if they would integrate the major extensions into the program itself. Then they could fix these poor programming problems you talk about For example, why is adblock not an official part of Firefox? The only conceivable reason is that they don't want to anger the companies that give them money.

Extreme Coder
May 11th, 2007, 08:59 PM
and BTW, racoq, Firefox is coded in GTK, but it has themes support too.

Extreme Coder

racoq
May 11th, 2007, 09:22 PM
and BTW, racoq, Firefox is coded in GTK, but it has themes support too.

Extreme Coder

Firefox is multi platform, it is coded mostly in XUL. There are no gtk dependencies of firefox in KDE, from what i know. That language is based on XML, see more about it in:

http://www.xulplanet.com/tutorials/xultu/intro.html


EDIT

http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Linux_Build_Prerequisites

Saw this link, and it uses GTK for its widget, or QT, xlib so as you can see, firefox can be built to any platform DE

Extreme Coder
May 11th, 2007, 09:56 PM
What I meant is that if you try firefox on KDE(without using gtk-qt-engine), or any other non-GTK DE, you will notice that the buttons and forms(like the preferences window), will look bad, because they need a GTK theme.

Extreme Coder

igknighted
May 11th, 2007, 11:19 PM
Guys, there has been many mistakes here in this thread.

One of them is that epiphany and others are faster than firefox. I can only talk about epiphany that is the one i have tested. Epiphany is a native gtk application, which should make it faster to load on my xubuntu, than the default firefox, but that is really not true, firefox is faster starting up than epiphany without extensions (and it is not a native gtk application), also epiphany features, seems crippled to me comparing it to firefox, would you expect a speed demon of a full featured browser? If you are not satisfied about firefox speed, use dilo or others, for me firefox is like ubuntu, "just works", and possibly is one of the best open source applications there is (in terms of quality and full featured software) .

for those who are not satisfied, i can say that mozilla is working hard to address some of the mistakes done in this release. Do you guys already tried, Gran paradiso (The upcoming 3.0 version of firefox?). its damn faster than 2.0 version, maybe some of you could grab it here and try it (and contribute by testing, finding bugs, and report bad and slow behaviors, improving its quality)

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/granparadiso/alpha4/

Another thing that i think some guys are bashing without arguments, Mozilla , and firefox, is that mozilla doesn't have responsibility, of pour programmed extensions, that are a memory hog on firefox. All that takes to kill firefox performance is having few bad programmed extensions loaded.

I don't know a lot about epiphany, so I wont refute your claims about it compared to FF, but I can speak for Konqueror and Opera, and both of these programs, which come with all the features included that I could want and then some, are able to provide a quicker, snappier web experience than firefox with NO extensions, I even skip out on ones I love like mouse gestures (built into the afore mentioned two) to increase speed. I love that people are getting into Firefox as it is open source, but really, is that the best they can do? I use IE7 on windows machines over FF because I can't stand waiting for FF, and the disparateness is worse on linux.

maniacmusician
May 12th, 2007, 12:11 AM
epiphany has always loaded faster for me than firefox. maybe on a faster computer you wouldn't notice the difference, but on older computers, epiphany is a boon.

racoq
May 12th, 2007, 12:21 AM
epiphany has always loaded faster for me than firefox. maybe on a faster computer you wouldn't notice the difference, but on older computers, epiphany is a boon.

On Pentium III 800 MHZ, running Xubuntu, they are basically the same (although i feel firefox is a little faster). However i tested epiphany with gran paradiso, and firefox in this last test is significantly faster.

EDIT
Firefox Gran Paradiso - 5 seconds
Epiphany - 7 seconds

Rhox
May 12th, 2007, 01:20 AM
I definitely wouldn't say it's the worst. As the someone said before Firefox 3 is looking really promising.

siimo
May 12th, 2007, 02:34 AM
Don't get me wrong but every Joe six-pack seems to be knocking firefox these days. Just a couple of years ago everyone loved it even though it was just as memory leaky as it is now. :confused:

aysiu
May 12th, 2007, 02:38 AM
Don't get me wrong but every Joe six-pack seems to be knocking firefox these days. Just a couple of years ago everyone loved it even though it was just as memory leaky as it is now. :confused:
I can't speak for anyone else, but I remember one of the big ways in which Firefox was "sold" around mid-to-late 2004 was as being faster than Internet Explorer. And for me, it was faster than Internet Explorer... at least back then. God knows why.

But then I started getting into extensions and themes... lots of extensions and themes... and my Firefox just kept getting more and more bloated. Recently (as in last week), I got rid of all the crap. Now I have three extensions and one theme, and Firefox is speedy again. Not as speedy as Opera or Konqueror, but at least usable.

I still think speed is overrated. I don't use dial-up any more, and I usually load pages in background tabs while reading the currently selected tab. A fraction of a second doesn't matter to me unless I'm using Internet Explorer 6... and I don't use Internet Explorer 6 any more.

Rhox
May 12th, 2007, 02:40 AM
Don't get me wrong but every Joe six-pack seems to be knocking firefox these days. Just a couple of years ago everyone loved it even though it was just as memory leaky as it is now. :confused:

Stop being so anti-hip and act like a damn sheep!

mrgnash
May 12th, 2007, 03:43 AM
Maybe it's because my PC is reasonably quick, but I haven't noticed any great amount of lag while using Firefox; and I have a decent number of extensions running, too. :confused:

RAV TUX
May 12th, 2007, 06:35 AM
I run the 3 main OS, Linux, OS X and Windows. Firefox which was originally designed to be a lightweight fast browser, now appears on all platforms to be the absolute slowest of all browsers, gigantic pauses when loading some pages.

I used to be a Firefox fanboy, now all that is left is gmail compatability and nice extentions.

It is now the bloatiest, slowest browser there is? if you disagree state why please.

not the worst but I prefer Opera or Konqueror over Firefox.

(someone should make a Slimfox Browser)

Polygon
May 12th, 2007, 06:39 AM
if no one has said this already, a lot of firefox's "slowness" comes from customizing it, aka themes, extensions, toolbars all that stuff. if they are coded badly or have memory leaks then its going to slow down firefox horribly

i have two extensions and the default theme and firefox runs really fast

DoctorMO
May 12th, 2007, 06:46 AM
nah I never install extras in firefox, from my dissecting of firefox code and usage I've determined that it's caching is really bad in Linux and it tends to keep a hell of a lot of data in RAM, for instance keeping strings of html and html node dom structures at the same time is a no no so is not designating history and prevous page data as 'cachable' to linux memory manager.

Put simply, Firefox is just a bad port of a window app that won't do well on Linux until it's coded properly for Linux.

RAV TUX
May 12th, 2007, 06:58 AM
Put simply, Firefox is just a bad port of a window app that won't do well on Linux until it's coded properly for Linux.

Interesting thought.

EdThaSlayer
May 12th, 2007, 11:00 AM
I don't use any extension and the experience is much better for me.When I used the extensions it caused firefox to crash a lot.

racoq
May 12th, 2007, 11:06 AM
to kill the slowness issue in this Thread here is an excerpt from the official troubleshooting:



Poorly designed or incompatible Add-ons can cause problems with your browser, including make it crash, slow down page display, etc. If you encounter strange problems relating to parts of the browser no longer working, the browser not starting, windows with strange or distorted appearance, degraded performance, etc, you may be suffering from trouble with your Add-ons.


link: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/3.0a4/releasenotes/#troubleshooting


Mozilla can't and won't be responsible for the bad usage users give to their browser.

Please stop bashing firefox, it is still the best open source web browser, and opera in terms of interface and usability doesn't come even close to firefox, And you know what? Opera its PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE..

So if you are unhappy you have many options:

- Start using it well (delete the addons that are slowing down), or use none
- stop using firefox at all
- use the current version of firefox gran paradiso. and start reporting bugs, in order to improve next version

I just see here people flaming, and that doesn't contribute nothing for improving firefox. At least i'm using gran paradiso for my daily tasks on Ubuntu, and reporting bugs. are you?

You can say whatever you want, but until there is one better alternative, firefox is and will be THE default web browser of the majority of all linux distros, And is THE web browser of the open source community.

I rest my case

steven8
May 12th, 2007, 11:12 AM
to kill the slowness issue in this Thread here is an excerpt from the official troubleshooting:



link: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/3.0a4/releasenotes/#troubleshooting


Mozilla can't and won't be responsible for the bad usage users give to their browser.

Please stop bashing firefox, it is still the best open source web browser, and opera in terms of interface and usability doesn't come even close to firefox, And you know what? Opera its PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE..

So if you are unhappy you have many options:

- Start using it well (delete the addons that are slowing down), or use none
- stop using firefox at all
- use the current version of firefox gran paradiso. and start reporting bugs, in order to improve next version

I just see here people flaming, and that doesn't contribute nothing for improving firefox. At least i'm using gran paradiso for my daily tasks on Ubuntu, and reporting bugs. are you?

You can say whatever you want, but until there is one better alternative, firefox is and will be THE default web browser of the majority of all linux distros, And is THE web browser of the open source community.

I rest my case

amen to all of that!!

karellen
May 12th, 2007, 01:01 PM
nah I never install extras in firefox, from my dissecting of firefox code and usage I've determined that it's caching is really bad in Linux and it tends to keep a hell of a lot of data in RAM, for instance keeping strings of html and html node dom structures at the same time is a no no so is not designating history and prevous page data as 'cachable' to linux memory manager.

Put simply, Firefox is just a bad port of a window app that won't do well on Linux until it's coded properly for Linux.

:D....I guess you hit the nail on the head

bruce89
May 12th, 2007, 02:02 PM
Has Firefox fallen from best browser to the worst?

It was never much good, especially post 1.5 (bloody stupid version numbers too).

I wait for a Webkit powered Epiphany, but I have settled for a Gecko powered Epiphany (which makes OpenStreetMap's memory eating (http://munin.openstreetmap.org/openstreetmap/www.openstreetmap-memory.html) ) look pathetic (thanks to gecko).

moore.bryan
May 12th, 2007, 02:22 PM
I don't know a lot about epiphany, so I wont refute your claims about it compared to FF, but I can speak for Konqueror and Opera, and both of these programs, which come with all the features included that I could want and then some, are able to provide a quicker, snappier web experience than firefox with NO extensions, I even skip out on ones I love like mouse gestures (built into the afore mentioned two) to increase speed. I love that people are getting into Firefox as it is open source, but really, is that the best they can do? I use IE7 on windows machines over FF because I can't stand waiting for FF, and the disparateness is worse on linux.
on my machine, running a server-install and openbox on a 1.8ghz processor and 1gb ram, both opera and konqueror are INSANELY slower than firefox and swiftfox to render pages. when i run benchmark tests on websites with a nifty "old school" chronograph in my hand, swiftfox renders quickest, firefox second, konqueror a DISTANT third, and opera so slow i chose to watch the grass grow instead. ;-)

johnaaronrose
May 12th, 2007, 02:59 PM
I'm using Swiftfox (i.e. processor optimised Firefox) rather than Firefox. I use approx 10 extensions. It loads in 3 seconds rather than 15 seconds on a Dell Inspiron 1501 laptop. Its display of web pages is sub second. I've never had it crash.

I love the way it loads all my web pages (as an option) when I boot up after shutdown on the day before with Swiftfox left open.

iPower
May 12th, 2007, 03:22 PM
MSIE is still the worst browser

starcraft.man
May 12th, 2007, 03:25 PM
MSIE is still the worst browser

LOL, I don't think anyone will ever argue that point :p Between the activeX causing problems/exploits and the failure to customize look/extensions, its a poor excuse.

Extreme Coder
May 12th, 2007, 03:41 PM
on my machine, running a server-install and openbox on a 1.8ghz processor and 1gb ram, both opera and konqueror are INSANELY slower than firefox and swiftfox to render pages. when i run benchmark tests on websites with a nifty "old school" chronograph in my hand, swiftfox renders quickest, firefox second, konqueror a DISTANT third, and opera so slow i chose to watch the grass grow instead. ;-)

Konqueror is slow on your PC because you're not running KDE, it's the KDE web browser after all ;)

Sunflower1970
May 12th, 2007, 09:36 PM
- use the current version of firefox gran paradiso. and start reporting bugs, in order to improve next version

Took your advice and installed FF alpha4. And am very impressed! There's a big difference between 2 and 3 in speed on just about everything. :)

hoagie
May 12th, 2007, 09:49 PM
I only use addblock plus (I hate adds) and the default theme, and firefox is really fast. I never liked opera it always gave me a weird feeling.

GSF1200S
May 12th, 2007, 09:54 PM
Other than loading firefox after initial bootup, firefox seems really fast to me. The initial load takes about 4-5 seconds, and after that maybe 2 (due to cached memory).

In terms of rendering, Ive ran konqueror, Opera, and firefox side by side. It seemed to me they were virtually identical, with the edge to Fox and Opera. I like the Konqueror philosophy alot, and Opera is a really nice browser, but my Fox with 30+ extensions is so much more powerful and effecient in terms of power browsing, I cant stand to use the alternatives.

Ive also heard theyre aiming to make Fox faster and more effecient in Firefox 3. Its already fast to me, so faster would be amazing...

racoq
May 13th, 2007, 12:27 AM
Ive also heard theyre aiming to make Fox faster and more effecient in Firefox 3. Its already fast to me, so faster would be amazing...

Why don't you test it for yourself (like Sunflower1970), that advise applies to all of you guys , and download it from the link i have previous referred. Lets transform this Thread "Firefox fallen from best browser to the worst", in "hell yeah, Firefox Alpha 4 is kicking ***, and we will help it for the final version to kick even more ***."

Enverex
May 13th, 2007, 02:05 AM
I remember I used Firefox originally (it's been through one or two namechanges since it started) because it was fast, light and didn't have the major secutiry issues of IE. Now it's big, slow and crashes all the time. So yes, I agree entirely with the thread title.

tehkain
May 13th, 2007, 05:53 AM
I love epiphany's speed but there are a few things(functional spell check, and the search bar) that I can not live without in firefox. I try to make the switch once a week. Are there any more capable versions of epiphany?

Mateo
May 13th, 2007, 06:00 AM
I love epiphany's speed but there are a few things(functional spell check, and the search bar) that I can not live without in firefox. I try to make the switch once a week. Are there any more capable versions of epiphany?

What do you mean by capable versions?

I just recently made the switch so I understand some of your concerns. There is a spell check in Epiphany, but it just doesn't give you suggestions. But it does underline misspelled words. This feature didn't exist at all in Firefox until 2.0, so we've lived without it before.

I actually like the way Epiphany does search better. Not sure if you're aware, but there is a thing called "smart bookmarks" which simulate the search bar. For example, you can make a bookmark for Amazon, then if you type "Harry Potter" in the address bar, it will come down with a list of your different searches, so then you can select Amazon and there you go. I like this better because it doesn't waste more space like the firefox search bar does.

tehkain
May 13th, 2007, 06:08 AM
Yes I use smart bookmarks already. I was accustomed to(dragging and dropping for search). The spell check is an issue for me at least because I very rarely have to use it but when I do I am perplexed and dyslexic for that moment and unable to figure out how to spell the word because its usually a word like Xerophthalmia.

edit: Also I miss the right click -> properties feature

Mateo
May 13th, 2007, 06:14 AM
It's something to get used to (the absense of a search bar), but for me the transition was fast because I liked this method so much. I like the fact that you can easily make them yourself, but with Firefox you had to hope someone had made them for you (and usually they had, but still).

I made a Dictionary.com smart bookmark so any time I see a misspelled word I just copy, open a new tab, and paste.

GSF1200S
May 13th, 2007, 06:48 AM
Not to be an instigator, but I think alot of people always rebel against the "big guy." Ive NEVER had firefox crash, it loads pages as fast if not a smidge faster than Opera, and it has the powerful extensions. Its only downside is it takes MAYBE 1-2 seconds more to load than Opera. Granted, I have a fairly decent system, and I understand it may not be as effecient for someone with a much slower system. That being said, its gotten far faster and leaner as of recent, with memory usage being capped a bit.

Theres many different degrees of internet usage. I for one honestly research ALL KINDS of crap on the web, and the effecient way I can do that far outclasses any other browser. I respect the browsers available, but Fox is not BAD for craps sake...

Once again, no offense meant to ANYONE here, but I think when something becomes large and recognized, everyone starts to notice every little issue, while there coveted small equivalent application is immediately granted clemency because its not so "well funded" or "supported." The big guy is always hated- the US government, every empire in its day, the police in many cases, everything...

Firefox being a horrible web browser is going too far. I understand if its particular benefits dont mean enough to compensate for what you think it lacks, but accept as a browser for someone else..

If you feel there is a particular problem, lets fix it! Send your thoughts to Mozilla and tell them to make it faster, leaner and more stable (if thats a prob for you). Then we can all have a browser we love.

Firefox rocks for me...

Mateo
May 13th, 2007, 07:01 AM
GSF1200S: I agree partially with you. I agree that there might be some anti-"the man" stuff going on here but it's hard to make that accusation against anyone in particular. Also, I don't see a performance problem either.

But I do get occasional lockups. Just a while back, for about a week, any time I went to ubuntuforums the browser would freeze for about 10 seconds (yes, 10 real seconds). Then it stopped doing this for no reason.

I also have a problem with them not putting adblock as a feature of Firefox and not just a 3rd party extension (or make it an extension, but have it come with the browser as with Epiphany). There is no ethical difference between blocking ads and blocking popups. So why do they do one and not the other? The only reason I can think is that their paying costituents wouldn't like it.

SlayerMan
May 13th, 2007, 09:37 AM
@OP: You made me curious, so I installed Opera (via Synaptic) and did a bit of testing.

My first impression was that Opera isn't faster than Firefox. In fact, Firefox felt a bit snappier and seemed to render pages a bit faster than Opera (yes I cleared the caches on both before testing).

Enverex
May 13th, 2007, 12:12 PM
Not to be an instigator, but I think alot of people always rebel against the "big guy." Ive NEVER had firefox crash, it loads pages as fast if not a smidge faster than Opera, and it has the powerful extensions.

I can assure you the former isn't true in my case and in terms of the latter, well, just because it seems to work for you doesn't mean that it works perfectly for everyone else. I'm starting to hate it due to the memory it seems to eat on occasion and then also not free up as well as other seemingly random lockups.

GSF1200S
May 13th, 2007, 01:08 PM
I can assure you the former isn't true in my case and in terms of the latter, well, just because it seems to work for you doesn't mean that it works perfectly for everyone else. I'm starting to hate it due to the memory it seems to eat on occasion and then also not free up as well as other seemingly random lockups.

OK.. well likewise it doesnt NOT work for everyone else, it doesnt eat memory for everyone, and it doesnt lock up for everyone else.

Since this is the case, we should try and let them know this stuff rather than create threads with the sole purpose of bashing an app.. it sounds like it depends on the platform or something. But there is definitely an incongruency in the results of everyones use...

Im not saying this thread is a bad thing, so long as it is used in a constructive way to make the "problem child" better for most involved...

Enverex
May 13th, 2007, 01:18 PM
OK.. well likewise it doesnt NOT work for everyone else, it doesnt eat memory for everyone, and it doesnt lock up for everyone else..

You're missing the point. Lots of people ARE reporting these issues which means there ARE problems, you just appear to be trying to ignore them and pretend everything is rosy.

I would report these issues but they already have been many times before. I guess they are just going to fix them all in FF3... which could be some time away.

guitarmaniac
May 13th, 2007, 01:27 PM
firefox is by far the best browser i've ever used. it works for me, and thats why i continue to use it.
it is slightly on the heavy side, but that pales into insignificance when weighing up all its pros and the fact that it works for me.

Hit the nail on the head.

Dan Hammond
May 13th, 2007, 01:32 PM
No matter what anyone says about Firefox it will always be fast and better than Internet Explorer, but then thats a microsoft program isn't it ........

dashman
May 15th, 2007, 02:51 AM
FF is nice but isn't perfect yet. Too many crashes on ubuntu...I don't know if it's because I don't have a lot of ram but on xp it wasn't like that and I got rid of xp this week for good. I hope I won't regret it

GSF1200S
May 15th, 2007, 03:17 AM
You're missing the point. Lots of people ARE reporting these issues which means there ARE problems, you just appear to be trying to ignore them and pretend everything is rosy.

I would report these issues but they already have been many times before. I guess they are just going to fix them all in FF3... which could be some time away.

I ignore them? Come on man- I never said anything derogatory about you..

Im not trying to ignore anything: nothing progresses this way. Im merely stating the fact that I DONT have these problems, aside from the 1-2 second increase in loading time.

Its good these issues are being reported, and im sure theyre very valid. That being said, people should know that not everyone suffers from instability and extremely slow rendering. They should try the browser, and make the choice themselves. Fox is just as fast FOR ME, is just as stable FOR ME, and has far more functionallity FOR ME.

Im not trying to be at war with you over this.. but I think we can both agree that the extension capability of Firefox is an incredible addition, allowing one to make the browser do exactly what they want. If the problems that many are apparently having get resolved, than everyone can benefit.

No other browser offers what firefox does. Ill be honest with you: I really wish Konqueror had the extension base that Firefox does, because a browser that powerful with the capability of accessing my filesystem while at the same time loading as fast as it does.. that would be awesome.

I think we both feel the same way, we just have had dramatically different experiences...

steven8
May 15th, 2007, 03:20 AM
FF is nice but isn't perfect yet. Too many crashes on ubuntu...I don't know if it's because I don't have a lot of ram but on xp it wasn't like that and I got rid of xp this week for good. I hope I won't regret it

You won't

nanotube
May 15th, 2007, 04:55 AM
well, firefox does have some speed problems, and memory-eating problems, but i can't live without the extensions, specifically:
adblock plus
noscript
flashblock
nuke anything
prefbar
imagezoom
(roughly in order of preference).

when speed is of the essence, i fire up a seamonkey, elinks, or dillo

Anthem
May 15th, 2007, 05:05 AM
To answer the original question:

No. No it hasn't.

yatt
May 15th, 2007, 05:45 AM
Konqueror is slow on your PC because you're not running KDE, it's the KDE web browser after all ;)
That doesn't seem to effect me at all. I use GNOME and Konqueror for all but one webpage.

steven8
May 15th, 2007, 05:47 AM
To answer the original question:

No. No it hasn't.

Ditto.

Unconscious
June 5th, 2007, 04:17 AM
There's something else afoot here. I've been whining about FF slowness on these forums for a long time now. I've tried all kinds of settings in about:config to no avail. I've tried other browsers, and they're slow too.

On my win xpp box, however, its very fast.

I also use ubuntu at work; different network, etc. and FF is much faster there.
...but here's the weirdest thing: When I run FF in a win2k VM in the VMware player under ubuntu (bridged networking), it is much faster. What up wi'dat?!?!

LightB
June 5th, 2007, 05:56 AM
Try Swiftfox. Might be faster for you. For me it's fast enough, and I can't live without smooth wheel scrolling, which Opera and Konqueror don't have (or is unusable in their current state).

kevinlyfellow
June 5th, 2007, 06:07 AM
Try Swiftfox. Might be faster for you. For me it's fast enough, and I can't live without smooth wheel scrolling, which Opera and Konqueror don't have (or is unusable in their current state).

Swiftfox has iffy compliance to the licenses. Check this out http://forums.getswiftfox.com/viewtopic.php?t=202

kevinlyfellow
June 5th, 2007, 06:12 AM
I'd move away from firefox if I hadn't grown dependent on some of the extensions. I don't like where FF is leading, and I've tried jumping ship many times, I just can't do it.

Unconscious
June 6th, 2007, 01:33 PM
Tried SwiftFox, FasterFox, and a whole bunch of other browsers... No change...
Thus, It's NOT the browser.

Note that FF, running in a VM (virtual machine), on the same box, using the same interface hardware, and a good part of the network stack software, runs significantly faster. This strongly suggests that there is something iffy about the upper layers of the linux, or ubuntu, network interface.

...and it only happens on my home network, which strongly suggests some evil synergy between the upper layers of the linux/ubuntu network interface and DSL, or my home network configuration. From what I've seen on these forums, others are experiencing this too.

I will happily provide wireshark network traces, if you don't believe me.

ThinkBuntu
June 6th, 2007, 02:08 PM
I've found Firefox's download features to be very buggy. When downloading anything over 100MB, such as a Linux ISO, it will cut out for no reason and say that the download's complete. I only use wget in Linux for such downloads (or KGet) now, and I use Safari in OSX because it doesn't have wget.

allix
June 6th, 2007, 02:57 PM
I can't live without smooth wheel scrolling, which Opera and Konqueror don't have (or is unusable in their current state).

Opera does have smooth scroll that works fine. They fixed the rendering issue a few version ago.

proalan
June 6th, 2007, 03:00 PM
every release seems to be less stable than the previous, very RAM hungry too. I hope they concentrate on stability than introduce features we don't need. I've found myself switching between konqueror and even IE7.

Time for this browser to return to its roots, be fast lightweight and reliable.

RAV TUX
July 24th, 2007, 02:36 AM
Actually, I still use Firefox daily, I even changed all the browsers at my work from IE to Firefox.

DeadSuperHero
July 24th, 2007, 03:03 AM
I love Firefox, I've been using it for years...
Infact, I'm using it right now.
But, Ubuntu is all about choice, and that's all good with me.

stmiller
July 24th, 2007, 03:59 AM
Epiphany FTW! It's lightning fast, esp with this ubuntuforums page, digg.com, and other pages with lots of scripting going on.

jusmurph
July 24th, 2007, 06:23 AM
There are many tweaks available, including different clients such as Swiftweasel off the top of my head?

crimesaucer
July 24th, 2007, 07:13 AM
There are many tweaks available, including different clients such as Swiftweasel off the top of my head?

I agree Swiftweasel and the proper about:config settings, disabling IPV6, as well as using OpenDNS does the trick for regular browsing for me.


I do hate when I open way too many tabs with my limited memory (512MB), so for some reason it dumps memory into my SWAP file, and my lightning fast Swiftweasel turns into Snailweasel.

LookTJ
July 24th, 2007, 07:50 AM
It is now the bloatiest, slowest browser there is? if you disagree state why please.Disagreed, Firefox can be tweaked to be fast. but in my mind IE7 is the worst, the bloatiest, slowest of all time.

init1
July 24th, 2007, 07:10 PM
I run the 3 main OS, Linux, OS X and Windows. Firefox which was originally designed to be a lightweight fast browser, now appears on all platforms to be the absolute slowest of all browsers, gigantic pauses when loading some pages.

I used to be a Firefox fanboy, now all that is left is gmail compatability and nice extentions.

It is now the bloatiest, slowest browser there is? if you disagree state why please.
Works fine for me. If you don't like bloat, use dillo. ;)
It is about as fast as is physically possible.

init1
July 24th, 2007, 07:13 PM
Disagreed, Firefox can be tweaked to be fast. but in my mind IE7 is the worst, the bloatiest, slowest of all time.
I second that. IE7 is just a pathetic attempt at cloning FF.

Rhapsody
July 24th, 2007, 07:38 PM
Well, I think the topic creator is right in a way.

Firefox is slow, not particularly good looking, a bit buggy (http://pointlessness.freehostia.com/images/brokenfox.png), and can be unstable.

Opera is faster and I would have to say that Presto probably has better standards support.

But Firefox extensions are still impossible to beat in terms of variety and usefulness, and Firefox is second only to Internet Explorer in real-world web site compatibility. It's also probably the best free software browser around at the moment.

So what could switch me from Firefox? Well the Opera developers can improve their browser until they drop dead from effort for all I care, I'm not using a proprietary browser as my main browser.

Konqueror looks more promising though, with the KHTML developers now working on WebCore. If Konqueror can get replacements for my Firefox extensions and manage decent web site compatibility, then that could be the Firefox killer for me. That's only if the Firefox developers can't improve their speed and fix some of the little flaws first though.

So it's a race between Konqueror and Firefox for me. Firefox is staying for now, but who knows what'll happen in the future?

Zennlavian
July 24th, 2007, 07:46 PM
I agree that FF is slower on linux. but is it just me or has FF in general been slower since teaming up w/ google?

hobieone
July 24th, 2007, 07:49 PM
fire fox blost is mainly from people sticking alot of extensions on it and yes they are good but adds to the browsers bloat and some are big themselves and can hog a connection and slow the browser. i run very few extensions anfd fire fox both on my windows and ubuntu machines are very quick firefox onthe ubuntu one is quicker for some odd reason it has the same extensions? any it faster then ie by far and i haven't noticed a slow down with unless i install certian extensions that will pull info from the net.

strabes
July 27th, 2007, 02:29 PM
I have a total of 16 extensions installed, most of which I have gotten used to and therefore could no longer browse without. Some examples of essentials are: adblock plus & filterset.g, all in one gestures, gmail manager, greasemonkey, noscript, tabbrowser preferences, etc. The rest I have installed are mostly just convenience ones like search keys, url fixer, second search, downthemall, and download statusbar.

I find firefox to be a bit unstable especially when browsing flash-heavy sites like youtube on linux. It takes forever to start up but IMO it's worth it. I wish the mozilla guys would make it faster.

@trophy
July 27th, 2007, 03:40 PM
I stick with FF out of tradition I guess... it's what I have used for the past several years.

<rant>
But I'm thinking about switching to something else soon because this whole "All your RAM are belong to me" crap that most programs have been getting into lately makes me think some people out there in the open source world need to have a cluebat interface with the side of their head. There are many ways which Windows has the advantage over Linux, and one of the ways we have the advantage over them is that we can build lightweight software. To not do so is beyond stupid. Also, "But computers are fast now, and RAM is cheap!" is a dumb answer, and a lousy reason to develop stupidity.
</rant>

Seriously, though... Bug #1 isn't going anywhere if we get lazy or stupid...

sunexplodes
July 27th, 2007, 07:09 PM
I've become very frusturated with Firefox over the last few months. Even with Swiftfox AND the Fasterfox extension installed, it's still very slow when i have more than a couple tabs open.

So I've switched to Epiphany, and managed to replicate middle-click tab closing, adblock +filterset, and flashblock, which are my required themes, and it's SUPER speedy. No ads, good tab behavior, and the gecko rendering engine. I seriously reccomend it.

PurposeOfReason
July 27th, 2007, 07:33 PM
IF you get Swiftfox and get the fasterfox plugin. Maybe change the maxpiplinerequests in about:config to something about 30 . Then you'll be set.

sunexplodes
July 28th, 2007, 12:16 AM
Eh, at this point Epiphany with all the extensions is just as fast as out of the box Firefox, and does all the things I want it to. It's a better browser for me.

I do miss early, lightweight firefox.

I don't understand why the developers insist on constantly adding new features to the core of Firefox, when they coud just as easily write them all as extensions which could be used optionally. Like, Firefox 3's "Places" is a cool feature, but not enormously useful to me. But alas, it's a browser feature, and will weigh things down even more.

Oh boy.

mrgnash
July 28th, 2007, 12:35 AM
Hopefully the eventual release of Firefox 3 will resolve a lot of the speed problems for many of you. I'm using Epiphany as my primary browser right now, but I have tested a number of the Gran Paradiso Alphas (in fact, all of them so far, and a few nightly builds besides) and even the flaky ones have been a lot faster for me than FF2. And I should add that this is not due to the fact that I have one laden with extensions, and the other without, due to compatibility. I have tested both extensively, without extensions, and I usually operate using very few extensions anyway (usually just Zotero).

handy
July 28th, 2007, 01:35 AM
I use a variety of distro's & sometimes BSD, being able to use FF on all of these & easily import my bookmarks is great.

FF is reliable & the only complaints I would have about the web comes down to the way some webmasters design there pages specifically for IE.

The speed is fine, it sure beats surfing on a 28.8k dial-up modem!

omns
July 28th, 2007, 01:58 AM
I never have speed isssue with FF, then again I'm not a big user of extensions and only have a few installed. Firefox seems to be a reflection of many people's machines in general. Some keep them lean and mean and some pack them full of crud they hardly ever use. It's all about user preferences in the long run and using that as a yard stick, FF can accomodate the needs and preferences of just about anyone :)

Dimitriid
July 28th, 2007, 02:03 AM
This is good. I am coming from a different place and to me Firefox seems like a time traveling machine compared to IE. If people think its too slow is because we're demanding more and more out of it which is imho a good thing, shows the Linux community is a lot more mature and hence ideal for technology advances.

AlexenderReez
July 28th, 2007, 02:09 AM
and my lightning fast Swiftweasel turns into Snailweasel.

hahha..:lolflag::lolflag::lolflag:

cmat
July 28th, 2007, 02:11 AM
FF is starting to crash on me on some occasions. Just in the last month and a half though. I don't know why. Usually it crashes when it's loading media like video clips. This leads me to believe that it's my video drivers.

DjBones
July 28th, 2007, 09:13 AM
with swiftfox, fasterfox, and a ridiculously rude amount of pipelining requests.. its smokin on my laptop. ((i have had minimal problems with crashing though))

i do agree with a previous poster about converting browser "features" into optional extensions,
which would lean the code and restrict load times.

bluebyt
July 28th, 2007, 01:05 PM
I like to use epiphany, but I cannot find an extension similar to tab mix plus?
I want to be able to restore all my tabs (last session) when I open up my browers?

merlyn
July 28th, 2007, 01:32 PM
G'day all,

I'm currently running FF 3.0a6 (Gran Paradiso), and it runs noticeably faster on my system at least. That's without the Fasterfox extension enabled as the current version isn't compatible.

You might want to pay a visit to this (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=481470) thread.

Something else of interest I stumbled across lately is an interview (http://apcmag.com/6040/how_12_people_banded_together_to_make_firefox_1_0) with Mitchell Baker, CEO of the Mozilla Foundation.

There is a section where she mentions plans for the future (web 3.0) and that a swag of code has been in place since 2.x in order to prepare for it.

No doubt this contributes to much of the bloat.

Ok so that may not be everyone's cup of tea, I guess it's a good thing there are a number of browsers to choose from, such as Opera & Epiphany.

Though until (if ever) Mozilla release a stand alone version of Gecko, Epiphany will depend of FF to be installed.

Anyway it's not a bad read.

Cheers.

zach12
July 28th, 2007, 01:45 PM
firefox is so fast on my ubuntu6.06 laptop

crimesaucer
August 2nd, 2007, 12:50 AM
IF you get Swiftfox and get the fasterfox plugin. Maybe change the maxpiplinerequests in about:config to something about 30 . Then you'll be set.

The max number can only be 8, anything over 8 is just treated as 8: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Network.http.pipelining.maxrequests



Recommendation: 8. While it doesn't hurt to set it to 100 like in other tweak examples, it will have no effect whatsoever because of the mentioned limit.

...quoted from here: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=53650

cookies
August 2nd, 2007, 02:11 AM
It's at like 200th for me.

Ugh, yeah, that Flash and WMODE issue keeps it there. It also runs better in Wine than native! I don't get that!

So I use Konqueror, It has native KDE Widgets in Web Pages and does JavaScript Menus and Flash right (WMODE).

darksidedude
August 2nd, 2007, 02:15 AM
yea its fallen from best to worse and Internet Explorer 7 Is the New Best:lolflag:

Old Pink
August 5th, 2007, 02:14 PM
Firefox 3 (http://www.mbhoy.com/05-07-2007/gran-paradiso-alpha-6) looks to be quite good, it's certainly lighter (although that may be purely because of the lack of extensions/add-ons) and the RAM management works really well.

The current alpha release (http://www.mbhoy.com/05-07-2007/gran-paradiso-alpha-6) is really stable, give that a try, you can even keep your existing Firefox 2.0.0.6 setup.

However, I haven't noticed it slowing. At all, really, it's still a great browser.

Mazehero55
August 8th, 2007, 02:20 AM
I have tried Konqueror and epiphany and opera. And they are so slow I want to hit the monitor.

Firefox is so amazingly fast. It just seems unstable and keeps restarting gnome for some reason after awhile.

vexorian
August 8th, 2007, 04:21 AM
Has Firefox fallen from best browser to the worst?

No.

...
Nobody gives a damn about browsing speed, ok, perhaps some geeks that love to believe in benchmarks, I can open 20 pages at the same time in firefox that's what matters, and I love some plugins, so no, I don't care at all.

Other browsers are way too limited, proprietary or garbage they could be the fastest thing on earth, they still suck for me.

pacsum
August 8th, 2007, 06:23 AM
Man Firefox gaved me a lot of headaches. I'm now using Opera, (altought it also haves some minor problems) the navigation it's faster and the flash pages aren't slow (it was a nightmare loading a page with transparencies on Firefox like some profiles from myspace, etc). Firefox kept crashing, freezing...

cookies
August 8th, 2007, 07:46 AM
No.

...
Nobody gives a damn about browsing speed, ok, perhaps some geeks that love to believe in benchmarks, I can open 20 pages at the same time in firefox that's what matters, and I love some plugins, so no, I don't care at all.

Other browsers are way too limited, proprietary or garbage they could be the fastest thing on earth, they still suck for me.


But I do give a heck about:
http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/1664/snapshot2jy0.th.png (http://img380.imageshack.us/my.php?image=snapshot2jy0.png)

punkrokk
August 8th, 2007, 07:47 AM
ROFL are you kidding? I still use wget and linx ;)

vexorian
August 8th, 2007, 03:53 PM
But I do give a heck about:
http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/1664/snapshot2jy0.th.png (http://img380.imageshack.us/my.php?image=snapshot2jy0.png)
So, you intend to prove that adobe's flash plugin sucks? You don't have to.

sunexplodes
August 9th, 2007, 07:36 AM
I have tried Konqueror and epiphany and opera. And they are so slow I want to hit the monitor.

SERIOUSLY? That's so weird. I can't vouch for Konqueror or Opera, but Epiphany outperforms Firefox by leaps and bounds on my Feisty machine.

LookTJ
August 9th, 2007, 07:57 AM
So, you intend to prove that adobe's flash plugin sucks? You don't have to.
In my view, that proves that adobe sucks at programming flash sites. Heck, Have anyone seen how much flash content there is on Myspace? Seriously....People need to learn that the easy way isn't the best way.

SERIOUSLY? That's so weird. I can't vouch for Konqueror or Opera, but Epiphany outperforms Firefox by leaps and bounds on my Feisty machine.
Different speeds for different browsers on different computers and internet companies.

Ozor Mox
August 9th, 2007, 03:27 PM
I find Firefox to be just as fast and stable as it's always been.

The only add-on I'm using however, is the British English inline spell checker. I have the Flash and Java plugins. I think the Flash plugin is the cause of the occasional crash in Firefox.

It crashes maybe two or three times in a week. I don't find this a problem thanks to the restore previous session feature, so I have no need to change browsers. One day I might try Epiphany or Opera though, just to see what they're like.

proalan
September 4th, 2007, 05:48 PM
I'm starting to agree with FF becoming the worse browser about.
I had to completely remove it to stop the FF habit.

I've known that FF had some resource issues, what i didn't realize was that it causes system instability with the x-server.

On my powerful desktop machine it ain't a problem but on my laptop the system starts to crawl after 30 minutes of browsing.

I wasn't a fan of microsoft updates boosting the hardware requirements, and I ain't a fan of FF developers neglecting the memory leak issue in every release. Most programmers see wasting system resources as an evil thing.

For those interested in the specific details of the memory leak problem
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox/+bug/111299

proalan
September 4th, 2007, 06:02 PM
Also just wanted to question whether FF should be shipped as the default browser with some linux distributions (including ubuntu) especially with the reasons specified in this thread.

Anteaus
September 4th, 2007, 06:21 PM
I prefer Seamonkey, even though I don't use its mail or HTML design components. The config options are better, for one thing. Plus which it's slightly more responsive.

One thing I really dislike is the IceWeasel name change on GNU versions. That must be one of the most awful names for any piece of software, ever. Awful icon too.

quixotic-cynic
September 22nd, 2007, 04:50 PM
I'm using Kazehakase quite a bit atm.

(Installed via http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=554232)

Zootropo
September 22nd, 2007, 05:21 PM
Also just wanted to question whether FF should be shipped as the default browser with some linux distributions (including ubuntu) especially with the reasons specified in this thread.
For the same reasons why Ubuntu ships with Gnome and Kubuntu with KDE.

TeraDyne
September 22nd, 2007, 05:39 PM
Also just wanted to question whether FF should be shipped as the default browser with some linux distributions (including ubuntu) especially with the reasons specified in this thread.

I think they should package SeaMonkey with it, but that's just because I like SeaMonkey.

To be honest, I stopped using FF as of 1.5.0. I loved it up until 1.0.4, and then it started going downhill. If Moz Corp is going to push something that's even more bloated than Windows itself as the best browser out there, then they've completely lost their minds.

Takmadeus
September 22nd, 2007, 05:55 PM
Welll.... I am having a kind of hard time using FF since it is slowly degrading its quality (IMO) dunno.... the initial attractor was its safety and speed , for which I have to say, speed is not as good as it used to be.... it is a better solution than using IE though.... fortunately I have found Elinks and I am about to fall in love with it.... it is so clean and fast.... yet for "graphical" browsing I am still deciding if to continue with FF or go Konqueror

jviscosi
September 22nd, 2007, 06:10 PM
I've been using Seamonkey (including for mail, IRC, and HTML editing) for about 10 months and don't plan to go back to Firefox. I like SM's integration, plus it has been way more stable for me than FF 1.5+ was.

However, I would not call FF the worst browser. That honor still goes to IE 6. ;-)

Baby Boy
September 22nd, 2007, 06:12 PM
Firefox works great for me, it's 10x faster than IE and I'm completely satisfied. I haven't tried the other browsers though.

bruce89
September 22nd, 2007, 07:14 PM
For the same reasons why Ubuntu ships with Gnome and Kubuntu with KDE.

Firefox is not GNOME, Epiphany is.

tomstar3000
September 26th, 2007, 12:43 AM
I used Firefox for about 10 minutes on Ubuntu, then went straight to Seamonkey. Super fast and no problems at all. Firefox is so buggy. Even on osX. My Windows machine (work) Firefox just plain rocks...

Gremlinzzz
September 26th, 2007, 12:54 AM
This is what im using Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.6,
This is what i should be using Firefox 2.0.07
why doesn't ubuntu give firefox updates/?
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/

Gremlinzzz
September 26th, 2007, 01:39 AM
Did the update myself just deleted old firefox data then gksudo and exchanged firefox folder.seems like it worked


desktop:~$ firefox -version
Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.7, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2007 mozilla.org
:guitar:

Sayers
September 26th, 2007, 01:45 AM
It's fast and fine for me. I have the ram to support it.

Gremlinzzz
September 26th, 2007, 01:58 AM
Did the update myself just deleted old firefox data then gksudo and exchanged firefox folder.seems like it worked


desktop:~$ firefox -version
Mozilla Firefox 2.0.0.7, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2007 mozilla.org
:guitar:

just had to remove and reinstall java works good

Gremlinzzz
September 26th, 2007, 02:02 AM
just had to remove and reinstall java works good

the automatically check for updates works with this version:guitar:

HokeyFry
September 26th, 2007, 02:23 AM
one (really dumb reason) i stick with firefox


i liek how the find function isnt a window, it pops up at the bottom of the browser


otherwise id be more prone to try another one

nanotube
September 26th, 2007, 06:29 AM
If you want to use the latest firefox (or thunderbird, or seamonkey) build straight from mozilla, with automatic updates, you can use the ubuntuzilla project to install it for you.
http://ubuntuzilla.sourceforge.net/

but the reason ubuntu isn't putting out a 2.0.0.7 in the repos for firefox is because the vulnerability that was fixed for that release is windows-only.

GSF1200S
September 26th, 2007, 08:21 AM
If you want to use the latest firefox (or thunderbird, or seamonkey) build straight from mozilla, with automatic updates, you can use the ubuntuzilla project to install it for you.
http://ubuntuzilla.sourceforge.net/

but the reason ubuntu isn't putting out a 2.0.0.7 in the repos for firefox is because the vulnerability that was fixed for that release is windows-only.

Pretty crappy considering Firefox was originally MADE for Linux. Seems theyve forgotten there priorities and are more concerned with market share.

exile
September 26th, 2007, 08:31 AM
In my experience swiftfox is faster than ff with the same plugins installed. BUT there is something about swiftfox that makes me hesitate installing it on all my machines - can't really explain why - maybe it's the fact that it's maintained by a single person etc.

I have nothing but good things to say about Konq as a browser generally as well.

Joeb454
September 26th, 2007, 08:34 AM
firefox is ok, it just has a lot of memory leaks that's all.

It just means you have to force quit every so often

mostwanted
September 26th, 2007, 09:06 AM
If you want to use the latest firefox (or thunderbird, or seamonkey) build straight from mozilla, with automatic updates, you can use the ubuntuzilla project to install it for you.
http://ubuntuzilla.sourceforge.net/

but the reason ubuntu isn't putting out a 2.0.0.7 in the repos for firefox is because the vulnerability that was fixed for that release is windows-only.Pretty crappy considering Firefox was originally MADE for Linux. Seems theyve forgotten there priorities and are more concerned with market share.

So it's a bad thing Windows gets all the bugs...? Do you think they should rather issue a patch fixing a non-existing bug on Linux? This isn't a pissing contest on who gets the highest version number.

Circus-Killer
September 26th, 2007, 09:13 AM
well, from my personal experience, theres nothing wrong with firefox. if i could find a better browser, i would use it.

i have tried epiphany, but found it to be too featureless, there are text-based browsers with more features. opera was too slow and gave me hassles. and no web browser other than firefox has an option to delete all cookies/history/etc. on browser exit, which to me should be in EVERY browser, as an option for those who want it.

i honestly find that firefox does what i need, does what its supposed to, and does it well.

insane_alien
September 26th, 2007, 11:17 AM
i use epiphany. it does everyhing i need it to. except DTA so i keep FF around just for that. also, i'm not to happy that epiphany depends on firefox. i know that it is for the gecko engine but can't that be copied into epiphany?

ukripper
September 26th, 2007, 11:23 AM
firefox is ok, it just has a lot of memory leaks that's all.

It just means you have to force quit every so often

I hate that bit in middle of Family guy on You tube I have to bloody terminate the process.... i tried swiftweasel ...it is just carppiest than alll....it terminates itself:lolflag:

i will give try to seamonkey

nanotube
September 26th, 2007, 03:23 PM
Pretty crappy considering Firefox was originally MADE for Linux. Seems theyve forgotten there priorities and are more concerned with market share.

um, dude, you probably misunderstood... the /vulnerability/ only affected windows, and not linux. so they issued the patch for windows, and not for linux - because linux didn't need one. that is not a bad thing! :)

GSF1200S
September 27th, 2007, 06:39 AM
um, dude, you probably misunderstood... the /vulnerability/ only affected windows, and not linux. so they issued the patch for windows, and not for linux - because linux didn't need one. that is not a bad thing! :)

Duely noted. I expect greed in people, to a point in this case where I was ignorant and jumped to conclusions.. :) happens to all of us

czepluch
September 27th, 2007, 10:10 AM
Here’s something for broadband people that will really speed Firefox up:

1.Type “about:config” into the address bar and hit return. Scroll down and look for the following entries:

network.http.pipelining network.http.proxy.pipelining network.http.pipelining.maxrequests

Normally the browser will make one request to a web page at a time. When you enable pipelining it will make several at once, which really speeds up page loading.

2. Alter the entries as follows:

Set “network.http.pipelining” to “true”

Set “network.http.proxy.pipelining” to “true”

Set “network.http.pipelining.maxrequests” to some number like 30. This means it will make 30 requests at once.

3. Lastly right-click anywhere and select New-> Integer. Name it “nglayout.initialpaint.delay” and set its value to “0″. This value is the amount of time the browser waits before it acts on information it receives.

If you’re using a broadband connection you’ll load pages MUCH faster now!

Hope this helps

ukripper
September 27th, 2007, 10:30 AM
Here’s something for broadband people that will really speed Firefox up:

1.Type “about:config” into the address bar and hit return. Scroll down and look for the following entries:

network.http.pipelining network.http.proxy.pipelining network.http.pipelining.maxrequests

Normally the browser will make one request to a web page at a time. When you enable pipelining it will make several at once, which really speeds up page loading.

2. Alter the entries as follows:

Set “network.http.pipelining” to “true”

Set “network.http.proxy.pipelining” to “true”

Set “network.http.pipelining.maxrequests” to some number like 30. This means it will make 30 requests at once.

3. Lastly right-click anywhere and select New-> Integer. Name it “nglayout.initialpaint.delay” and set its value to “0″. This value is the amount of time the browser waits before it acts on information it receives.

If you’re using a broadband connection you’ll load pages MUCH faster now!

Hope this helps

Thnks for tips I'll give it a go today

samjh
September 27th, 2007, 11:42 AM
For me, Opera takes nearly twice as long to load most web pages than Firefox. Konquerer is the only browser that consistently equals or out-performs Firefox in terms of page-rendering speed.

So Firefox still rules the roost as the best browser for me. YMMV.

bigbrovar
September 27th, 2007, 01:09 PM
1 Hour Ago 11:42 AM
samjh
Re: Has Firefox fallen from best browser to the worst?
For me, Opera takes nearly twice as long to load most web pages than Firefox. Konquerer is the only browser that consistently equals or out-performs Firefox in terms of page-rendering speed.

So Firefox still rules the roost as the best browser for me. YMMV.


couldnt agree less

otaviofcs
September 27th, 2007, 01:31 PM
couldnt agree less

I agree that FF it's now (since 1.5) a little bit sloooooow. But it has no opponent!

Are you going to stick into a single platform browser like IE (sorry, IE isn't a browser, it's just a bug provider :) ), Konkeror, Epiphany ou Safari. Opera is even slower than FF...

Rhapsody
September 27th, 2007, 06:08 PM
I agree that FF it's now (since 1.5) a little bit sloooooow. But it has no opponent!
For now, I agree. But for different reasons than you.


Are you going to stick into a single platform browser like IE (sorry, IE isn't a browser, it's just a bug provider :) ), Konkeror, Epiphany ou Safari.
Safari is now available for Windows (though that doesn't mean much to me, except for making it possible to run through Wine) and Konqueror will be fully multi-platform and running with an improved version of WebKit in version 4.something, making that the new 'browser to watch' in my book.

Edit: To clarify, here's why I'm excited. As I look at it now, here is my ranking of layout engine standards support.

Presto > Gecko > WebKit > KHTML > iCab >>> Trident

With the KHTML-WebKit merger, here's my prediction of how things will change.

Presto > WebKit > Gecko > iCab >>> Trident


Opera is even slower than FF...
Virtually all testing disagrees with you, including my own anecdotal test (which means nothing to you, but everything to me). I continue to use Firefox because I can't get the features my extensions provide anywhere else.

plb
September 27th, 2007, 06:25 PM
I agree that FF it's now (since 1.5) a little bit sloooooow. But it has no opponent!

Are you going to stick into a single platform browser like IE (sorry, IE isn't a browser, it's just a bug provider :) ), Konkeror, Epiphany ou Safari. Opera is even slower than FF...

uhmm..no..especially not the 9.5 alpha

crimesaucer
September 27th, 2007, 06:33 PM
Here’s something for broadband people that will really speed Firefox up:

1.Type “about:config” into the address bar and hit return. Scroll down and look for the following entries:

network.http.pipelining network.http.proxy.pipelining network.http.pipelining.maxrequests

Normally the browser will make one request to a web page at a time. When you enable pipelining it will make several at once, which really speeds up page loading.

2. Alter the entries as follows:

Set “network.http.pipelining” to “true”

Set “network.http.proxy.pipelining” to “true”

Set “network.http.pipelining.maxrequests” to some number like 30. This means it will make 30 requests at once.

3. Lastly right-click anywhere and select New-> Integer. Name it “nglayout.initialpaint.delay” and set its value to “0″. This value is the amount of time the browser waits before it acts on information it receives.

If you’re using a broadband connection you’ll load pages MUCH faster now!

Hope this helps

Set "network.http.pipelining.maxrequests" to 8.

8 is the maximum number it can be set to: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Network.http.pipelining.maxrequests


Also, here is a good page for your Firefox/Swiftfox/Swiftweasel about:config settings: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Category:Tweaking_preferences


...and here is another good page that explains the same settings: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=53650


...and this page is for all the about:config settings: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Category:Preferences

...and page 2 of all the about:config settings: http://kb.mozillazine.org/index.php?title=Category:Preferences&from=Layout.css.dpi


...and deactivating IPV6 also helps:

first edit this file: /etc/modprobe.d/aliases

by adding the lines:



alias net-pf-10 ipv6 off
alias net-pf-10 off
alias ipv6 off



and commenting / removing the line:


alias net-pf-10 ipv6

...then in your about:config, set this boolean to true:

network.dns.disableIPv6 = true


Fasterfox using the custom settings (or turbo) helps...

And my last two tips is to use OpenDNS: https://www.opendns.com/start?device=ubuntu

...and also use a Local-Dns: http://www.debianadmin.com/local-dns-cache-for-faster-browsing-on-ubuntu-system.html

iamah
October 2nd, 2007, 04:23 PM
this thread is full of ****...

just change the title to "I use Opera. It's Faster, I save save 0.1 seconds every time I run the program. Also I don't need to get rid of my Pentium MMX 233MHz!!!"

ukripper
October 2nd, 2007, 04:40 PM
So you mean you running OPERA on 233MHZ processor. is it a joke?

wern0122
November 9th, 2007, 03:08 AM
I don't understand the point of Konqueror... I've been trying out KDE for a few days, and I'm sticking to firefox for browsing. Yes, Konqueror is MUCH faster than firefox, but it displays every webpage I go to incorrectly. It won't even load the google mail page--it just freezes and gives a blank screen. And then, if I'm browsing files and directories, I use the default Dolphin file manager. What is the point of konqueror then? Why does KDE have a second browser/file manager that is a distant second choice for both tasks?? Is it being phased out?

Anyway, I'm going back to Gnome. Speaking of which, it's been a while since I've used Galleon, is that still up-to-snuff?

Colro
November 11th, 2007, 12:15 AM
It is sad how slow Firefox has become, but I don't know if I'd call it the "worst" browser just yet. Try out the v3.0 betas some time, they're significantly faster and a step in the right direction, although, obviously, a beta and thus still buggy. I did a table rendering test with 2.0 and 3.0 both running and 3.0 rendered it in 1/4th the amount of time every single reload. I think we've got a lot to look forward to.

bruce89
November 11th, 2007, 01:04 AM
I'm sure I've mentioned that for this to be true, Firefox would have had to have been the best browser.

WebKit would be nice as I've said over and over again.

SomeGuyDude
November 14th, 2007, 05:39 AM
Firefox may be slower, but it FUNCTIONS better than the rest, for me anyway.

Opera has widgets, but no "extensions" in the way FireFox does. It's little tiny programs as opposed to actual additions to the program.

DJ_Peng
August 2nd, 2009, 02:09 PM
i used to think it was slow, but now that i only have two extensions (adblock plus and filterset.g updater) firefox runs and loads pretty fast

i like firefox, it handles flash well (unlike opera) and has a ton of extensions, and is rapidly being supported by basically everything.

Sorry to reach back so far into the past, but I found this post while looking up info about Adblock Plus. Actually I learned from the Adblock Plus Forums (http://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2708) that FiltersetG doesn't play that well with ABP. Instead the EasyList filters are better candidates. As far as Epiphany goes, it's my default browser and while it does have Adblock with FiltersetG in epuphany-extensions I really wish they'd move to ABP. But that's just one user's opinion.