Firefox Progressively Getting Worse

File: 1359232548365.png (12KB, 560x407px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 560x407px

>>56902771
It's still the best out of the box browser we have.

>FF vs Chrome - 30 Random sites
https://webmshare.com/play/KBm8v
>FF vs Chrome - 11 News sites
https://webmshare.com/play/Meo8O
>FF vs Chrome - 40+ Instagram profiles on Windows
https://webmshare.com/play/Wn1GD
>FF vs Chrome - 40+ Instagram profiles on Arch Linux
https://webmshare.com/play/6wK0n
>FF vs Chrome on bad machine (2core/2thread - 2GB RAM)
https://webmshare.com/play/gBdJb
>FF vs Chrome with uBlock
https://webmshare.com/play/RAE86

>Vivaldi vs Opera vs Chrome
https://webmshare.com/play/LX38L

>>56902801

Holy shit. Firefox is JUST the browser.

How can the devs fuck up so hard? It used to be really fucking good back in the day.

>>56902771
Works fine for me. Both on PC and phone.

>>56902869
I know.. but just wait a few minutes until all of the freetards here come up with excuses.

Works on my machine™

>>56902797
which is really sad

File: 1474391333716.png (44KB, 381x385px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 381x385px

>>56902771
it started when they removed colored tabs and it went all downhill from there. they kept hard-removing features for so long now, also e.g. the about:config entry for disabling the tab-close-button, with no apparent reason. why not make it / LEAVE IT a config entry? some very stupid decisions were made by very stupid people over at mozilla in the past couple of years.
ironically enough, despite all these miserable changes, firefox yet remains uncontested.

>>56902801
That's the power of the botnet, it's also an unrealistic test - when was the last time you opened 40+ pages at the same time?

>>56903059
every time I start my browser? and that's coming from somebody who doesn't even use chrom*

>>56902771
>I've been using this shit for like 10 years now and don't want to install the Chrome botnet. I've been loyal to Mozilla. What do, bro?

Export your bookmarks and passwords. How do you not know how to do that after ten years???

Remove and reinstall Firefox. The internet is a botnet so worrying about hurr, durr botnets is not for adults. What you do DOES NOT MATTER. Paranoia is the idea of individual importance.

"Loyal" to a browser? Are you fucking stupid?

I run Firefox locked down and with various useful add-ons, while I leave Chrome unstrangled for shitposting and porn. Drive space is cheap so I keep other browsers (Konqueror, Midori, Opera) to play with. The idea of switching is epic stoopid. You can run many and use whatever works best on a given task.

Seamonkey and Iceweasel work nicely too.

File: Screenshot_20161003-173533.jpg (30KB, 348x390px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 348x390px

Just use PaleMoon :3

>>56903059
There's also a 11 sites test? How the fuck is that unrealistic? And even there Firefox does just as poor as in the other tests

>>56903083
In that case you dont need a new browser - you need medication. The need for 40 pages at the same time to entertain you might be a sign that you have an attention related disorder.

All I can say is that the regular Firefox builds are dogshit. Use ones from tete or pcx instead.

>>56902771
>It's been slowly happening over the last 2-3 months.
You're noticing this now?
It's been slowly happening over the last 2-3 YEARS.
You can even say that it's slowly happening since FUCKING 2011, when they switched to rapid releases.

>>56903401
You could tell firefox was over when they stopped receiving cakes from the chrome (or was it IE) guys. The mozilla team received a cake every time they released a new version. All well and good up to like version 8 or so then the numbers just skyrocketed when they tried to be chrome

>>56903199
He's probably one of those mongoloids that uses tabs as bookmarks for some retarded reason.

>>56903059
BotNET works better at rendering. The test is actually pretty fine. The problem even shows up in regular. Browsing when you have a large thread on 4chan, firefox will lag/freeze where as the BotNET powered browser seems to handle it just fine.

IMO firefox simply needs to take the core of BotNET and rewrite bits to remove the Google integration and then add in the power of Firefox customizations.

>>56902771
FF is slowly turning into Chrome.

>>56903551
So it becomes like every other browser around?

And that would also make you lose all the extensions, which is the biggest reason to still stick with FF.

In other words, just use Chromium if you want Chrome with less botnet.

>>56902771
>again with the bate and shill thread
Firefox is more optimised on Linux. I literally don't have any problems you've described.
Pale meme or seamonkey should be used on Windows if you want the gecko engine because they're better optimised for Windows.
Opera, iridium, ungoogled chromium or iron if you want a better chrome.

>>56903777
>Pale meme or seamonkey should be used on Windows*

*if you only want half of your extensions to work.

>>56903700
But they're gonna drop current extensions api or something, aren't they?

>>56903815
They said it. I'm still holding on the hope that they will come to their senses and change their minds, or else I am royally fucked.

If they do I'm switching to Chromium since there will be no reason to stay on FF anymore.

>>56903777
>Firefox is more optimised on Linux.
ayy lmao https://webmshare.com/play/6wK0n

>Firefox is shit
If there was another browser that had good extension support, customization, and regular updates, I'd be using it.

>>56903938
Vivaldi
>good extension support
check
>customization
check
>regular updates
check

Keep being "loyal" to Firefox even though there are better browsers, lol.

>>56903999
>closed down
check
>botnet
check
>copy of chrome
check.

>>56903999
I forgot
>open source
That's also pretty important.

>>56902801
Could you redo the test with latest Nightly?
Was e10s disabled or enabled?

>>56903858
>chrome loads ads faster
>this is somehow a "feature"
>chrome loads google javascripts faster
>he thinks google doesn't do that on purpose
And I'm not sure what kind of a potato tier PC that is, but everything loads fast on mine.

>>56904050
e10s was enabled and I even set dom.ipc.processCount to 50. Nightly didn't change anything about it. I have recorded numerous tests for this board, I'm not going to record another one for something that has proven to be 3x slower in literally every test.

>>56904099
>potato tier PC
Skylake Xeon
Plextor M6e SSD
16GB RAM

If you think my machine is a potato, you're retarded.

>>56904099
>but everything loads fast on mine.
Prove it.

>>56903053
Has Firefox been invaded by Gnome "developers"? I think "regressors" is a more apt word.

>>56902771
works fine for me.
I even use Seamonkey and ESR versions (which are slower) and I have zero problems.

maybe stop visiting bloated sites??
or install a botnet

>>56902771
So, Brave is a thing?

>>56903858
Can you attempt it in Nightly with e10s enabled?

>>56902771
Switched to Operah when they forced Eich out, I knew it was going to shit. Now I'm a happy camper with a snappy browser.

>>56904316
Not yet, it still has some annoying bugs, scrolling is broken on some sites and it annoys me to hell. It'll be good in about 6 months.

Any company that spends 10k moneys on removing "slave" from their code instead of optimising their browser with said funds needs to die

>>56904317
read >>56904109

>>56902801
FREETARDS ON SUICIDE WATCH

>its another "same 5 autists shill chrome skins" episode

>>56904524
Shit was hilarious. I originally only posted the first test with e10s and processcount.. and then the excuses came. First they said "omg nobody opens 30 sites, FF performs better in real world tests".. so I only opened 11 news pages. Then they said it's because of Windows, so I booted into Arch and did the same again. Then they said it's because Chrome takes all of your resources and FF performs better on low machines.. so I created a shitty VM with only 2GB RAM and it still performed better. Then they said FF performs better with uBlock.. and you can imagine the result... so yea, them being on suicide watch is pretty much on point

>>56903059
i have over 1200 right now mate

File: 1422494498459.gif (137KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 500x500px

>>56902801
DELETE THIS!!!

File: 1402630632175.gif (1MB, 828x828px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 828x828px

>>56904811
Sorry, wrong picture. Meant to post this one. ^_^

>>56902771
Have you tried refreshing your profile?

File: charitable_chief.jpg (105KB, 649x607px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 649x607px

>>56904387

>>56904524
chrong is also free

>>56902801
>starting with ff and then chromium
>on all of them

>doesnt know what dns caching is
>doesnt know what inetcache is

thx, but... yeah... no thx. dropped

>>56902797
Chrome/Chromium is better out of box. Firefox is better once you tweak it to your liking.

>>56905008
difference is that google has a ton of products, and the sjwturds are not actively meddling with the browser development with such stupid measures

>>56905137
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH WORST EXCUSE EVER

>>56902771
Fucking FF always gave me issues with flash related stuff. Also noticed it's getting slower and slower loading stuff. But I can't let it go because the extensions are too fucking good.

>>56902869
When they started hiring for diversity instead of skill

>>56905415
>>56905415
Why not reverse the test then?

>>56905303
chromium is google botnet free?

>>56905771
nope. people on /g/ want to believe that chromium is botnet-free but it's actually exactly the same as chrome only without the google account integration. apart from that, it's exactly the same code.

>>56905419
>almost 2017
>unironically using Flash

/g/ was a mistake

>>56905812
you want ungoogled-chromium

File: Firefox.png (376KB, 2535x1395px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 2535x1395px

There's nothing wrong with Firefox.

>>56906765
what theme is that

>>56905137
>dns caching is
Isn't ff support it?

File: 1409346863511.gif (2MB, 300x150px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x150px

>>56902771
The only major issue I have with Firefox is that it gets ridiculously slow and laggy after my laptop resumes from sleep. This has been the case for dozens of Firefox versions and 3 Windows clean installs. I always have to close and reopen it after waking the laptop up.

>>56904718
I admire your dedication

>>56903127
more like pale meme LMAO

>>56903999
>cookie whitelisting
oops

>Seamonkey
I like this browser, but esential addons like self destructing cookies doesnt work, any alternative to it?

>>56907581

Change the cookie retention policy to session only, block third party cookies and explicitly block Google/Microsoft/etc. cookies. It's not perfect but it's good enough.

>>56904718
>what happens on my machine is objectively true and can be applied to others

>>56907974
you're free to do your own test then

I have spent a lot of time fucking with firefox performance and 90% of the issues are disk reads/writes from arbitrary sqlite dbs.

Disable them entirely and the browser runs fine with a shitload of tabs AND a shitload of addons. Since e10s it doesn't hang when you close a million tabs at once either.

>>56906041
how do you use extensions with ungoogled-chromium?

>>56908015
I already did :^)

>>56907831
how do i explicitly block google/microsoft/etc cookies?

File: jew.png (166KB, 451x417px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 451x417px

>>56902771
>they fell for the diversity meme

N E W P R O F I L E
E
W

P
R
O
F
I
L
E

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/refresh-firefox-reset-add-ons-and-settings

>>56908120
>implying i use anything mozilla would recognize as a profile
Profiles are a meme that are designed to cause more databasing. THEY CANT GET ENOUGH DATABASES ON YOUR DISKS.

They are like vampires that feed on shitty disk writes.

>>56908080

about:data, go to cookies only. Select the cookies you want to blacklist and check "when removing cookies, block the listed websites from setting future cookies".

>>56908153
You can't use Firefox without a profile as that's where all the settings for the browser are stored. it's not Google Account shit, it is absolutely fucking required for the browser to work and remember any history/cookies/settings you have made.

>>56908167
Thanks a lot

>>56902771
They should hire more women HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>56908178
It is ABSOLUTELY FUCKING REQUIRED... for the browser to believe it has a profile. I am not 100% sure you even NEED a profile if you find some magical user preferences. You can 100% block half the trash the profile wants to write to.
>crashes -> /dev/null
>datareporting -> /dev/null
>formhistory.sqlite -> /dev/null
>minidumps -> /dev/null
>search.json -> /dev/null

Most of the sqlite outside places and maybe cookies,permissions are optional but you can keep places and cookies on a ramdisk so it never has to write to disk.

>>56908153
These are the people browsing /g/. Too dumb to even look at a link they got provided and without any clue, jumping to wrong conclusions.

>>56908244
Site cache, add-ons, passwords, cookies, about:config settings, everything custom is stored in the profile folder. Sure, you could make do without one, but that really makes it just unnecessarily inconvenient.

>>56908026
how do I disable the disk writes / reads? I already have browser.cache.disk.enable on false and browser.sessionstore.interval on a high value but Firefox yet writes >10GB a day.

>>56908313
You really can't do without one, it does not start. Cache is 100% optional anywhere but tracking and history stuff is not. Eventually the browser then wants to write all of that non-optional stuff down and that takes a while, even when you fix their broken sessionstore setting.

Portable firefox used to be a thing. They didn't used to spawn a new database every time they added a bad feature.

>>56908347
my solution was to keep my profile in an overlayFS which would load a skeleton profile from disk into a ramdisk which would then run the firefox.

>>56908015
done and diddley done with installing both on fresh VMs so none of the has any cache built up :^)

l2bench mactard

Have you tried PaleMoon?

>>56902801
Chromium is open source, right? Do any Chrome extensions actually work with it? It does piss me off how slow Firefox is these days with lots of tabs open.

>>56908449
LMAO

>>56902771
I haven't used FF in 3 years, Chrome leaves it for dead.

>>56908449
LOL

>>56907438
There's a fix out there for that. I used to have that problem, can't remember the exact fix though.

File: chromium_bb.png (20KB, 642x401px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 642x401px

>>56908455
>Chromium is open source, right?
Sure. Doesn't mean you'´re safe from the botnet, though.

>>56908455
>Do any Chrome extensions actually work with it
all of them, chrome is based on chromium

>>56902771
>It's been slowly happening over the last 2-3 months
*years

>>56908491
There's also a lot of hard-coded google services requests in there.

can somebody redpill my why pale moon is a joke/not a viable, un-fucked firefox alternative?

File: 1410386336980.gif (554KB, 295x221px) Image search: [Google]

554KB, 295x221px

I feel like Firefox has fallen for the "we need a new version, quick change stuff" meme. They spend so much effort and money doing stupid things like redeveloping the UI every 2 years, removing handy features, and adding shit features no-one wants, instead of actually making the browsing experience as smooth as possible.

You don't need benchmarks to see that Chrome is just smoother and faster than Firefox, even with no add-ons. I use Firefox at work but occasionally I need to use Chrome for certain things and the difference in responsiveness is readily apparent. It's a shame because Firefox is open source but they really need to concentrate of improving its speed, even if it means stealing Chromium's web engine.

>>56908604
They have been focusing on that stuff for the past 5~ years, they just haven't mainlined ANY OF IT til this past version.
>Okay so our renderer is slow.... lets invent a programming language that allows us to write a faster renderer!

And today we have Servo.... not in firefox. Not in firefox at all. We got electrolysis tho

>>56908604
They've redone the UI a total of one time in the last 10 years. Changing a theme is not redoing the entire UI you dumb nigger.

>>56908631
They hired way too many SJW web devs and now they can't stop their bullshit from running rampant. Needs more computer scientists working on the back end of things.

>>56908491
>Yoshino Yoshihito

But Japanese people don't use anything else except Internet Explorer.

>>56908623
5 years hasn't yielded much, it seems. Is the UI even running in a separate thread from page loading? Doesn't seem like it since when I open my browser everything is unresponsive until the 15 or so tabs have nearly finished loading (and this is with a 12 core CPU).

>>56908661
as of 49 electrolysis is not on by default. You can turn it on and configure the number of processes they use in about:config.

>>56908688
49 enabled e10s if you have approved addons or do not have addons

>>56908688
Thanks, turned it on with 10 processes and it's way faster.

I'm currently on 49, should I switch to Nightly or Aurora?

Also, should I do that SSD "fix" ?

>>56905137
>dns caching
>Vivaldi still faster than Opera

>>56908845
the SSD fix is a general fix to firefox performance, I hope whoever set it to that low number was instantly fired.

Set sessionstore to as high as you possibly can.

File: 1459272424958.jpg (72KB, 956x960px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 956x960px

>>56908035
Some devs let people download their extensions manually in a .crx file or .zip off of github or their own site. Then it's just a matter of drag and drop or browsing through menus.

Here's what I have so far
>uBlock Origin
>uMatrix
>https everywhere
>4chan x
>style chan

>>56908906
It's to restore windows in case of a crash. The higher you set it, the more likely it is that you'll lose something.
It's in your judgment whether that's alright for you or not.

>>56908906
I've set the value to 15 minutes but Firefox still writes an incredible amount of data on my SSD. Can I circumvent that without creating a RAM disk?

>>56908952
>letting firefox protect your tabs
You've already lost m8

>>56908965
You could potentially do that yes, if you have a decent fuckin OS.

>>56908965
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Firefox_on_RAM

Firefox 50 is a lot faster than 49 , why do they even offer 49

>>56909013
I've already done this and it improved nothing.

>>56909301
It's meant for SSD health

>>56909341
I know but FF still writes >10GB/d even after I've applied this guide.

>>56908965
You arent going to write 1PB of data on that ssd.
Who gives a fuck if things write to it?
You bought it to USE IT
The first and second gen,sure, but not anymore

>>56909354
That's impossible, if you followed that guide.

>>56902801
mods please pin this post

>>56906041
thank you based anon

What about Iridium or ungoogled chromium?
Those are just as good as chromium, and just as botnet free as firefox. (Chromium is just good, don't deny it with stupid arguments unless you actually work on a 2GB RAM machine)
Am I missing something?

>>56909494
iridium isn't particularly degoogled, firefox isn't either by default.

>>56908604
/thread

>>56902771
>Even if I had 3-4 tabs open only, it could go to 700k-800k memory-wise.
i have like 11 tabs + several addons
and it's at 700k right now for me. the fuck are you guys doing?
use uBlock instead of ABP by the way if you care about memory usage,

In pc works like a charm for me, but not the same in my phone, any suggestions?

So what's the consensus on Vivaldi, guys?

>>56909494
inox

>>56903551
So basically Vivaldi.

File: 1465031987464.gif (3MB, 286x258px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 286x258px

>>56902771
>It's been slowly happening over the last 2-3 months
>last 2-3 months

>>56903059
Everytime I fap, which is 3 times a day.

>>56902771
Firefox on windows is garbage.

>>56902771
>As soon as I opened up Twitch, Youtube, or something with Flash, it shoots up past 1.5-2 million and destroys my viewing experience.
So you blame the browser for adobe being incompetent?

>>56902771
>I've been using this shit for like 10 years now and don't want to install the Chrome botnet. I've been loyal to Mozilla. What do, bro?
Use an alt-browser

I'm on qutebrowser myself. Very easy transition from pentadactyl to qutebrowser

Don't bother with chrome, you will only be disappointed by it if you are a long-time firefox user by how inflexible and locked-down it is.

File: airtech_s90r.jpg (210KB, 1600x1071px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1600x1071px

>>56902771
I'm using lubuntu and firefox works just fine. I've got flash extension installed for chromium in case I ever need it and it works about the same.

It's all fast and works just fine on my machine: z97 with i3 and ssd.

>>56908347
You need to install Pale Moon Commander addon from Pale Moon's website; it gives you advanced options, one of which is actual legit disabling of the caches. the setting you mentioned does not do this, as you know.

>>56914729
lol
SJWfox caches on the drive and the constant writes of the session restorer means it'll write 20 gigabytes daily just from that alone

>>56908592
It's made by a furry

Do you really need more reason than that?

>>56903863
Sure, but how long it'll keep being "good"?

>>56916256
>SJWfox caches on the drive
So does every other browser
>the constant writes of the session restorer
That's what it's designed to do. I don't want to lose my session in case a shitty plugin crashes.
>it'll write 20 gigabytes daily just from that alone
And? I probably write hundreds of gigabytes per day.

>>56908941
>4chan x
thread watcher still hasn't been fixed on firefox

>>56914729
>z97
>i3
You're either baiting or clinically retarded

>>56908244
Enable private browsing to run all of the time and you prevent 99% of disk writes straight away.

>>56916636
>he wants to redownload images, javashit and css constantly
thanks for wasting 4chan's bandwidth

Attempted to switch to Firefox. It was laggy as shit (loading animations, scrolling animations, etc.) on my 6820HK with 16GB of RAM.

>>56902771
just switched to chrome after 10 years of firefox. it took me 5 hours to set up extensions and shit and now it's blazing fast. firefox is not bad but it feels like an old dinosaur comparing to chrome.

File: 1475522125820.jpg (135KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 1080x1080px

>>56907551
upvote ^

>>56902771
Works fine for me.

PEBKAC m8

>>56917557
All browsers I've ever used except w3m are laggy and unusable as shit on my Dual Xeon 2xE5 2670 with 32 GiB of quad-channel RAM

Didn't know firefox has sideways tabs in its experiments right now

works pretty gud and doesnt slow shit down like tree style tabs

>>56903525
Retardation is the only reason to do that

>>56902797
>what is Ungoogled Chromium

>>56917623
>it's better cause its new :^)
Typical botnet shill.

>>56903127
Have you tried Dillo?

Force-enable e10s. Also
>flash
>any year

>>56918028
Dillo has virtually instant page rendering even on Northwood celeron cpus.

>>56918381
it has no ublocko tho

>>56902801
Doesn't Firefox disable background webpage loading by default?

I had my PC crash two times this week due to a chrome memory leak. So I went back to Firefox instead.

>>56902771
>Twitch

>>>/v/

>>56902771

Chrome bloat is even worse. Just use an FF fork like Pale Moon, or use SeaMonkey. You won't get as much extension compatibility, but all the essential extensions should work, or have fork-specific ports.

Who uses any of the mainline browsers anymore? They're all excessively bloated, even Opera. This is one of the reasons why FORKS exist. FF has numerous forks.

>>56918028
Wait Mozilla's doing a first party vertical tabs implementation? God I hope that makes it to SeaMonkey.

>>56919495
https://testpilot.firefox.com/experiments/tab-center

>>56903858
>Firefox is more optimized on Linux

Except it is. Some distributions give you a more stripped down or optimized version of Firefox right out of the box. Newer versions of Firefox on my Slackware machine used less than half as much memory as a Windows desktop installation.

To those complaining about SeaMonkey extension compatibility:
http://addonconverter.fotokraina.com/

This is an online script that converts FF extensions. In my experience, it works in most cases. Of course, you'll have to go through the hassle of using it every time you want to update the extension.

>>56902771
>2-3 months
Uhhhh, it's been a lot longer than that.

I get losts of errors in firefox while im on facebook.
Cant watch videos normally, STOP SCRIPT all the time, loading comments slowly.
What is alternative (no googlebotnet)?

>>56920412
Chromium

>>56921669
ungoogled-chromium, straight chromium is a super botnet. Ixon? or whatever and iridium also minorly botnet.

>>56921749
what about opera?

>>56921844
Proprietary, so 100% botnet. Someone will eventually make a decent firefox build that is less shitty, I deshittyfy it myself and it is an awful process.

>>56903525
>He's probably one of those mongoloids that uses tabs as bookmarks for some retarded reason.
There's literally no reason to close a tab if you know you're going to revisit the page soon, so long as it doesn't passively suck assloads of CPU or bandwidth. This is literally the basis of caching.

>>56921893
>>56921749
So which one are you using?

>>56903525
You're a fucking moron.

>>56921954
Official Mozilla Firefox Stable, with my own profile hacks. ~/.cache crammed into my tmpfs /tmp, profile loaded into a different, effectively read-only ramdisk. Loads of user prefs changed so as to not rely on google services, loads of addons to block things by default. Userscripts designed solely to stop hax/malware/tracking in javascript at the cost of basically breaking all javascript, even when javascript is enabled.

>>56921916
Even worse, bookmarks are stored in sqlite just like tabs! There's a performance penalty no matter which way you go. Might as well go the convenient route.

>>56902771

>over the last 2-3 months

More like the last 2-3 years; I left that fucking shitstain of a browser a few months ago because of all the shit they've done to it: Australis (that shit no one asked for), Pocket integration (what the fuck, why would you do that?), and requiring add-ons to be signed by Mozilla®, as if users are mentally fucking retarded and need to have their hand held through everything.

>>56918028
I'm using Vertical Tabs Reloaded and it works pretty good.

>>56902771
Firefox has eaten memory since like '06 man. Absolute piece of shit.

File: 1472208003869.png (266KB, 720x503px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 720x503px

for christs sake switch to seamonkey, the interface is just like how it was before hipsters took over the internet. should have found out about it sooner.

firefox blocking unsigned xpi's was the last straw for me

>>56902771
I stopped updating it long ago. I'll just use chrome if i want to use websites which require new features.

>2016
>not using seamonkey already
Literally no excuse when you can convert Firecuck addons to work with it.

>>56923659
Well to be fair SeaMonkey doesn't have vertical tabs and TST fails to convert

>>56923685
https://addons.mozilla.org/EN-US/seamonkey/addon/seamonkey-vertical-tab-bar/?src=search

Using the botnet is so hard, geez.

>>56923721
>implying I haven't tried googling it
Either way thanks, you cocky fuck.

>>56923754
Do you have cookies disable and shit? If not the botnet will give you personalized results. That was literally the third link there was.

>>56923779
I've got them enabled
>the botnet
Quit using shitty memes

>has a bunch of preferences
>configuring them does nothing
Well, at least I have vertical tabs now.

>>56923837
Please teach me about the patrician memes then.

>>has a bunch of preferences
>>configuring them does nothing
What? Anyway, if you want to change something specific just look it up. If having too much control over your browser bothers you this much you might as well switch to Chrome.

>>56923882
>What?
The addon doesn't follow the preferences I set.
>set tab bar to be on right
>it stays on the left
>change appearance of tab bar
>it looks the same
>change width of tab bar
>width doesn't change

>If having too much control over your browser bothers you this much you might as well switch to Chrome
Fuck off, you goddamned retard.

>>56918112
no 64 bit windows binary

>>56909354
go to about:config
search for:

browser.sessionstore.interval

change it to 600000 (this is the amount of miliseconds between browser saves, you can change the value to whatever you want, but accept the "risk")
apparently they change it with version 52 (in beta at least) but until then you have to change it manually

>>56923934
>Windows

>>56923912
Oh, I thought you were talking about Seamonkey preferences. You could try converting a Firefox vertical tab addon as well.

>>56923934
>windows
>64 bit programs
What am I reading?

>>56923954
>You could try converting a Firefox vertical tab addon as well
You think I haven't?

>>56923974
>implying Windows is 32-bit only

>>56923976
How many? One? You could as well make the addon yourself, or compile Seamonkey with the feature you want.

>>56902771
I upgraded my ram and changed my hard drive before it dawned on me, maybe it's the browser especially when the upgrades did nothing. The browser still hangs, pages load like shit etc.

File: 1365031212095.jpg (106KB, 1440x810px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1440x810px

>>56924035
Only 64-bit Windows has are some system files, it can't even run """"64-bit""" programs in true 64-bit.

>>56924047
At least three or four. I'm not going to spend my day searching for an addon that just might possibly work nor am I going to bother learning to write addons.
>compile SeaMonkey with the feature
What feature? Vertical tabs isn't a stock feature in Firefox or SeaMonkey. Or are you one of those retards that go "it's open source, modify it yourself!"

>>56905812
Does it still monitor your activity without telling you it's monitoring you activity?

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/63204/20150625/not-ok-google-chrome-allegedly-listening-to-your-voice-and-recording-it-without-your-permission.htm

File: 4chan.jpg (419KB, 1842x920px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 1842x920px

I'm floating at around 500mb usage with several tabs open. Who gives a shit? I have 12GB of ram, I have an abundance of ram and Firefox isn't hogging very much of it.

>>56924092
Ok, so you can't program and want a feature in thing but won't bother to do it yourself. Just go back to whatever other browser you like.

EDGE BROS WHERE YOU AT

>>56924155
Aren't you ever an insufferable cunt.
>Just go back to whatever other browser you like.
I've yet to leave it on my desktop and can't go back to it on my laptop. Just preparing SeaMonkey for the inevitable day that I do need to leave the mastterace.

>>56924184
>Aren't you ever an insufferable cunt.
I'm not the one bitching and doing nothing to change it. If you don't like Seamonkey because it doesn't have the feature you want you can stay with Firefox. If you desperately need that feature just learn how to do it, there already are addons that do what you want, you just need to read a bit and tweak them here and there, you might even learn a thing or two out of it you nigger.

>>56924247
>If you don't like Seamonkey because it doesn't have the feature you want you can stay with Firefox
Why would I do that? Fx is even worse. Regardless I don't see what you're bitching about. I wanted sidetabs in SeaMonkey and I have sidetabs in SeaMonkey, why the fuck would I learn to do it when someone else has already done it for me?

>>56924287
Weren't you saying how you can't change its settings? Open up the script and directly change it there.

>>56924315
All I was saying is that if it has settings the settings should do what they say they do.

>>56924158
trying to load the "reply to tread" box

>>56904718
Defending skynet
shiggy

>>56904718
As I told you in a previous thread the reason firefox is slower is that the tabs are loaded sequentially all on one process while chrome's tabs are separated into different processes and can be loaded out of order and on separate threads/cores.

Change the number of processes e10s allows and firefox can loads tabs much faster. The reason it has not been enabled by default is that per-tab processes uses an excessive amount of memory.

>>56902771
>Click a webm with more than 8 tabs open
>Firefox crashes
>Always need to scrollwheel click webms to open them in new tabs
>If I'm just browsing a thread and click an image I see before looking at the file type my browser will crash

>>56926555
Fuck off

>>56926647
>scum detected

>>56926664
What in the everliving fuck are you on about?

>>56925993
>Change the number of processes e10s
I did that you fucking moron. I set process.count to 50 in those videos you turbofaggot.

>cool logo
firefox
>sort of protect muh freedoms
firefox
>best addons
firefox
>not normie's first choice
firefox

good enough for me

File: caching.png (7KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 640x360px

>this thread
>caching
Plz

It all started going downhil when they started hiring people that led to the ejection of Brendan Eich.

There's nothing to do, any company hiring for "diversity" instead of merit is bound to end up like that.

That is of course unless you're an extremely big corporation like Google, they can afford it because they'll just throw all the purplehairs in the same building and close it off from the rest, they have their hugbox and the sane people can still keep working on important projects.

Mozilla is not that big, and it counted on external contributions as much as internal, but people who actually want to work on things do not want to work with crazies, so they stop contributing, and they dispersed among other projects.

Same happened to GitHub. Same happens to other small to medium companies who do it. It's a recipe for technological suicide.

But it's alright, because in enough years people will start realizing what's happening, and it will stop.

We'll have to recover the lost years, but hey, whatever.

>>56926781
I don't believe you. Mostly because these are the same videos you posted the last time when I told you about it but also because I've actually tried it myself several times and firefox loads tabs almost immediately.

>>56927404
nice swap

>>56927778
Dont need swap on a properly configured system

OOM: NOT EVEN ONCE

>>56927820
>not using zswap
pleb

That's what happens when you're more concerned with getting CEOs fired because they trigger you than actually fixing software

>>56927832
you need a swap file/partiton to use zswap...

>>56927832
You meant ZRAM?

>>56924158
reporting in, anniversary update, adblock, dark theme, feels comfy AF.

Feels good to be a patrician

/g/ - brag about using shitty software for tinfoil hat reasons

>>56903059
Today

>>56905889
>>>56905419
>>almost 2017
>>unironically using Flash
>/g/ was a mistake
How do you go to chaturbate without flash ?

>>56927778
Swap is non deterministic shit. Fuck swap.

See Genode book 16.04, intro chapter.

Linux is shit. Finally on its way out. Good riddance.

>>56928433
Livestreamer bro

Vivaldi

>>56928633
top kek

>>56903127
Dev needs to stop putting his values above functionality and implement full HTML5 video support.

>>56928678
Use a video player to watch videos.

>>56928695
That doesn't solve the Flash issue

>>56928784
You didn't say anything about Flash.

>>56928796
It's kind of implicit

>>56928837
>Flash
No it's not.

>>56928837
>>56928784
The solution to the flash issue is to uninstall flash. HTML5 is literally not even required when you have video files that can be played by html5 because they are universally compatible with standalone video players.

Browser video players are on the whole quite awful by comparison.

>>56908455
google remote desktop doesn't work for me using chromium on linux, every other extension works perfectly

>>56903059
Every single fucking day.

>>56924122
>I'm floating at around 500mb usage with several tabs open.
Be precise, ''several'' can be 5 or 20 or 50... and what are the tabs. If i run 10 4chan tabs, it will be approx 500-600mb i think, but if I add facebook and maybe 2 youtube tabs, it can easely goes to 1gb.

Also, enjoy your blender ram usage : when i run Maya, it's at 600mb

>>56902771
Just downloaded seamonkey. It's nice but the UI is legacy garbage. What works best to fix this?

>>56929380
>legacy garbage
>objectively best

>>56929380
Just play the settings, you can make it look pretty nice without installing anything.

>>56902771
it's fine, please stop with the bitching about slight lag

File: 1371451996547.gif (885KB, 250x144px) Image search: [Google]

885KB, 250x144px

HELP

Has anyone noticed firefox slowly down to a near crawl when scrolling up or down especially when making new tabs?

It eventually freezes forcing me to force shut it down

I'm using vivaldi full time now. I was always more of a opera user and only used firefox for emergencies. Once proper Opera disappeared I was forced to use it as my main browser. With all of its extensions it could never do all the shit that opera presto could.

>>56903059
I had 180 opened when I was studying for finals
fuck it was satisfying as hell closing them all

>>56929380
Seafox addon makes it UI arranged like in Firefox 3

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/seamonkey/addon/sea-fox/?src=search

>>56931088
CTR

Pale Moon doesn't have this problem desu~