lame

I personally love Mozilla Firefox and believe it is & can be the future of web browsing but not for the minority like me who have such little system resources as it is, that having memory consumption of 47mb of ram for 1 tab, compared to IE's 21mb and Opera's 18meg, this shows that Firefoxes code needs clearing up ALOT as this usage is simply unacceptable when compared to the competition.

I've been trial testing Opera v8.50 for the last week (due to this memory hogging problem with Firefox & also because i was hearing such great comments about the latest ad-free Opera) and i've got to say i'm very impressed on how far it has come since the last version i tried which was version 6.0.

Out of the box, not only is Opera now a wonderful resource friendly browser, with an interface which is so similar to Firefox with it's ease & effectiveness, you could easily mistaken the product as being Firefoxs twin brother.

In my tests, not only does Opera match the ease of use & stability the latest version of Firefox also offers, but it's security seems to be as watertight as Firefoxes also, with 3 spyware scans with various products giving my system the all clear after a week of serious surfing, & i browse the worst of the worst sites, trust me ;)

What sets these two browsers apart, & which appears (at least in my studies) the only real downfall of Opera is it's plug-in support which is awful btw (just try to get Flashget (my favourite download manager for the past 6 years) to work with Opera, sigh :()

I personally believe that extensive open source plug-in support is so important, that now in a world where all these products seem to be clones of each other; it defines which product stands out from the crowd and which one doesn't.

Something can definitely be said for the "personal touch" and i believe everyone welcomes this idea in their everyday computing lives.

And because of this, i believe that once the Firefox team clear up the browsers code and successfully keep the browsers resource usage down to an absolute minimum that is comparable to the competition & while continuously updating the product on a monthly basis for years to come (unlike Microsoft), (coupled with their on-going advertising campaign for public awareness of course), then it is my personal opinion that Firefox will eventually win the browser war and provide every pc user with a browser they rightfully deserve & can be proud of.

Because at the end of day, once we have gotten past all the bulls*** of peoples pride "Opera is better then Firefox, Firefox is better then Opera" etc, people NEED a browser that is fast (all round), secure, easy to use, flexible, resource friendly, easy to use & most importantly, constantly paid attention to by it's developments and updated on a "regular basis" like every other program out there on the internet.

While Opera has made a commendable effort, I believe Firefox is just a head in the race @ reaching these goals & one other important thing Firefox has but Opera doesn't, HYPE, it's got the HYPE but more importantly, unlike most other things that are hyped, Firefox lives up to it's name, lives up to it's hype and delivers what it promises, thus hype will not be the death of Firefox, but rather it's catapult to success. It is a shame Opera doesn't now share this same type of hype that it did once have before Firefox (but no where near what Firefox has achieved now).

Opera missed their chance to steal the show as soon as Firefox was released.

Opera has had *years* to dominate over the continuously disappointing failures of IE & steal it's constantly fed-up user database, but it never did, and now Firefox has stolen the show & i believe as long as Firefox doesn't screw up what it’s got, Opera's time to shine has passed & the whole product has been pushed to the background, so instead of it being a serious alternative to escape from the pains of IE (which was a powerful position to have) it's now got the position of (alternative to those who have a problem with Firefox) like myself with Firefoxes memory management but why care about what name is on the top of the product?

You should care more for what the company can do for you (the end user), then what you can do the company, the little people are what matters, not some childish fight over a companies pride.

So with that in mind, why can't people just sit down, stfu (with their non-constructive comments) and enjoy the show.

I have no problem with the Firefox code, memory useage. Really on a system with a gig at least of RAM, and I always have 8+ tabs open, memory useage ranges from 36M to 80M. This is completely acceptable to me on all levels. My system isn't split I/O'ing or paging out or thrashing to bring me any pages, even with Outlook open or up to 10-15 other apps open. Open source is what I trust and I have used this browser close to 2 years now and few complaints.

My singular complaint is the plug-in management. Many buggy plug-ins, many common ones, like the java plug-in, which I must use for work, and which frequently crash any browser I use, but firefox, since I use it 90% of my day, crashes quite ugly with this plug-in, where I must end task on it several times a day. I *REALLY* think that no plug-in should be able to destabilize the Browser, nor the OS, and every browser maker needs to work on this.

I'm curious about FF 1.5, because my testing with the RC's has shown the upgrade from 1.0.* will be painful unless they address a lot of the migration bugs. Check out the mozilla forums and zine for many complaints about this. Hopefully they wait until it's ready, and not by a milestone date.

I like Microsoft's reaction to all this also. They obviously take FF seriously, because many of their dev bloggers use FF primarily as their browser, as I follow about 5-6 and they love it. MS is actually starting to design with FF in mind, and not to break FF purposefully, which was the MS of past would have done.

You know, I was almost agreeing with you and sympathizing with your low-system resource situation... almost. This is a long rant, and some of it might just be nonsense to people, but it is something that you (and I'm sure a lot of users like you) need to read/hear and really let sink in before you make yourself look foolish by complaining about a products resource consumption...

First of all, I'll preface this by saying-- with RAM prices so low in many cases, there's really very little reason not to upgrade. Even possible low-income situation aside, in terms of your computer that should be your first priority.

You don't mention what version of Windows you're running. If you're running Windows 98 or ME, then you really can't blame any one app for causing the faults you experience. It's a collective issue with system resources and while RAM alone isn't going to fix it, it would help significantly (you also need to factor in possible system/registry corruption and other apps that are consuming resources needlessly). If you're running Windows XP in 128MB of RAM, then you're causing your own problems by running it in a memory footprint that is severely inadequate. The *minimum* requirements for the OS are 128MB of RAM with 256MB being recommended and 512MB+ preferred by any tech person with some sense. That says absolutely nothing for the apps you're choosing to run which obviously consume more. If you run a Linux distribution, then understand that even most current Linux variations require a lot more resources than they've traditionally admitted to. Most also expect 64-128MB as absolute minimums and that's for the OS alone.

Keep this in mind-- System Requirements listings for products do not take into consideration multi-tasking. They are the minimum supported configuration for the application in question. Rarely do they factor in the OS and other applications you are running.

So let's think about this--

OS - 128MB+
Antivirus - 32MB (MINIMUM, most require 64MB+)
Office Suite - 64MB+ (Even OpenOffice expects this now)
Internet Apps - 64MB+ (Browser, IM, etc etc)

Which means you should have at least 256MB to even think about getting things done with only a barebones 1 app at a time expectation. Keep in mind, those are conservative numbers, so having at least 512MB available for today's standard applications is not an unreasonable expectation.

You may not like being told you need to upgrade, but you don't have to like it-- just accept it and deal with it. It's simply an unfortunate fact of computing.

Personally, I can't stand Opera.... never have, and doubt I ever will, but it's great if it works for you. By all means use it. You do have a point that people need to spend more time using their own choice rather than whining about the other choices. Kudos to that belief!

Your complaint about Firefox's memory consumption is also valid. Firefox is a memory hog, and it will continue to be until the Mozilla developers sit down and really look at their code for some optimization. However, please understand that a large part of that in your situation stems from your own insufficient resources as well. You would most definitely see improvements with the upgrade I recommend above... regardless of browser or application.

The reason I bring all this up is that I've read a lot of your product reviews complaining that X product is bloated and nothing but crap. You're always saying products are worthless without whatever hack/patch relieves you of the burden. Always complaining about bloat in products (which is worthless since it's purely subjective to the user, not the product- one man's bloat is another man's gold mine), and the real issue is your own system configuration and what you're trying to do with it, only little about the product itself.

If you came on here saying you had a 3.2GHz system with 1.0GB of RAM and were legitimately saying a product was resource intensive and bloated, I would find you a lot more credible. However, since you indicate you have little resources as it is, I can only be left with a feeling that you cause your own issues.

Without trying to be offensive here, with a nickname like "GimieGimieGimie", I think it's time you realize your computer is probably saying "GimieGimieGimie more RAM/Resources!"

OMG! I can't believe I find myself agreeing with you on something, lol...

Memory management/code optimization in Firefox is definitely needed, but you hit the nail on the head by mentioning plugins and extensions. These plugins are what consume most of the memory. I've done barebones installs of Mozilla and removed all plugins and extensions, and Firefox runs just fine, albeit lacking functionality. I think it's things like the Flash/Shock ads on pages that consume the most. Without Shockwave installed, I stayed well under 50MB of RAM usage over an entire session of 20+ pages on multiple tabs. As soon as I reisntalled Flash and Shockwave, BAM-- back up above 50MB again... and although it means a lot more sites are open to me, it means a lot more ads. Maybe AdBlock or similar extension is the solution here, I don't know.

I will say that Firefox 1.5 comes a long way. Aside from the issues with Shockwave ads, I find 1.5 to be extremely fast and stable. I have had no problems with migrations except for one upgrade instance back on Beta 1... since then, it's been smooth sailing in my experience. Admittedly though, I only have a few extensions. The big ticket test will be how quickly extension writers update them at the 1.5 release.

You're right about Microsoft... they are taking Firefox very seriously. They're accepting it too, because they're actually developing more plugins and compatible pages, and on top of that, they're even making an effort to collaborate more (You can read more about that on the IE Blog).

Hey Goodthings2life,

Heh, rants are more then welcome if they are constructive which i see yours is, so i have no problem with reading & responding constructively to it.

I didn't include my system config because the post was long enough as it is, and i know from experience even the most important people can be too lazy to read something they feel is too long, but alas, i will include my system specs in future posts.

I'm running Windows XP Professional on an AhtlonXP 3200+ Barton core, 512MB Ram & 100GB Sata HD.

I'm CompTIA A+ & N+ qualified, been around computers all my life & i am also quarter way through my MCSE 2003, so i know a fair bit about what i'm saying.

I do agree completely with you, that with memory prices being as low as they are, i should go out and buy another stick of 512mb of ram, but that's not the point i'm trying to make.

My point is, if Opera can make a browser that is just as secure as Firefox, just as user friendly (interface wise, tabbed browsing etc), with a rendering engine that at least for my week's worth of testing, is just as good, if not better on some pages than Firefox is.

While still being able to do all this without the excessive memory usage Firefox uses.

So that being said and i can show evidence, you must ask yourself (excluding the need for extensive plug-in support which i have already pointed out) why even bother to use or defend a browser that does exactly the same job, but with more system resource usage, REGARDLESS of the system ram installed, why?

Obviously, i'm going to continue to trial test Opera until Firefox releases another version that uses less ram, because i don't see any justifiable reason why Firefox must use that much ram since Opera's rendering engine is so close to what Firefox has (at least on all the pages i visit) and Opera manages to do this while consuming half the resources that Firefox uses to do the same job.

Even if i had 2 gigs of ram installed, i still wouldn't justify Firefoxes memory usage as long as their is an alternative product that appears to match everything Firefox has to offer (at least the features i use for my browsing experience of course) that does the same job while using less resources.

It's just plain daft & i would much rather save that extra 15MB-20mb of ram to use for my applications (btw, being a trained administrator, i take complete control of the applications i choose to run in the background/foreground, and i ensure you, are kept to a complete vital minimum)

So like i was saying, i'd rather save that extra 15-20mb ram, then have it go to waste on an application (which right at this moment, appears unjustifiable) that should do one of the two things:

a) Check their code to see if they CAN clean it up a bit and bring the memory usage down as much as they can.

b) If they can't do this for whatever reason other than (they can't be bothered), then the Firefox team should explain & justify the reasons why they can't (which it is my belief has never been touched on by any application, (you would have to be the son of the main developer to get this info :P.

At least then i would respect their truthfulness & know that there is nothing humanly possible that within the programmer's knowledge, there is nothing more they can do.

But we are far from this point, so for me, as long as Opera continues to meet my browsing, downloading, resource usage & security needs, i will not switch back to Firefox until one of the following happens:

a) Reduce their memory usage with future versions of Firefox.

b) Add such an amazing feature that i MUST sacrifice system performance for this feature.

c) Find a hole in Opera that compromises my browsing experience so much so, i have to switch over and sacrifice ram.

Please make note, this is not a personal grudge against the Firefox team or product, on the contrary, as you can read from my last post, i love the product and wish it all the success in the world, but i do admit i am a little upset that through the whole process of v1.5 beta's & RCS, memory management seems to have been completely left off of their list of "things to do" despite users cries/reviews for them to do something about it, which can be clearly seen on betanews.com, of course this upsets me, because i know i'm not the only one who suffers from this problem.

Your probably right, i don't even acknowledge my browsing experience to be a "plug-in" one, even with Firefox, because i only have what i believe to be the stardard necessary plug-ins installed to get the most out of the web, which are Flash, Shockwave, K-lite mega codec pack & Flashgot.

That's all i ever install and all i need so far, so if it IS this plug-ins to blame, then something should really be done about them ;)

Oh and you shouldn't be so shocked on actually agreeing with me or someone on this forum for that matter, it has never been proven that humans were actually designed to not get along together, even though most of the time, it does feel that way, lol

Thanks for the informative response! I do totally agree. My only counter-response is that as long as the application lets go of the resources used when the application is closed, I'm *personally* OK with it using the resources while I'm using it. I can understand that not everyone agrees. Firefox does fit the bill on that, it will let go of the resources when you exit.

You are right, though, that the Mozilla developers need to make this a high priority moving forward, or it is going to severely damage their credibility, just as the security of Internet Explorer has hurt it.

I agree with that completely, i never suggested Firefox did this, a program that doesn't let go of the resources it uses after it has been closed is quite clearly, poorly coded and should be crucified for the poor programming ;)

Firefox 1.5 has made all the right changes to win over a die-hard Microsoft support like myself. The new improvements to tabs and general performance improvements were enough to justify a full-time switch for me, but the improved page rendering compatibilities, and the considerably more stable experience are the icing on the cake.

I only use two extensions--- Fasterfox for general performance tweaks since I'm on a high speed computer and connection; and IE View which I use for the few pages that just refuse to work with Firefox (i.e. Outlook Web Access and Windows Updates).

I manage several OWA servers, and many users prefer FF because OWA is just so much faster with it. Even on a LAN connection OWA just takes too long for page refreshes using it's native IE interface, although many of the "extra" features are there like notifications and scheduling features, I still see many people want fast access to their mail and prefer FF there.

I don't have any problems with page refreshing using the Premium interface (which I not only prefer, but insist on) but then again, I have done a lot of tuning of my servers, so performance is not the issue in my situation. This is purely a matter of asthetics... I like the Premium interface, so I prefer to use it. I am perfectly OK with using IE for it and Windows Updates exclusively, and I will hope that the next release of Exchange addresses the compatibility.

looks like these open source evangelists are going the commercial way.

Great...Mozilla Corp. is making their next step towards profiting from advertising. This is where the whole IE vs. FF war could get interesting...how far will they go, I wonder?

I'm down, I love Firefox, it's by far the best browser I have used! Not to mention Thunderbird! Awesome Mail application!

I can't stand Thunderbird.

I do, however, like Firefox.

I can't stand email clients without a system tray icon :P

For what it's worth, my Thunderbird opinion depends on what it's being compared with. On it's own--- pretty darn good!-- except for that damn address book.

Compared to Eudora, Outlook Express-- hands down, Thunderbird kicks butt and takes names.

Compared to full-blown Outlook-- without question, it is defeated as a "90-pound weakling". Without the calendar and tasks functionality and a decent address book, Thunderbird isn't even a contender. Although with Sunbird [slowly] on the way, that could change if they also improve the address book.
--------
Also for what it's worth, as a Microsoft "fan", even I have taken Firefox as my default and primary browser since I started working with 1.5. They've made just the right changes to 1.5 from 1.0.x to make it worth my while. :)

I'm waiting for Evolutions Windows port, or my laptop to actually work properly with a Linux kernel without having to apply x number of patches.

"Previous text-based efforts have been quite effective but we know they can't convey the real joy and excitement that people get from using Firefox."

Spoken like a true PR shill.

What utter tripe.

prefer they say it in ghetto slang?

nothing tripe about standard fare PC talk. Is it hiding anything? Is it distracting you from something?

just a dang fan involved campaign, those are a good thing.

Spoken like a true elitist, there, roj.

Thanks for the input.

So is everyone who gets excited about something a shill nowadays?

No - just those who do the fanboi thing, are apologists for a cause beyond any hope of logic or do PR spin that is clearly bulls***.

Elitist? Moi? You haven't overheard me discoursing on audio have you? :) :) ;)

"nothing tripe about standard fare PC talk"

If you mean overblown gushing hype bordering on pure bulls***, you're right - nothing new.

"Is it hiding anything?"

Apart from the truth? Nope.

"Is it distracting you from something?"

Apart from the reality that the browser is a reasonably competent effort suffering form poor design goals and management and lagging behind the competition in speed, features, compatibility, robustness, lean resource usage and is generally overhyped beyond all hope of redemption and defended by rabid fanboiz, no it's not distracting anyone from anything.

"just a dang fan involved campaign, those are a good thing."

Maybe I've been in this business too long and am just jaded (read: realistic).

The emperor hasn't worn new clothes for me in decades and I traded in my Rose Coloured Glasses for Serengetis a long time ago. Sorry, but I don't have orgasms over unwarranted religious fervor.

So if they *really* like it, they're a fanboi *and* a shill, right? Because no-one could actually *really* like it...

I think I got it now.

As *No Beer For You* posted, I think calling it "real joy and excitement" is definitely a PR overstatement.

On the other hand... I won't deny that the overall end-user experience with Firefox (especially 1.5) is much better than alternatives... at least for the time being. It's much better than Opera has ever been [and yes I've unfortunately used it recently], and until I see how IE7 turns out, I've found a browser that I can honestly say makes my web-browsing experience... "happier".

Hmm, maybe it's not such PR shill afterall...

y0 y0!!!!1 f|r3f0x0rz |z 0ff d4 h33zy f0 sh33zy!!!!!!11

Or how about "l33t ghetto slang" ?

*Please, oh please, don't flame me... I'm only kidding!*

I think what they are going to do is pretty lame, but not quite as lame as your logic in this string of comments.

:-P

> It's much better than Opera has ever been

Not when it comes to speed, small download size, innovation, and functionality out of the box, no.

man people aren't understanding this. Here's my perspective, they are asking people to create videos based on advertising why they love FF. Not only will this create more exposure and teach people about what the big deal is that seems so second nature to us, but it'll also nurture the fan community built around it by allowing and encouraging people to use a diffent content medium to express themselves creatively for a common purpose. More content mediums means more fan involvement, whichmeans not onl more advertising, but more inspiration and encouraging to create more. We could see some opera vids and IE parody vids made out of this deal.

I have high hopes and am glad for the opportuniy. funny? Lame? all fan content isliek that, it ain't saying much, encouraging creativity and discussion makes the world a greener and safer place to live in, thats my creedo.

Rock on, itanshi. I totally agree. See my comment below.

"Previous text-based efforts have been quite effective but we know they can't convey the real joy and excitement that people get from using Firefox"

Oh gosh. Yeah. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm just giddy as a school girl about my browser.

I knew it!

You're constant gushing and the occaisional "cute" giggle gave you away.

hope they release the videos on the web in the form of ads so i can block them using adblock plus.

...and this is what FF users are not getting from this article. Those ads that IE has that FF doesn't--savor it while it lasts! Mozilla has to make money somewhere, and if no financial donations are being made then where do they get it? (I'm not saying they currently aren't getting donations--just an "If...Then" scenario)

It is a great browser but it certainly doesn't merit a video commercial/ad.

This will be a joke.

Hopefully a rather amusing one. I'd hate to see this go by and not even get a snicker out of it.

Mmmm...snickers....

"real joy and excitement"??? Are you kidding me?
I'm a big fan of Firefox but what's exciting and joyful about a web browser?
Ridiculous.

Ease of use (tabbed browsing), harder to download virus's unawares, extensions for better functionality, the list goes on.... but "joy and excitement"? Hell no!

I don't know guys; it sounds silly on the face of it, but anybody who has been involved in the Mozilla dev scene longer than a few years knows that hardcore Firefox users (to quote Apple) "think different". Just take a look at the varied and mind-boggling list of extensions and the side projects of the developers who build them. These men and women are talented, motivated, and for the most part, have a great sense of humor (Abe Vigoda Watch anyone?). I can see these video commercials being really funny with the right people involved... like the Geico caveman commercials.

oooo!! yay!! look at me! *click click* ooooo *type type* soo much fun!! Look how joyful and excited I am! yay!!!!

Thank you. You are the first FF fanboy who hasn't made me see red.

Oh, how true!! Just like Apple users, many of Firefox's hardcore users "think different", alright... unfortunately, most of them went outside the box and into Streets of Insanity and got hit by drunk drivers.

It's one thing (a good thing!) to really like a product and sing it's praises (as any good, responsible user should do), but it's a another thing (a bad thing!) to be an elitest fanatic that ridicules anyone who still uses a mainstream product. The sad part-- no, the annoying part-- is that many "hardcore users" fit that latter description.

lmao...

This could be quite hilarious or incredibly lame.

Can't wait to see what they come up with, though.

lol I can "Express my creativity" with IE just as well as FF, I use FF and it wasn't a revolutionary switch nor has it given me any more freedom of creative expression. I'm not excited over it, and I'm not jumping up and down in a fit of joy. I just use it.

It was hard to get me to switch from IE cuz I never had ad issues with IE with the MSN toolbar on, I also don't go to freedesktopwallpaper.sites asking for spam either, my story is i was pushed over to it by switching to linux. Good browser, but I think it needs to come with the most popular media plugins like flash,wmp,vlc,mplayer,etc. I get tabbed browsing with the new msn toolbar, i get popup blocking and site blocking w/ the MSN toolbar. I far from defend IE, but I fail to see the "new and innovative" "fun and exciting" "revolutionary" "different and better than IE" features in the FF browser from a non-developer prespective.

since...your target market is the non-developer anyway, how're you going to convince the "users" to switch when they see no apparent difference beyond "my favorites arent there anymore" "things are in different places" and the #1 excuse I get from people for not switching to FF "Only real difference I see is that it looks different".
With proper configuration including the MSN toolbar, my non-hacker-targeted user-base has no reason to believe me that switching is better for their computer's health.

I say this as I steer customers clear of IE every chance I get.

"This could be quite hilarious or incredibly lame."

My money's on the latter - and I don't bet on anything that isn't at least 85% a sure thing.

Been a slice - outta here before it gets complicated.

"as I steer customers clear of IE every chance I get."

Funny, I don't recommend IE either - just variants like Maxthon and other worthy efforts such as Opera. I do warn others away from ZillaLand though - too many inherent disadvantages (listed elsewhere in this discussion) and besides, I was never a big fan of l33t fanboi cults.

"I was never a big fan of l33t fanboi cults."

"how're you going to convince the "users" to switch when they see no apparent difference beyond "my favorites arent there anymore" "things are in different places" and the #1 excuse I get from people for not switching to FF "Only real difference I see is that it looks different"."

Actually, your favorites ARE there... As I'm sure you're aware, there is an Import Wizard that runs when you first run the browser that moves things over. They're just called Bookmarks, and the menu is in the exact same place as in IE.

Also, that's exactly the point--- the only real difference is that with tabbed browsing and a few other menubar/toolbar changes, it just looks a little different. Functionally it is still the same but still offers a "safer" experience by not allowing the browser-hijacking spyware installs, and you can tweak it to be a lot less annoying because of ads.

"l33t fanboi cults"

LOL, so if one doesn't use maxthon or opera then they are a member of a "l33t fanboi cult"?

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Hrm, sounds like you are the member of the "l33t fanboi cult".

:-P