But that's the thing, my firefox is only slower while starting up, compared to a stock firefox install, its performance is higher than the default firefox install due to a network tweaking addon ;)
And firefox mobile is still a beta. There are a couple apps I no longer try betas and the likes, browsers being one of them. I usually try briefly important firefox betas, just to run the addon compatibility app, to check that all my addons will be compatible in the new version, and if any isn't, I contact the addon developer directly. I like to keep my firefox always chugging along nicely :) On Oct 31, 1:46 am, "THEfog ." <[email protected]> wrote: > And one other thing, sure it is nice to have a browser that has a add-on for > pretty much everything, but if I have to sacrifice performance for added > function then the browser isn't doing its job properly. I believe chrome > runs its add-on's in a seperate process to reduce performance impact it has > on the main executable. Lol now that you mention it, I used opera mobile on > android breifly but I found it's interface way to clunky and slow although > it was rather fast. > > THEfog > > On 31/10/2010 10:32 AM, "tribaljet" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Well, not having a gpu to accelerate kinda makes it pointless, which > also leaves me wondering if firefox 4 will be able to use our igps to > accelerate renderings. Chromium is the fastest, by a small margin > though. Firefox gets slower the more addons you make it run. I'm > currently running firefox 3.6 with 11 addons, and with 20 tabs open, > it doesn't go above 250mb of ram, which is acceptable for me since ff > 3.5 running with 4 addons and 20 tabs sometimes peaked at 500mb. Also, > some addons weigh much more than others, I have statistics, > geolocating, screencaps, network tweaks and a few other things that > don't weigh much. I just hope they make ff 4 as a win7 compared to > vista/ff3.6 and previous. > > Being honest, I recommend chromium to the uninformed computer user, as > it is very simple and to the point, and has the benefit of being the > slightly faster rendering engine. But for just about anyone who knows > and wants his browser to do a bit more, firefox is the way to go, > mainly due to mozilla having the largest addons library in the world. > Although firefox doesn't have a tab manager, it does have a plugin > container, handling plugins on a separate thread so if any plugin > crashes, said plugin just stops working and not crashing the browser, > refreshing the page makes it work again. > > For me, chrome is very similar to safari, both being the simplest > browsers, but quite fast. The curious thing is that opera isn't > exactly far behind, and has the best computer-mobile device > interoperability, though the new mobile firefox version might stir > things up on that area. > > On Oct 31, 1:21 am, "THEfog ." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The reason I like chrome is it i... > > On 31/10/2010 3:29 AM, "tribaljet" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > First, I don't recommend chr... > > -- > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
