Jump to content

Slow, Boring Firefox ESR... NOT Anymore!


Recommended Posts

V.T. Eric Layton

Oooh, I'm havin' fun now!

 

After upgrading my kernel and realizing that my herky-jerky mouse issues were possibly FF or Nvidia. I decided to see if I could upgrade away from this old obsolete v68.x ESR version of FF that is in stable Slackware 14.2. Back a few years ago, I tried to upgrade FF by building it on my Slackware. However, it didn't fly (no audio) because that version was the first version that required Pulse Audio. I was still running ALSA back then. I gave up on the project and stuck with the stable FF.

 

Today, I was tootling around on LinuxQuestions.org and actually found that long time member Ruari Oedegaard had written a very cool script to create an install-able .tgz package for Slackware that utilizes the most recent stable version of FF (89.0). I figured what the heck... I can revert if it goes boom. Even if it REALLY GOES BOOM, I can bring up my mirrored rsync backup from earlier today (before the kernel upgrade). So...

 

I DID IT. :)

 

I'm running FF 89.0 fully sync'd and customized on my Slack 14.2 right this minute. It's BLAZING fast compared to that ol' ESR version. It's also much more efficient. With 11 tabs open, one playing music on YouTube, it's using about 540M of RAM and barely tickling the CPU @ 1.4% while I'm typing this. COOL, huh?

 

I'm a HAPPY Firefox user!

  • Like 2
  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • V.T. Eric Layton

    13

  • saturnian

    13

  • securitybreach

    11

  • raymac46

    9

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

At least he didn't write: "There are two Universal elements - Hydrogen and Stupidity. (Frank Zappa.)"

Oooh, I'm havin' fun now!   After upgrading my kernel and realizing that my herky-jerky mouse issues were possibly FF or Nvidia. I decided to see if I could upgrade away from this old obsole

For once I agree with almost everything Dedoimedo says, particularly about development for development sake. There are virtually no new features in Firefox in the last 10 years that I would care if th

abarbarian
11 hours ago, V.T. Eric Layton said:

Oooh, I'm havin' fun now!

 

After upgrading my kernel and realizing that my herky-jerky mouse issues were possibly FF or Nvidia. I decided to see if I could upgrade away from this old obsolete v68.x ESR version of FF that is in stable Slackware 14.2. Back a few years ago, I tried to upgrade FF by building it on my Slackware. However, it didn't fly (no audio) because that version was the first version that required Pulse Audio. I was still running ALSA back then. I gave up on the project and stuck with the stable FF.

 

Today, I was tootling around on LinuxQuestions.org and actually found that long time member Ruari Oedegaard had written a very cool script to create an install-able .tgz package for Slackware that utilizes the most recent stable version of FF (89.0). I figured what the heck... I can revert if it goes boom. Even if it REALLY GOES BOOM, I can bring up my mirrored rsync backup from earlier today (before the kernel upgrade). So...

 

I DID IT. :)

 

I'm running FF 89.0 fully sync'd and customized on my Slack 14.2 right this minute. It's BLAZING fast compared to that ol' ESR version. It's also much more efficient. With 11 tabs open, one playing music on YouTube, it's using about 540M of RAM and barely tickling the CPU @ 1.4% while I'm typing this. COOL, huh?

 

I'm a HAPPY Firefox user!

 

 

Neat. 😛

 

What are you using to measure memory use ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton
8 hours ago, abarbarian said:

What are you using to measure memory use ?

 

$ top in terminal and Xfce Task Manager in GUI.

Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian

I think I should be seeing an update to Firefox 89.0 in Arch here soon.

 

I had been using Firefox ESR in Debian, but lately I've been using the Brave browser in Debian. I'm sticking with Firefox in Arch, though; I didn't install Brave in Arch because I didn't want to add anything else from AUR at this time, and Brave isn't in Arch's main repos. I installed Brave in Debian to have it as a 2nd option, with FF being the primary browser, but Brave seems to be growing on me. Can't see myself giving up Firefox completely, in any case -- it's been my primary browser for most of the time since before I got started with Linux.

 

I haven't checked anything re: performance but Brave does seem faster than Firefox. Could be my imagination, I guess. Not sure if anybody else here has been using it. Based on Chromium (!!). Not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
sunrat
2 hours ago, saturnian said:

Based on Chromium (!!). Not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.

It's a bad thing. Support browser diversity, down with monocratic browser despotism. Firefox needs support, if it goes away, every browser will be based on the same core.

 

Quote

Brave does seem faster than Firefox. Could be my imagination, I guess.

Can confirm it's your imagination. The speed and quality of internet connection has far greater effect on browser performance than different browsers. I now have a 256Mb/s pipe and the difference between FF and Chromium is imperceptible. And if you're revisiting pages which are cached, the speed of your processor, RAM, and storage also plays a small part.

  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian

You have both Firefox and Chromium installed, sunrat? I like having two browsers. My secondary browser for the past few years has been Pale Moon. I am not gonna be uninstalling Firefox. Are there concerns that Firefox might be going away?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sunrat
37 minutes ago, saturnian said:

You have both Firefox and Chromium installed, sunrat? I like having two browsers. My secondary browser for the past few years has been Pale Moon. I am not gonna be uninstalling Firefox. Are there concerns that Firefox might be going away?

Yes I do have both. Chromium worked better with a couple of secret custom Tampermonkey scripts I was using for operating an Ingress anomaly event. Other than that 1% occasion I use Firefox always.

Usage share of desktop browsers shows Firefox falling rapidly to under 7% whereas Chrome has 68%.  Edge and Opera are also Chromium-based so the stats are even more dire when those are included.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

It's like what happened to Netscape when Internet Explorer surfaced and that turned out to be a travesty for the whole internet with standards being ignored and development stalling once market dominance was won. I am extremely worried history is repeating.

  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
14 hours ago, saturnian said:

Brave does seem faster than Firefox. Could be my imagination, I guess. Not sure if anybody else here has been using it.

 

I used it for a couple of months but then it borked on me and I got rid of it. It did seem to be a tad faster than FF though.😎

Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, V.T. Eric Layton said:

 

$ top in terminal and Xfce Task Manager in GUI.

 

Looks like your Slackware set up is faster than my Arch.FF with you Tube playing and 12 open tabs.

Mind you the cpu use goes up and down with a high of around 8.5%.

 

OwrVOOf.png

 

W9mkYrL.png

 

😎

Edited by abarbarian
  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian
9 hours ago, abarbarian said:

I used it for a couple of months but then it borked on me and I got rid of it.

 

What happened?

Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian
9 hours ago, abarbarian said:

12 open tabs.

 

6 open tabs is a lot for me! Very rare for me to have a lot of tabs open.

Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
14 hours ago, saturnian said:

 

What happened?

 

No idea. It stopped working after an update. As I was just playing around with it I decided not to waste any more time trying to fix it.

14 hours ago, saturnian said:

6 open tabs is a lot for me! Very rare for me to have a lot of tabs open.

 

I only had the 12 tabs open to recreate Eric's test run. I usually only have four or five sites open at once. I'm a guy I don't do multitasking well 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton

Usually, the only time I have multiple tabs open is when they're from the same site... like Diaspora or here at Scot's, etc. I will check for unread posts and then open them in tabs. There might be a YouTube tab playing music occasionally, as the mood hits. Oh, and my homepage (custom_dial) is always open. It's a local file on my system, not on the Internet.

 

I'm not one of those 37 tabs open kind of people.

 

Browser w/ Custom_Dial Homepage Open

 

glqHuSz.png

  • +1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton

I found a neat tweak for FF 89.x (Proton Interface) today.

 

One of the things I didn't like about this new interface is that fact that the tabs are too fat (tall); wasting screen space, in my opinion. Using a config tweak, I was able to narrow them down about 25%, which is just the right size for me.

 

- In address bar: type about:config -> agree to warning message -> browser.compact.mode.show -> make True

- R-click toolbar -> Density Setting -> Compact mode (not supported)

 

And POOF! Tabs now nice and slim. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian

I may be wrong, but I think that does the same thing as changing the value for browser.uidensity from the default "0" to "1" (for "compact mode").

Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton

Well, without making the modification in about:config, I didn't even have the choice for Compact mode. I only had "Normal" and "Touch". :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton
29 minutes ago, saturnian said:

but I think that does the same thing as changing the value for browser.uidensity

 

That could very well be true. I didn't know about that modification.

Link to post
Share on other sites
saturnian

Hm. Changing browser.uidensity to "1" also puts the "Compact mode (not supported" option into the "Density" menu. But it also changes the browser to compact mode. The browser.compact.mode.show key puts the option into the menu, but it doesn't automatically enable compact mode for you. So they don't do exactly the same thing. looks like.

Edited by saturnian
  • +1 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton

Well, one thing's for sure. I definitely like the thinner tabs. I'm happy with FF 89.x now. I probably won't be tweaking much anymore.

 

By the way, on my system, FF still renders fonts much more dark and richly than Chromium.

Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach
20 hours ago, saturnian said:

Hm. Changing browser.uidensity to "1" also puts the "Compact mode (not supported" option into the "Density" menu. But it also changes the browser to compact mode. The browser.compact.mode.show key puts the option into the menu, but it doesn't automatically enable compact mode for you. So they don't do exactly the same thing. looks like.

 

Neat

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firefox 89 - Another redesign, another rollercoaster 

 

Note the section, "All this said Firefox should still be your no.1 browser". I tend to agree with all that.

 

I'm not sure what the big deal is about the icons in the menu. They're still showing up in FF 89 here. [Edit: My mistake, no icons in FF 89's main menu here.] The items in Brave's main menu don't have icons. Personally, I like it better without the icons.

Edited by saturnian
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, securitybreach said:

Why do all these projects all choose the name Proton? That is also the name of steam's compatibility api for windows games on linux.

 

Roger Ramjet: I'll just take one of my Proton Energy Pills. They give me the strength of 20 atom bombs for a period of 20 seconds.

 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/12/2021 at 7:49 AM, saturnian said:

 

For once I agree with almost everything Dedoimedo says, particularly about development for development sake. There are virtually no new features in Firefox in the last 10 years that I would care if they never existed. The same goes for that other C-word browser and a plethora of other software out there. If only "development" would go back to meaning "better" rather than just "bigger, prettier, and/or different". Development should mean fixing bugs, improving performance, reducing overhead. There's nothing fundamentally different about how I use a browser from 20 years ago, and the way they looked was perfectly acceptable at the time way back then.

One particular example of good development that comes to mind is Ardour the multitrack audio workstation software. It has had only minor UI changes in it's 16 years of life, but its functionality and performance are leagues ahead.

 

All this said, Firefox should still be your no.1 browser

Here he makes the same point I was talking about in several other recent topics:

Quote

Firefox does not use the Chromium engine - thus if Firefox disappears, there's nothing to stop total technology domination by a single product, and we go fully back to the Internet Explorer 6.0 era, when every computer-capable chimp hardcoded HTML/CSS declarations so they worked in this one particular browser. In fact, this is already happening, and there are tons of (useless) Web sites that only work in Chromium-based applications. Whenever I encounter a site like that, I think of education in the sunny expanses of the Gulag system, and then I add them to a permanent blacklist, so I never ever visit them again.

 

  • +1 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
abarbarian
8 hours ago, sunrat said:

One particular example of good development that comes to mind is Ardour the multitrack audio workstation software. It has had only minor UI changes in it's 16 years of life, but its functionality and performance are leagues ahead.

 

Pretty much why I use Window Maker 😍😍

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's hardly anything in Firefox 89 that I can find to complain about. I think the devs are actually doing a pretty good job. For me, from what I'm seeing here, the worst thing about the recent upgrade is the default has too space on the tabs. Certainly nothing that would make me want to stop using Firefox.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...