Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 13th Mar 2008 20:41 UTC, submitted by RJop
Mozilla & Gecko clones "While Firefox 2 used less memory than it's predecessor, Firefox 1.5, we intentionally restricted the number of changes to the Gecko platform (Gecko 1.8.1 was only slightly different than Gecko 1.8) on which Firefox was built. However, while the majority of people were working on Firefox 2/Gecko 1.8.1, others of us were already ripping into the platform that Firefox 3 was to be built on: Gecko 1.9. We've made more significant changes to the platform than I can count, including many to reduce our memory footprint. The result has been dramatic."
Permalink for comment 305274
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Good
by kaiwai on Sun 16th Mar 2008 11:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Good"
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

Convoluted...don't you mean clear.


No, convoluted. Long winded gobbly goop going on about non-existent optimisations as justification for code bloat; Christ, use your brain and search OS News for the number of blog articles written by Firefox developers trying to justify the unjustifiable!

Do you not remember all those points being knocked down when this article was a couple of small paragraphs at the bottom of a very long list of feature changes. You seem to miss out the massive changes in firefox unrelated to any bug fixes.


I never said there weren't changes. I said that they were never honest when it came to memory leaks. AGAIN, how does it go from 'memory being used to optimise the user experience' to facing the reality, the 2 tonne elephant in the corner of the room, that Firefox is a giant memory leak that needs fixing.

I'd like you to point to point out where the Mozilla developers are lying scum...I suspect with a project with open development and discussion it would be somewhat trivial for several choice quotes.


I never said they were lying scum. I said they were liars because for over a year we the end users were told that the 'bloat' and 'memory leaks' of Firefox 2.x weren't memory leaks but part of their 'optimisation of Firefox' and that the 'memory is used to improve the browsing experience'.

Well, here we are, months before the release of Firefox 3.0 and told, "well, they were leaks, and we've fixed them". How the hell do you go from claiming that they're optimisations to now classifying them as memory leaks.

The bottom line is that some "uneducated half-wits" claimed nothing was being done about the "memory leak"snicker;)


Nothing was being done because no one in the Firefox development team wished to admit that their product leaked memory like there was no tomorrow - and everytime they were questioned on the bloat of their software they came up with the same rubbish of, "well, its for optimising the end user experience" - yeah, sure; what next, you'll be telling me that Hillary really does care about the welfare of the average American.

Edited 2008-03-16 11:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2