Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Aug 2010 22:00 UTC
Permalink for comment 438779
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-01
There was a video demo on BetaNews recently. Indeed just like its mature brother, it takes ages to start. I really don't know how can other companies make their browsers start so quickly but Mozilla cannot. I also have a feeling it has to do with the XUL based interface as everything based on XUL so far seems very slow including Thunderbird according to my observations.
I didn't even bother installing this thing on my Hero. My free RAM is hovering around 70-90% with no apps running. Launch SMS, Browser, other small utilities and it quikcly drops. Knowing FF for PC takes so much RAM, I can only imagine what will happen to my free RAM when I launch FF on my Hero and probably that battery will drain quite quickly. Not worth it. I think it's time for the FF developers to get their act together and start focusing on startup performance and resource usage otherwise people will start turning away. I switched from IE to FF about two years ago but now I am considering Chrome or IE again due to FF resource usage.
OOo got their act together....so can Mozilla.
Edited 2010-08-31 09:32 UTC