"When Firefox launched in beta release five years ago, it burst on the open-source browser scene like a young Elvis Presley - slim, sexy and dangerous. Since then it has attracted millions of users, generally set the agenda for browser development and unseated Microsoft's IE as the de facto monopoly in the field. But, with Firefox 3.0 poised for release later this year, the 'IE killer' is in danger of morphing into an early Fat Elvis, if increasing numbers of die-hard fans turned reluctant critics are any guide."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-10
People also have to realise that Firefox runs on top of a cross-platfrom UI library, XUL. Firefox runs on OSes as diverse as OS/2, RISC OS and BeOS. Firefox cannot be as perfect as a wholly native browser, like Safari; ergo, one must cut Firefox at least a bit of slack.
Member since:2006-01-12
Member since:2006-01-12
You can say the same for Opera
That takes alot more memory than Firefox, last time I looked it was 60Mb within a few minutes.
Opera uses much, much less memory than Firefox. Especially if you don't restart your browser every 15min.
At about 100 tabs Firefox easily breaks 1GB of memory and more (at least it did before I stopped using it), Opera stays below 300MB. Additionally, Opera loads faster, it's crash recovery is more reliable and somehow they managed to fit the browser and half a dozen apps I've never used in a download that's half the size of Firefox.
Opera's cookie managment is still a PITA and I miss a few features of Firefox like nuke everything (and Firesomething; the endless possibilities always put a smile on my face and I'm not even being sarcastic =).
Member since:2006-01-26
Please don't say lies like this, it's totally false.
I'm a Opera user since early 9 version to the today's one (9.10) and I'm very unhappy with the experience on Opera. This occour to me even more than with Firefox.
I experienced a lot of bugs seeing certain sites, crashes that later deleted my bookmarks and tabs. I was unable to recovering those pages I needed to read, so again using google and wasting even some hours.
I had very bad experiences with most web browsers: Firefox and Opera both are quite buggy and corrupt bookmarks and unable to recover sites. Even both haver quite big rendering problems and slowdowns. On the other hand, Internet Explorer is even worser in most aspects.
I hope more renderers like WebKit or better are going to be developed, but that maybe cannot happen due to the web world becoming an annoying mass of bloated technologies. I think the web must evolve into a new standard with all the needed stuff but becoming simple and avoiding bloat.
Maybe the WebKit port to KDE could help the appear of kightweight browsers using toolkits like FLTK2. Sometimes I use Dillo because is quite fast, but it lacks most standards for becoming a really usable browser. It seems tkhtml2 is a dead project, it was promising at the time.
Edited 2007-05-18 22:05
Member since:2006-08-29
I have to agree with SlackerJack, last time I *tested* it Opera 9.x did use more memory than Firefox. I did my own tests, opening a set of 'heavy' webpages in both browsers and monitored usage.
The fact is memory is irrelevent as long as you can spare it and it's managed properly by the application. *You* are correct in that Opera tends to *manage* it's memory alot better than FF, and in terms of UI, tab and webpage responsiveness I don't think Opera can be beat.
Now if only Opera would ship a 64 bit binaries for Linux (and other platforms) so I can start using it again. I am sick of dodgy fonts and an ugly UI on my otherwise beautiful pure 64-bit system. Give us a 64-bit build! We have nspluginwrapper, let us have it for the love of God...
Member since:
2005-11-12
That takes alot more memory than Firefox, last time I looked it was 60Mb within a few minutes.
Firefox is no more bloated than the other popular browsers, so if anyone can give me the numbers(unlike the artical has) then fine.It can be the case that web pages are more boated then ever, flash is slow and people want more features there is a price to be paid.