Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th May 2009 08:24 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 362293
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I used the memory topic as an example of how sometimes people make a huge problem of something that can be solved just by restarting the browser from time to time.
Edit: Just to clarify, FF 2 had some severe memory management issues, but it was possible to aleviate them with a little care.
Edited 2009-05-07 18:36 UTC




Member since:
2006-03-12
I've heard this many times, specially from people constantly whining that FF leaks memory (having 50 youtube tabs open at the same time has nothing to do with the huge memory consumption, of course) and I still don't get it.
But that's just my two cents, of course.
Are you talking Firefox or Flash. Firefox 2 had regressions and new features...firefox 3 is a no brainer to upgrade to and I suspect 3.5 will the same. Memory consumption is less than other browsers now, and a embedded version is coming.
Flash on the other hand is painful and the only major binary blob on my system. I update religiously to each version of gnash in hope that its a real replacement...but as yet it disappoints. Its simply closer.
That said this mentioning memory thing in anything other than move to firefox 3 or stick with firefox 1.5 is just silly.