Firefox 3.5

Discussion in 'Software' started by BoredOutOfMyMind, Jun 20, 2009.

  1. BoredOutOfMyMind

    BoredOutOfMyMind Picabo, ICU

    Anyone using the Beta?

    Thoughts?
     
  2. iwunderdownunder

    iwunderdownunder First Sergeant

    i have been using it since it was in alpha.takes i bit long to load but that could be due to some addons i am using.the clear private data function doesn't pop up like it used to when closing like the old versions.
    i haven't had any problems with it
     
  3. sexyandy81

    sexyandy81 MajorGeek

    Firefox 3.5 has now finally released RC1, download this latest update if anyone hasnt done so yet.
     
  4. bigbazza

    bigbazza R.I.P. 14/12/2011 - Good Onya Geek

  5. DavidGP

    DavidGP MajorGeeks Forum Administrator - Grand Pooh-Bah Staff Member

    Hi Boomm

    Not using 3.5 but using 3.6a of Fx and actually its pretty snappy (I dont use addons or minimal, but then again not many work in this verion at all) loadup time is much quicker than older Fx versions.

    But not used 3.5 at all so cannot compare, but interesting to hear that in iwunderdownunder's case it maybe a slow loader, but could be due to other issues, so would like to hear anyone whos actually using its thoughts on is Fx loading slower, does it still hog ram etc?

    3.6a with one window open uses 32,220k
    IE8 with one window open uses 23,005k

    Although the more tabs you open in IE the more ram it uses collectively against Fx with same number of tabs open, so in 3.6a the ram usage is very good and incrouraging as it was a thorn in Mozilla's side is ram creap.
     
  6. augiedoggie

    augiedoggie The Canadian Loon - LocoAugie (R.I.P. 2012)

    Yup on FF memory creep in RTM FF, I have my normal 10 tabs open and instead of the usual ~100MB at start up, it is now using 250MB and if I then let it go for a few more days it'll probably reach 500GB! :eek (I run 24/7) I do have plenty of RAM (4GB in X86) but I expect it to get real slow when it gets near 500GB.

    It's good to hear that after all these years of them denying memory creep that they might actually finally fix it. We'll see eh?;)
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2009
  7. sexyandy81

    sexyandy81 MajorGeek

    I have tried FF 3.5 and also have tried FF 3.6a1pre and there is not much difference in browsing speed. I havn't noticed anything different between them.
     
  8. iwunderdownunder

    iwunderdownunder First Sergeant

    "but interesting to hear that in iwunderdownunder's case it maybe a slow loader, but could be due to other issues," you are probably right with this statement i am not running the super computer of today's standard my old girl is a bit of a relic compared to what is available these days. interesting though that looking in my task manager the memory usage on this old relic sits at 53,000 kb with just this one tab open..bye the way its only a amd athlon 2000 1.5 gig processor 740 meg ram fairly ancient really but meets my needs.
     
  9. sexyandy81

    sexyandy81 MajorGeek

    My computer is fairly old aswell but its packed with intel p4 processor running at 2.8Ghz with 1.5GB Ram and now with 512MB ATi Radeon Hd3650 graphics card. But the computer is Packard Bell Imedia 5097 which serves it purpose for what I want it to do. Here is the link to my computer http://support.packardbell.com/uk/item/index.php?m=home&pn=P700405101
     
  10. samtal

    samtal Corporal

    Firefox looks like a resource hog on my system.
    Don't know if this is normal or not. A surprise to me.

    FF 3.0.11 is using 66,152k (one open window on each)
    IE 8 is using only 19,744k
     
  11. silas

    silas MajorGeek

    Mines 87,208k
     
  12. sexyandy81

    sexyandy81 MajorGeek

    Last edited: Jun 24, 2009
  13. DavidGP

    DavidGP MajorGeeks Forum Administrator - Grand Pooh-Bah Staff Member

    I agree with you DomLuc


    Safari while ok and I use it daily in its iphone form is no match for IE, Opera, Fx or Chrome, just not a fan of Chrome, a personal taste thing.

    Do think that Mozilla have a winner if they keep on the same development track they are with Minefield, I find it quick loader and quick on pages, plus its ram usage does seem better as I mentioned, but then it could be one of those things as I have 6GB (using Vista x64) but even trialing 3.5 on same PC Minefield used less ram.

    I dont add many addons just 2 or 3 core ones.


    TBH and personal observation, dont think that Apple will ever get to that stage or at least in next 5yrs or so, think in reality Fx has best chance of overtaking or denting and dually becoming main broswer with IE, with Chrome following.
     
  14. augiedoggie

    augiedoggie The Canadian Loon - LocoAugie (R.I.P. 2012)

    I tried Safari about a year ago when they made it available for PC machines as a trial or something, I can't remember. The thing looked like it was made in the 80's!:puke I fooled around with it for an hour or so just to look at options etc. and it was so lame that I was actually surprised that Apple would have ported that over to Windows. AFAIWC, it was an embarrassment for them to showcase it at all to the PC world!rolleyes
     
  15. tarmin8or

    tarmin8or Private First Class

    Downloaded and tried the new Firefox 3.5
    WTH???!!!
    It wasn't able to accept the theme(s) I had loaded because they were not compatible!!!!
    That's a bunch-o-crap! I went back the the prior version. Screw the 3.5! Can't they get things to work right before they release this stuff????
    AHHHH!!!!

    Thanks!
     
  16. satrow

    satrow Major Geek Extraordinaire

    LOL, the vast majority of add-ons and themes for Mozilla products are made by users not Mozilla, if the creators are busy with other things, they may take a while to get updated.

    My only theme is Littlefox, it seems to be updated very fast with any FF version change, as to my add-ons, within a day or 2 of a FF release, they are all working as they should.

    Try 3.5 again, it was upgraded for many reasons, some of them were security-related.
     
  17. tarmin8or

    tarmin8or Private First Class

    All I know is that when I updated to 3.5, all but one of my themes were not compatible. I really don't care who designs them, they are availale on the FireFox website. I love FireFox. Just didn't like it when I updated and it changed my setup, that's all!!!!
    I will wait until the themes are compatible and try again sometime in the future.
    I don't use the stupid yahoo toolbar either. Too much clutter.
     
  18. tarmin8or

    tarmin8or Private First Class

    Well excuse me! Sorry i pissed off everyone.
     
  19. dr.moriarty

    dr.moriarty Malware Super Sleuth Staff Member

    Posts like your No. 17 & 20 would eventually lead to a reply stating that it's in your interest to make sure that compatibility won't be an issue before updating any software, to prevent setup changes - i.e. add-ons not working.

    dr.m
     
  20. BoredOutOfMyMind

    BoredOutOfMyMind Picabo, ICU

    Bump of a thread I started and I am now using 3.5.1Pre (bug fix to 3.5.0) in Ubuntu. I installed this one from the Mint Repos though....

    So far only the bug where unable to view Youtube full screen.
    [solved]
     

MajorGeeks.Com Menu

Downloads All In One Tweaks \ Android \ Anti-Malware \ Anti-Virus \ Appearance \ Backup \ Browsers \ CD\DVD\Blu-Ray \ Covert Ops \ Drive Utilities \ Drivers \ Graphics \ Internet Tools \ Multimedia \ Networking \ Office Tools \ PC Games \ System Tools \ Mac/Apple/Ipad Downloads

Other News: Top Downloads \ News (Tech) \ Off Base (Other Websites News) \ Way Off Base (Offbeat Stories and Pics)

Social: Facebook \ YouTube \ Twitter \ Tumblr \ Pintrest \ RSS Feeds