2 ms·

Thank you for providing this detail, I used to use tree tabs before the webextensions fiasco but hadn't gone back to it yet as I wasn't aware it was possible to

Thank you for providing this detail, I used to use tree tabs before the webextensions fiasco but hadn't gone back to it yet as I wasn't aware it was possible to hide the existing tab bar. I'll definitely give it another shot now thanks to your help! The last time I tried TST, it was fairly hostile to my battery on macOS; is that still a problem? Sidebar tabs are a massive workflow upgrade, it surprises me that it's not a core browser feature, especially now with the ridiculous proliferation of those loathsome vertical-space hostile sticky elements that have spread through the web like a plague.

nneonneo 8y ago
If by "last time" you mean the pre-WebExtension version - yes, that version was rather CPU intensive and I used a different extension (no longer maintained post-WebExtension) back then. I haven't seen any negative performance impact as far as battery or CPU usage are concerned, but as usual YMMV.
- shabbyrobe 8y ago
  I just gave it another try. Unfortunately, things haven't improved. `about:performance` shows a "medium" energy impact for TST. My 2015 Macbook's fans come on and stay on until I disable TST again, after which they reliably spool back down after a short delay. While TST is enabled, Firefox shoots up the list of CPU users in Activity Monitor. Oh well, it was worth a shot, sidebar tabs are just so good when they're working well, but it's not worth the battery drain. Your userChrome.css tweaks worked great!
  - ejstronge 8y ago
    As another point of data, with FF Nightly on macOS 10.14/2018 MBP and ~10 tabs, I see no fan activity and low-to-none energy impact.
  - henriquemaia 8y ago
    Different OS (Linux, FF 64), but I was curious to know the impact here. TST has no discernible impact.
    - shabbyrobe 8y ago
      I'm using a bunch of other extensions and customisations, so I guess there's some dodgy interaction going on somewhere. No time to go spelunking though. I'll just use it on my desktop instead, where I won't notice the load.

nneonneo 8y ago

If by "last time" you mean the pre-WebExtension version - yes, that version was rather CPU intensive and I used a different extension (no longer maintained post-WebExtension) back then. I haven't seen any negative performance impact as far as battery or CPU usage are concerned, but as usual YMMV.

shabbyrobe 8y ago
I just gave it another try. Unfortunately, things haven't improved. `about:performance` shows a "medium" energy impact for TST. My 2015 Macbook's fans come on and stay on until I disable TST again, after which they reliably spool back down after a short delay. While TST is enabled, Firefox shoots up the list of CPU users in Activity Monitor. Oh well, it was worth a shot, sidebar tabs are just so good when they're working well, but it's not worth the battery drain. Your userChrome.css tweaks worked great!
- ejstronge 8y ago
  As another point of data, with FF Nightly on macOS 10.14/2018 MBP and ~10 tabs, I see no fan activity and low-to-none energy impact.
- henriquemaia 8y ago
  Different OS (Linux, FF 64), but I was curious to know the impact here. TST has no discernible impact.
  - shabbyrobe 8y ago
    I'm using a bunch of other extensions and customisations, so I guess there's some dodgy interaction going on somewhere. No time to go spelunking though. I'll just use it on my desktop instead, where I won't notice the load.