4 ms·
I'm actually excited about the second part: The new version also significantly reduces the memory overhead of leaky add-ons. I'm going to download a bunch of
by dimitar 14y ago
I'm actually excited about the second part:
The new version also significantly reduces the memory overhead of leaky add-ons.
I'm going to download a bunch of downloads and see how it feels now.
- josephcooney 14y agoDon't they say that EVERY firefox release?
- PommeDeTerre 14y agoYes, they do. Whenever the topics of Firefox's memory leaks or performance problems come up, there are always people who claim that it has none. They hold this position even when presented with mountains of evidence to show that there are in fact problems. Then the next version of Firefox is released, and the release notes go on and on about how memory leaks and performance problems have been fixed. Strange, how could they fix these problems that supposedly never existed in the first place?
- SquareWheel 14y agoThere isn't one single cause of the memory leaks, it's a very complex piece of software and plugging those leaks is a continuous process. And they are making progress, this version is much lighter.
- keeperofdakeys 14y agoWell I can usually hold 300-400 tabs with 2GB of memory, so I'm not complaining. Chrome will naturally use more memory because of multiple processes, however.
- tedmielczarek 14y agoThe MemShrink project has been in progress for over a year now, with measurable results shipping in many updates. The specific bullet point here is a fix to a very common addon problem that has been shown to have real-world benefits. Nobody here is denying there's a problem, things are getting fixed.
- mbrubeck 14y agoNot really, but here's why it might seem like it: https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2012/08/29/debunking-a-misconception-about-firefox-releases/ https://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/2012/08/29/debunking-a-...