4 ms·
I'd hate for this to become the revisionist history of the migration from FF -> Chrome. When I finally made the move FF had no extensions, no malware or any a
by nkozyra 12y ago
I'd hate for this to become the revisionist history of the migration from FF -> Chrome.
When I finally made the move FF had no extensions, no malware or any add-ons. I ran the same (mostly) version on Ubuntu, OSX and Windows 7. It had become unusably slow on all platforms. Looking around on the Internet in those days saw enough validation of the problem being widespread in terms of speed and memory resources that I tried Chrome and found it significantly snappier.
In fact, I still do, although I note the great strides FF has taken in that regard. My problem is I haven't seen the same degradation in Chrome that I saw in FF a few years back. If it's getting bloated, I've missed it (in terms of palpable heft with slowdowns, crashes).
- logn 12y agoThe historical FF record: https://areweslimyet.com/ https://areweslimyet.com/
- nnethercote 12y agoThat site is the historical record of memory usage on one automated benchmark on one particular test machine. It's useful for finding memory regressions but you really can't draw general conclusions from it. In particular, it's worst-case behaviour (esp. spikes) that hurts the most with memory usage, and Firefox is much better in that regard than it used to be.