13 ms·
Firefox 41 will use less memory when running AdBlock Plus
- RRRA 11y agoWhat about µBlock?
- heycam 11y agoµBlock does not use the same technique of creating a style sheet and inserting it into all loaded documents, so the type of sharing done as part of this work does not help µBlock.
- jzelinskie 11y agoI'm pretty sure it does according to this wikipage[0]. It may not load _all_ the rules into every page, but it definitely does create a stylesheet and inject it into the page. [0]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Cosmetic-filtering-in-%C2%B5Block:-version-0.4.0.0-update https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Cosmetic-filtering-in...
- heycam 11y agoI can't see where on that page it talks about using style sheets. Last week I searched the µBlock sources for use of the nsIStyleSheetService, which is Gecko's internal interface for adding style sheets without manipulating individual documents, and the only use of that interface is for adding css/legacy-toolbar-button.css, which I assume is for some UI.
- jzelinskie 11y agoSo, this might be a case of me assuming too much, but I basically read every instance of _cosmetic filters_ basically as _css styles_. There are a couple CSS files in the git repository that have "filter" in their names[0], but yeah I can't actually be 100% certain at a glance that they're using CSS and not manipulating the DOM with JS. [0]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/tree/master/src/css https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/tree/master/src/css
- heycam 11y agoI just did some poking around, and it looks like uBlock does insert a couple of <style> elements into the document. I'm not sure if this is how all style-based blocking is done in uBlock, but since these are document-level style sheets, they are not shared like user agent-level sheets are. (We will in the future be investigating whether we can share more data between common document-level style sheets across multiple documents, though.)
- shmerl 11y ago14 years old bug fixed. Congratulations! (I'm not sarcastic - it's always good when such bugs are fixed).
- heycam 11y agoThank you!
- kylek 11y ago>> Firefox 41 Developer Edition is scheduled to be released in the next day or two.
- blinkingled 11y agohttp://vimcolorschemetest.googlecode.com/svn/html/index-c.html http://vimcolorschemetest.googlecode.com/svn/html/index-c.ht... - the page referenced in the article that shows extreme AdBlock overhead - Chrome just chokes on it for a long time - the tab uses 1.7GB of memory while it is still loading! With uBlock and FF 38 - the page load completes faster and only about 850MB memory is used in total! Chrome people should really be doing something about the memory and battery usage on the desktop. It's getting ridiculous. Also I wonder how things such as OS X's Compressed Memory feature affect this in real life. I mean without the fix, the OS will notice the duplicated, in-memory style sheets and compress them to reduce memory usage and you should not see much of an improvement due to this patch on platforms like OS X that implement memory compression. (Looking at activity monitor with FF loading the vim color scheme test shows 0MB Compressed Mem for FF - not sure if FF opts out or if there simply isn't enough memory pressure for the OS to start compressing FF's mem.)
- taspeotis 11y ago> Chrome just chokes on it for a long time - the tab uses 1.7GB of memory while it is still loading! Chrome 43.0.2357.130 m (64-bit) on Windows 8.1 here, takes 787.6 MB for me (with uBlock). If I open an Incognito window (i.e. no extensions) it takes 109 MB. Not sure where this discrepancy is coming from. Chrome's responsive the whole time. http://i.imgur.com/QFG2ryq.png http://i.imgur.com/QFG2ryq.png
- blinkingled 11y agoI was testing on OS X - On Windows 8.1 the page kept loading for a while and then the tab crashed - it used 767Mb before crashing. Probably the extensions you are running are different from me as well - I am running uBlock, Privacy Badger, Lastpass and ChromeCast. Edit: The crash on Windows 8.1 is reproducible for me. Turns out I'm running a 32-bit build on Windows. But that just very likely means the crash is due to it exceeding the 32-bit process address space limit. I've seen it reach 900+Mb but since the reporting is not real time in chrome://memory it's hard to know at what point it crashes.
- 11y ago
- dethstar 11y agoI can finally go back to ABP! Firefox used to crash a lot, and freeze a lot back when I was using ABP. ublock has never worked as well for me, I also dislike the element selector. Sometimes I want more than blocked something being displayed, like blocking a script. And ABP allowed that easier, that's something I miss.
- unexistance 11y agoyeah, uBlock Origin makes it a tiny little bit hard to undo what you've block, I find it easier by bookmarking the below which opens the settings page & remove the most recent lines you added / blocked chrome://ublock0/content/dashboard.html
- gorhill 11y ago> Sometimes I want more than blocked something being displayed That's what the logger is for: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/The-logger#creating-filters https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/The-logger#creating-f...
- a3n 11y agoFastmail web interface users + ABP|ABE|uBlock users: When I have any of these three blockers installed, and then use mail composition on the Fastmail tab, the page jumps around while I type. Eventually the line that I'm typing has scrolled itself down to the bottom of the window, and sometimes even jumps between below the window and just enough above the bottom. Anyone seen that?
- atonse 11y agoSafari's new approach of using a built in (natively compiled) rules engine to block content seems more and more to be the best option. But it's also the kind of option you'd only see from a vendor who doesn't make any money from ads (Apple... and possibly MS).
- EricVi 11y agoWhat doesn't prevent these vendors to advertise their own products. Or make money by letting others pay. Apple, MS and {{any_big_company}} do everything that generates revenue. Even Mozilla has started to sell data and advertising space in Firefox. I don't care where the spam is coming from. And no Mozilla, I will certainly never book my next holiday trip on booking.com.
- Manishearth 11y agoAdvertising space, not data. Nobody is tracking you through the new tab page. Mozilla just populates it with some default ads (which can be removed or replaced with your own new tab customizations)
- BenjiBajing 11y agoActually Mozilla analyzes and stores the user's surfing data to allow it's customers to direct ads to the user's preferences. I actually don't understand why so few seem to bother. I think it's a quite big deal. Same with these telefonica chat thing.
- Manishearth 11y agoSource? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-do-tiles-work-firefox#w_what-data-is-being-collected-and-why https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-do-tiles-work-firef... https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/tiles/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/tiles/ Regular telemetry data. Not surfing data. And certainly not sold. Hello doesn't collect data passively either; using the video chat can of course lead to data collection though I doubt it does (but you would have to assume that can happen for any non peer-to-peer service of this kind since there will always be a server side component which you can't verify) Stop spreading FUD.
- sergiotapia 11y agoThis is good but do not use Adblock Plus. Use µBlock. Adblock Plus let's through some 'kosher' ads. If that's acceptable to you, all good. If you want no ads whatsoever, use µBlock. It works out of the box and blocks everything. Uses even less resources that any other alternative. Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpalhdlnbpafiamejdnhcphjbkeiagm?hl=en https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ublock-origin/cjpa... Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/En-us/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/ https://addons.mozilla.org/En-us/firefox/addon/ublock-origin...
- redstripe 11y agoUnder "filter preferences" there is an option for "Allow some non-intrusive markerting". Is that what you're talking about?
- shmerl 11y agoYou can disable that. The only questionable part is who decides what ads should be allowed when that setting is on. Here I agree, if AdBlock developers are paid for whitelisting, such practice is very questionable. Are they?
- sergiotapia 11y agoWhat do you think? WINK WINK.
- voltagex_ 11y ago
- vgeek 11y agoHow much did ABP pay Mozilla?
- nindalf 11y agoConspiracy theorist much? Mozilla knows that a significant portion of their userbase uses ad blockers and complains about the high resource usage. They added a cool feature today that would reduce that usage, resulting in a better experience for their users. But you feel someone needed to pay them?
- JohnTHaller 11y agoAdBlock Plus is the most popular Firefox extension by a huge margin, so it makes sense to ensure those users get a good experience: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/extensions/?sort=users https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/extensions/?sort=us...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- bitmapbrother 11y agoI'm surprised by the complete disregard for people and companies that are reliant on ad revenue for a living. It's only a matter of time before we reach the tipping point and sites start blocking browsers from viewing their content if they detect an ad blocker is installed. I'm surprised more sites don't do this.
- MichaelGG 11y agoSome sites try. It's an unsolvable problem, like DRM. My machine, my rendering rules. Only way around it is restricted clients, like consoles and iPhones and so on. Or maybe Intel SGX, which allows remote attestation of running specific code. And ad companies brought this on themselves by being idiotic and annoying. Even Google is as bad as the others in the 90s. On mobile apps, I get scammy "virus scan now" or "clean phone fast" with blinking yellow and red. They link to the Google Play store, to install some app that requires all permissions.
- manigandham 11y agoIt's usually solved by paywalls. For better or worse.
- throwaway6845 11y ago> My machine, my rendering rules Indeed, but also: my server, my choice not to serve pages to you. uBlock, ABP etc. are fairly easy to get around if you're serving your own ads/analytics.
- Rifu 11y agoYou'll find it's because for the most part, the amount of people browsing websites with an ad blocker is still significantly lower than those who don't, so companies just let it slide. Though of course it's growing every year so maybe in the near future your scenario might happen.
- brokentone 11y agoI'm always shocked at the age of some really important bugs. Large optimization potentials of many public / well used / open source systems have been noted for many years.
- jlebar 11y agoConsider that the web has changed a lot over the past 14 years. Back when this bug was filed, it was much less common to have many tabs open, and those tabs would have contained many fewer documents on average. So even if ABP had existed back then, the optimization potential would have been much smaller.
- pgeorgi 11y agoTabs were introduced to Phoenix/Firefox in September 2002, so 14 years ago there were no tabs :-) Multiple windows, sure, but the win98/2000/xp style of window management wasn't conductive to having 100 open windows, either.
- BuckRogers 11y agoAnyone here prefer uBlock over UBlock Origin? I tried both and stuck with Origin since something like this should be relatively easy to reach "feature complete" status, thus go into pure maintenance mode. Either are a big step up from ABP.
- fwn 11y agoIf you compare their repo activity, it seems to suggest that the actual development happens at origin. Origin: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/graphs/contributors https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/graphs/contributors Nonorigin: https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/graphs/contributors https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/graphs/contributors
- arthurfm 11y agouBlock Origin does a more thorough job at blocking network connections [1] compared to uBlock since the former disables prefetching and the latter doesn't. [2] uBlock is also missing the per-site switches and strict domain blocking features from Origin. [3] Personally I can't see any reason to use uBlock over uBlock Origin. [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/tag/0.9.8.2 https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases/tag/0.9.8.2 [2] https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/releases/tag/0.9.5.0 https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/releases/tag/0.9.5.0 [3] https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/issues/1306 https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/issues/1306
- bane 11y agoI'm a convert to using "the great suspender" in chrome and the amount of memory it consumes for me has dropped dramatically. The tradeoff is waiting for a page to reload when I focus the tab, but it let's me keep dozens of tabs "open" at once, for long periods of time, without annihilating my system memory. Combined with µBlock and click to activate plugins etc. Chrome almost behaves now.
- DiabloD3 11y agoGreat Suspender + Spaces (from the same guy) makes Chrome usable again.
- aorth 11y agoFirst, I believe everyone should be using uBlock (Origin) [1] anyways. Second, I'm looking forward to seeing how Firefox's built-in tracking protection will evolve[2]. Also, should be interesting to see how Safari's new blocking framework changes the game. [1] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock [2] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/tracking-protection-firefox https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/tracking-protection-fir...
- thescrewdriver 11y agoI'm also curious to see how things evolve with the countermeasures: http://www.businessinsider.com/former-google-exec-launches-sourcepoint-with-10-million-series-a-funding-2015-6/ http://www.businessinsider.com/former-google-exec-launches-s... (a terrible idea imho).
- nicolas_t 11y agoI would love to have a way to accept kosher ads with ublock origin (but not ads that have been whitelisted by paying ABP). It would be great if there was a transparent community driven ad whitelist. I want to support content creators but I also do not want to have to deal with the more obnoxious ads (or flash ads or animated ads and so on). I currently support a few creators with patreon but that's only limited to a few.
- nitrogen 11y agoMaybe one could write an addon that checks the contrast and other visual features of each ad, then blocks that site or network's ads indefinitely if an ad exceeds the thresholds.
- erikb 11y agoHow about non-ad ways to interact with the right communities, like a corresponding subreddit? To me that sounds more reasonable, since that way you increase the communication and your own awareness, but don't support spamming people with information they haven't requested.
- ep103 11y agoYou're basically describing ABP
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- erikb 11y agoIt's not clear to me from reading the article, if the headline is correct. From what I understand (non-native speaker) with the mentioned fix ABP uses less memory than last year without that fix. But does it make FF use less RAM in general, compared with FF with fix but without ABP? That's how I understand the headline, ABP makes you save RAM compared to using FF without ABP. But that's not how I understand the article.
- nnethercote 11y agoMmm, I see the ambiguity. It's meant to mean that "the combination of Firefox + AdBlock Plus will use less memory than it did previously", not "Firefox + AdBlock Plus will use less memory than Firefox alone". The fix will also reduce the memory usage of Firefox when used without AdBlock Plus, but the difference will be small.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- tiatia 11y ago1. Why not start with 1 or 2 decent host files? http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm 2. What is bad about ghostery?
- anc84 11y ago1. Hosts blocking is very broad. Good tracking-/ad-blocking is granular. 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostery#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostery#Criticism
- skrowl 11y agoAs Chrome gets more and more bloated and slow, I think more and more people will switch (back) to Firefox
- mike-cardwell 11y agoI'd wager the majority of Chrome users are simply normal people who had it shoved in their face when using Google web properties with Internet Explorer. These people are not aware of Firefox.
- JustSomeNobody 11y agoHas anyone compared memory usage when using a hosts file to block ads?
- driverdan 11y agoIt's good that this is fixed but why is it taking 14 years to fix bugs?
- antgiant 11y agoIs there a Chrome or Firefox equivalent to IE's "Personalized Tracking Protection List"? In short it tracks the resources loaded by sites you visit and if they show up on more than a configurable number of sites they get blocked. Basically, it only blocks what actually could be tracking you. I would love to have that functionality in Chrome or Firefox, especially if the tracking list could survive a reinstall (IE's cannot).