Re: Firefox 29
 

I quite like the look of the new UI. The developer tools still aren't a patch on the ones that come with Chrome though.

I'm still having a problem with popping some flash movies out to full screen where the picture doesn't maximise properly. That seems to have crept in with FF28.

Re: Firefox 29
 

Another vote of thanks from me. Was ready to ditch Firefox after v29 update!

Re: Firefox 29
 

Thanks joglynne, however this is the final straw for me and firefox, the fact i have to use start using addons to make it work is not good for me. Soon as i am back off holiday tomorrow and i have broadband back i will move to chrome until such time they fix what they have done.

Re: Firefox 29
 

Chrome is much better for resources than firefox unless you use a fair few plugins/extensions. Chrome deals with extensions in such a way that each one takes up another chrome instance and corresponding memory.

People are gonna stop upgrading their software if companies keep making nasty changes that no one wants. Be it windows 8 with no start bar or the look or firefox, people are wanting ways to go back to a previous version. It's not all about peeps not liking change, some of these changes are not necessary and counter productive.

Re: Firefox 29
 

Mucking about with the look and feel is always an easier option than working on the core issues. By changing the look many will think it's a new version instead of a facelift. Windows 8 for instance does have some new features i admit but the change of ui was there biggest change and it has for most people been a complete disaster.

Re: Firefox 29
 

I have to admit i do think Firefox seems to be taking up more and more system resources with each new version.

I have one tab open which is this page and just 3 add ons which are not large and its using 500,000k system resources.

Re: Firefox 29
 

Oh they removed the menubar in 29? Jeez feels so long ago, I'm on version 31 already.

---------- Post added at 18:36 ---------- Previous post was at 18:28 ----------

Sadly fails to match the performance of Chrome.

I've been back and forth a few times. I used to find Firefox was more reliable in restoring your tabs after a crash than Chrome was, Chrome frequently lost everything although I've since learnt to do a manual restore.

Ironically, since Firefox started looking like Chrome it's also picked up Chrome's penchant for losing all your open tabs when it crashes.

While on every system I've used I find Chrome uses more memory than Firefox, RAM isn't a limitation on any system I use so I tend to run both at the same time.

Right now Firefox is using 1.2GB on my desktop, but Chrome is using about 2.9GB.

On my other machine, Firefox has 28 tabs open and is using 450MB. Chrome has 8 tabs open (on the same site) and is using 700MB. On my laptop, Chrome is using 2.4GB. Firefox 800MB with three time as many tabs open.

On my work iMac (which I'm nowhere near right now) Chrome also sucks memory like a mofo, but Firefox is still single-process... grr!

---------- Post added at 18:42 ---------- Previous post was at 18:36 ----------

Pfft.

Chrome with 62 tabs vs. Firefox with 108 tabs:

http://qasdfdsaq.com/images/misc/lolram.png

Re: Firefox 29
 

On a laptop at the moment and have Firefox open only on Cableforum and it's using 217Mb of ram and that is with 2 add ons.

Chrome on the other hand with no add ons only on Cableforum uses 190Mb.

Not much difference really.

Re: Firefox 29
 

I think there's something wrong with your FF install, I've currently got 12 addons, 5 greasmonkey user scripts and this page open and Firefox is only using just over 380K

Re: Firefox 29
 

Having tried chrome yesterday i decided to remove that arwful new version of firebox and reinstall version 28 instead and will stay with that as long as i can. I cannot see firefox ever getting any better going forward as the new layout just does not work as well as the old layout and they will not change it back you can bet. :(

Re: Firefox 29
 

If you want to stay back then you can use the ESR versions (latest is 24 I think). I need Firefox for work as apps we use need it (or IE - yuk!).

I agree that v29 is not nice but extensions can bring back some sanity. Seems that Mozilla are trying to accommodate touchy/feely interfaces despite most users sticking with keyboards and mice. (Maybe MS and Ubuntu are paying them :))

Re: Firefox 29
 

Define "better". Version 31 is already better, in many ways. I don't see any way in which it is worse. The layout is/can be set to be exactly the same as Firefox 3 easily enough.

Re: Firefox 29
 

How is V31 regarding stability qasdfsaq and are there any appreciable differences over V30 for a non-techie such as myself?

Re: Firefox 29
 

Well, take this with a grain of salt as it's still alpha, but it seems more stable than V30, as a lot of the frequent freezes and crashes I had with V30 are gone. That said I only used V30 when it was in alpha too, so they may have been fixed by the beta or final.

Memory usage seems to be improved if what people are reporting in this thread are anything to go by, however I haven't directly compared it to V29 or V30 myself because I hadn't checked until people mentioned it here. I rarely check memory usage because I have enough RAM to not really care.

My desktop has 24GB of RAM and Firefox, being 32-bit, will crash itself long before it can even use a quarter of that. That said, I find it still slows down to the point of unusability before you've opened enough tabs to fill up it's maximum memory usage...

... But yes, it did lose all my tabs once recently, following a system-wide bluescreen, which is something I'm used to Chrome doing...

Re: Firefox 29
 

Thanks qasdfdsaq.

Bluescreen!!!!! For someone who gets a tad shaky https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2014/05/7.gifat the thought of even opening and typing in a black box the bluescreen has me running for the hills.

Methinks I will stay with V30 for a little longer and leave the alpha version to those with more courage than this timorous beastie. :D