Firefox 53.0.2 - Browser is fast again with multiprocess/e10s !

Status
Not open for further replies.

ng4ever

Level 16
Thread author
Verified
Feb 11, 2016
789
I just wish Mozilla would of done this sooner! At first I thought losing so many add-ons was horrible once Firefox 57 comes out and only supports Web Extensions but now I think it is a new future! A better future!

With Multiprocess/e10s now to enjoy (as long as you don't have a extension that disables it) Firefox is once again back to its full glory! Hopefully with forcing, the developers that want to, porting addons will help make Firefox even better than it is now!
 

RejZoR

Level 15
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Nov 26, 2016
699
New extensions are utter garbage. LastPass for example was out of this world better in Firefox compared to Chrome, in Firefox it became an integral part of the browser and it worked perfectly. Now (like 2 releases), they all have same Chrome limited clumsy garbage that feels like webpage stuck on top of browser. Ugh. What the hell were people at Mozilla thinking, sacking one of the best things they had out of ALL browsers. Super flexible and brilliant extensions (add-ons). I don't like the way things are heading AT ALL. Everything based on stupid Chrome. Yeah, bare browser is fast, but when you need 15 extensions just to get it on a somewhat usable browser level, it becomes a fat bloat that eats as much RAM as it can get. And it has some of the dumbest design decisions one could never think of them coming from Google. And other idiots are just copying it like Google is some sort of GUI/UX prophet or some crap.
 

ng4ever

Level 16
Thread author
Verified
Feb 11, 2016
789
New extensions are utter garbage. LastPass for example was out of this world better in Firefox compared to Chrome, in Firefox it became an integral part of the browser and it worked perfectly. Now (like 2 releases), they all have same Chrome limited clumsy garbage that feels like webpage stuck on top of browser. Ugh. What the hell were people at Mozilla thinking, sacking one of the best things they had out of ALL browsers. Super flexible and brilliant extensions (add-ons). I don't like the way things are heading AT ALL. Everything based on stupid Chrome. Yeah, bare browser is fast, but when you need 15 extensions just to get it on a somewhat usable browser level, it becomes a fat bloat that eats as much RAM as it can get. And it has some of the dumbest design decisions one could never think of them coming from Google. And other idiots are just copying it like Google is some sort of GUI/UX prophet or some crap.

I agree that the new web extensions are garbage. I couldn't find any that were really worth using. Hopefully NoScript once it is done ported makes the cut!
 

Deletedmessiah

Level 25
Verified
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Jan 16, 2017
1,469
@ng4ever and @RejZoR, I agree with both of you. I've been using Firefox Nightly for some months. While the speed improvement is really great, I too don't like some of the decisions made by them. Removing APIs which'll limit or kill many extensions in upcoming Firefox 57 and changing the UI to be ugly ripoff of Chrome.
 

Winter Soldier

Level 25
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Feb 13, 2017
1,486
Speaking of stability: if a website causes a crash in the browser with multi-process, the thing is limited to a tab.
The real point, however, is that this change of direction inevitably leads to greater consumption of RAM, even with a few open tabs, in my opinion.
 

Handsome Recluse

Level 23
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Nov 17, 2016
1,242
Maybe there are many Chrome clones because Google is doing something right that the clones think the benefits of recreating everything to simply replicate Chrome is better than the cost of having the legacy stuff. They're the ones who have the data about their markets after all.
Adapt. Adapt. It's a hallmark of skill being able to change shape based on the container as fluids do.
@ng4ever @ParaXY You can force enable multi-process in about:config. I combine multiprocess with Probalance since apparently Chrome is doing it and Mozilla is too small and doing many other things.
 

Handsome Recluse

Level 23
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Nov 17, 2016
1,242
FF = Chrome clone , multi-process, sandbox...i rather stick with Chrome then. i tried FFv54 beta ; i don't see much speed difference compared to Chrome.
No real reason for the reverse either. Only marginal benefits from switching. It will probably be because of the difference with website compatibility between Blink and Gecko anyway. In this case, both would be preferred. The competition means they're relatively equal and are all trying to improve.
 

Ink

Administrator
Verified
Staff Member
Well-known
Jan 8, 2011
22,361
The changes to Firefox (by Mozilla) are for better performance, stability and security.

Legacy Firefox add-ons are less secure as they allow Full Access to your Browser Data, unlike permission-based extensions as in Chrome, Edge and Mobile Apps. Developers are given lots of opportunities to update their add-ons to be WebExtensions.

Switching to the cross-platform WebExtensions is the right move in modern times (because "privacy") and because people may be multiple browsers, across different devices.
If you are embracing the changes with Firefox 57 plus, you should still be cautious about what extensions you install.

firefox-addons-legacy-webextension-660x399.png
(Image Source)

But... some users don't like change, and still want web privacy. Go figure.. o_O
 

Handsome Recluse

Level 23
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Nov 17, 2016
1,242
@Spawn It's also a way for Mozilla to update their browser without breaking addons so they can improve and update/change as fast as Chrome.
 

tonibalas

Level 40
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Well-known
Sep 26, 2014
2,973
Ok about privacy and security i understand why Mozilla is coping Chrome.
But i would prefer that Mozilla should focus more on performance instead of coping the UI of Chrome.
I can't accept the fact that FF is using 5% or more CPU than Chrome while browsing in the same sites.
And the percentage is much higher when i am watch something on line streaming or in YouTube.
In the end i want better privacy, security and performance from FF but with the old GUI.
 

Handsome Recluse

Level 23
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Nov 17, 2016
1,242
Ok about privacy and security i understand why Mozilla is coping Chrome.
But i would prefer that Mozilla should focus more on performance instead of coping the UI of Chrome.
I can't accept the fact that FF is using 5% or more CPU than Chrome while browsing in the same sites.
And the percentage is much higher when i am watch something on line streaming or in YouTube.
In the end i want better privacy, security and performance from FF but with the old GUI.
Maybe just different strategies. Maybe Chrome uses GPU more or something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tonibalas

RejZoR

Level 15
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Nov 26, 2016
699
What is there to "break" when extensions are so bad it's hard to break anything else, when they are already broken when "new" and 100% functional state?
 

RejZoR

Level 15
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Nov 26, 2016
699
Not really Mozilla's problem anymore, isn't it?

They pushed the change to this crap because Chrome also does it. Which makes me think if all Mozilla devs would jump into a Grand Canyon just because Google devs have...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fritz

Purshu_Pro

Level 29
Verified
Honorary Member
Aug 3, 2013
1,879
Firefox now has a built in theme customization option which is similar to Edge, and again thats a copy too. UI matters, and Firefox isn't good in improving it. Although you don't need two menu options(Above navigation bar and side to navigation bar), two search bar's. I guess these extra stuff is making them resource hungry which makes the FF fans annoying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tonibalas

tonibalas

Level 40
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Well-known
Sep 26, 2014
2,973
I am trying FF 53.0.2 for a few days.
There are some good improvements in this version.
It's a bit faster that previous versions but Cent is still much faster on my system.
CPU usage has improved, i don't see a big difference with Cent even watching sports on live streaming.
But just browsing over the internet still FF uses more CPU than Cent.
RAM usage has also improved.It's using about 100 MB of RAM more than Cent but that's a big step forward than previous versions
where i could see RAM usage could reach 1 GB.
Conclusion FF 53.0.2 is a step forward but still work needs to be done.
p.s: Mozilla please through away the chrome UI and bring back the old one for FF
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top