Firefox rocks!

[Attrox]

Originally posted by: MrChad
Thanks for starting the 4,584,394th thread on this topic.

You're welcome.

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: Attrox

Originally posted by: rh71
yes it's better than IE for the most part, but I hate that it's a big fat pig, especially for a browser that's supposed to be the shell of its former self. Loading it is almost like loading Photoshop.

It's a trade off IMO, as long I leave 1 firefox window open then it's okay. I rather surf faster and wait a lil bit when the first firefox process open. I can surf much faster with FF especially with the hack that someone posted here a few months ago.

Well I can agree, but if the extra bulk make your system page like crazy, it'll be MUCH slower. I noticed this immediatly as my older laptop w/512 would page like a bitch w/ FF and the same web pages open as IE. Your thinking narrowly. Try opening 10 web pages (as I often run, 6 is almore a bare minimum) and you'll see a BIG difference in IE vs. FF.

 

[Attrox]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: Attrox

Originally posted by: rh71
yes it's better than IE for the most part, but I hate that it's a big fat pig, especially for a browser that's supposed to be the shell of its former self. Loading it is almost like loading Photoshop.

It's a trade off IMO, as long I leave 1 firefox window open then it's okay. I rather surf faster and wait a lil bit when the first firefox process open. I can surf much faster with FF especially with the hack that someone posted here a few months ago.

Well I can agree, but if the extra bulk make your system page like crazy, it'll be MUCH slower. I noticed this immediatly as my older laptop w/512 would page like a bitch w/ FF and the same web pages open as IE. Your thinking narrowly. Try opening 10 web pages (as I often run, 6 is almore a bare minimum) and you'll see a BIG difference in IE vs. FF.

Hmm, I'm also using an old IBM laptop. It's 900MHz, Windows XP Pro with 512MB RAM.
Normally I have 1 window open (2 at the most) but with lots of tabs in 1 window and don't really notice a significant slow down. Have you tried the hack that was posted here before? (Enabling http pipelining and increase the max pipelining request)

 

[Trente]

Originally posted by: Attrox

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: Attrox

Originally posted by: rh71
yes it's better than IE for the most part, but I hate that it's a big fat pig, especially for a browser that's supposed to be the shell of its former self. Loading it is almost like loading Photoshop.

It's a trade off IMO, as long I leave 1 firefox window open then it's okay. I rather surf faster and wait a lil bit when the first firefox process open. I can surf much faster with FF especially with the hack that someone posted here a few months ago.

Well I can agree, but if the extra bulk make your system page like crazy, it'll be MUCH slower. I noticed this immediatly as my older laptop w/512 would page like a bitch w/ FF and the same web pages open as IE. Your thinking narrowly. Try opening 10 web pages (as I often run, 6 is almore a bare minimum) and you'll see a BIG difference in IE vs. FF.

Hmm, I'm also using an old IBM laptop. It's 900MHz, Windows XP Pro with 512MB RAM.
Normally I have 1 window open (2 at the most) but with lots of tabs in 1 window and don't really notice a significant slow down. Have you tried the hack that was posted here before? (Enabling http pipelining and increase the max pipelining request)

Got no issues at all... but then again, i'm running 1gig of RAM.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: Schneider879
agreed.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Anubis
yea Opera is badass

I tried it and hated it, but I love FF

i used opera b4. its not bad...but FF is a lot better. opera took too long to load up initially

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: Attrox

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: Attrox

Originally posted by: rh71
yes it's better than IE for the most part, but I hate that it's a big fat pig, especially for a browser that's supposed to be the shell of its former self. Loading it is almost like loading Photoshop.

It's a trade off IMO, as long I leave 1 firefox window open then it's okay. I rather surf faster and wait a lil bit when the first firefox process open. I can surf much faster with FF especially with the hack that someone posted here a few months ago.

Well I can agree, but if the extra bulk make your system page like crazy, it'll be MUCH slower. I noticed this immediatly as my older laptop w/512 would page like a bitch w/ FF and the same web pages open as IE. Your thinking narrowly. Try opening 10 web pages (as I often run, 6 is almore a bare minimum) and you'll see a BIG difference in IE vs. FF.

Hmm, I'm also using an old IBM laptop. It's 900MHz, Windows XP Pro with 512MB RAM.
Normally I have 1 window open (2 at the most) but with lots of tabs in 1 window and don't really notice a significant slow down. Have you tried the hack that was posted here before? (Enabling http pipelining and increase the max pipelining request)

Yeah, I am running the pipeline setting, but from what I gathered that just increased the loading of web pages, not reduced memory usage, or app load time. After all it's a http setting...

 

[Chunkee]

Originally posted by: rh71
yes it's better than IE for the most part, but I hate that it's a big fat pig, especially for a browser that's supposed to be the shell of its former self. Loading it is almost like loading Photoshop.

agreed

 

[yobarman]

Firefoz ia retarded. I try to download the critical update, but it won't download. It just stalls while looking for the update. Now that's retarded. But that happened to me a lot on IE too.

 

[mobobuff]

No... no. Internet Explorer is better.