Top web browsers 2019: Firefox scores second straight month of share growth

No, that wouldn't fix it. It gives what I want but I would have to install an extension. I am into installing as few extensions as possible (without losing usability). Thats what I achieve with Firefox, specially since Firefox 57 came out. Since then, I only install 1 addon in Firefox (NoScript), its all I need to have Firefox functioning and looking exactly as I like to feel comfortable with.

Another thing about Chrome that bothers me is automatic updates, I disable automatic updates. I dont want my browser updating automatically. I understand going through hoops it can be disabled in Chrome, but it causes problems. Mozilla took that option Off a few updates ago but we can still achieve it by creating a policy for it. And it works great. Also, I mentioned earlier that I disable Multiprocess, in Firefox disabling the sandbox works flawlessly but as I understand it, thats not so in Chrome. So, in the end, its many little details that once they are added, it makes Firefox the perfect browser for me.

Bo

 

Disabling multiprocess will make it perform worse than Chrome though. You're also using 32 bit version, only using noscript as extension so yours will consume much less resource obviously. I use Firefox since it performs better than Chrome for me but disabling multiprocess will beat the purpose.

 

No, thats not the case at all. But anyway, my reason for disabling Multiprocess is to avoid conflicts with Sandboxie. I achieve better compatibility between Firefox and Sandboxie by disabling MP. Never have issues, and Sandboxie works better, never have to do workarounds and FWIW, I get more than plenty sandboxing from SBIE, sandboxing from Firefox in my personal case is not needed.

Yes, by using only1 extension, my browser consumes a lot less resources. But the impact in resources usage by using NoScript is a lot greater than the fact that I only use 1 addon.. Let me show you real quick. For example, in sites like Wilders, using or not using NoScript wont make much difference in what Firefox consumes, but when you go to sites like cbssports.com, the difference is huge.

Look at this pictures, picture 1 shows my Firefox consumption when viewing a video with NoScript enabled.



Picture 2 shows my Firefox comsumption when viewing same video after disabling NoScript.



Tremendous difference, and the difference grows if I stay in the page for a while. The more videos I watch, the greater the gap becomes between a browsing session using NoScript and one where I am not using NoScript. What I am saying applies also to random browsing. If I browse for a couple of hours without NoScript and then compare it to what I am used to seeing, its like night and day.

Now in Firefox we have the Task manager (about: performance), by opening it and looking at it is easy to see the impact of using NoScript.

Bo

 

It did happen to me when I used Firefox without multiprocess a few months back, the performance was noticeably weaker than Chrome. The scrolling wasn't good. Even worse on older device. On my old laptop it was very laggy with using single process but when I enable multiprocess, it was noticeably smoother than Chrome.
Noscript is very useful extension, I'll learn how to use it properly when I have time.

 

Firefox uses many thread in each process to perform concurrent tasks needed to parse, render and etc website. Changing from default 4 content processes to one content process may primarily decrease stability (crash of content process will crash all websites). Firefox processes are in my experience more stable than Chrome content processes, though. I don't think it is decreasing interactivity and response time substantially.
Keep in mind Firefox architecture is constantly evolving.

 

In my personal case use (W7 and W10), its the opposite, performance is a lot better without Multiprocess and more so in the older W7. And stable crazy. In W10, the computer I am using every day, Firefox doesn't crash at all. I bought this computer on July 7, 2017, to this day, Firefox has crashed about once ever since. Thats stable.

Bo

 

I have similar experience on Windows 7. Before disabling multiprocess it would take some time for Firefox to close (end all processes). After disabling it, it closes instantly. Also no problems with stability on my system.

 

I have had no crash issues with Firefox either with multiprocess enabled or disabled. Except when I open very heavy webpages full of gifs and videos but thats not a normal situation, no browsers in my system could handle that

 

If you wish, you can make Firefox use MORE RAM.
In about:config edit "dom.ipc.processCount" and set it to -1
This allows Firefox to use unlimited processes.

I should probably remind people that these are the wilders security forums, not the wilders idiotic tips for saving RAM at all costs forums.
Using more RAM is a direct security benefit.

Yes, the more processes there are the longer it takes to close them. Pretty simple logic. What's your point?
That it takes 0.1s to close instead of 0.05s? Boohoo.

 

No, that it takes 4-5 s to close it instead of 0.5. No big deal for you, but deal breaker for me

 

12 tabs, Gnu/Linux, cheap ADATA SSD, 6 yo i5 Intel processor - it closes instantly.

 

+1 , you buy food to eat it, not let it rot in the basement.
However, on low-end machines it could be a problem.

+1, closing 10 doors takes more times than closing just one.

 

On my system it doesn't for whatever reason (even with one tab open). I never looked into it because disabling multi process "solved the problem" for me.

 

Idk man, that's like putting a band-aid with itching powder on a bleeding wound (get it?), you should try to resolve the issue rather than be satisfied with worse outcome (no multi processing)

 

I also don't close my main browser very often. I think I close/restart browser around three times a week.

 

I know what you mean. For me it's not s big deal though.

 

Really?
The fall of the nation, giving up privacy.

 

What browser do you use?

 

Actually, this is one of the reasons that I dumped Firefox. Because tab management is pretty bad. Do you know of a Firefox forum where I can post my feedback?

I still hate Opera for killing the excellent Presto engine. And basically Vivaldi is what the new Opera should have been.

 

Yes, but why did so many people even bother to download Chrome, when IE/Edge and perhaps even Firefox was already installed? They should have been focused on security/privacy and a faster browser engine, years ago.

Exactly, haven't heard of Firefox Quantum being targeted. And you can limit child processes to a maximum of 4 what should help to reduce RAM usage and make it less sluggish. I need to restart Vivaldi every 2 hours because performance gets worse and worse. It's probably because of that Chromium crap. Also, check out this awesome video about Crappy Chrome from RAM producer Corsair:

https://twitter.com/CORSAIR/status/1088199514819768320/video/1

 

How about Safari? lol

 

Nice to get pictures LOOOOL

 

Because they wanted to get rid of that Get Chrome notification every time they try to search for something.

 

OK.

 

@Daveski17 i made a joke, "safari = get pictures (of animals)" not asking you to post a screenshot of it, sorry but thanks anyway for it