Firefox

Lozt_again

Master Poster
May 9, 2006
3,353
3
0
34
soundcloud.com
#1
Ok, recently, I read a article on how to speed up Firefox. There is the obvious
download and install FasterFox option which I believe must be connected to the
next solution.

So, by typing in about:config you can mess about with mainly 5 options
and add one named along the lines of paint delay or something.

I tried this, and did actually find the results to be quite noticeable.

This leads to the point of the thread, if you can do this simple thing to speed up
Firefox, why doesn't it come like that? Is there a sensible reason?
 

proof

Elite Member
Nov 9, 2005
1,984
0
0
29
#2
I think its because it can cause compatibility / stability issues. Im not sure tho.
Some sites don't like you using FasterFox. So there must be a reason. I think it could have something to do with the amount of information it tries to recieve and how it recieves it from the sever.
 

Beodude123

Electronic Warrior
Feb 9, 2007
4,721
0
0
37
#5
[QUOTE="Lozt_again, post: 0]This leads to the point of the thread, if you can do this simple thing to speed up
Firefox, why doesn't it come like that? Is there a sensible reason?[/quote]


Using FasterFox puts a lot more load on the servers of websites. Think about it like this. Basically, FasterFox opens every link on every page "under the table", so that you don't know it. But when you click on a link, it already opened it up a minute ago, so it can open the page very quickly. For the websites servers, it would be like having to get every link pulled up every time you go to a single page. You can guess how much more of a load it puts on the servers...
 
C

Comatosed

Guest
#7
I've only just started using firefox myself, about 4 days now, and I went through to set it up for broadband and the difference is quite noticable. Just need to persuade the misses to let me put it on her PC now, she just doesn't like new software lol.
 
Feb 20, 2008
7
0
0
43
#8
I've used FF for ages, but never really felt that it needed to be speeded up. Surely with most people having broadband nowadays, something like fasterfox isn't really needed?

In the days of dial up, it was a good idea as it would save some time waiting for a page to load.
 

Beodude123

Electronic Warrior
Feb 9, 2007
4,721
0
0
37
#9
[QUOTE="notanovice, post: 0]I've only just started using firefox myself, about 4 days now, and I went through to set it up for broadband and the difference is quite noticable. Just need to persuade the misses to let me put it on her PC now, she just doesn't like new software lol.[/quote]

Yeah man, Firefox is the best! I had to use Internet Explorer a while back, and it was a good deal slower than Firefox. Not to mention Firefox is a lot more secure than IE.
 

noethix

Superior Member
Oct 15, 2007
815
0
0
35
#11
I would love to choose Firefox over IE 7 but I just can't make a whole transition with it's current state. Having memory/cpu meters on my sidebar I can see how much of a hog Firefox is with memory, this isn't the problem though. The problem is it's horrible memory leaks, even with beta 3 after I close Firefox the trapped memory remains and my percentages for used ram never go back down. :(
 
Feb 16, 2007
5,078
12
0
29
#12
[QUOTE="Faceless, post: 0]I have been trying out the Beta of Firefox 3 and it seems to be faster and more stable than IE already. Looks like I may be switching.[/quote]FF3 was quite good - a steady improvement over FF2 but it stopped working for me for some reason. Anyways, does anyone know when the final FF3 is going to come out? It's been in beta stage for ages - surely the full release is imminent?