Firefox Extension Guide and More

Anonymous Coward writes "A comprehensive list of Firefox extensions geared for the average power user and web developer includes description and screenshots of featured extensions. Plus Firefox Hacks and keyboard command guide. Always updated with the latest Firefox extensions, and tweaks."

Comments

Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[justthinkit]

I've heard that Firefox is a memory hog. I use Opera and like its lightweight design -- pages load fast, ads are blocked and ram usage is low. Does Firefox trump this?

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[masterzora]

Well, excluding extensions (which Opera has support for, too, though extending is more difficult), the only other advantages don't matter to most users: it's open source and it's a much smaller download. It blocks ads, too, so that's not an Opera advantage. It just comes down to a matter of preference after that: lower ram usage compared to better extendibility.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[$RANDOMLUSER]

> I've heard that Firefox is a memory hog

Firefox caches a lot of pages in memory because studies show that the "back" button gets heavy use in average browsing situations. So cacheing recently visited pages improves performance.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[nostriluu]

Firefox is not a "memory hog." It simply uses all the memory of your system in a very effective way. Since modern computers ship with 512MB of RAM or more, Firefox will happily consume all this memory. Firefox *screams* with 16GB of RAM. It also *screams* when you have not so much RAM, although in this sense of "scream" I mean it crashes.

Firefox is also a visionary product, looking forward to the day when the browser is the only application one uses.. if it's not, it certainly doesn't leave much room for other apps.

I mean, seriously, I *heart* firefox, but it's scary when it consistently uses twice as much memory as the traditionally most bloated of all apps, a Java IDE.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[caffeination]

I have about 700MB of RAM on my Celeron D laptop - this is fairly average hardware as I understand. I have never seen any of this fabled memory hogging, and I have the KDE system monitor in my taskbar at all times in order to identify just this kind of issue.

What it does suffer with is instability. While it was an improvement when I moved from Internet Explorer a few years back, Konqueror and Opera are both definitely better browsers. Familiarity with the UI, keyboard shortcuts, and the range of extensions are what keep me in Firefox, not the quality of the app itself - similar to what kept me in Windows for about a year after discovering Linux, incidentally.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[kv9]

i've got no problem with the memory usage. my install hovers around 60-70 megs with ~10 tabs opened at all times. if it starts acting funny and passes the 100 meg mark i just restart it. session saver helps you not give a fuck about that.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[justthinkit]

The only people who would kill for speed are geeks. As a 22+ year computer user I think I qualify. I almost never use the back button as I can't stand how so many sites reload when I do that. So I shift-click (or middle-button-click in Opera). So Firefox is hogging my RAM (that I use and want to continue using for other things TYVM) for a feature I don't use?!

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[justthinkit]

Wait, a much smaller download than Opera?! Opera v8.51 was 3,843,584 bytes. Anything less than this can not seriously be considered as a notable feature.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Anonymous Coward]

Firefox caches a lot of pages in memory because studies show that the "back" button gets heavy use in average browsing situations. So cacheing recently visited pages improves performance.

When your low memory system starts swapping because of FF, its definitely NOT improving peformance.

Why does FF not free() memory when I close tabs or windows? I can get to a situation where I have closed everything except a blank window and it yet still hogs hundreds of megs of memory.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Anonymous Coward]

So Firefox is hogging my RAM (that I use and want to continue using for other things TYVM) for a feature I don't use?!

No. You're not using Firefox, you're using Opera. Remember? Firefox isn't hogging any of your RAM for anything. Feel better now?

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[pdpTrojan]

lol, whatever... If it was IE, all you fags would be like ZOMGWTFBBQ!!!! MS is trying to own my computer!!!

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does FF not free() memory when I close tabs or windows? I can get to a situation where I have closed everything except a blank window and it yet still hogs hundreds of megs of memory.

That may be your operating system's fault. Many OSes assign memory to an application as demanded, but do not reclaim it when it's released - they leave it assigned to that application, so the next time the application demands memory it can just reuse the same block. I believe Windows may do this as a compatibility measure -- it reduces the likelihood of badly-written programs crashing, because there's a better chance that dereferencing a freed pointer will still actually point to valid data.

So, yeah, it sucks, but it's not necessarily Firefox's problem.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, but Firefox does free memory when you close tabs and windows.

It just almost never returns it to the operating system. See, instead of using one of the many well-tested memory allocators available online, they use a custom memory allocator. And the way it works, it only returns memory used at the end of the heap back to the OS.

So, generally speaking, memory Firefox uses will NEVER be returned to the OS. Oops!

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Overzeetop]

So how come it won't just render a "back" gesture instaed of trying repost the !$%% data to have the server regenerate the page? That's what the !@#$#@$ reload button is for.

Sorry 'bout that. Its just that the "instant" back (w/o re-post) is one of the things I miss from opera. I'm sure all of my other annoyances could be fixed with plugins in ff, but I don't have time to find them (mozilla.org is terribly unorganized, imho).

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it's been a while since I've been to either download page, but I remember Opera being 16MB and Fx at 5MB. Forgive my error, but I *did* call the point negligible.

(Excuse the AC posting. I'm posting from my cellular phone.)

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[hairyfeet]

One of the wonderful things about open source.Don't like the way something works?Tweak it to your liking.Here are some links that will help with doing just that

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Reducing_memory_usage_(F irefox)#Settings_that_reduce_memory_usage http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/04/04/reducing-y our-memory-usage-in-firefox/

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you hear a whoosing sound above your head when you typed your response?

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[nostriluu]

In support of the troll, what would you say if MS Word or vi worked like that?

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[pjt33]

> Since modern computers ship with 512MB of RAM or more I wish. In the U.K. most big computer vendors still put all the money into the processor, because consumers know that the processor speed is the indicator of performance. An Acer advertising insert from a newspaper happens to be near the top of my paper recycling pile and while most computers in it do have 512MB or more it does have a 1.6GHz laptop and a 2.8GHz (!) desktop with 256MB.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[kv9]

what would you say if MS Word or vi worked like that?

MSWord costs money. i'd call support and bitch about it. vi is a damn text editor. text editors don't crash or use lots of resources. what i'm saying is that for what it does and how it does it Firefox is *not* a hog. if i can live with it in only 256 megs of ram, then i must call bullshit on all the people that have 2G and still whine.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[XchristX]

For even faster caching (on linux), Do this:

Make a ramdisk by putting this line in /etc/fstab:


none /mnt/ramdisk tmpfs defaults,gid=<whatever> 0 0


on shell prompt type "mount /mnt/ramdisk"


Then, in the firefox user profile directory (typically ~/.mozilla/firefox/<arbitrary>), open the file user.js and add the line:

user_pref("browser.cache.disk.parent_directory","/ mnt/ramdisk");

restart firefox

The cache loads in ramdisk, much faster that doing disk I/O for caching.

Also, it may be possible to do about:config in firefox and enter the new string

"browser.cache.disk.parent_directory"

and put the ramdisk path as the value.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[LiquidEdge]

Most people that have problems with Firefox amping out their memory have it because of an extension that has a memory leak (such as SessionSaver). Take a look at your extensions and you'll usually solve that problem.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[hkmwbz]

FYI, Opera has always been a smaller download than Firefox. On Mac and Linux, Firefox is about twice the size of Opera, IIRC. On Windows, Opera is now 3.7 (including the Flash plugin which is 700K or so), while Firefox is 5.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[nostriluu]

Sorry, I don't think the point of free software is to duck responsibility for high quality.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[Anonymous Coward]

You do know that Opera had that first, right? And they manage to do that without the memory leaks.

In other words, you are eating the bullshit the Mozilla folks are feeding you.

Re:Are extensions the only advantage of Firefox?

[WiZZLa]

So cacheing recently visited pages improves performance. It doesn't improve performance when it's eaten most of my RAM.

Slashdot is working towards a Sunday trifecta

[ColdWetDog]

1. First post has nothing to do with TFA

2. TFA is slashdotted after the first post

3. I'm waiting for the dupe.

Ah, Sunday mornings in cyberspace.

Re:Slashdot is working towards a Sunday trifecta

[caffeination]

4. This is the most boring self-promotion ever.
5. There was no need or demand for this.

This story reaks of one of those Top Ten lists you see in print magazines.

Re:Slashdot is working towards a Sunday trifecta

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd agree that this wasn't needed, but the dood has some tre chic linkage to daft stuff in the sidebar. I really got a kick out of the artsy manhole covers (and *no* it's not a goatse thing!).

Re:Slashdot is working towards a Sunday trifecta

[Anonymous Coward]

5. There was no need or demand for this.

I can't get through to see the article, but from the summary I was imagining it actually tried to identify useful extensions for the average user. That's totally different from what the official Mozilla extensions listings do: those throw it all together in loose categories, so you'll have essentials like Adblock all mixed in with esoteric stuff like extensions that scan page text for references to the Lotus Sutra and convert them into links to parallel passages from the Analects of Confucius or whatever.

It's not actually uncommon for people to complain that there are too many extensions and they just don't have time to go through and find out what would be useful for them. So, sorry, but you lose -- there is both a need and a demand for... well, I don't know if it's for this, but if not, it's for something like what I've described.

Re:Slashdot is working towards a Sunday trifecta

[caffeination]

Yeah! A list of cool extensions? I take it all back! +digg!

Re:Slashdot is working towards a Sunday trifecta

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean I'm not the only one whose first thought was "this crap belongs on Digg"?

Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[PingXao]

TFA slashdotted after being up for less than 10 minutes on /.? There's got to be a better site for Firefox extensions. Not exactly making my bookmark list.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[VJ42]

There's got to be a better site for Firefox extensions

It's called addons.mozilla.org ;)

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[christopherfinke]

There's got to be a better site for Firefox extensions.

There is. I'd also like to mention here that Slashdotter is at version 1.5 and now supports customizing the style for each Slashdot section separately.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[BruceCage]

There are, how about the Extend Firefox contest or CNET download.com's Best Firefox Extensions and Optimizing Firefox.

And this article doesn't even mention ScrapBook even though it has to be one of the most revolutionary ways to organize reference material. Just check it out, it won 'Most Useful Upgraded Extension' in the Extend FF contest.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[baadger]

Personally I don't like any webpage that has a 'slashotted' link to the The Digg Effect on Wikipedia! No Digg!...oh... wait..i mean... move along nothing to see here.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[TubeSteak]

I use Portable FireFox (and addons.mozilla.org)

I find it preferable to have a no-install zip file than a windows installer and the mozilla site lags waaay behind in providing a no-install version.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[TubeSteak]

Coralized link
http://willlangford.com.nyud.net:8090/geekpages/fi refox/

works for me :0)

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[Pneuma ROCKS]

I would like to see a site that *does not* have a comprehensive list and instead shows something a little more useful, like the extensions that are not in alpha or beta stages, and the extensions that are not the "my first useless geek" extension. A list of good extensions.

I like addons. But I think it still has a long way to go to become user friendly. On the other hand, extensions are generally aimed to more tech-savvy users, because average users may be afraid to try them. Are these sites aiming at the right demographics or leaving out a very large potential audience?

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[zanglang]

Have to say it's a wee bit disapointing the 'OMG Ponies!!' style didn't come with 1.5, but awesome extension nonetheless ;)

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Here is a list of extensions that have memory leaks:

http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/04/04/reducing-y our-memory-usage-in-firefox/

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Boy, could that web site have more "coming soon!" sections? Seems the only thing they have is portable firefox. Nice idea, but no thanks.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[jbarr]

Seems the only thing they have is portable firefox.
Um what about Portable AbiWord, Portable FileZilla, Portable Gaim, Portable GIMP, Portable NVU, Portable OpenOffice.org, Portable Sunbird, and Portable Thunderbird also available on the site?

Also, I think you and others miss the point of this. PortableFirefox exists in a single directory structure, and doesn't require an "install" other than just unzipping a .zip file. And the profile directory is completely portable, so if you have muptiple PC's on which you do browsing (say, work and home), it's a simple matter of just copying the directory to your thumb drive, and then copying it to wherever you want.

It's a nice, clean way to maintain the browsing experience YOU LIKE without having to install anything. And removing it is as simple as deleting the directory. Away goes the app and all of your browsing history.

And if you leverage the Bookmark Synchronizer, keeping bookmarks synced among different locations a snap.

For those who want portability, this is an excellent choice!

-Jim
http://jimstips.com/
http://gmailtips.com/

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[pile0nades]

It also doesn't mention Stylish, which provides a very easy interface to customize websites using CSS code. Its like Greasemonkey, but with CSS.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[lolocaust]

does it have pinkdot?

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[m50d]

Can it give me back my ponies? I've lost them since /. apparently took down the images and css file.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[advocate_one]

slashdotter 1.5 has been approved and is now on Mozilla Addons...

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>ScrapBook even though it has to be one of the most revolutionary ways to organize reference material.

If you like Scrapbook (if you're anything like me you will), you'll like Opera's Notes feature which is similar.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[elcid73]

Amen brutha... amen.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

I use Portable FireFox

It's Firefox. It's not meant to be camel cased!

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[tqft]

v3.0

I am running ff v3.0 (nightly - ie cvs HEAD). Slashdotter doesn't want to play. Yeah one of the risks of the bleeding edge.

Is this likely to change? Is there anything I can do to see what the problems are? Or is it just a that v3 has a different enough API that it won't work.

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

mod parent down. This so called "joke" has been run further into the ground than that stupid in soviet russia "joke". Better yet, maybe cmdrtaco could eliminate the 'funny' mod. That will get rid of all of these stupid "jokes"

Re:Nice Idea, but No Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

How similar? It looks quite rudimentary in comparison at first glance.

Correction --

[tomhudson]

Always updated with the latest Firefox extensions, and tweaks."

Should be: "One at a time, please ..."

1 post and its already inaccessible.

No wonder the guy submitted it anonymously.

Re:Correction --

[surendran]

I wonder why they left MOUSE GESTURES ??????

Re:Correction --

[Goaway]

This Slashdot article no verb.

Are there any extensions...

[ZSpade]

To make it stop crashing? I mean I like firefox and all, and I use it on every computer I have, but I've also seen it crash on every computer I've had... Especially when it comes time to open the dreaded PDF...

So I ask, are there any extensions or hacks to help with this?

Re:Are there any extensions...

[Elsan]

There's a useful extension called(I think) "PDF Download" that when a .pdf link is opened, it asks whether or not you want it to open it or save it. Works very well.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[lukewarmfusion]

Firefox stores plugin information in memory long after the plugin is closed and done being used. Whether this problem can be attributed to Adobe's work or Mozilla's, it's still a problem.

Firefox keeps downloaded items in the download list, even when they're completed. Unfortunately, this can add up quick - so you should make sure you clear out that list frequently. I heard about this and discovered my list was hundreds of items long. It took nearly thirty seconds just to register the download.

There are also memory problems with using a lot of tabs. I used to restart Firefox five or six times a day because it was either crashing or moving so slowly that it wasn't usable.

Finally, I removed most of the extensions I had. The stuff I didn't use on a regular basis or that were further sources of my headaches (FoxyTunes is great except that it caused iTunes to open [and lock FF up)]any time I hit certain key combos).

My solution?

I use Flock and the only extensions I use are Web Developer, AdBlock, and IE View. There are plenty of others, but I decided I can afford to skip them. Also, I find it far prettier than Firefox and any of the skins I've tried.

Just my $0.02, of course, but it might work for you.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[gihan_ripper]

There's certainly a way to help with PDFs, namely not to use the plugin at all! You can get Firefox to open the file externally by default. Details on my blog. Alternatively, use the PDF download extension.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[Anonymous Coward]

Inside Firefox. Tools>Options>Privacy>Download History>Remove Files from Download Manager: Upon Successful Download/When Firefox Exits/Manually. Pick your poison, and again...problem solved.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[justthinkit]

Firefox stores plugin information in memory long after the plugin is closed and done being used. Whether this problem can be attributed to Adobe's work or Mozilla's, it's still a problem.

When I used IE, Adobe's horrible Acrobat plugin was definitely the problem. Close a page that was a pdf and the Acrobat plugin would stay in memory (taking a huge chunk of it BTW). I would have to fire up Task Manager and kill the Acro plugin every time.

As to a better PDF reader, may I suggest Foxit PDF reader. Loads much faster, better memory usage etc.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[multiOSfreak]

Firefox keeps downloaded items in the download list, even when they're completed. Unfortunately, this can add up quick - so you should make sure you clear out that list frequently. I heard about this and discovered my list was hundreds of items long.

You can change this behavior in preferences. In the "Privacy" tab, select the "Download History" tab. From there, you can decide when Firefox should purge the download history list. You can set it to delete items from the list as soon as a download is complete, when Firefox exits, or manually.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[Anonymous Coward]

Close a page that was a pdf and the Acrobat plugin would stay in memory (taking a huge chunk of it BTW).

Define "huge"

Re:Are there any extensions...

[justthinkit]

[I had to reconfigure Acrobat to be used by default for PDFs in IE, so I only did this on my oldest computer, a 320MB RAM machine running XP.]
IE Acrobat plugin uses 22MB used, Acrobat plugin stays in memory when IE is closed

By comparison on my main machine, a 1GB RAM machine running XP,
FoxIt plugin uses 7.9MB, Foxit plugin removes itself when IE is closed

Comparing both plugins on the same machine would make things look even worse for Acrobat -- IIRC, it will use about 32MB of RAM on a 1GB machine.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[zanglang]

You're probably looking for a session manager/crash restoration extension, personally I'd recommend Tab Mix Plus. Every time it crashes, I just shrug, restart Firefox, click 'Restore', tadda, all tabs restored, back to browsing.

One thing I've learnt about opening PDFs is... well, don't open pdfs. Check the link first, then unless I know it's a mediocrely sized file, right-click, 'Save as'. Haven't tried the PDF Download extension others are recommending though, trying to keep my extensions at a minimum. :P

Re:Are there any extensions...

[From A Far Away Land]

Thank you for the tip on cleaning up the download list. I didn't know that a long list was why it was taking about 4 seconds for my downloads to start. You've quadrupled my download productivity! :-)

Re:Are there any extensions...

[gnud]

I just have FF launch an external program (xpdf) to view PDF's. That would be a bother with the bloated Adobe Reader, of course.

Re:Are there any extensions...

[dave1212]

All the responses seem to want you to change your settings for the download manager. I have had the same issues and just out of frustration usually end up back in Safari or Opera.

I ask, why is this necessary? Safari takes no performance hit when its download window is full of stuff, why does Firefox?

Seems like the question is being avoided. Don't tell me how to get rid of my download items automatically. I want to see what I've downloaded in the past, but I don't want to wait for twenty seconds every time I click a download link. Is there any way to do this with Firefox?

Re:Are there any extensions...

[Bonewalker]

Try this. Ditch adobe and go with foxit pdf viewer. Small, very fast, and no hassle.

http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php

Re:Are there any extensions...

[Anonymous Coward]

I second the plug for Foxit PDF reader! Great software, too bad it's Windows-only.

It will NOT, however install as a Firefox plugin and show the document in a tab. (Thank God!) You'll have to associate .pdf with the Foxit Reader executable in Windows, and then instruct Firefox to follow this association, and it will launch a new instance of Foxit Reader each time you download a PDF.

Hint -- "no hassel" isn't exactly accurate, because FoxitReader, in its default installed state, is Adware. (The newer versions of Adobe's reader are too, for that matter, so it doesn't really lose any points there.) The ads appear on the toolbar, but they can be turned off -- but it must be done individually, per-ad! Right click on the toolbar, uncheck "Advertisement", and you won't see that ad again. Close the reader and repeat four times, and you're ad-free. (You can also turn them off by firing up RegEdit and setting each ad to 0 under HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Foxit Software\Foxit Reader\MainFrame)

Re:Are there any extensions...

[Bonewalker]

Heh, that is funny. I must be so used to ignoring ads that I don't even recognize them anymore. I never once saw those ads in Foxit. :)

CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[Anonymous Coward]

The coral cache has mirrored this site already and works beautifully. If you don't know the URL, it is http://willlangford.com.nyud.net:8090/geekpages/fi refox/ Have fun.

Re:CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[jtara]

Naw, the Coral Cache is slashdotted too!

Anyway, Mozilla's own extension list has always worked well for me. Why do we need another one?

Oh, I know! For anonymous' Adsense income!

Re:CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[Anonymous Coward]

No it doesn't work beautifully.
It's slashdotted too.
BTW: does this coral cache ever work at all? Or is it just a running joke?

Re:CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, I know! For anonymous' Adsense income!

I doubt it, for in that case he/she wouldn't have talked so much about Adblock ;)

Re:CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[porttikivi]

Well, it works for me, with the Firefox Coralize extension. And Coral always worked for me when pages were slasdotted.

Re:CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[1110110001]

That should be http://willlangford.com.nyud.net:8080/geekpages/fi refox/. Port 8080 works better behind firewalls and is now also the offical port on http://coralcdn.org/.

Re:CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[SmilingBoy]

Why not port 80? I can only access ports 21, 23, 25, 53, 80, 110, 143, 443 and 1723 from work.

Re:CORAL CACHE WORKS BEAUTIFULLY

[1110110001]

http://a.random.host.nyud.net/ seems like port 80 is already used. Maybe if someone could donate a nice domain they could switch to port 80. I agree that would be the best choice.

Mirrors

[VJ42]

Coral cashe: http://willlangford.com.nyud.net:8080/geekpages/fi refox/
Google cashe: http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:http://willlan gford.com/geekpages/firefox/
Mirrordot: http://www.mirrordot.com/stories/ae719a80708f8f898 a2de351770c74b9/index.html
One of them should work for you. :)

Re:Mirrors

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF is a cashe?

Re:Mirrors

[Anonymous Coward]

It's my appalling spelling of cache.

--I'm the GP; posting AC because I'm way off topic.

Firefox extensions and plugins are good.

[AWhiteFlame]

I've used opera and I just didn't like the UI. Even though Firefox is not necessarily lightweight, it one of my main applications; it doesn't last a minute closed. I have my Gmail notifier in the corner, my adblock extension removing all banners and ad squares, I have my slashdot extension providing alternate links to sites. If I go to a site with an embedded wmv, avi, or whatever, I have MPlayerPlug-in which will play it for me. If there is a site where it disallows me because I'm not using Internet Explorer, I can switch what firefox identifies itself as. Pages load plenty fast, I've never thought of it as being slow. So, as someone above said, even though firefox has its faults, it fits my needs. Perhaps opera suits your needs better.

That being said, coral cache, google cache, mirrordot and the original link all seem to not be working for me, so I can't comment on TFA. :/

Re:Firefox extensions and plugins are good.

[chrnb]

One feature Opera has that is missing from firefox and i couldn't find in any extensions is the ability to truncate the page to fit the width of the screen.. especially usefull for browsing girly pics ^^

Combined with a picture extracter thats lines up all the linked images, its just a bliss.

Re:Firefox extensions and plugins are good.

[XO]

Considering that the Opera UI is made to mimic IE by default, and Firefox is also made to mimic IE (but is not nearly as configurable to the average human being), I'd be curious what you mean by that.

I had the same sort of complaint from a person about the changes to the interface between O7 and O8 .. except that there really weren't any changes between O7 and O8 to the UI, most of the UI changes happened in O7. hmm.

So you blame Firefox for Adobe's product?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since it opens the dreaded PDF as a plugin? A plugin that Adobe, not Mozilla/Firefox, developed?

Re:So you blame Firefox for Adobe's product?

[Anonymous Coward]

From inside Acrobat Reader. Edit>Preferences>Internet>Uncheck "Display PDF in Browser">OK. Problem solved.

Re:So you blame Firefox for Adobe's product?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since it opens the dreaded PDF as a plugin? A plugin that Adobe, not Mozilla/Firefox, developed?

Even if Firefox can't do anything about the slowness in opening a PDF (which they probably can't), there MUST be something they can do about the insane slowness of closing one, or going back to previous page.

Okay, maybe the plugin will insist on hogging some memory for the next half hour but having been told to go back to the previous page Firefox should be perfectly capable of displaying the previous page, not leaving the plugin in place for as long as it feels like sitting there.

Link to chached text

[ColeonyxOnline]

Link to google's cached text for the article.

From that list, I use Adblock Plus. Great extension if you have dialup, like me :)

Re:Link to chached text

[CapnGib]

I always love /. stories about FF extensions, as it introduces me to some that I haven't tried yet. Here are the extensions I can not do without.

Essential extensions:

1. Adblock Plus, (with filterset updater) = much much better than regular Adblock

2. IE Tab, for when you really need to use IE (this has been giving me trouble in OSX lately) Replaced Launchy for me.

3. Update notifier, auto-update FF and all your extensions, automatically natch

4. Linkification, turn text-links into clickable links, automatically. Faster and easier than, select, copy, ctrl-L, paste (or select, rt-click, search web for...)

5. Sessionsaver and Restart Firefox, this combo makes installing/updating/removing addons painless. Just click one button and restart FF right where you left off, with your new extensions installed.

Essential timesaver:

Get rid of the search box, use quick searches!
Right-click in a search box on any webpage, add a keyword for this search (i use g for google). Now just use ctrl-L, "g search term", and there you go.

The slashdotter plugin is essential for /. users, especially the CC linker, for /.ed stories.

the list as I would have written it.

[artifex2004]

1. GreaseMonkey.
It's cool. Seriously! It's way, way cool. And I mean that. Totally.

Best plugin evar.

2. I forgot.

Re:the list as I would have written it.

[oever]

Yep, and this is the most useful script for it: QuickGallery.

Click here to install.

Re:the list as I would have written it.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/921

Re:the list as I would have written it.

[XO]

Hmm. I note that that script doesn't actually work in Opera like it claims. Pity, it looks useful. And the author has made it a pain in the ass to contact him... Suppose I should get off my arse and Use the Source, and fix it, but...

Re:the list as I would have written it.

[oever]

Yes, the authors email is in the code. It's true that the script does not work with Opera any more because the api's diverged too much.

Re:the list as I would have written it.

[XO]

Only thing done since Opera 8, which it claims to work with, is adding XPath, as far as the new Jscript stuff goes. :-S

Re:the list as I would have written it.

[oever]

Yes, Opera stayed the same but GreaseMonkey changed. I considered GreaseMonkey support more important and changed the script accordingly. I wouldn't be very hard to port the script to Opera though. It's just a hassle and I don't need it. Feel free to fork the script though. You wouldn't be the first.

Re:the list as I would have written it.

[XO]

ah, i see.. i'll have to take a look at it, and see what I can find out.. might be a simple thing to check features, and do it.. *shrug* i haven't worked with jscript in several months since I wrote the Opera Fark add-on, so i'm a bit rusty :-S

My extensions

[Lord Satri]

Well.. while the linked site does not answer (/. effect probably), here's my favorite extensions. I try to install only those really useful to my efficiency. Right now, it's really hard to find the best extensions from Firefox's site.

Adblock
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=10&application=firefox
Needless to say, the most important extension to me. But even better with this one: Adblock Filterset.G Updater 0.3.0.3 https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1136/

TabFX
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=1486&application=firefox
while we wait for Firefox 2.0

FlashGot
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=220&application=firefox
but I never really used it on a regular basis

Page Update Checker
https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php ?id=920&application=firefox
That one should be in the built-in features. Very useful.

And not to forget (not listed on Firefox's website): Bug me not:
http://roachfiend.com/archives/2005/02/07/bugmenot /
Very useful for the soul-sucking registration-required articles on slashdot ;-)

Cheers.

Re:My extensions

[cciRRus]

I think you meant Adblock PLUS.

Re:My extensions

[Anonymous Coward]

FlashGot has to be the most overhyped extension EVER. FlashGet sucks anyways, you'd have to pay me to use it, so there's little point to an extension for it. Of all the download managers I've tried, that was more or less the worst. I find it funny they even ask money for it.

And you're missing LOTS of great extensions still:

Forecastfox (for weather)
PDF Download (so it asks to download PDF file vs open it in slow bloated plugin)
Foxytunes (to control winamp or whatever without switching tasks)
Various tab/download/etc tweakers, I've also used one that "linkified" plain text URLs (quite handy), "copy plain text", etc. There are tons of great/handy extensions if you dig enough to find them.

And if you're into web development at all there's tons more:

Web Developper Toolbar (totally wicked)
SwitchProxy (quick switch to HTTP debugging proxy - or Tor, or whatever)
ColorZilla (when you see a color you really like and want to know the number)
There's also a very, very cool sidebar (devedge)
Various JavaScript & CSS tools (too many to list)
And again tons more (like a "lorem ipsum" generator) ...

And then there's tons of stuff that sounds extremely useful, but that I've never really bothered with. Things like:
-extensions to sync your bookmarks between all PCs
-greasemonkey (well, I tried this one, but it didn't work *AT ALL* no matter how hard I tried)
-stumble upon (found a some really interesting links that way, just never really bothered installing it again)
-a few XUL apps (FTP & IRC clients at least, but I didn't like them as much as a "real" app)

Unfortunately, Firefox has issues... After a couple hours of browsing it's GUARANTEED to be using 150MB+ of RAM. A couple more hours and it's more like 250+, and usually 90% of the CPU too. I so wish Opera had extensions. I love the browser, but without extensions... Not a chance, I'll stick with my buggy browser meanwhile.

Re:My extensions

[MrTufty]

The FlashGot extension doesn't just work with FlashGet, but also quite a few other download managers. I personally use Free Download Manager with mine, but I'm looking for a better one. I do agree though, FlashGet sucks!

Re:My extensions

[VJ42]

Actually, I still perfer Adblock over Adblock plus now that they've finally added whitelisting.

Re:My extensions

[birder]

I use the DownThemAll extension for file grabbing. It has regex built in.

  http://downthemall.mozdev.org/

Re:My extensions

[Khaed]

One I would never want to be without, because of pdfs:

Target Alert (http://www.bolinfest.com/targetalert/)

Lets you know what you're about to click on. Helpful for stupid webpage owners who don't label mailto or pdf links.

Re:My extensions

[Anonymous Coward]

Note to self: Pay more attention next time when placing URL in a link. Excuse the formatting in the above; didn't think I needed a preview to check on a simple link.

Re:My extensions

[XO]

Your browser doesn't give you the file name/type that you're about to click on when you hover over it? What's wrong with your browser?

Re:My extensions

[Anonymous Coward]

If I hover, it shows it in the status bar. This is right next to the mouse cursor. I don't know of any browser that puts up file name and extension near the mouse (like, where I'm focused) when you hover. (But I don't use Opera; it may. I know IE doesn't.)

Re:My extensions

[XO]

yeah, Opera does. There's also a UserScript that will put icons next to all links telling you what type they are, too..

Re:My extensions

[Anomylous Howard]

Here is my favorite: Tabbrowser extensions
http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/tabextensions/index .html.en
(beware of lamness filter's affect on URLs)
It is the only extension you'll ever need for customizing the behavior of tabs. Does anyone remember why it is no longer on the Mozilla site?

My other is the combination of "Adblock Filterset.G Updater" and "Adblock Plus".

Re:My extensions

[radish]

DownThemAll is my choice for batch downloading. It's all built in, no external apps like FlashGet needed. Simple, free, supports regex, nice UI.

Slashdot Extension

[suv4x4]

The TFA is about Firefox Extensions.
The TFA was quickly Slashdotted.

The perfect moment to suggest the Slashdot Firefox Extension:

Slashdot Extension

Generates TFA mirror links and other handy features...

Re:Slashdot Extension

[Damek]

I was trying to read the TFA on my mobile cell phone while automatically getting cash from an ATM machine but the text of the TFA was too small small.

Re:Slashdot Extension

[jeblucas]

The perfect moment to suggest the Slashdot Firefox Extension

Yep. I used it to make this largely meaningless reply. Folks, making meaningless replies has never been so easy. Truly this is a great day for the Slashdot community. Run, run to get the Slashdot extension in the parent above. May our endless blather will never cease.

Re:Slashdot Extension

[Anonymous Coward]

anyone have the problem where you're unable to collapse threads with this plugin? the link just doesn't show up.

Re:Slashdot Extension

[Tumbleweed]

I'd suggest a better thing to install would be the CoralCache extension - it'll work on any site, not just Slashdot.

Re:Slashdot Extension

[christopherfinke]

This is due to some changes made to Slashdot's HTML on March 31. The new version is compatible with the new HTML.

Re:Slashdot Extension

[Damek]

No, no, no, mods. It wasn't trollish, it was repetitively redundant!

Re:Slashdot Extension

[silvwolf]

Yep. I used it to make this largely meaningless reply. Folks, making meaningless replies has never been so easy.

Nevermind me, just testing the latest extension I've installed :D

I really need this website

[Anonymous Coward]

My Firefox really needs a tweaking... This page is taking all day to load!

Firefox in Linux is a memory hog

[ravee]

Firefox is my favourate web browser. But unfortunately, linux build of firefox is a memory hog. I wonder if it is the linux distribution maintainer's mistake or there is a bug in firefox code for linux.

Re:Firefox in Linux is a memory hog

[Myen]

Well, the Mozilla devs have been very good with cross-platform parity; it's also a memory hog on Windows :p

Some have reported that extensions can cause the memory usage to be worse; try Firefox's safe mode (which basically lets you run without extensions or themes, but the same prefs are used) to see if that might be the problem.

Re:Firefox in Linux is a memory hog

[ravee]

It is not the extensions really. I have not installed any. Still it takes up a lot of memory. Also the firefox build that is installed in Ubuntu dapper displays the web pages with an 'i' character missing from the text in the webpage.

Re:Firefox in Linux is a memory hog

[mrchaotica]

It's Firefox, because it does exactly the same thing in Mac OS X.

Re:Firefox in Linux is a memory hog

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. I think the version bundled in Ubuntu/Hoary has a memory leak too.

Average power user?

[rossdee]

So what is an average power user? Did somebody do a survey? (the term average implies some statistics have collected...)

Re:Average power user?

[madcowbrit]

I can't see any data referenced. I'd prefer to see the extension list for the Above average "power" user... -scf

Re:Average power user?

[tomhudson]

So what is an average power user? Did somebody do a survey?

Survey says:

• North America: 120 volts
• Europe: 240 volts

Now, since the article itself is slashdotted ... why not a little off-topic Sunday entertainment:

... come on, "power user"? Right up there with "road warrior" for laptop users. If you don't code, you're not a "power user" - you're a user. And please, spare us all the "I can modify my spreadsheets" - that was the original idea - that USERS can modify them. No technical skill required. No real "coding".

Now plese wxcuse me while I look for my asbestos undies.

Re:Average power user?

[ScrewMaster]

I'd say someone who's monthly electric bill is in the $40-$50 range.

Re:Average power user?

[drDugan]

"average power user" -- oxymoron. If you're a power user, you are not average, and taking an average of the outliers doesn't make much sense.

Re:Average power user?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, there's no way statistical analysis of refined data can be useful. If you can't analyze something in the first go-round, it's not worth looking into.

Re:Average power user?

[drDugan]

I'm not sure if you're trolling or if you really mean this. I wouldn't go so far as to say any refined data can't be analyzed. It's just that typically, the reasons you get outliers in distributions are often diverse, so averaging over a subset that includes just outliers (power users) will group together disparate factors and can give skewed interpretations. There are many kinds of data refinements that make statistical analysis MORE interesting, like throwing out the outliers.

Re:Average power user?

[Kjella]

Tell that to the complete and utter morons at my ex-university that figured out that you should normal distribute the grades no matter the intake cut-off. That means the basic math we shared with several "low-status" lines was a breeze, other subjects were completely impossible because only smart people with excellent grades from school took them. At the switch-over people that had never ever gotten less than a B in any subject at any school suddenly got D, E and even F! (A-F scale, C is "average", F is failed). That is grades for "barely passed minimum standards", not "low end of genius" grades. Yes, yes reputation of the institution means a bit but would you hire someone that look like they just barely got out with a degree? I'm so glad that really silly new policy was barely in effect before I graduated.

Re:Average power user?

[robfoo]

So you're saying anything not 'average' is an outlier?
If you think of your standard bell curve distribution, I'd say power users are just that bit on the right hand side.. Not exactly outliers, just higher than average..

Re:Average power user?

[thefroatgt]

Yea, but he is talking about a fairly specific type of outlier. And if you look at the actual data, many power users have a great many things in common, they are not scattered randomly about.

Combating the dreaded Flash

[lightyear4]

Adblock may handle most everything else, but it is still lacking in its ability to handle {Macromedia|Adobe} flash.

The solution is FlashBlock, and it works incredibly well. Not only does it make browsing faster, it reduces the bright flashing 'bunch bush to win $10' ads to whitespace -- tis much easier on the eyes.

For those rare occasions where you actually want to see the flash, just click on the play button that adblock substitutes for the embedded swf.

Re:Combating the dreaded Flash

[Clueless Nick]

Ever tried Ctrl + Shift + F with Adblock? *I've* never found it lacking in any respect. You should also try the Filterset.G extension as a companion to Adblock. Why use two separate ad blockers when one is enough? -clueless

Re:Combating the dreaded Flash

[Anonymous Coward]

The best thing about flashblock, is that because it blocks all flash, it blocks those little hidden flash elements they put on pages to make popup windows. When most people complain about "popups" with mozilla, they're really just being bitten by flash's stupid ability to make popup windows irrespective of your mozilla preferences.

Sure, there's an obscure mozilla setting to disable this, but it's not enabled by default. Why? Use flashblock and nuke them all, click to run the ones you want, whitelist the sites you like.

Re:Combating the dreaded Flash

[Tumbleweed]

I wish FlashBlock would add a menu item to loaded Flash animations letting me remove them. THAT would make it perfect.

Re:Combating the dreaded Flash

[Xtifr]

Well, I, for one, don't want to block all ads--merely annoying ads. I find that disabling gif animation and using flashblock provides me with a very satisfying web experience.

Re: Combating the dreaded Flash

[Anonymous Coward]

"The solution is FlashBlock, and it works incredibly well. Not only does it make browsing faster, it reduces the bright flashing 'bunch bush to win $10' ads to whitespace -- tis much easier on the eyes."

I've got a better solution. OpenBSD. Flash isn't even natively supported, so those annoying flash ads are never a problem. As an added bennefit, it also has quite an array of technologies that help to mitigate the effects of other annoying things like buffer overflows and the like.

"For those rare occasions where you actually want to see the flash"

Not being a recreational drug user, I can't recall a time that I have actually *wanted* to see any of the flash related garbage that's circulating around there on the net. To each their own. You could always run Windows, Mac OS X or (ugh) Linux ;^)

Re:Combating the dreaded Flash

[lightyear4]

Because one ad-blocker ISNT enough. See the devel page for adblock. The stuff in development (and not totally refined - I've tried it) is what flashblock handles with ease. When the next generation of adblock is released, I'll be more than happy to use it exclusively. But until then, I'll use both side by side.

NEWS: DUKE NUKE'M COMES OUT

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok now that I've got your attention: does anyone have ANY information about when it comes out? Tnx

Exelent use of all possibilities Firefox has to of

[xavdeman]

Nice layout, Web2adelic baby!

NYUD link

[Anonymous Coward]

geez people, just add .nyud.net:8090 after the .com (http://willlangford.com.nyud.net:8090/geekpages/f irefox/)

TFA

[Anonymous Coward]

Plug-ins - General

Forecastfox - Get international weather forecasts from AccuWeather.com, and display it in any toolbar or status bar with this highly customizable and unobtrusive extension.

FlashGot - Download one link, selected links or all the links of a page at the maximum speed with a single click, using the most popular external download managers for Windows, Mac OS X, Linux and FreeBSD (dozens currently supported products, see http://www.flashgot.net/ for details). FlashGot offers also a Build Gallery functionality which helps to synthesize full media galleries in one page, from serial contents previously scattered on several pages, for easy and fast download all.

Adblock - One of the best plug-ins ever written. Adblack allows you to block elements of a web page, images, flash, i-frames, etc This will help make pages load faster and with zero ads!

Adblock is a content filtering plug-in for the Mozilla and Firebird browsers. It is both more robust and more precise than the built-in image blocker.

Adblock allows the user to specify filters, which remove unwanted content based on the source-address. If this sounds complicated, dont worry: its not.

Just add a few filters. Every time a webpage loads, Adblock will intercept and disable the elements matching your filters. See?- nothing to it.

Adblock Filterset.G Updater - This is a companion extension to Adblock and should be used in conjunction with it. This extension automatically downloads the latest version of Filterset.G every 4-7 days. Filterset.G is an excellent set of filters maintained by G for Adblock that blocks most ads on the internet. In addition, this extension allows you to define your own set of filters that you can add along with Filterset.G during an update.

Tabbrowser Preferences - This extension provides a comprehensive UI for changing a number of the hidden tabbed browsing preferences in Firefox. It also provides the ability to control how internal and external links are opened in the browser and how the browser will react when links are sent to it.

IE Tab - IE Tab - an extension from Taiwan, features: Embedding Internet Explorer in tabs of Mozilla/Firefox. Note, this will also allow you to run Windows Update also.

Wizz RSS News Reader - News is the new frontier for the web. With the up-and-coming rss and atom technologies, news is becoming easier to read and more accessible, but Firefoxs livebookmarks are rather lacking when it comes to features.

Wizz RSS News Reader is the solution. Over the past year, its evolved into a mature feed aggregator. Although the UI lacks polish, it includes a number of powerful features, such as the watch list, OPML support, and the ability to subscribe to podcasts. The documentation is extensive and the author maintains support forums, so its easy to get help too :)

Viamatic foXpose - The Viamatic foXpose plugin is a tiny little extension that lets you view all your tabs inside a browser window.

Duplicate Tab - Duplicate Tab allows you to clone a tab along with its history.

SessionSaver - SessionSaver restores your browser -exactly- as you left it, every startup, every time. Not even a crash will phase it. Windows, tabs, even things you were typing theyre all saved. Use the menu to add + remove sessions; right, shift, or middle-clickin

Re:TFA

[Glonoinha]

With the ability to manage / monitor more than one GMail account at the same time, I use GMail Manager instead of GMail Notifer.

That said, changing the network.http.pipelining to true and network.http.pipelining.maxrequests to 100 made an AMAZING difference in page render speeds.
Thanks.

Re:TFA

[XO]

...until you run into the webservers that you suddenly can't get pages from anymore, because the servers can't deal with pipelined requests.

Re:TFA

[radish]

changing the network.http.pipelining to true and network.http.pipelining.maxrequests to 100 made an AMAZING difference in page render speeds
It also used to break GoogleMaps - not sure if it's fixed yet but I disabled pipelining a while ago for that reason.

The same in french

[tium]

For french speaking people, I've written mine a few days ago. It also explain how to install all your favorites extensions in one time. http://tium.iteam.org/blog/?2006/02/17/17-passer-d e-firefox-a-super-firefox-en-moins-d-une-minute

Coral extension too!

[antdude]

With that, use Coral extension! It works well in my Mozilla v1.7.12 installations in Windows XP, Mac OS X 10.2.8, and Linux (Debian).

Horrible list of extensions.

[ProfanityHead]

No Tab Mix Plus?

I've replaced 3 other extensions including Tabbrowser Preferences with this and I will never turn back.

http://tmp.garyr.net/

Use NoScript instead of FlashBlock + Adblock

[Dan Ost]

Ever since I started running with NoScript enabled, I haven't needed either FlashBlock or Adblock. NoScript has a similar "click to run" method for handling flash, and it appears that most annoying ads are launched via javascript.

Oh Come On!

[acid_zebra]

Aside from the fact that the server handling that page is obviously ill-equipped to handle any load the list itself starts out with "Forecastfox". Yay. Recommended only for those who want their browser decked out like a walking talking christmas tree complete with blinkenlights. Don't forget to complain about memory use on the forums later.

Me, I like to keep it light:

Adblock plus, Bugmenot, Downthemall, Sessionsaver, Greasemonkey, Tabmixplus.

Optionally Aardvark, Del.icio.us, enhanced history manager, and IEtab.

Plug-ins to Avoid unfairly targets fasterfox

[bobbutts]

Plug-ins to Avoid FasterFox [mozdev.org] - Over the last few months the amount of visitors using Mozilla Firefox has grown to about 25%. The amount of bandwidth being used has also increased a large amount. Part of the reason behind this is that many Firefox users use an extension called "Fasterfox". This extension "pre-fetches" links on a page so that if the user were to click on a link it would load much faster because its already been downloaded. This may be more convenient for viewer, but is a major problem for many webmasters who are low on bandwidth. Since Fasterfox constantly requests new files, it can cause many servers to overload much faster than if a person viewing the same content without Fasterfox were to view it.

Fasterfox does some nice things and IMO belongs on the list of good extensions..
As far as the author's claim.. In the fasterfox config there is a tab for "Enhanced Prefetching" which comes disabled by default and has the following warning:

This setting should be used with care
Visit the FAQ page at http://fasterfox.mozdev.org/ for more information.

That page has some interesting answers on prefetching and seems to show that fasterfox is playing by the rules. I don't think the author has shown much expertise in the extensions field. Also if he's upset at fasterfox for bandwidth wait until he gets the bill from this slashdotting :)

Re:Plug-ins to Avoid unfairly targets fasterfox

[AngryNick]

Is it possible that Fasterfox prefetching contributed to the /.ing that has been pounding the site all day?

Firefox is the most unstable program in common use

[Futurepower(R)]

Note 5 things:

1) There is complete agreement from Firefox developers that Firefox often becomes unstable due to extensions.

2) There are numerous pages devoted to telling users hours of highly technical things they can do when Firefix is unstable.

3) Firefox is the most unstable program in common use.

4) Anyone who has made any negative comment above in this story (as of 2006-04-09, 10:08 PST) has been modded down.

5) Firefox developers become angry and disrespectful when people try to report instability and CPU hogging to Firefox Bugzilla.

The Firefox CPU hogging bug makes a computer unusable until all Firefox windows and tabs are closed. Basically, Firefox uses first maybe 10%, then maybe 20% of the CPU, and, as Firefox windows and tabs are opened and closed, continues taking more of the CPU time until Firefox is closed. This CPU usage is with NO Firefox activity, or any activity of any program.

This bug is more than 3 years old. It is extremely difficult to characterize; no one has succeeded yet. Here are some clues:

Somehow Thunderbird and Mozilla share this bug. Sometimes when Firefox is taking say, 94% of the CPU, and Firefox is closed completely, Thunderbird or Mozilla will begin using a lot of CPU time. Very weird, but it often happens.

Firefox 1.5.0.1 is much worse than 1.5, which is worse than earlier versions. This suggests that there is some resource in Firefox that is being more overused as features are added.

The CPU hogging bug continues unchanged when Firefox 1.5.0.1 is installed with a clean profile and no extensions.

Too many mouse clicks too closely spaced will often increase Firefox's CPU usage, or sometimes cause it to crash.

--
Some of those who believe they are superior are merely angry.

compatibilty issues

[giriz]

I have been using Opera and firefox. Firefox's best concept is extensions. But since there were extensions compatibilty issues when upgrading from 1.0.x (i guess) to 1.5, i had to dump firefox because i screwed up my installation which had a LOT of extensions. my bad. Now that Opera 9 has widgets, its almost equivalent to having extensions. Plus Opera already has lot of standard features which are available as firefox extensions. Forecastfox was my favourite in firefox but now its available as a Opera widget.

Re:Firefox is the most unstable program in common

[jfengel]

I was kind of curious about your link titled "Firefox is the most unstable program in common use." Perhaps it was some sort of study; I was interested in its methodology.

But no, it's a link to another posting by you. You cite all sorts of interesting bugs in Firefox, which are bad and wrong, but don't add up to justifying your statement that it's the "most unstable". Clearly many users find it "stable enough", especially at the price ($0), and more usable than the leading competitor (i.e. IE).

By the time I got to posting this you'd already been modded "offtopic", which isn't entirely right: the article is about FF extensions, and you're validly pointing out that extensions make FF even more unstable. You devote a lot of space to a memory bug which does need to be fixed, but debugging details aren't relevant in this forum. Nor is your repeated assertion that FF users are some sort of cult who are intent on covering up the bugs by modding you down.

So you're gonna get modded down, and you're probably going to take that as more proof of your persecution. I wanted to take the time to suggest that if you struck a more reasonable tone in your arguments, focusing more on the bugs and their effects than the ad hominem attacks on FF developers and users, then you might find a more tolerant audience.

Another good extension for CSS (ab)users..

[moreati]

I came across this recently, similar to Aardvark. It's CSSViewer which shows in a (large) tooltip, the css applied to an element over which the mouse is hovering.

I found it very useful for closing the loop between code and result.

plugins

[Anonymous Coward]

Should check out "advanceddork" it just was updated to 2.0 beta
Its a great search tool, I cant live without it anymore
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/2144/
"Description: This small, yet powerful Firefox extension was designed to quickly and efficiently search for specified text inside Google's Advanced Operators."

NoScript?

[DeafByBeheading]

It's nice that the guy mentions NoScript, but why does he mention it with the web developer tools? It's a very handy general purpose extension. By the way, it's amazing to see how many web developers can't use the <noscript> tags properly (or just don't care): lots of websites just break when you turn off Javascript--no error messages, no nothing.

Extensions and Security

[brockill]

How secure are extensions? I see from Wikipedia that the whitelist and 3 second delay are meant as defenses against malicious extensions, but do they get put under the microscope before they go on the whitelist?

extension request

[alex_guy_CA]

In my opinion, the one feature of Safari that almost kills Firefox is how good Safari Auto-fill is. I've tried a few FF auto fill extension, and they are not in the same ballpark at all. Anyone out there know one I'm missing? If not, could you make one?

Re:extension request

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of Safari autofill, you can make it even nicer with the following command sequence:

cd /System/Library/Frameworks/WebKit.framework/Versio ns/A/Frameworks/WebCore.framework/Versions/A/
sudo perl -p -i.old -e 's/(\000)a(utocomplete\000)/\1_\2/gs' ./WebCore

(remove any and all Slashcode-inserted spaces)

This overrides all those annoying sites that specify AUTOCOMPLETE=NO (banks and other financial institutions) without having to recompile WebCore from scratch.

Other plugins are available here.

Missing Link?

[bofhcabbit]

I thought this was pretty handy, adding to the extensions I already use regularly.

One thing I wasn't sure was why he neglected to include Window Resizer in the Web Design section. When I'm doing design, this thing is hella valuable because you can just hit a button and switch your window size to what it would be maximized on 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024, 1600x1200. Great for seeing how your site will look on multiple resolutions.

Re:Missing Link?

[kimvette]

The Web Developer tool bar can do this as well. Click the Resize button ant notice that you can configure your own custom sizes.

Now, for resizing the search box: I hate hard-coded sizes, and I've hated the search box from day 1. There is an extension called Resize Search Box which can avoid the need change the size by hard-coding a different size into the skin. Resize Search Box adds a handle to the Search Box element so that you can resize the field at whim as needed.

Please Give Him Mod Points

[forkazoo]

This is the first mention of noscript I've run across in this discussion. IMHO, it is the very first thing that needs to be installed. It will block plugins, like flash automatically, and disable javascript by default. Then, if you actually want to use you can turn it on temporarily for the session, or whitelist the particular site permanently. It should certainly be moved into the core ASAP.

Even my dad can work it. It was easy to explain. "If a site looks really funny, you probably need to tell the computer to trust that site. Click 'temporarily allow...' and the site will probably work fine then. Only do it if you think the site isn't working fully, and you are sure you trust it." I haven't had to clean up any spyware on my dad's computer, I haven't heard him complaining about popups, or annoying flash ads, or anything since I installed it. It's great!

Most important firefox extension ever. Everybody who uses the internet owes the author a beer!

Missing Faves: All in one gestures, Google toolbar

[Arkaein]

I really like the All-in-one-gestures extension, but not for the reasons you might guess. At first I tried out using gestures for normal actions but found it generally more tedious than normal keyboard shortcuts. However, gestures includes one feature that cannot be done with the keyboard: removing specific portions of a webpage.

I use Flashblock to eliminate most annoying flash advertisements, but so many webpages are just filled with so much crap that it's best to get rid of the clutter altogether. Even block flash ads take up space in the middle of text, and even not animated images can be distracting. By remapping "Hide Object" to the simple left gesture and "Undo Hide Object" to the right gesture I can quickly trim down most webpages. This is also useful for a few webpages which use small text but have poorly coded layout which gets screwed up when the text size is increased, as sometimes eliminating unimportant layout blocks can put things back in order.

The Google toolbar is also a great extension. Sure, Firefox already has Google search built into its toolbars, but I love having a spellchecker that works in any webform. Search history also proves handy every once in a while.

Re:Firefox is the most unstable program in common

[Anonymous Coward]

Note that the Slashdot comment linked was modded up.

Platypus!

[crow]

Platypus!

With Platypus, you can easily create Greasemonkey scripts to strip junk out of your favorite sites. You don't have to use JavaScript to strip out those unwanted sidebars at your favorite sites, and you don't have to search for scripts that others have written to see if someone else wanted to make the same changes.

You don't seem to disagree.

[Futurepower(R)]

You said: "... you're validly pointing out that extensions make FF even more unstable."

You are apparently not disagreeing with the idea that it is unfriendly to encourage people to use extensions when everyone agrees that extensions often make Firefox unstable.

You also apparently are not disagreeing with the idea that Firefox is the most unstable program in common use.

Also you have apparently not read the linked material which explains and supports the issues intensively.

Re:You don't seem to disagree.

[heinousjay]

You've drawn specious conclusions, in a manner which suggests you are a true zealot. I'd take a step back and breathe a bit if I were you - there are many things with more importance than trying to destroy Firefox's market share.

BAH!

[M0b1u5]

I'm sorry, but ANY list of "good extensions" which doesn't include EASYGESTURES is simply some nerd's favourites - and not an ACTUAL list of good extensions.

EASYGESTURES is the greatest aid to navigating the web since the invention of the hyperlink. There simply is no substitute for opening multiple tabs in the background: it improves the speed and amount of information available to you, in a way which does not cause any waiting.

Every single person I have taught to use Easygestures (and this includes 8-year olds to an 88-year old!) admits that it is "the best thing anyone ever taught me about the Internet".

So what are you waiting for? http://easygestures.mozdev.org/

Encourage extensions that cause instability?

[Futurepower(R)]

I think it is unfriendly to encourage people to use extensions when everyone agrees that extensions often make Firefox unstable.

This is an excerpt from the first link in the above Google search, and it describes my experience exactly: "Firefox has been trying to get me to update to version 1.5.0.1, for a while now so I finally did today. The new version has crashed 3 times already today."

Re:Encourage extensions that cause instability?

[masterzora]

For one, I never encouraged anyone to install them, I merely called them an advantage over Opera. (And, whether you think they are unstable or not, surely it can be agreed that the ability to easily install extensions is an advantage.)

Secondly, I have never heard anybody state that all extensions are unstable. I've seen lists of unstable extensions, but by no means is every extension listed on any of them.

Re:Encourage extensions that cause instability?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you missed your own point. Extensions alone do not make FF unstable, the point is unstable extensions make FF unstable. That's true of any large project, that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Stay away from poorly-written extensions or help contribute development; don't bash FF for enabling developers to do what they've been doing since the dawn of [insert language-flamefest of choice] - write bad code.

Re:Encourage extensions that cause instability?

[pugugly]

Hmm - actually, looking at the highlights of the first google page, it would appear that everyone that comes up agrees that it's possible to write unstable extensions - hardly the same thing.

Personally, I agree - I have had extensions that seem to cause the browser to crash. When I uninstall them and limit myself to the one or two . . . okay, twenty-eight extensions I have installed that seem to be perfectly okay, I don't have crashes.

Pardon me sir, but your hyperbole is showing.

Pug

Back IS Close

[Anonymous Coward]

Back IS Close replaces the "Back" button with a "Close" button when the "Back" button is disabled because there is no page to go "back" to. That Close Button will close the tab or browser, as appropriate.

Back IS Close is the perfect complement to tabbed browsing: it closes the many tabs tabbed browsing opens.

Re:Firefox is the most unstable program in common

[Anonymous Coward]

You've obviously never attempted to post a bug to the Mozilla Bugzilla. The developers are the rudest, least responsive, most conceited group I've ever had the misfortune of dealing with. When they're being paid to make Mozilla (and make no mistake, with Mozilla receiving some $70 million annually from Google, they're being paid), you'd think they could at the very least show some respect to the community that helped them grow.

But, no. Point out massive memory leaks, you get told "it's a feature!" or "oh, that's just the extension's you're using" or "oh, you can't read the memory usage column correctly." The last one is my favorite, because apparently I'm too stupid to notice the memory growth between when the browser started (50MB) and the current time (150MB). Any shared libraries would be in that first 50MB number and therefore be totally irrelevant to the 100MB additional memory being used.

Then we get to bug reporting. Almost any bug you post will get closed as either "INVALID" or "DUPLICATE", usually very rudely. "But you should have searched Bugzilla before posting!" Well, I did! I just didn't manage to guess the magical combination of words that would come up with the root cause of the bug I was experiencing. Because, after all, I'm supposed to know absolutely everything about the layout system before posting layout bugs.

Firefox desperately needs more people like Futurepower(R) to point out the flaws and bugs in it that the developers refuse to address. It leaks memory, wastes CPU (it takes Firefox a good 30 seconds to finally close after I close the last window - during that time, it's taking 100% CPU), and generally is a bloated POS. Yet the developers are refusing to address these issues, instead just waving their hands and blaming extensions and plugins for issues that are obviously issues with the browser.

I've been seriously thinking of starting up a "FirefoxWatch" blog to try and track the various bullshit Firefox developers spew about why their browser should be allowed to leak memory at alarming rates and waste massive amounts of CPU for what should be simple operations (closing a window). Every time an article on Firefox comes up on Slashdot, I become a little more convinced that the world needs a source to counteract the blatant Firefox spin by the cult of Firefox users. Firefox has a host of issues that need to be addressed - but anyone refusing to follow the cult dogma gets branded a troll and ignored.

everyone should use

[memnon]

this is just a great extension for those of use that got 10+ extensions installed ListZilla

Extensions Can OverLoad FF

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a fact stated on the extensions page that to many extensions can in fact overload firefox and it's critical to know exactly what you need/want to do.

In my case, the only extensions I include are downthemall, spoofstick, adblock, and copy plain text. This solves 95 percent of the web annoyances while enhancing my experience with FF signifcantly over IE.

Bookmark sync extension, not mentioned in TFA

[crazyvas]

If you want to sync bookmarks across all the machines you use, there's an *excellent* up and coming bookmark syncrhonizer, which is better (fewer bugs) than other sync extensions: Foxmarks.

http://www.foxcloud.com/wiki/Main_Page

From that page: "Foxmarks is an extension for Firefox that synchronizes bookmarks across multiple machines."

Digg??

[Bob54321]

Why does the link about slashdotting go to a wikipedia article about some site called Digg :)

Beware the Google Safe browsing extension

[carlmenezes]

I had it enabled (without the enhanced functionality mind you) and my firefox memory usage jumped to 120MB+ on startup, on a blank page! and then Firefox proceeded to consume 100% CPU and slow things down to the point where I had to use the Task Manager to kill it. I found the cause by removing one extension after another. The moment the Google Safe Browsing extension was uninstalled, things went back to normal and Firefox was not using more than 27MB of RAM.
After some googling, I found a thread about this memory leak I also came across this - a thread detailing which combinations of extensions result in memory leaks.

Opera

[XO]

Of course, Opera has damn near all of that built in now, and is still 1/4th the size of Firefox.

Tab Mix Plus

[krunk4ever]

hows does TabFX compare to Tab Mix Plus:
https://addons.mozilla.org/addon.php?id=1122

That's the one I've been using.

Re:Tab Mix Plus

[Lord Satri]

Well.. I downloaded TabFX quite a long time ago and you just made me realize some other extension has *way more* features. You made me switch to Tab Mix Plus :-)

That kind of extension really should be integrated in the vanilla Firefox. I know tabs will change in 2.0... we'll see then.

Firefox extension's website is bad. It shouldn't. (this will also improves over time I guess :-)

How can Firefox be secure with trojan extensions?

[KWTm]

I've always wondered this, so I hope someone can answer this for me: Firefox is arguably the premier open source desktop product, with security being one of its selling points. At the same time, almost anyone can write an extension for it which alters its behaviour, possibly in some hidden way. How do we reconcile the two?

I wonder about this every day as I start up Firefox on my KDE desktop. Should I be using Konqueror instead? After all, it passed the ACID2 test. But then I think of all those indispensable extensions --Adblock (Plus), Filterset.G, NoScript, etc. Geez, every time I install those (at the dozen work computers I use, since I rotate between locations), a warning dialogue pops up which I habitually ignore: "Warning! This extension is not signed!" (So far I haven't come across a single extension that *is* signed.) And I wait the obligatory n seconds before clicking on the "Install Now" button.

My current take on this is that, yes, Firefox has this vulnerability built in, and I actually hope that some day some trojan extension makes headlines so we can start taking this seriously. In the meanwhile, though --where are the signatures on the extensions? Where's the md5 hash (or whatever is secure these days) on the extension download page?

Am I being too cavalier? Are we breeding a bunch of Firefox users who are as numb to security threats as the typical MS Windows user who accepts spyware as a way of life, or as the typical smoker who gives nary a glance at the big notice on the cigarette package that says, "If you smoke this, you will die"?

Or can someone please show me that I'm wrong? Can someone please tell me that the downloaded *.xpi files are actually human-readable and as open-source as JavaScript? Does Firefox set up a sandbox so that InnocuousExtension.xpi can't actually log my keystrokes or send my pageview history to TotallyInnocentDomain.com.ru?

Any insight into this would be greatly appreciated.

No Mozex?

[munpfazy]

The only thing that makes firefox usable, in my opion, is Mozex. It allows you to handle text areas, links to non-html URLs, and lots of other tasks using the external applications of your choosing.

The official version is way of out date, since firefox keeps on changing the way extensions work... but there's an updated version here:

http://www.gatsby.ucl.ac.uk/~iam23/code/mozex/

Why one should need an extension to force a browser to do what should have been built in from the start is another matter.

I can only imagine the mozilla people sat around one say and someone said, "Let's see . . . we can either write our own crappy text editor from scratch and *force* every user to use it. Or, we can give people the option of using any of hundreds of exisiting editors with decades of development history behind them." And someone else said, "You know, I've always wanted to write a text editor. But since there are so many good ones out there, no one would ever use mine unless we forced them to do so. Let's go with the first option."

Extensions change the game in the war for IE

[Anonymous Coward]

The announcement of extensions for Firefox is a huge coup. Microsoft Internet Explorer isn't designed for extensions. They have plug-ins, but with such poor security that Charles Barker called it "The most insecure software running on the modern PC", it's pretty clear that IE's days are numbered.

And now someone has listed all the Firefox extensions. With a list, choosing extensions will be even easier. I can't wait for this to be released (his site is slashdotted at the moment). With extensions, Firefox will be even better. This is great news!

try this one

[vague_ascetic]

You may be interested in Nuke anything enhanced. It adds an right-click option to remove chosen content, but for loaded flash content, because of the way it steals the right-click content menu on focus, you need to learn the right-click sweet spot trick which is best for you. I've found two methods that work best for me, depending on the layout. One is to right-click just outside of where the right-click content menu gets jacked, the other is to highlight an area with the start/end embed code tags included, but that is sometimes tricky.

I also used this extension on my previous, RAM challenged box, and it gave me no grief.

Alternately, peruse the Squarefree bookmarklet section, ZAP. Some nice features to eliminate annoyances, which do not require piling on extensions within the program itself.

security begins with you

[vague_ascetic]

I'm neither a mozilla adept nor evangelical, and I cannot address your concerns about lusers the whole world over, but there are ways to keep your own box reasonably secure.

An xpi file is only a zipped archive. Rename one to zip and try it, if your zip program doesn't recognize the extension.

What is inside the compressed xpi archive will differ from extension to extension, but many of the files are 'human readable'. (rdf, js, manifest, xul, etc...)

Where you may need another program to read the xpi archive's files are the *.jar files, which are sometimes a part of an extension's archive, but they are also archives, which most compression program can handle, and they too are usually archives of 'human readable' files.

It takes a bit of work, but hey, it is after all, your box, not mine.

Also, for the security conscious:

• only download XPIs from the secure firefox estension site
• be wary of extensions which are in conjuction with a specific internet site, unless you trust the site before loading up the extension
• use a program which monitors and lists your net connections now and then

In a bit of opposition to the second recommendation above, I use and have been happy with a few of MR Tech's Mozilla Extensions, especially the local install extension.

The Mr Tech website also has a public board for mozilla-based extensions.

Also, check out available bookmarklets for functionality you are looking for, and avoid extensions if a bookmarklet does the trick. A few possible places for applicable bookmarklets are, one, two, three and four.

SETTINGS are an open source advantage?!

[hkmwbz]

"One of the wonderful things about open source."

Say what? Settings are one of the wonderful things about open source? What on earth does having settings have to do with being able to view/edit the source code?

Now, if you had suggested something which required a source code change, that would be one thing. But those are just normal settings, and closed source programs have them too. In fact, I think two of those are even in Opera's GUI.

Re:SETTINGS are an open source advantage?!

[pugugly]

More succinctly, settings that, in closed source are typically undocumented and so inaccessible to access as to be unusable are more easily available in open source. Documented, ehh, not so much.

Pug

Re:SETTINGS are an open source advantage?!

[hkmwbz]

"settings that, in closed source are typically undocumented and so inaccessible to access as to be unusable are more easily available in open source"

Erm, this has got nothing to do with whether the software is open or closed source.

Opera has always been smaller than Firefox.

[hkmwbz]

Opera has always been a smaller download than Firefox.

You may be referring to the optional Java bundle that used to be available ages ago, but Opera doesn't require Java to run. It was simply there as a convenience. Opera without Java was 3 or so MB.

Heck, since Opera 5, Opera has bundled the Flash plugin in all versions, so basically Opera itself is half a meg or so smaller than the download since Flash adds a lot to the size.

Seeking mature, sensible moderator...

[TFGeditor]

...to correct the injustice of the parent being modded "Troll." The poster asked a legitimate question, but it seems to have rankled a Firefox fanboy with mod points.

Re:Seeking mature, sensible moderator...

[justthinkit]

I'd settle for someone explaining why a list of extensions that has been around for who knows how long makes the news on slashdot. A week or two ago I checked out that very page, actually the first 15 of them. There wasn't a single extension I wanted enough to use Firefox. So yeah my question was legit.

If I had that top post to do over again, I'd change one thing. I'd say I've heard that Firefox is a memory hog and that these very extensions make it more unstable than Windows 3.1. I use Opera and like its lightweight design -- pages load fast, ads are blocked and ram usage is low. Does Firefox trump this?

Oh well, I hear that work is progressing on the next Firefox extension: a Vista sidebar emulator.

Re:Seeking mature, sensible moderator...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have the modpoints, but the poster makes it pretty clear in his followup to your comment that it was a troll, after all.

(am posting anon so as not to kill said modpoints)

There is a lack of intellectual honesty.

[Futurepower(R)]

The problem with Firefox extensions is a lack of intellectual honesty:

1. Mozilla Foundation actively promotes extensions.

2. When there are problems, users are told "Do hours of work to discover which extensions are unstable with your usage patterns."

3. Many, many people have suggested that maybe Firefox should not be so vulnerable to problems with extensions, OR maybe extensions should not be encouraged. That issue is consistently avoided. Mozilla Foundation takes NO responsibility for extensions, but that is not made clear to new users. There is no official system of approval for extensions.

4. Firefox is sometimes unstable with a clean profile and no extensions. The issue of fundamental Firefox instability is often avoided by blaming extensions.

5. So, the intellectual dishonesty has an angry purpose; it allows Firefox developers to hide the instabilities in Firefox.

6. Many Firefox users experience problems with instability. It is intellectually dishonest to try to draw attention away from that fact by directing attention elsewhere.

See the following comment. I don't know who wrote it, but in my experience everything that is said is correct: I've been seriously thinking of starting up a "FirefoxWatch" blog.

Web site devoted to Firefox dishonesty:

[Futurepower(R)]

You said, "I've been seriously thinking of starting up a "FirefoxWatch" blog..."

There is an entire web site devoted to Firefox dishonesty: Slyerfox.

Re:Web site devoted to Firefox dishonesty:

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for! Added a comment to the "Innovation" page about various Firefox innovations that were amazingly enough implemented elsewhere, first.

Memory problems :(

[Anonymous Coward]

Adblock has those nasty memory leak problems, though, and I didn't think it had been updated in more-or-less forever.

Definitely use filterset-g updater with either, though.