Firefox 49 Arrives With Improvements (venturebeat.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firefox 49 Arrives With Improvements (venturebeat.com)

Posted by msmash on Tuesday September 20, 2016 @08:00AM from the browser-delights dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla today launched Firefox 49 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. The new version includes expanded multi-process support, improvements to Reader Mode, and offline page viewing on Android. The built-in voice and video calling feature Firefox Hello, meanwhile, has been removed from the browser. First up, Firefox 49 brings two improvements to Reader Mode. You can now adjust the text (width and line spacing), fonts, and even change the theme from light to dark. There is also a new Narrate option that reads the content of the page aloud. Next is the Mozilla's crusade to enable multi-process support, a feature that has been in development for years as part of the Electrolysis project. With the release of Firefox 48, Mozilla enabled multi-process support for 1 percent of users, slowly ramping up to nearly half of the Firefox Release channel. Initial tests showed a 400 percent improvement in overall responsiveness.Mozilla says at least "half a billion people around the world" use its Firefox browser.

74 of 129 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Isn't it supposed to play Netflix too? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 08:07 · Score: 1

This is also supposed to be the version you can play Netflix on. If that's true, I will never, ever install Chrome again.
So long, Google spyware!
1. Re:Isn't it supposed to play Netflix too? by T.E.D. · 2016-09-20 08:39 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Good luck with that. Android doesn't let me uninstall it, and Google's search widget uses it and cannot be configured to use another browser.
  Remember when Microsoft got a legal finding of anti-trust violation against them for doing this exact same thing?
2. Re:Isn't it supposed to play Netflix too? by Stephen+Chadfield · 2016-09-20 09:42 · Score: 1
  
  When I try to view Netflix using FireFox 49 on Linux it asks me to install Silverlight...
3. Re:Isn't it supposed to play Netflix too? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 11:33 · Score: 1
  
  Remember when Microsoft got a legal finding of anti-trust violation against them for doing this exact same thing?
  This is all smartphone vendors, Android now ships with a browser you can't remove and private APIs in their closed source Google Play Services. Apple does the same thing shipping a browser you can't uninstall, they actively prevent alternative browsers so you can only skin the engine that is shipped (which is even worse than Microsoft), they even claim you can't remove it because it would break OS functionality (oh where have I heard that before?), they ship with private APIs that only they can use and you can't even change the default programs for opening files.
  It's the same anti-competitive behavior (even worse in the case of Apple) but they both get away with it thanks to forming a duopoly. Microsoft only got sued because nobody wanted to argue that Linux was a viable alternative. This actually harmed Linux too by cementing the idea that Microsoft's Windows was the only way to go for desktop operating systems.
4. Re:Isn't it supposed to play Netflix too? by Stephen+Chadfield · 2016-09-20 20:14 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Ahh - it works if you configure a user agent add-on to report the browser as Chrome on Linux. Neat...
If only I could test my website on it by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 08:10 · Score: 1

No longer directly supported by Selenium, you are no suppose to use Marionette as the driver. Marionette, however, will be done Real Soon Now.
Improvements by Hognoxious · 2016-09-20 08:10 · Score: 4, Funny

Improvements? They put the UI back to how it was in version 38?

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
1. Re:Improvements by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 08:40 · Score: 1
  
  Did they fire Asa Dotzler?
2. Re:Improvements by Hognoxious · 2016-09-20 08:50 · Score: 1, Flamebait
  
  Don't be so fucking retarded.
  XP FTW.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
3. Re:Improvements by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  yes let's move on from something that worked great for 14 years for whatever shiny "modern" design microsoft wants to push into your face that makes a system less accessible for many. and then not have this modern design for another modern design in a required iteration of windows
  no thanks
4. Re:Improvements by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 10:33 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Improvements? They put the UI back to how it was in version 38?
  Surely you meant version 3.6. Firefox 4.0 is when everything started to go downhill fast.
  Google brought out Firefox developers to start Chrome, they gave Mozilla filthy amounts of money, the developers left or returning started to make Firefox into a dumb Chrome clone badly targeted at novices (shit UI is shit UI for everybody) who are obviously stopping to use Firefox as they upgrade their PC (because their geek friends and family members are not installing it anymore on their PC), and we went from 30% market share back then, to less than 10% today.
  That's a number they seem to fail seeing, among the shit-ton of data they are harvesting from users, pissing on everyone's privacy.
5. Re:Improvements by lgw · 2016-09-20 10:42 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Are you one of those people that wish MS would still stick with the Windows 2000 UI?
  
  That's pretty much the usable Windows UI. It got a bit better with Win7 in that the taskbar can combine launching programs and switching to them, if you prefer it that way (I do). Other than that, Win7 UI as configured by a geek looks very much like the Win2k UI.
  Almost every UI change in the past 15 years - to bascially any established software product - was wrong-headed, stupid, and abandoned in the next version.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
6. Re:Improvements by Hognoxious · 2016-09-20 10:49 · Score: 1
  
  I figured out how to switch it to classic look. I'm like that there John Stuart Mill, very advanced for my age.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
7. Re:Improvements by Gussington · 2016-09-20 13:29 · Score: 1
  
  Have you used Win2000 lately? I was one of those staunch win2000 UI supporters too. When I got WinXP I used the classic theme because a green start button was just gay. I skipped Vista because of the UI, and Win 7 took me a long time to adjust to, and Win 8 was a shocker (full screen start menu really?).
  I decided with Win10 that I would jump onboard early and just run with it, now I could never go back. For browsers I don't care so much since 99% of what I do is in the window itself. I can understand some people preferring the old way, but it really isn't that much of a big deal to still be going on about years later...
8. Re:Improvements by lgw · 2016-09-20 18:36 · Score: 1
  
  Win 10: https://www.penny-arcade.com/c...
  It's just Win 7 + "fuck you"
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
9. Re:Improvements by iampiti · 2016-09-21 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  It's time to move on if the new UI is better than the old if not we'd be better off with the old one.
  I don't mind minor UI changes like those introduced until Win 7 but explain to me why on a desktop is better a flat UI, no borders on buttons, no shadows, huge UI elements, tons of whitespace. Those things are nice on a touchscreen, on my PC I want a high density UI.
  In Linux at least the UI is decoupled from the base OS and thus you can choose whichever you like the most
10. Re:Improvements by Gussington · 2016-09-21 13:47 · Score: 1
  
  No that's Win8.1. Win10 fixed that.
11. Re:Improvements by Gussington · 2016-09-21 13:50 · Score: 1
  
  In Linux at least the UI is decoupled from the base OS and thus you can choose whichever you like the most
  Or rather, choose the UI you hate the least. Linux GUI is an abomination, and don't pretend otherwise. It is the classic example of design by committee.
12. Re:Improvements by Hognoxious · 2016-09-21 21:49 · Score: 1
  
  ground ups use DOS
  
  Nah, Linux Mince.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Does it.. by TechyImmigrant · 2016-09-20 08:17 · Score: 5, Funny

Does it come with a real menu bar with file, edit and other proper menus? Or do I have to play "hunt the secret glyph" to unlock a menu?

--
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
1. Re:Does it.. by wonkey_monkey · 2016-09-20 08:22 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Or, y'know, press Alt...
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
2. Re: Does it.. by oddware · 2016-09-20 08:22 · Score: 2
  
  Pressing the ALT key will reveal the menu your are asking about.
3. Re:Does it.. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  Right-click on the chrome anywhere around the address bar, and check Menu Bar. It's everything you ever wanted.
4. Re:Does it.. by Zumbs · 2016-09-20 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  Does it come with a real menu bar with file, edit and other proper menus? Or do I have to play "hunt the secret glyph" to unlock a menu?
  Yeah, it does. You can even configure it to always show it. Alt+v opens the view menu. Then select Toolbars (e.g. by pressing t) and select Menu Bar.
  
  --
  The truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head
5. Re:Does it.. by thegarbz · 2016-09-20 09:59 · Score: 2
  
  What do you need a menu for? All functions of a modern app should be managed by making funny faces at the camera to will it into submission.
6. Re:Does it.. by johannesg · 2016-09-20 10:27 · Score: 1
  
  Does it come with a real menu bar with file, edit and other proper menus? Or do I have to play "hunt the secret glyph" to unlock a menu?
  It has never not done that. Just right-click... in the right spot... and select "menu bar" - and there it is again. The right spot may be tough to find though. The plus-sign next to the tabs works, at least.
  I do agree completely that it should never have been hidden to begin with.
7. Re:Does it.. by Barefoot+Monkey · 2016-09-20 11:35 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, it does. You can enable it by right-clicking on the toolbar and ticking the "Menu Bar" option. To make the menu bar a fixture rather than appearing only when you press alt. When the menu bar is enabled in this way you can still toggle its visibility by pressing F10.
  Personally I find the menu bar occupying a whole row on its own to be a waste of space, so I install the Personal Titlebar extension, which allows me to use the "Customise" screen to add a page title next to the menu.
  Here's what my browser looks like at the moment.
8. Re:Does it.. by nadaou · 2016-09-20 16:42 · Score: 1
  
  Add the "Hide tab bar with one tab" Firefox extension and you'll recover even more wasted screen real estate.
  
  --
  ~.~
  I'm a peripheral visionary.
9. Re:Does it.. by fph+il+quozientatore · 2016-09-20 18:12 · Score: 1
  
  How is this not still "hunt the secret glyph"? It's just that the secret glyph is on the keyboard, and it's named alt.
  
  --
  My first program:
  Hell Segmentation fault
10. Re:Does it.. by Reziac · 2016-09-21 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  Ugh. They've turned it into Chrome.
  
  --
  ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
11. Re:Does it.. by fph+il+quozientatore · 2016-09-22 03:50 · Score: 1
  
  For the average user, yes. If you test your browser's usability only on Vi and Emacs hardcore users, I am not surprised how bad it looks.
  
  --
  My first program:
  Hell Segmentation fault
Cool. Now ... by fahrbot-bot · 2016-09-20 08:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

Anyone have a list of the about:config settings required to disable the new "useful" and/or annoying "features" added and/or changed by this release?

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
1. Re:Cool. Now ... by Raenex · 2016-09-20 10:34 · Score: 2
  
  Just be happy you're still getting those, and 3rd party plugins for the rest of the stuff they fuck up that can't be changed through config. I would have abandoned Firefox a long time ago if it weren't for that.
"Exact numbers"? Half a billion users? by UnknownSoldier · 2016-09-20 08:38 · Score: 2

Mozilla doesnâ(TM)t break out the exact numbers for Firefox, though the company does say âoehalf a billion people around the worldâ use the browser.
Translation: We're in decline but don't want to confirm that by looking at the actual data. We'll just hand wave that for everyone else.
Opera by darkain · 2016-09-20 08:51 · Score: 1

While everyone here is bitching and whining about the lesser of two evils between the changes being done to Chrome and Firefox, as well as debating the stability of both, I'll just continue to sit over here comfortably with Opera for the time being. And if I feel like getting adventurous, there is still Vivaldi too.
1. Re:Opera by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  Because software from a random Chinese company never hurt anyone.
2. Re:Opera by hyades1 · 2016-09-20 09:27 · Score: 1
  
  I've gone to Pale Moon, but I have Opera as a backup. I'm not pleased that they've been acquired by a Chinese company, because I have little doubt the only thing standing between me and full-scale surveillance by one of the nastier totalitarian regimes on the planet is their lack of interest.
  
  --
  I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
3. Re:Opera by samwichse · 2016-09-22 00:41 · Score: 1
  
  Opera jumped the shark for me :(
  Vivaldi is what I'm browsing from (from the actual makers of Opera, not the Chinese company).
FF49, still a pig by fyngyrz · 2016-09-20 09:16 · Score: 2

I still have it installed on my Mac, too. And FF49 still eats memory by the gigabyte and slows down grossly after operating for as little as an hour with no more surfing that reading Slashdot and surfing Amazon a little bit. Has to be restarted many times a day if I want it to perform reasonably. It's been like that for years. They're so busy adding features, they don't bother to do even the most basic debugging.
However, Safari is terrible, Chrome is a joke, Opera has repeatedly sent me running from CSS problems, and Omniweb... basically lost in the past. As long as I keep restarting it, FF works better than anything else.
I just wish they had someone on the team that could put it through the wringer and kill these horrific memory-eating habits it's got.

--
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
1. Re:FF49, still a pig by rudy_wayne · 2016-09-20 09:33 · Score: 2
  
  And FF49 still eats memory by the gigabyte
  I've been hearing this complaint for years and yet I've never experienced it. Not even once.
  Right now, for me, Firefox is using 340 MB which is the most I've seen in quite a while.
2. Re:FF49, still a pig by fyngyrz · 2016-09-20 09:58 · Score: 1
  
  ok, fine -- but isn't it reasonable to expect that load to go away when I close the slashdot tab?
  
  --
  I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
3. Re:FF49, still a pig by fyngyrz · 2016-09-20 09:59 · Score: 1
  
  What OS are you running?
  
  --
  I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
4. Re:FF49, still a pig by scdeimos · 2016-09-20 10:00 · Score: 1
  
  I've got 15 tabs open across six windows at the moment on Firefox for OSX. It's currently using 1.04GB but stays open for days at a time - it only gets restarted for System Software updates and the ocassional Angular web site going pear-shaped.
  Going to about:memory shows that about 1/2 of that (483 MB) is consumed by gfx-textures, about 1/4 (253.29 MB) by the js-main-runtime component and pretty much everything else spread out through the heap-allocated collection.
5. Re:FF49, still a pig by Yvan256 · 2016-09-20 10:38 · Score: 2
  
  This seems to be the key, Firefox seems to have memory leaks on OS X but not on other platforms.
6. Re:FF49, still a pig by grumpy-cowboy · 2016-09-20 11:16 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I installed the Tab Momory Usage addon on FF and what I noted is site like Gmail, Facebook, ... consume a LOT of memory because of all the Javascript bloat they use. My Gmail tab alone consumed almost 200 MB of memory! So I switch to the basic HTML version of GMail and memory usage dropped to 3.5 MB only! Yes I lost all the keyboard shortcuts, draft auto-save, ... (come on Google, you can at least enable keyboard shortcuts!), but I can leave with the basic version.
  So yes maybe browsers need optimization but some sites are responsible for outrageous memory consumption.
  
  --
  Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
7. Re:FF49, still a pig by mrchaotica · 2016-09-20 11:20 · Score: 1
  
  As I type this, Firefox 48.0.2 is using 1200 MB. There are 20 windows open, with a total of 95 tabs between them. I just closed one window with 23 tabs in it, and the memory usage didn't change.
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
8. Re:FF49, still a pig by davester666 · 2016-09-20 18:12 · Score: 1
  
  For me, on MacOS X 10.10.5, FF 48.0.2 is using about 4.75 Gb of VM space, which is around where it sits most of the time (starts lower, then slowly creeps up, I normally have a whole bunch of tabs/windows open). But every once in awhile, FF will decide to start eating memory, until the computer runs out of virtual memory. It gets up to about 50-60Gb, and FF is completely unresponsive, and I have to force-quit the app. Wait a minute for the computer to reclaim the VM space (and reduce the size of the VM file), then relaunch FF and all is well again. Sometimes happens 1/2 after launching FF, sometimes after several weeks. And it's happened for a couple of years worth of versions.
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
Firefox Hello by Thelasko · 2016-09-20 09:18 · Score: 1

There was a built in video chat feature in Firefox! I didn't have to use Skype!? Why is the first I heard of it the day they killed it?

--
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
1. Re:Firefox Hello by Fruit · 2016-09-20 09:48 · Score: 2
  
  The core functionality (WebRTC) is still there, they just removed their frontend. You can still use WebRTC in Firefox (or Chromium/Chrome) by visiting https://opentokrtc.com/. Chromium may be a better bet if you're behind a crappy firewall, because it supports TCP as well as UDP (Firefox only supports UDP).
er... FF48, still a pig by fyngyrz · 2016-09-20 09:18 · Score: 1

...except the upgrade they pushed to me today was 48.02, not 49. Just looked. I ASSumed that today's update would be today's update as represented here. Silly me.

--
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Permanently a pig. by fyngyrz · 2016-09-20 09:20 · Score: 1

Oh, and also, "You cannot perform further updates on this system."
So fuck me, I guess. Here's some broken shit, live with it.

--
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
1. Re:Permanently a pig. by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 10:34 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  So fuck me, I guess.
  No, thanks. You seem a bit needy and high maintenance.
2. Re:Permanently a pig. by mrchaotica · 2016-09-20 11:14 · Score: 1
  
  LOLWUT?
  It's open source, silly. Mozilla doesn't get to decide that; you do. Just download a 49 binary and install it, and if that doesn't work then compile it from source and make it work!
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
3. Re:Permanently a pig. by ctrlshift · 2016-09-20 16:22 · Score: 1
  
  I just ran into this today as well. Apparently Firefox is dropping support for Mac OS 10.8 and older in version 49. Just like Chrome did some time ago.
  
  Et tu, Firefox?
Extension Support? by SeaFox · 2016-09-20 09:51 · Score: 1

Isn't this also the version that changes extension APIs so we essentially have to use Chrome extensions now?
They didn't get rid of slashdot ads by WillAffleckUW · 2016-09-20 10:05 · Score: 1

Just saying.
Sigh

--
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
To my shock and awe they didn't break my plugin by rsilvergun · 2016-09-20 11:51 · Score: 1

and I'll be darned if I know how they pulled that off. I haven't had time to work on it (various health problems combined with long work weeks) so it's still running the old style plugin and it still works.

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Can I save sets of tabs yet? by transami · 2016-09-20 13:22 · Score: 1

I often do research for projects and end up with a set of related tabs open all at once. How nice it would be to be able to save those tabs to a file, so I don't have to leave them open in a separate window all the time.
You know, it's the simple things that really make the difference.

--
:T:R:A:N:S:
1. Re:Can I save sets of tabs yet? by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 16:51 · Score: 1
  
  Tried the Session Manager extension?
headine is quite telling... by e432776 · 2016-09-20 13:31 · Score: 1

The bar has been set so low by the last few years of Firefox releases that the new version is announced as bringing "Improvements". Yikes. And I write this as a person who uses FF as my main browser.
1. Re:headine is quite telling... by Anonymous Coward · 2016-09-20 14:18 · Score: 1
  
  With how the people around here view Firefox, they might as well just give up and generically say "improvements", because we'll find reasons to hate everything Mozilla does regardless. Best not waste time, and just give us the floor to hate on everything.
Get real by mister_playboy · 2016-09-20 14:19 · Score: 2

Hardware lacking SSE2 support (i.e. pre-Pentium 4) is barely capable of accessing the web as it currently exists, and would probably be better served by running a browser a lot more lightweight than current builds of FF anyway.

--
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
1. Re:Get real by YouGotTobeKidding · 2016-09-21 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  Oh bullshit. There are plenty of older rigs that have been re-purposed as 'surfers' for peeps that dont do much beyond interweb surfing.
  This is just another douche move from a company that is quickly killing itself.
To be fair to google by rsilvergun · 2016-09-20 15:23 · Score: 2

half of an anti-trust violation is having a strong enough market position to abuse. Google has fairly strong competition with Firefox on Android. I primarily use FF Android because it's nearly as fast, displays the real page without me having to mess around and does a better job of displaying that real page. Tabs also work a lot better.

Now with Apple, who won't even let another company make a browser for iOS (any browser on iOS is really just a skin on Safari) and therefore has no competition you might have a point. But we don't like to speak ill of Apple around here. I think mostly because they're a godawful company that makes gadgets folks love and it's kinda like how you don't talk about how sausage is made at a barbecue...

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
1. Re:To be fair to google by T.E.D. · 2016-09-21 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Now with Apple, who won't even let another company make a browser for iOS (any browser on iOS is really just a skin on Safari) and therefore has no competition you might have a point. But we don't like to speak ill of Apple around here
  I can't speak for "we", but I didn't mention them because they just aren't that relevant to me. They provide roughly the same product as the Android vendors, but with worse lock-in issues, and for hundreds of dollars more. Last I checked their sales market-share was in the vicinity of 1/5th of the market, and falling. There will probably be a blip up next month due to a new version coming out, but the trend is pretty clear.
  Android as of March had a hair more than 70% of all sales in the market. That's not the >90% Microsoft used to have, but 70% is plenty. I understand legally to be considered to have a monopoly, you typically have to have at least 50% of the market. That's a bare minimum threshold of course, but Android is way over it.
After that by rsilvergun · 2016-09-20 15:24 · Score: 1

Don't forget to go to View-> Toolbars -> Menu Bar. There, now you don't even have to press Alt.

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
1. Re:After that by wonkey_monkey · 2016-09-20 19:40 · Score: 1
  
  Or just right-click the empty space next to the tabs and select Menu bar. Now you don't have to press Alt at all!
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
sticking with version 48 by kwoff · 2016-09-20 23:10 · Score: 1

I disabled updates because they're going to get rid of addons. If I have to start over trying to get the functionality of noscript, greasemonkey, privacy badger, ublock, adblocks edge, adnauseum, google privacy, status-4-evar.... I might as well submit to google and install chrome.
What have they done to the dark theme? by Barefoot+Monkey · 2016-09-20 23:17 · Score: 1

What have they done to the developer tools dark theme? They seem to have changed it to a bright, low-contrast medium-grey-over-pale-blue scheme. I'm all for trying new things, but that's hardly practical.
1. Re:What have they done to the dark theme? by davidcasey · 2016-09-23 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. The background looks like Atom One Dark. Anyone have a solution to customize the colors? Monokai, Seti, Torte, Jellybeans?
I just switched to Chrome at work by xenobyte · 2016-09-21 00:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

Running with the exact same number of tabs (pinned and regular) in two windows and similar extensions I get:
Startup and tab load:
Firefox: 72 seconds
Chrome: 15 seconds
Launch a new zendesk.com tab from a link in a mail (I do this a lot):
Firefox: 35 seconds
Chrome: 1 second
Memory use:
Firefox: 1750 MB
Chrome 114 MB
Firefox really needs to pick up its game!

--
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
1. Re:I just switched to Chrome at work by T.E.D. · 2016-09-22 02:19 · Score: 1
  
  Or perhaps their user-base doesn't really care about startup time and memory use.
  If I just start the browser once when I boot my computer, and then use it for days (or weeks) thereafter, its tough to get really exercised about that whole extra minute I had to wait that once. If I'm primarily using my system for web browsing, and it has 16Gig of memory, do I really need the browser maintenance engineers spending all their available time getting it to take up 0.0007% of my available RAM instead of 0.01% of it? Wouldn't I rather they work on actual features I might want to use?
  I'm not saying Mozilla is better there either, but that's a much more legit place to hit them if they aren't.
2. Re:I just switched to Chrome at work by T.E.D. · 2016-09-22 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  I use Firefox daily, mainly because I don't like Google, but occasionally
  
  Same here, but I wouldn't say I don't like Google. I actually love the hell out of Google. Won't trust my web searches with any other company.
  But I don't like to use the same company for multiple different things if I don't have to, because the market that results from that kind of behavior will never be in my best interest. I also don't like to use proprietary products when there's a viable Free Software alternative. The former points me away from Chrome, and the latter points me to Mozilla.
Re: "Improvements" by xiando · 2016-09-21 04:18 · Score: 2

They haven't taken away Addons from us - yet. The ironic thing is that half my addons just restore functionality that was previously built-in but was taken away.

--
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation