Ever since I disabled Flash, I'm seeing much fewer crashes and freezes in Firefox.
I could see how Firefox might potentially have freezes from a plugin, but crashes of the browser it self seem unlikely to me due to it being contained in it's own plugin process. Something that other browsers like Chrome don't have (instead it will crash the process running that webpage).
Have you checked what causes your crashes in about:crashes ?
Granted this is/., but why is the user responsible for tracking down these issues?
Because this is a discussion site for geeks, not average Joe. It's not a geeky discussion or even informative if all you say is "X CRASHES ON ME SO I SWITCHED". Average joe does that all the time, on all software, this isn't something new.
I don't have ad-block plus, but I do have certificate patrol, HTTPS-everywhere and British English dictionary. Not experiencing any crashes. The only plugins I have installed is Adobe flash, every other plugin is disabled.
There is no way I can tell you what is causing the crashes because the window that comes up gives me no information as to what caused the crash. If there is a way for us to find out any details as to what could have caused the crashes _please_ let me know. Thanks!
Considering how this information is so readily available from Firefox's website... You're not really that great of a Slashdotter...
You can track crashes in Firefox by opening about:crashes, if Firefox crashes before you can even do that, you can see the crash reports in %APPDATA%\Mozilla\Firefox\Crash Reports\ on Windows.
No other browser auto updates and breaks people's stuff like firefox does.
You've never heard of Internet Explorer? Because unlike Firefox, I've seen it do automatic updates that break a users Windows' installation, rather than just the program.
With no information on where the problems are being experienced, you can't make an informed opinion on whether or not it's even the FF developers at fault here.
Switching software over a crash problem without first finding out what it is really isn't something I expect to see from Slashdotters.
The graphics were good, but the engine was inefficient in that it overly taxed the video card too much.
I started playing Star Trek: Online when it was officially released, not in the beta. I run STO on a netbook and it's entirely playable, sure the GPU is maxed out, but it runs really decently, so I'm not understanding the problem?
At the time, I wish I could have walked the deck of my own starship in first person.
That was available in Star Trek Online just a week after release... How did you not see that?
I stopped playing it though because the away team missions absolutely sucked.
Quite a few nice team missions in STO to be honest...
Shitty implementation in areas of gameplay that matter.
I reiterate for posterity: I will never buy any game that requires Steam or any other DRM that prevents me from installing it twenty years from now or forces me to give up personally identifying information (especially CC numbers).
Hi, I have a game called on Steam called "Commander Keen", it's over 20 years old now and it works on my 64bit Windows 7 computer.
I think the best solution would be if YouTube went to pay-per-view model. Users would get to see for example 1 minute of the video and if they like it, they can quickly pay for access from their wallet.
Here's an example (firefox 3.6.23). Yesterday I had many mozilla windows and tabs open. The browser took up 600MB. I closed everything except one one window with one tab, and opened a new tab, and closed the other tab (so there is no page to go "Back" to).
The browser process still took up 400MB. Why? Note: I am using noscript, adblock plus, treestyle tabs and certificate patrol.
I just tried it on another mozilla browser that does not have treestyle tabs (but with noscript, adblock plus and certificate patrol), on start up: 67MB. Opened up slashdot, classic discussion, opened a few large articles, got that browser process to 170+MB. Opened Google in a new window (so no cacheable "back history") . Closed everything else. Browser process drops from 170MB to 105MB. So what is the extra 30+MB for?
I had about 19 Windows open, at least a hundred tabs in each Window and was baffled to only see Firefox using just over a gig for all those pages. So, I closed all the other tabs but this slashdot page, left it for ten minutes (using Firefox 7.0.1 with Certificate Patrol, HTTPS-everywhere, British-English dictionary addons, Flash plugin - Nothing else, not even the skype addon), it's at 109MiB RAM now. I don't understand the problem?
This is exactly what Steve Jobs said about Android a year ago. Microsoft is nothing, if not reliable in copying what Apple's already done in the past, not just with products, but with a CEO's views on android.
Don't worry, Steve Jobs is dead now, so there is nothing to copy anymore.
Before smart phones, you had to use proprietary platforms for the most part.
Which all more or less supported J2ME, the phone models on their own didn't usually lock you into only being able to install software from one source either. I don't really feel these are similar situations.
It looks like Redhat default apache install has those settings by default.
The configuration file still needs to be configured to spawn Apache's MPM preforking children accordingly to the expected load ratio, which you (as in you, not default install) should have already configured to a reasonable amount file descriptors in the kernel for the expected load.
So, technically, no, not "settings by default", binaries are as you pointed out however, compiled to support that configuration however.
I'd personally go nginx and php5-fpm with mysql backend rather than apache. Its much more likely to perform well with a 2500 user phpbb than apache.
That's really a side effect of not setting up the OS and Apache properly.
If you're expecting a large amount of simultaneous connections, configure the OS to provide that many file descriptors to Apache and configure Apache's MPM preforking accordingly to that ratio with mod_php. I suggest avoiding threaded MPM for security, recovery and stability reasons.
You will suddenly find that nginx's performance is not so great in comparison and doesn't have the disadvantage of PHP-FPM's additional usage of file descriptors.
Apache isn't very good against nginx when it's starved of file descriptors, but that's normally due to not configuring the system accordingly for the load expected. Regardless, by not configuring your system accordingly, you're generating additional CPU load as the software has to fall back on other more CPU intensive methods to deal with the lack of file descriptors. The extra load on the CPU usually costs more power as well as the potential capacity if it had more file descriptors available.
Slashdot Mirror
I could see how Firefox might potentially have freezes from a plugin, but crashes of the browser it self seem unlikely to me due to it being contained in it's own plugin process. Something that other browsers like Chrome don't have (instead it will crash the process running that webpage).
Have you checked what causes your crashes in about:crashes ?
Because this is a discussion site for geeks, not average Joe. It's not a geeky discussion or even informative if all you say is "X CRASHES ON ME SO I SWITCHED". Average joe does that all the time, on all software, this isn't something new.
I don't have ad-block plus, but I do have certificate patrol, HTTPS-everywhere and British English dictionary. Not experiencing any crashes. The only plugins I have installed is Adobe flash, every other plugin is disabled.
Considering how this information is so readily available from Firefox's website... You're not really that great of a Slashdotter...
You can track crashes in Firefox by opening about:crashes, if Firefox crashes before you can even do that, you can see the crash reports in %APPDATA%\Mozilla\Firefox\Crash Reports\ on Windows.
You've never heard of Internet Explorer? Because unlike Firefox, I've seen it do automatic updates that break a users Windows' installation, rather than just the program.
It's working fine for me under Wine, why doesn't it for you?
How is this insightful?
The guy doesn't even bother locating what the problem is. For all we know, it could be some crap that has nothing really to do with Firefox, but say Norton Toolbar ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=680274 ), which is one of the leading crashers on the Firefox statistics ( https://crash-stats.mozilla.com/topcrasher/byversion/Firefox/7.0.1/14 ).
With no information on where the problems are being experienced, you can't make an informed opinion on whether or not it's even the FF developers at fault here.
Switching software over a crash problem without first finding out what it is really isn't something I expect to see from Slashdotters.
Nope, it can go to warp.
Nope, you can fire torpedo spreads.
Get different phaser emitters.
To be fair, this is an alternate time line in the 'future' of Star Trek where enemies are running around with regenerators and personal shields.
Why would they when they could make a lot more money going free 2 play?
It's a business at the end the day.
I started playing Star Trek: Online when it was officially released, not in the beta. I run STO on a netbook and it's entirely playable, sure the GPU is maxed out, but it runs really decently, so I'm not understanding the problem?
That was available in Star Trek Online just a week after release... How did you not see that?
Quite a few nice team missions in STO to be honest...
I'm sceptical you really played the release game.
Hi, I have a game called on Steam called "Commander Keen", it's over 20 years old now and it works on my 64bit Windows 7 computer.
They should be using a laser and an artificial satellite.
Why would I use Youtube if I had to do that?
I had about 19 Windows open, at least a hundred tabs in each Window and was baffled to only see Firefox using just over a gig for all those pages. So, I closed all the other tabs but this slashdot page, left it for ten minutes (using Firefox 7.0.1 with Certificate Patrol, HTTPS-everywhere, British-English dictionary addons, Flash plugin - Nothing else, not even the skype addon), it's at 109MiB RAM now. I don't understand the problem?
I'm just not seeing this "extreme memory usage".
As opposed to listening to music on my Android phone, which houses MP3s ripped from CDs I own right now?
I don't think so.
I'll also note that I was listening to music on a Nokia communicator before the iPhone was even known (also using MP3s ripped from CDs I own).
Don't worry, Steve Jobs is dead now, so there is nothing to copy anymore.
Which all more or less supported J2ME, the phone models on their own didn't usually lock you into only being able to install software from one source either. I don't really feel these are similar situations.
Use motorbikes instead!
Out of curiosity, does that mean Firefox is lacking some features you need?
Seamonkey is compiled against Microsoft's visual studio c++ runtimes on Windows, so, yes, there is Microsoft code?
I can't find the ribbon bar in Firefox 7, how do I enable it?
I told them that I support them all the way. Thanks for the link.
This might come as a shock to you, but Linus Torvalds is not the word of God.
The configuration file still needs to be configured to spawn Apache's MPM preforking children accordingly to the expected load ratio, which you (as in you, not default install) should have already configured to a reasonable amount file descriptors in the kernel for the expected load.
So, technically, no, not "settings by default", binaries are as you pointed out however, compiled to support that configuration however.
That's really a side effect of not setting up the OS and Apache properly.
If you're expecting a large amount of simultaneous connections, configure the OS to provide that many file descriptors to Apache and configure Apache's MPM preforking accordingly to that ratio with mod_php. I suggest avoiding threaded MPM for security, recovery and stability reasons.
You will suddenly find that nginx's performance is not so great in comparison and doesn't have the disadvantage of PHP-FPM's additional usage of file descriptors.
Apache isn't very good against nginx when it's starved of file descriptors, but that's normally due to not configuring the system accordingly for the load expected. Regardless, by not configuring your system accordingly, you're generating additional CPU load as the software has to fall back on other more CPU intensive methods to deal with the lack of file descriptors. The extra load on the CPU usually costs more power as well as the potential capacity if it had more file descriptors available.
You do that. I'll just watch.
My reaction was: LOL.
My reaction was: LOL.
My reaction was: LOL.
My reaction was: LOL.
LOL? Not getting your point at all to be honest.