Re: Removing Firefox Version Number

On 8/22/2011 1:14 PM, Sailfish wrote:
> My bloviated meandering follows what Mohannad graced us with on
> 8/22/2011 6:07 AM:
>
> [snip /]
>>
>> The most serious bug that drives me bananas is the huge memory
>> footprint/leak in Firefox. After less than half an hour of use I am
>> already hitting a few hundred megs of precious RAM space (I have other
>> applications I'd like to use, that need RAM, too) -with no way to
>> force garbage collection other than restarting the browser. This seems
>> to be the number one complaint for me and the developers I know or
>> work with.
>>
>> Still though, we all think Firefox is one of the most solid browsers
>> if not the most. We might be using more of Google Chrome lately but
>> that's only because Chrome seems to manage memory consumption quite a
>> bit better than Firefox. But when it comes down to serious debugging
>> or reliability, we turn to tried and trusted Firefox and Firebug.
>>
>> You're probably thinking that I am going off topic here. True, but for
>> a reason. I think there are bigger issues to tackle with Firefox,
>> which in my opinions are better use of your time than small matters
>> like going version-less or rapid release cycles, which are actually
>> angering your users and thinning out your fan base. Please don't
>> destroy Firefox!
>>
>> Mohannad
>> Sent from my Firefox 5.0 (Refusing to upgrade to 6.0 because God knows
>> I really need those add-ons working!)
>
> Here's an article that seems to offer much hope in the memory leak
> department: http://tinyurl.com/3slaeop
>
> You'll need to upgrade to Firefox version 7 to take advantage of it and
> you may find the Mozilla Add-on Compatibility Reporter helpful in
> mitigating your add-on incompatibility concerns. You may want to sandbox
> install it now to test it and, if it solves your memory leak concern,
> start investigating for any add-on compatibility issues.
>
> Interestingly, I doubt that this fix would have availed itself to anyone
> so soon if not for the rapid release cycle.
>
True.  We would probably not see it until next spring, or later.
One of the really big RAM users is having lots of tabs open.  Users seem 
to think that these open tabs, when not on the screen, don't still take 
up RAM and CPU time.  NOT SO.  So a user complains FF is eating 1GB of 
his memory, then he tells me he has 200 tabs open, and most of them are 
running Flash animations of one kind of another (as most websites seem 
to do these days).  Gee, what a surprise.