Re: Why should ordinary user have to tweak the program after updating?

On 11/16/2011 8:01 AM, Desiree wrote:
> "Ron Hunter"<[email protected]>  wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 11/15/2011 5:01 PM, Desiree wrote:
>>> "Greywolf"<[email protected]>   wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>    From mozilla.support.thunderbird:
>>>>
>>>> On 14/11/2011 6:05 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> Third, don't try to keep a FF session active for a month, or even a
>>>>> week.  This kind of software isn't designed for long-term continuous
>>>>> use.
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>> Ron, I know you mean well, and it's all excellent advice.
>>>>
>>>> However, the days of leaving it up to the user are long past. The
>>>> average
>>>> naive user, who just wants to surf ans facebook and such isn't going to
>>>> do
>>>> any of this stuff. And IMO (s)he shouldn't have to. Releasing updates
>>>> that
>>>> require precautionary maintenance in order to work as they should is
>>>> something that's OK for hobbyists, but not for ordinary users.
>>>>
>>>> Cross-posted to mozilla.dev.usability, where I'm probably being ignored.
>>>> ;-(.
>>>>
>>>> HTH
>>>> Wolf K.
>>>
>>> Why would a browser NOT be designed to have a session active for a month?
>>> I
>>> know Fx is not but Opera is so why not Fx? Why would you think a user
>>> should
>>> be delighted to have to continuously open and close Fx? It takes time to
>>> reopen the last session when that session has 50-100 tabs. Fx should be
>>> stable enough, without excessive RAM usage and proper release of RAM when
>>> minimized to the task bar for long periods, to not need to be closed and
>>> reopened more than once a month.  With Opera, you never shut down because
>>> that shuts down Unite and then others cannot fetch files off your file
>>> server, etc.  Besides who wants to have to restart Fx frequently? That is
>>> an
>>> irritant that should not be a part of any browser. Opera properly
>>> releases
>>> RAM on minimization. I read yesterday that Memshrink team says part of
>>> the
>>> RAM problem with Fx is memory leakage from extensions but if the RAM
>>> problem
>>> can be solved then Fx should be stable enough to not require shutdown
>>> except
>>> when one is forced to reboot their computer which for desktop users might
>>> be
>>> once or twice a month (Microsoft Tuesdays).
>>>
>>>
>> I totally disagree with the idea that an application should be left
>> running when not in use.  Loading FF on my system takes only a couple of
>> seconds, and assures that I get a minimal system load each time I restart.
>> Most of the problems with FF RAM usage growing when minimized relate to
>> extensions, or so I am told.  As for Opera, that is quite off topic, and
>> if, as you say, it sets up a file server for sharing, would violate my ISP
>> terms of service.  I reboot mostly when I do MS updates, but some programs
>> still require a reboot when installing, or uninstalling, so keeping FF up
>> all the time isn't likely if you do a lot of installing, and uninstalling.
>> As for the time to load 50-100 tabs, that is no longer an issue as they
>> won't load until clicked on. Frankly, the idea of keeping 50-100 tabs open
>> is just as unreasonable as keeping a FF session up for a month.  According
>> to Testpilot runs, only 3% of users ever use more than 10 tabs.  I
>> normally use no more than 4 or 5, and that is pretty rare.
>> Note that if your program releases RAM when minimized, then the restart of
>> it will take almost as long as if it had been terminated, and will greatly
>> increase the memory fragmentation, and overhead for memory management.
>
> First of all, I suggest you try Opera. It is an excellent browser but not
> perfect as none of the browsers are that.  The reason I came back to Fx was
> after having only Fx 1.5 until Fx4 (and using Opera mostly for the past two
> years) was because Piro finally introduced TBE3 for Fx4. Tabbed Browser
> Extensions (which was the first extension written and was written for
> Mozilla Suite back about 2000 and then ported to Firebird later), was the
> reason I started using Mozilla Suite around 2001 and fell in love with
> tabbed browsing. I continued to love this extension through Fx 1.5. Then it
> would not work on Fx 2 without considerable hacking and then worked sort of.
> It worked better on Fx 3 (with no hacking needed) but not well. Only with Fx
> 4 is Piro back with the greatest of all extensions working fantastically
> well.  It is now TBE3 and broken into several smaller extensions instead of
> just one large one.
> Opera Unite would not violate your ISP's TOS because the file server, and
> all the other servers, are hosted on Opera servers. But Opera isn't the
> subject here so I won't say anymore.
>
> You actually believe that I should start Fx every few minutes? I use the
> computer about 8-10 hours a day but in not one session. I go cook a meal,
> vacuum the house, go running, etc. inbetween using Fx. So, I should shut it
> down repeatedly every day? That's makes no sense. I never shut down my
> computer. It runs 24/7/365 and I see no reason why my browser should be
> constantly shut down. I don't shut down Word, or Ping Plotter Pro, or
> WinAmp, or Outlook Express, etc just because I am not sitting at the
> computer for awhile.
>

My computers all run 24/7 365.  I use them several times a day, and at 
odd times, including during the night.  I also have an application that 
monitors for substitute teacher jobs, and alarms if one comes up, so 
that needs to run all the time.

> The entire point of tabbed browsing is to be able to have 50 or more tabs
> open. If you only have 3-5 tabs open just use windows. You don't need tabs
> if that is how you use a browser. All my browsers usualy have 50-100 tabs
> open. Opera has no memory problems because of this. Iron does but that is
> because of the stupid sandboxing of each tab. Even on SeaMonkey (which I
> would use all the time if Piro would port TBE3 to it so I could have the
> excellent mail client built into it) I have 50-100 tabs open.  TBE has tree
> style tabs vertically on the left and can group them in various ways, etc.
> After using TreeStyle tabs I had an awful time using other browsers with
> tabs horizontally across the top and not grouped (until recently on Opera).
> I know many users who stayed with Fx 1.5 for TBE and tree style tabs until
> Fx4. The extension is extremely addictive.
>
I don't keep many apps running.  There is the one for checking for sub 
jobs, and TB, and my file manager open now.  If I don't use it, I shut 
it down.  It gives me a clean slate when I start up.
The way I use the computer would benefit not at all from tabs, unless I 
want to follow a link without losing my place on a webpage.  The FF8 
feature of not actually opening a tab from a previous session until the 
user accesses it is to avoid extremely slow startups, and high initial 
RAM usage.  It is optional.  I really don't believe you use 50-100 tabs 
in a session in such a way that they won't need updating to make sure 
your information is current anyway.  For those addicted to many tabs, FF 
provides Panorama, which is a tab manager.  Try it, you might like it.


> I had read that Fx8 insanely refuses to load all tabs on start! I cannot
> fathom having to wait for it load later when you click on it. I would never
> allow such a feature. Of course,  TBE overrides dumb stuff like that. All
> tabs should fully load with their thumbnails (how else do you know where
> each tab is if it doesn't load on start then there will be no thumbnail so
> you can locate it in the tree) on start. If I start a saved session within
> the current session, why in the world would I not want all tabs to load?
> That is why I would start a saved session within the current session.  If I
> did not want all tabs to load when I start Fx, and am asked by Session
> Manager what session to start, and I click on "previous", why would I click
> on previous? I always click to load the previous session and I want the tabs
> available all the time. I don't care how long it takes to start Fx because I
> rarely close Fx! I have a desktop not a laptop that I have to lug around. I
> have a desktop by choice so that I can keep it and my browser running 24/7
> with rare reboots, no shutdowns of the computer, and rare shutdowns of the
> browsers. (I always have at least two browsers running).
>
I have a desktop, a laptop, a netbook, and a smartphone.  My wife also 
has a desktop.  All but the netbook (its for traveling) stay on all the 
time.  When I finish a session, I shut down the FF application.  I also 
shut down apps on my iPhone when I am done with them.  The only times my 
computers are shut down is when we have a power failure, which is not 
rare enough, so I have UPS on the desktops.


> Fx has horrible bookmarking and that, along with history, has never been
> substantially improved in all the years I have used Mozilla browsers. (In
> fact it has gone backwards because as of Fx4 you can no longer control how
> much history it saves) and bookmarks are still in one, long, very unwieldly,
> very slow to scroll column so you are forced to get an old buggy extension
> to give your bookmarks columns! Opera does that automatically. That is one
> big reason I have so many tabs open all the time. Opera, on the other hand,
> handles booksmarks and history superbly but I can't use TBE3 with it. So, I
> remain with Fx as the default browser because of TBE3 and because it saves
> text in text boxes if it is closed or crashes and Opera does not.  But I am
> not upgrading 4.01 probably for at least for a year. There should be no need
> to upgrade a well planned, well developed browser more than once a year
> except it should have security patches during that year but not upgrades to
> full new versions where extensions have to be checked, etc.
>

I totally disagree that Ff has horrible bookmarking.  It appears you 
haven't discovered the power of the bookmarks toolbar, which offers the 
features you were complaining about not having.
Check it out.


> It is not necessarily true that if a program properly releases much, but not
> all, of its RAM when minimized for a long period (like hours or overnight)
> will be slow to start up. Opera is not slow to start up and if it was using
> 250,000k RAM and while minimized down to 60,000k for instance it starts back
> up fast. Fx is currently using 560,000k and I only have 2GB RAM and the
> nVidia mobo doesn't allow adding more.  Fx will not release any on minimize.
> The Fx Memshrink team's blog says the RAM problem is likely mostly from
> extensions. So, I welcome Mozilla looking in this, listing the extensions
> that leak the most (maybe TBE is a bad leaker...I have no idea), and trying
> to get the authors to fix the leaks.
>

You can Google for 'problematic Firefox Extensions', and get some of 
them.  If your system is limited to 2GB, then keeping 100 tabs open is 
probably not a good use of resources.  I suppose it is ok if they are 
mostly text based, but graphics on webpages that are tabbed eats RAM in 
wholesale lots.  This also makes your idea of leaving everything running 
all the time even less practical.  It may be time for a new computer, 
preferably one with more 'elbow room' (an more CPU horsepower).
Generally, the larger the RAM footprint of an extension is, the more 
likely it is to have memory leaks.  In any case, if you load a 400MB 
extension, then it WILL cause FF to use more RAM, obviously.


> Fx, (actually starting with Phoenix) in the beginning, was the geeks
> browser. It has lost its way over the years. Those of us who worked hard to
> help build it by testing all those buggy, half finished builds before Fx1.0
> ended up being rewarded with the decision to abandon us. We are not
> "typical" users who use 3 or 4 tabs.
>
> Lastly, I run virtual machines both on VMWare Workstation 7, Virtualbox and
> Microsoft Virtual PC. It takes time and hassle to shut down virtual machines
> so I can reboot the host so, of course, I will avoid rebooting until I see
> an obvious need which on my aging Dell gaming machine is about once every 3
> to 4 weeks (unless reboot is required for installing something but I don't
> do much installation these days except maybe on the virtual machines).
>
> We all use computers differently and browser makers as well OS makers need
> to be aware of this an try to accomodate to the needs of different users. Fx
> though has thrown its fate into the hands of the group of users who are
> ignorant of computers and have no interest in learning about computers.
> Those users are fickle and will not see any reason to be loyal to Mozilla.
>>
>
>
I disagree that Mozilla has abandoned us Geeks.  FF is still the most 
modifiable, configurable, and customizable browser available.  Yes, it 
caters to the 'average user' in many ways, but maintains its roots 
underneath all that.