Discussion Forums > Technology

Firefox 3.6 has been released.

<< < (8/10) > >>

mgz:

--- Quote from: xShadow on January 23, 2010, 06:35:37 AM ---
--- Quote from: Xiong Chiamiov on January 23, 2010, 05:40:43 AM ---
--- Quote from: xShadow on January 22, 2010, 04:26:39 PM ---I don't know if it's just me, but try opening 100+ unique tabs. Then, tell it to bookmark them all. Now watch it sit there for about a minute or more.
--- End quote ---
I have never had any desire to do anything like that, so whether or not a browser can matters not at all to me.

--- End quote ---

Well no crap. It's not like I said everyone'll be out doing that, I just pointed out that bookmarking multiple tabs was one thing that 3.5 did horribly inefficiently.

--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---
--- Quote from: psyren on January 22, 2010, 02:18:17 AM ---
--- Quote from: Nikaido on January 21, 2010, 09:59:59 PM ---So, does anyone know of a 64-bit version of firefox?

[Edit] NVM, Found this on their wiki http://wiki.mozilla-x86-64.com/Firefox:Download#Firefox_3.6

--- End quote ---
Unfortunately, there's no full version there. Only RC2 is available.

--- End quote ---

Why a 64 bit version? The 32 bit one works just fine on 64 bit systems (at least it works fine on my W7 install...).

--- End quote ---
Then you lose the advantages of using 64-bit software.

--- End quote ---

... and may I ask what kind of massive awesomeness is going to ensue when you take a web browser and make it 64 bit? >_>;

No, seriously, I want to know, I'm kind of interested in what makes a 64-bit designed browser so much better than its 32-bit counterpart.

--- End quote ---
the same fuckin thing as most other programs that use 64 bit vs 32bit it will allow it to utilize your processors capabilities to a much fuller extent. Which should translate to shit working faster and better

fohfoh:


--- Quote from: fohfoh on January 22, 2010, 08:59:35 AM ---It frolicks with about 80MB to about 120MB with little usage.

Chrome is about 13MB to about 54MB.

It's the difference between a full browser vs a webkit.
* fohfoh shrugs
--- End quote ---
Uhm, you do understand that Chrome is a browser, right?  Sure, it uses webkit, but saying that it is "a webkit" is like saying Firefox is "a gecko".

If you want to epreen about your minimalistic browser, start using uzbl.
[/quote]

I epreen nothing. I'm enjoying using FF again. I was moreso commenting about resource usage, but I guess I used the wrong wording. :P

Kuroshima:
I've had bad expriences with my ISP too... It sucks when you get an incompetent...

sapsa:
after few hours i like 3.6 :)
Yes, there is a little RAM use cut - its ok :)
I didnt noticed the speed up for starting
Still few plugins are not compatible
Persona are great Idea ! like the preview before downloading !

But like xShadow said:
"Nothing like the days of Firefox 0.9, though."

But we need to think about Security thosedays

Security > Performence (but not allways ;) - we dont want to wait 10minuts to ff to start)

K7IA:
I upgraded to 3.6 from 3.5 today and they seem to have the zoom functionality crippled in this version.

It was properly zooming in and out just like a picture, but now it seems to work differently. I wonder what they have changed compared to 3.5 in terms of functionality.

I used it to take proper screenshots of pages, now it will be a problem  :-\

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page