Originally Posted By: badtlc
Are you unable to get Firefox sync to work?
Firefox sync works better than Chrome sync in my experience.
Are you unable to get Firefox sync to work?
Firefox sync works better than Chrome sync in my experience.
Is Internet Explorer pretty good now?
- Thread starter wirelessF
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Are you unable to get Firefox sync to work?
There was an issue a few months ago when Mozilla transitioned the synchronization from the "old" style to the "new" style. That caused a hiccup for a while, but I overcame that. Having used both for close to a year, I prefer Chrome's synchronization due to Mozilla not loading the website thumbnail icons until you actually visit the page on a different machine. The square "BOB" logo for this site, for example, doesn't show up in Mozilla until you actually visit the page once. Else, it's just a blank box with a dashed-line border. Chrome loads all of the thumbnail icons whether you've visited the site or not. Other than that, I find no appreciable difference between the two in terms of synchronization.
The reason I never have used Mozilla to any great degree is I can't synchronize it with any of my iOS devices...simply because it doesn't offer a product for an iOS device. Chrome does, and my bookmarks and open tabs are synch'd across all of my devices, whether that's my PC at work, my laptop at work, any of my computers at home, or my iPad or iPhone.
There's really not much about Chrome I don't like. It is resource intensive, but I find the same to be true of FireFox. I have them both open on my work computer, and with no tabs running, Mozilla consumes 210 MB of RAM and Chrome consumes 195 MB of RAM. With four tabs open (Fox News, Microsoft.com, Google Maps, Bing Maps), Mozilla consumes 390 MB of RAM and Chrome consumes 305 MB of RAM. Both are resource intensive in my opinion.
I'm running Mozilla v.32 and Chrome v. 37.
Are you unable to get Firefox sync to work?
There was an issue a few months ago when Mozilla transitioned the synchronization from the "old" style to the "new" style. That caused a hiccup for a while, but I overcame that. Having used both for close to a year, I prefer Chrome's synchronization due to Mozilla not loading the website thumbnail icons until you actually visit the page on a different machine. The square "BOB" logo for this site, for example, doesn't show up in Mozilla until you actually visit the page once. Else, it's just a blank box with a dashed-line border. Chrome loads all of the thumbnail icons whether you've visited the site or not. Other than that, I find no appreciable difference between the two in terms of synchronization.
The reason I never have used Mozilla to any great degree is I can't synchronize it with any of my iOS devices...simply because it doesn't offer a product for an iOS device. Chrome does, and my bookmarks and open tabs are synch'd across all of my devices, whether that's my PC at work, my laptop at work, any of my computers at home, or my iPad or iPhone.
There's really not much about Chrome I don't like. It is resource intensive, but I find the same to be true of FireFox. I have them both open on my work computer, and with no tabs running, Mozilla consumes 210 MB of RAM and Chrome consumes 195 MB of RAM. With four tabs open (Fox News, Microsoft.com, Google Maps, Bing Maps), Mozilla consumes 390 MB of RAM and Chrome consumes 305 MB of RAM. Both are resource intensive in my opinion.
I'm running Mozilla v.32 and Chrome v. 37.
That is really strange as on my computers Firefox (with 4 tabs open) is using about 800 to 900 MB less of RAM than Chrome with the same tabs open.
By the way IE11 consumes just 30 MB of RAM to have the same four tabs open as above.
Originally Posted By: ClutchDisc
That is really strange as on my computers Firefox (with 4 tabs open) is using about 800 to 900 MB less of RAM than Chrome with the same tabs open.
So if you open the same four tabs I did, in latest Mozilla and latest Chrome, what memory readings are you getting?
My hardware is Intel i5/4 GB RAM/Win 7.
That is really strange as on my computers Firefox (with 4 tabs open) is using about 800 to 900 MB less of RAM than Chrome with the same tabs open.
So if you open the same four tabs I did, in latest Mozilla and latest Chrome, what memory readings are you getting?
My hardware is Intel i5/4 GB RAM/Win 7.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: ClutchDisc
That is really strange as on my computers Firefox (with 4 tabs open) is using about 800 to 900 MB less of RAM than Chrome with the same tabs open.
So if you open the same four tabs I did, in latest Mozilla and latest Chrome, what memory readings are you getting?
My hardware is Intel i5/4 GB RAM/Win 7.
Ok, I did the test with your same tabs and the latest versions of Firefox and Chrome and this is what I got:
No tabs running, Firefox is using 216 MB
No tabs running, Chrome is using 409 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Firefox is using 389 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Chrome is using 665 MB
When I tested it before, I used different tabs and it was with earlier versions of both Firefox and Chrome..
My hardware is a Dual core Intel Pentium (2.20 GHz)/4 GB RAM/Ubuntu 14.04
Originally Posted By: ClutchDisc
That is really strange as on my computers Firefox (with 4 tabs open) is using about 800 to 900 MB less of RAM than Chrome with the same tabs open.
So if you open the same four tabs I did, in latest Mozilla and latest Chrome, what memory readings are you getting?
My hardware is Intel i5/4 GB RAM/Win 7.
Ok, I did the test with your same tabs and the latest versions of Firefox and Chrome and this is what I got:
No tabs running, Firefox is using 216 MB
No tabs running, Chrome is using 409 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Firefox is using 389 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Chrome is using 665 MB
When I tested it before, I used different tabs and it was with earlier versions of both Firefox and Chrome..
My hardware is a Dual core Intel Pentium (2.20 GHz)/4 GB RAM/Ubuntu 14.04
I couldnt live without adblock Plus.
Had to use Ie the other day and was getting popups on a payment page???
who puts giant ads on the payment page??
(and its not any [censored] software installed at my end)
chrome .. never liked it.
IE11 I use it with pages that are problematic with firefox.
Firefox not perfect but the best option for me I've found.
Had to use Ie the other day and was getting popups on a payment page???
who puts giant ads on the payment page??
(and its not any [censored] software installed at my end)
chrome .. never liked it.
IE11 I use it with pages that are problematic with firefox.
Firefox not perfect but the best option for me I've found.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Rand
I couldnt live without adblock Plus.
Had to use Ie the other day and was getting popups on a payment page???
who puts giant ads on the payment page??
(and its not any [censored] software installed at my end)
chrome .. never liked it.
IE11 I use it with pages that are problematic with firefox.
Firefox not perfect but the best option for me I've found.
+1 Adblock Plus is the best ever!
I couldnt live without adblock Plus.
Had to use Ie the other day and was getting popups on a payment page???
who puts giant ads on the payment page??
(and its not any [censored] software installed at my end)
chrome .. never liked it.
IE11 I use it with pages that are problematic with firefox.
Firefox not perfect but the best option for me I've found.
+1 Adblock Plus is the best ever!
Originally Posted By: ClutchDisc
Ok, I did the test with your same tabs and the latest versions of Firefox and Chrome and this is what I got:
No tabs running, Firefox is using 216 MB
No tabs running, Chrome is using 409 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Firefox is using 389 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Chrome is using 665 MB
When I tested it before, I used different tabs and it was with earlier versions of both Firefox and Chrome..
My hardware is a Dual core Intel Pentium (2.20 GHz)/4 GB RAM/Ubuntu 14.04
That's really odd. When I had Xubuntu installed on some of my home computers, the computer would idle, with Chrome browser running, at about 400 MB total RAM used...the OS was using about 200 MB and Chrome was using about 200 MB.
I also have numerous Chrome plug-ins enabled that increase memory usage (like Ad Block Plus, Gmail notification, etc).
I wonder what it is about your hardware or software that increases Chrome memory usage by so much. Your Mozilla memory consumption is about equal to mine. But while Chrome actually uses a hair less memory for me than Mozilla, it's about doubled for you. Weird indeed.
I, too, would quit using Chrome if it used twice the amount of memory.
I'd quit both of them and use IE11 if it offered built-in synchronization.
Ok, I did the test with your same tabs and the latest versions of Firefox and Chrome and this is what I got:
No tabs running, Firefox is using 216 MB
No tabs running, Chrome is using 409 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Firefox is using 389 MB
The same 4 tabs you listed, Chrome is using 665 MB
When I tested it before, I used different tabs and it was with earlier versions of both Firefox and Chrome..
My hardware is a Dual core Intel Pentium (2.20 GHz)/4 GB RAM/Ubuntu 14.04
That's really odd. When I had Xubuntu installed on some of my home computers, the computer would idle, with Chrome browser running, at about 400 MB total RAM used...the OS was using about 200 MB and Chrome was using about 200 MB.
I also have numerous Chrome plug-ins enabled that increase memory usage (like Ad Block Plus, Gmail notification, etc).
I wonder what it is about your hardware or software that increases Chrome memory usage by so much. Your Mozilla memory consumption is about equal to mine. But while Chrome actually uses a hair less memory for me than Mozilla, it's about doubled for you. Weird indeed.
I, too, would quit using Chrome if it used twice the amount of memory.
I'd quit both of them and use IE11 if it offered built-in synchronization.
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
That's really odd. When I had Xubuntu installed on some of my home computers, the computer would idle, with Chrome browser running, at about 400 MB total RAM used...the OS was using about 200 MB and Chrome was using about 200 MB.
I also have numerous Chrome plug-ins enabled that increase memory usage (like Ad Block Plus, Gmail notification, etc).
I wonder what it is about your hardware or software that increases Chrome memory usage by so much. Your Mozilla memory consumption is about equal to mine. But while Chrome actually uses a hair less memory for me than Mozilla, it's about doubled for you. Weird indeed.
I, too, would quit using Chrome if it used twice the amount of memory.
I'd quit both of them and use IE11 if it offered built-in synchronization.
I don't know, I am using adblock plus, but that is on both of them.. But the difference is about the same on my desktop as well. That is running Linux Mint 17 and only has 1 GB of RAM so it really make a big difference on there.
That's really odd. When I had Xubuntu installed on some of my home computers, the computer would idle, with Chrome browser running, at about 400 MB total RAM used...the OS was using about 200 MB and Chrome was using about 200 MB.
I also have numerous Chrome plug-ins enabled that increase memory usage (like Ad Block Plus, Gmail notification, etc).
I wonder what it is about your hardware or software that increases Chrome memory usage by so much. Your Mozilla memory consumption is about equal to mine. But while Chrome actually uses a hair less memory for me than Mozilla, it's about doubled for you. Weird indeed.
I, too, would quit using Chrome if it used twice the amount of memory.
I'd quit both of them and use IE11 if it offered built-in synchronization.
I don't know, I am using adblock plus, but that is on both of them.. But the difference is about the same on my desktop as well. That is running Linux Mint 17 and only has 1 GB of RAM so it really make a big difference on there.
I opened those same four tabs on my personal laptop (Celeron M 1.7/2gb/Win 7) and Chrome took 362 MB of RAM...about the same as my work desktop. I wonder if there's a difference in how Chrome consumes memory in Windows vs. in Linux. I will start a different thread later today as an informal poll.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
I just tried IE 11 after using Firefox for several months. How do you cope with all those ads everywhere? On my homepage MacombDaily.com, there's several adds shown. I get none of these using Firefox 32 with Adblock Plus.
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
I just tried IE 11 after using Firefox for several months. How do you cope with all those ads everywhere? On my homepage MacombDaily.com, there's several adds shown. I get none of these using Firefox 32 with Adblock Plus.
Install Adblock Plus. I have it hooked up to IE11 on all of my machines with that browser on it. Works just as good in IE11 as it does in Chrome or Firefox (at least for me).
I just tried IE 11 after using Firefox for several months. How do you cope with all those ads everywhere? On my homepage MacombDaily.com, there's several adds shown. I get none of these using Firefox 32 with Adblock Plus.
Install Adblock Plus. I have it hooked up to IE11 on all of my machines with that browser on it. Works just as good in IE11 as it does in Chrome or Firefox (at least for me).
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
I have Adblock Plus loaded on my Firefox 32(same Windows computer)
So there's a I.E. app for it at Adblock's website?
So there's a I.E. app for it at Adblock's website?
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
So there's a I.E. app for it at Adblock's website?
If you Google "adblock plus", the first listing is their website, along with this description:
"Adblock Plus is the most popular adblocker available for Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari, Android and Internet Explorer."
So there's a I.E. app for it at Adblock's website?
If you Google "adblock plus", the first listing is their website, along with this description:
"Adblock Plus is the most popular adblocker available for Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari, Android and Internet Explorer."
At work I prefer ie11, it plays better with our intranet websites.
At home I use google chrome with adblockplus.
I do not care for the new editions of firefox, too much like linux.
At home I use google chrome with adblockplus.
I do not care for the new editions of firefox, too much like linux.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
So there's a I.E. app for it at Adblock's website?
If you Google "adblock plus", the first listing is their website, along with this description:
"Adblock Plus is the most popular adblocker available for Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari, Android and Internet Explorer."
Loaded it... thanks!
it seems to disable itself when I choose InPrivate Browsing on I.E.
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
So there's a I.E. app for it at Adblock's website?
If you Google "adblock plus", the first listing is their website, along with this description:
"Adblock Plus is the most popular adblocker available for Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari, Android and Internet Explorer."
Loaded it... thanks!
it seems to disable itself when I choose InPrivate Browsing on I.E.
Decided to uninstall/reinstall Chrome. Found the 64-bit version and runs much better now.
I used a modified hosts file to block ads. Some websites cry when you use adblockers, I see page not available instead.
I used a modified hosts file to block ads. Some websites cry when you use adblockers, I see page not available instead.
Technically one doesn't need Ad Block Plus for IE 11.
1. Manage Add-Ons
2. Tracking Protection
3. Enable Fanboy AdBlock List and FanBoy Tracking List.
I didn't realize how far IE had come until reading this thread. Who knew it used so much less RAM and CPU power than Firefox, but especially Chrome?
1. Manage Add-Ons
2. Tracking Protection
3. Enable Fanboy AdBlock List and FanBoy Tracking List.
I didn't realize how far IE had come until reading this thread. Who knew it used so much less RAM and CPU power than Firefox, but especially Chrome?
- Status
