User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  1
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Firefox at 64bit for 64bit systems.

  1. #1
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,744
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Firefox at 64bit for 64bit systems.

    I've been looking for an alternative to all the nightly 64bit F builds doing the rounds here and there for a while now, and the one thing has has been a constant was their lack of any improvement in any way.

    So I tried again for whatever reason>. can't really remember, maybe something to do with Java(64bit) .. can't remember.

    So I went searching, and in that searching, I came across an offshoot branch, which is called WaterFox (### I 'spose!! )

    If you're currently using FF(the official version of 15.01 is still only 32bit), then the switch to WF which is at v15.0 will be easy.

    As it's FF based(but a 64bit build), it uses your current FF personal settings, so the change is simply install WF and you just have a 64bit version of FF(called WF) at your disposal instead.

    If you try Waterfox and it doesn't work for you, and then decide to uninstall it, do not remove all personal files and settings! You lose them in FF as well, as they're linked to the same settings files.

    So far that I've noticed, it is faster than FF(32bit).

    I've cleared the cache a few times now, and it still feels as fast in loading (all pages) irrespective of whether the cache has been cleaned out or not.
    FF on the other hand feels slower to load pages if cache files are cleaned out(I use CC Cleaner to clean out temp files too .. not FF itself)

    ... anyhow, just a heads up for those looking for not too different alternatives!(to FF that is).

    I have no idea on how it will work with any extensions and addons you have installed, but so far non of my 10 or so addons and extensions were rejected as 64bit incompatible.

    I'd rate it a recommended install for anyone running a 64bit OS, if not for the adventure, then more so for confirmation that it feels snappier than FF.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  2. #2
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    15,107
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Firefox, Waterfox. They sound elementary, eh!
    I'm waiting for the Day when one called Aardvark (Ground-hog) will be announced.

    Anyway, it looks interesting, and now I'm thinking again about installing a 64-bit OS - like I was going to do for the past year.
    Am.
    CC, Image editing OK.

  3. #3
    A royal pain in the bum!
    Threadstarter
    arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,744
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    LOL!
    You were one person I had in mind when I started the thread!
    (I didn't realise you're not on an x64 OS yet)

    A few more playful tests I was doing last night and this morning...

    Bloons Tower Defense 4(I'm only playing v4 not v5, and only for testing).
    It's a flash based online game, and when the screen is 'flooded' with weapons, the game can produce pauses. I was never sure if this was a software issue(ie. FF or flash) or a bandwidth issue(I'm on cable).
    On FF it used to pause, but so far with WF I haven't seen any of this stutteringness.

    Also, I'm an avid browser of PC gear pricing, and my main go to page is MSY's parts price PDF, as a point of reference.
    With FF, I used to get a sort of caching delay .. the PDF would part load and wait for me to scroll down towards the end of the PDF page before continuing to load the PDF.
    Not really a problem other than the delay in downloading the rest of the PDF document.
    Using the same PDF plugin via WF, I don't see this issue. I load the PDF webpage(that is view it online rather than download it) and it's already loaded fully and scrolling to the bottom of any PDF page is instant.
    (I'm assuming a RAM tweak of some kind .. where the pages are loading up fully, or whatever.

    One thing is for sure tho, WF does use a lot more memory than FF does.
    With two PDF pages loaded(but not entirely viewed, just loaded and sat there):

    WF has committed 707Mb of RAM
    FF has committed 365Mb of RAM for the same two pages and tabs loaded to the same point.

    I haven't seen any speedier load up times from WF compared to FF yet. That is, the time from clicking the program icon to the browser loaded and ready to go feel about the same.
    It's only in actual surfing and loading stuff up, where WF is appearing a bit smoother and faster.

  4. #4
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,639
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    WF is 64 bit and assumes you have lots of memory !
    regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
    Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff



  5. #5
    A royal pain in the bum!
    Threadstarter
    arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,744
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's the annoying thing about FF at the moment... lots of x64 systems out there in the real world, and no official 64bit version of FF available yet!

  6. #6
    Member The Man from Mona's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Sep 2012
    Location
    Orange
    Posts
    27
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Kym View Post
    WF is 64 bit and assumes you have lots of memory !
    How much is 'lots' in 2012?

  7. #7
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    06 Aug 2012
    Location
    Semaphore
    Posts
    530
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by The Man from Mona View Post
    How much is 'lots' in 2012?
    More than 4Gb, I suspect Seriously, I'm not sure, but my new Macbook Air came with 4Gb as standard and the cynic in me feels that you'll need more. Of course, I'm from the era where we started on the Commodore 64 and progressed to DOS and 640Kb floppy disks, and thought that was wonderful. Memory and data storage is so cheap now that I don't believe anyone even tries to write efficient code anymore. I guess it's the interaction with all of the graphics and other peripherals that's the issue, cheers Deb

  8. #8
    Still in the Circle of Confusion Cage's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Hunter Valley
    Posts
    4,578
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mathy View Post
    More than 4Gb, I suspect Seriously, I'm not sure, but my new Macbook Air came with 4Gb as standard and the cynic in me feels that you'll need more. Of course, I'm from the era where we started on the Commodore 64 and progressed to DOS and 640Kb floppy disks, and thought that was wonderful. Memory and data storage is so cheap now that I don't believe anyone even tries to write efficient code anymore. I guess it's the interaction with all of the graphics and other peripherals that's the issue, cheers Deb
    Oh, the memories. My Amiga had two plug-in 1MB memory modules and a whopping 40MB hard drive.

    Was heaps better than going the DOS route though.

    I run W7 64bit and it was not very stable with 4GB of memory. Added another 4GB and haven't had a gliche since.
    Last edited by Cage; 30-10-2012 at 9:22am.
    Cheers
    Kev

    D800 & GAS

  9. #9
    A royal pain in the bum!
    Threadstarter
    arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,744
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by trublubiker View Post
    .....

    I run W7 64bit and it was not very stable with 4GB of memory. Added another 4GB and haven't had a gliche since.
    Weird!

    I'm running 4 devices of all sorts of flavours on Win7 mainly 64bit, and I've never seen stability issues in any of them.
    laptops have 4gig each of ram, desktop has 8 gigs, my 32bit tablet has 2G ram, and all the 32bit PC's at work, running 32bit Win7 have 1-2Gig ram .. neve rhad troubles with Windows 7 on any of them.

    Some of the programs seem to have issues.
    My observations are that the 1G ram work pc running a tracking system, tracking only 5 vehicles, has so much trouble running that software .. it may simply be the WAN uplink getting saturated with data. It uses no LAN resources at all .. it's a very little used PC other than this one software running.

    None of my kids laptops have troubles running 4G ram on their Win7 x64 systems. I've run Nikon's CaptureNX2 off one as well(but not something I'd do again .. image editing on a laptop ... .. not for me.

    My desktop has been indestructible, other than for one program. The hugely RAM hungry IDImager cataloging software I run.
    Nice program, but is a massive memory hoarder. Will use all available memory as it can, and my next step is to see if I can install 16G or more on this PC .. and see if it ever stops!
    Will take over 7G or ram going by what Perfmon tells me.

    Win7 is always stable tho(and I overclock this desktop too).
    Sometimes the motherboard fails to boot past the initial boot sequence too past memcheck, so maybe I should back off the OC during these coming hotter months.

    Anything less than 1Tb now is passe .. 40Meg hdd's and talk of such lowly trash .. should be consigned to the scrap heap of history and stay there!

    I just want 64Tb or Ram and I want it now!

  10. #10
    Still in the Circle of Confusion Cage's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Hunter Valley
    Posts
    4,578
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well Artie, it didn't work for me.

    I was getting up to five screen lock-ups per day, and it was annoying the hell out of me.

    MS Support, an oxymoron if ever I've heard one, were about as helpful as udders on a bull.

    Eventually I installed a little freeware program called 'Core Temp' which monitors Core temps and RAM usage and left it sitting up in the top RH corner so I could see what it was showing when the lock-up happened.

    And guess what? Every time I had a screen lock-up, my RAM usage was off the planet.

    I'd pruned all the unnecessary crap out of start-up and was kicking off with the basics. What I noticed was that just running the basics with maybe a mail program and Firefox open was using around 1.5GB of RAM. Open up Photoshop and do some PP and you were asking for trouble. My stacking program caused an immediate freeze.

    So I stuck in 2 x 4GB of G.Skill Ripjaws running in unganged mode and have not had even a hiccup since.

    Worked for me !

    And I'm a great believer in the old axiom 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it'.

    Cheers

    Kevin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •