geekhack
geekhack Community => Other Geeky Stuff => Topic started by: tp4tissue on Sun, 28 January 2018, 02:19:26
-
Installed plugin, "Would you like to restart firefox",
Click Restart.....
And......... nothing, it doesn't Restart. !!
This is BS....
(https://i.imgur.com/GQi0NTl.gif)
-
Is it being clever and only restarting the relevant process rather than the whole thing?
-
Is it being clever and only restarting the relevant process rather than the whole thing?
No, it's clearly just f'kn with me.. It knows all my weaknesses.. afterall i use it to read all of my arrgh-matey epub books.
-
But, Firefox is the only fully featured browser that I can run on my 2ghz Pentium 4 Thinkcentre. HTML5 on a frickin' Pentium 4.. Dillo works but there's no Minecraft.. errr Java.
-
Around November Firefox removed support form some older protocols, this not only killed XP support but also broke a lot of plugins (on top of the certificate issue).
The good news, backup these files, delete your profile, then put them back and re-install your plugins.
Location - c:\users\(username)\AppData (hidden)\Roaming\Mozilla... then drill down through the folders to your profile.
Cookies - cookies.sqlite
Form Fill - formhistory.sqlite
Bookmarks - places.sqlite
History - sessionstore.js
Log-ins - signons.sqlite or logins.json
Login passwords - Key3.db (only needed if you use a master password I think)
Search options - search.json
search plugins - searchplugins (folder)
Preferences - prefs.js - !!!!!!may cause problems!!!!!
-
Around November Firefox removed support form some older protocols, this not only killed XP support but also broke a lot of plugins (on top of the certificate issue).
The good news, backup these files, delete your profile, then put them back and re-install your plugins.
Location - c:\users\(username)\AppData (hidden)\Roaming\Mozilla... then drill down through the folders to your profile.
Cookies - cookies.sqlite
Form Fill - formhistory.sqlite
Bookmarks - places.sqlite
History - sessionstore.js
Log-ins - signons.sqlite or logins.json
Login passwords - Key3.db (only needed if you use a master password I think)
Search options - search.json
search plugins - searchplugins (folder)
Preferences - prefs.js - !!!!!!may cause problems!!!!!
I tried everything.. finally, i had to go back to 51 so that more of the plugins work..
sigh....... Tp4 getn' old
(https://i.imgur.com/zh8eloM.gif)
-
Most plugins killed have replacements that work just fine.... Most.
I use Waterfox with FF as a backup for that reason, a few more weeks and it will be fine, but I dislike some of the new things FF has anyhow such as Pocket.
-
Ohh plugins. Ok, I understand the problem now. Ouch.
-
What is this "Firefox" you speak of?
Sent from Google Chrome
-
What is this "Firefox" you speak of?
Sent from Google Chrome
It's a browser that actually gives you control over what it does.
-
WHY AREN'T YOU USING INTERNET EXPLORER 6? IF YOU WERE USING IE6 YOU WOULDN'T NEED ANY "PLUG INS".
-
I was a Firefox evangelist from version 3 all the way until 2014 or so. I moved on to Waterfox, then to Palemoon, then to Cyberfox. Problem is, the engine was getting old and slow. I kept holding on all the way until 2017 when I couldn't take it anymore. I now use Chromium and Comodo Dragon (Chromium-based) which are lightyears faster. I tried firefox again just recently and it actually was as fast as they said but now I have no desire to move back to Firefox, at least at this time. I'm now used to my extensions in Chromium.
-
I was a Firefox evangelist from version 3 all the way until 2014 or so. I moved on to Waterfox, then to Palemoon, then to Cyberfox. Problem is, the engine was getting old and slow. I kept holding on all the way until 2017 when I couldn't take it anymore. I now use Chromium and Comodo Dragon (Chromium-based) which are lightyears faster. I tried firefox again just recently and it actually was as fast as they said but now I have no desire to move back to Firefox, at least at this time. I'm now used to my extensions in Chromium.
Firefox's engine was re-written just last year (v57), pretty sure it was done a few other times as well. Not that the age of a program is really an issue.
The others are not light years faster, start with clean browsers they all run relatively the same, the differences are super small. The problem is no one uses an even playing field in the real world, people forget plugins/extensions, these can create HUGE drags on the browser. One single specific plugin on FF sends my launch time from less than half a second all the way up to 3.5 seconds. Chrome worked around this issue partly by trying to run in the background on system start, this way you blame the OS for your slow boot times, instead of Google for slow launch times. So if you compare times from an old FF install to a new Chromium install, of course Chromium runs faster, you hadn't butchered it with plugins yet.
A lot of people who switched from one to another, if they later come back after getting a new system are surprised how fast FF is when in reality they just reversed the process, Chrome is now loaded with plugins/extensions while FF is all fresh and clean. FF 57 did actually improve things as well, despite complaints from long time users about how plugins were handled, which again, was probably part of the problem to begin with.
That's only part of the story.
Chrome/Chromium did have a slight advantage for a while on page loads, but there's a really good reason why. Firefox was using a small amount of cache, meanwhile Chrome was using hundreds of megs of your drive. So yeah it loaded pages faster, because it was sucking up a bunch of your drive and not actually fetching pages. You could do the same with FF by changing simple setting, though the opposite can't be said for Chrome, Chromium and anything based on it since Google hates you messing with their product. Chrome also stores backups of every update, I've seen older Chrome installs that were sucking down 2.5 gigs or more of drive space between cache and old versions, I'm not even sure there is a way to disable that.
While Chromium doesn't keep a backup of updates or run in the background, it does still share and send an awful lot of data to Google. I counted 7 connections to Google while launching to a blank startup page. I can't say on Comodo since there's is no Mac or Linux version and I can't be bothered to setup a Vm and firewall to test it, but since it's based on Chromium, it's not unlikely that it also has a few connections to Google and/or Comodo.
-
Firefox's engine was re-written just last year (v57), pretty sure it was done a few other times as well. Not that the age of a program is really an issue.
The others are not light years faster, start with clean browsers they all run relatively the same, the differences are super small. The problem is no one uses an even playing field in the real world, people forget plugins/extensions, these can create HUGE drags on the browser. One single specific plugin on FF sends my launch time from less than half a second all the way up to 3.5 seconds. Chrome worked around this issue partly by trying to run in the background on system start, this way you blame the OS for your slow boot times, instead of Google for slow launch times. So if you compare times from an old FF install to a new Chromium install, of course Chromium runs faster, you hadn't butchered it with plugins yet.
A lot of people who switched from one to another, if they later come back after getting a new system are surprised how fast FF is when in reality they just reversed the process, Chrome is now loaded with plugins/extensions while FF is all fresh and clean. FF 57 did actually improve things as well, despite complaints from long time users about how plugins were handled, which again, was probably part of the problem to begin with.
That's only part of the story.
Chrome/Chromium did have a slight advantage for a while on page loads, but there's a really good reason why. Firefox was using a small amount of cache, meanwhile Chrome was using hundreds of megs of your drive. So yeah it loaded pages faster, because it was sucking up a bunch of your drive and not actually fetching pages. You could do the same with FF by changing simple setting, though the opposite can't be said for Chrome, Chromium and anything based on it since Google hates you messing with their product. Chrome also stores backups of every update, I've seen older Chrome installs that were sucking down 2.5 gigs or more of drive space between cache and old versions, I'm not even sure there is a way to disable that.
While Chromium doesn't keep a backup of updates or run in the background, it does still share and send an awful lot of data to Google. I counted 7 connections to Google while launching to a blank startup page. I can't say on Comodo since there's is no Mac or Linux version and I can't be bothered to setup a Vm and firewall to test it, but since it's based on Chromium, it's not unlikely that it also has a few connections to Google and/or Comodo.
Of course it isn't just about age, but Firefox felt like it was stuck in the past and I didn't stick around long enough to try the new update until I tried it just recently. I used to do a lot of side-by-side testing on the browsers and even tried the other alternatives like Opera (which is now also Chromium based) but just didn't get the performance I wanted.
-
Firefox's engine was re-written just last year (v57), pretty sure it was done a few other times as well. Not that the age of a program is really an issue.
The others are not light years faster, start with clean browsers they all run relatively the same, the differences are super small. The problem is no one uses an even playing field in the real world, people forget plugins/extensions, these can create HUGE drags on the browser. One single specific plugin on FF sends my launch time from less than half a second all the way up to 3.5 seconds. Chrome worked around this issue partly by trying to run in the background on system start, this way you blame the OS for your slow boot times, instead of Google for slow launch times. So if you compare times from an old FF install to a new Chromium install, of course Chromium runs faster, you hadn't butchered it with plugins yet.
A lot of people who switched from one to another, if they later come back after getting a new system are surprised how fast FF is when in reality they just reversed the process, Chrome is now loaded with plugins/extensions while FF is all fresh and clean. FF 57 did actually improve things as well, despite complaints from long time users about how plugins were handled, which again, was probably part of the problem to begin with.
That's only part of the story.
Chrome/Chromium did have a slight advantage for a while on page loads, but there's a really good reason why. Firefox was using a small amount of cache, meanwhile Chrome was using hundreds of megs of your drive. So yeah it loaded pages faster, because it was sucking up a bunch of your drive and not actually fetching pages. You could do the same with FF by changing simple setting, though the opposite can't be said for Chrome, Chromium and anything based on it since Google hates you messing with their product. Chrome also stores backups of every update, I've seen older Chrome installs that were sucking down 2.5 gigs or more of drive space between cache and old versions, I'm not even sure there is a way to disable that.
While Chromium doesn't keep a backup of updates or run in the background, it does still share and send an awful lot of data to Google. I counted 7 connections to Google while launching to a blank startup page. I can't say on Comodo since there's is no Mac or Linux version and I can't be bothered to setup a Vm and firewall to test it, but since it's based on Chromium, it's not unlikely that it also has a few connections to Google and/or Comodo.
Of course it isn't just about age, but Firefox felt like it was stuck in the past and I didn't stick around long enough to try the new update until I tried it just recently. I used to do a lot of side-by-side testing on the browsers and even tried the other alternatives like Opera (which is now also Chromium based) but just didn't get the performance I wanted.
Opera and Commodo probably phone home to a particular state sponsors for a certain country. Oh Firefox, I went from figuring out that explorer.exe could load webpages (circumventing the high school's no internet policy) to using firefox a few years later. Such a difference compared to IE back in 2004. If I can't find or compile Qutebrowser I usually have no issues installing and running Firefox. Damn shame about Mozilla siding with that one organization and also that Mr. Robot stunt.