Get our Latest Finds
Subscribe to our RSS feed or enter your email address below to get the feed delivered to you by email:
Follow Gizmo
Using this Site
Top Rated
Gizmo's Freeware is Recruiting
We are currently looking for people with skills and/or interest in the following areas:
- Anonymous Surfing Service
- Mobile Apps contributors
- Mac Section contributors
If this sounds like you then click here for more details
Firefox: 50 Slow Performing Add-ons (link no longer active)
Editors Note: the link for this article is no longer active.
If you're thinking Firefox has become slow and sluggish these add-ons could be the culprit.
From the Mozilla Add-ons page:
"Add-ons provide many useful features and functions, but they can also cause Firefox to become slower. Some add-ons can even slow Firefox to a crawl and make it difficult to use for regular web browsing. If you think add-ons might be the reason Firefox is lethargic, check the list below for some of the biggest bottlenecks. And remember, for best performance you should disable add-ons that you no longer use regularly."
Here's the current list of add-ons that can cause Firefox to slow down. They are listed in order, with worst products first. For actual numbers on the degree of performance degradation check the current bad boys list at Mozilla which is regularly updated. In the last 24 hours the list dropped from 50, then to 7, then to 6 add-ons.
- #1 Firebug
- #2 FoxLingo
- #3 FoxClocks
- #4 FoxyTunes
- #5 Video DownloadHelper
- #6 Xmarks Sync
One additional thing I've seen that can really slow Firefox down are Flash cookies. These cookies are persistent and use Adobe's Flash to store their data in browsers. Flash cookies aren't deleted when you delete cookies from Firefox (or other browsers for that matter). Firefox add-on Better Privacy can detect and delete these cookies in Firefox, but that leaves other browsers wide open.
I've been using a small utility called KFC (Kill Flash Cookies) for quite some time now. It will delete any Flash cookies it finds and isn't browser dependent. It's a free download and works with Windows, Mac and Linux - you can get it here.
KFC is a stand-alone program, so it won't install anything on your system.
The download is a zip file, so you'll need to unzip it on order to run it.
KFC comes in either a command line or GUI version for all three operating systems.
Slow Performing Add-ons for Firefox
Off for now,
Rhiannon
Click here for more items like this. Better still, get Rhiannon's latest tasty tech treats delivered daily via your RSS feeder or alternatively, have the RSS feed sent as email direct to your in-box.
- Article type:
Printer-friendly version
Comments
Page not found....
@George.J; I appreciate the heads up, I've updated the article. =)
Hello, I found a few that you might want to include:
-GreaseFire
-BitDefender
-Lazarus
I'll post some more if I think ;)
"I don't have a problem with starting FF nor when running it. However, It takes forever to close and sometimes even ends up with 2 copies displaying in Task manager but only one actively displaying.
This has been happening to me thru several of the last update to FF 3.6.
I have not yet upgraded to FF4. Is it possible that the same Addons are causing this as well?"
Please post such requests in the forum in future, so that they can be better answered there.
Did you try uninstalling and reinstalling Firefox. If not, try it. And why not update to Firefox 4? Its definitely an improvement over Firefox 3.
Hi guys,
Are we ONLY talking startup times here?
I would think that not worth thinking about. What is bugging me is the "creep". FF sucks up more and more memory as the day goes on (my average would be around 750K by the time I kill it and start again.)
What are the memory sponges for actual online browsing?
Cheers!
Save yourself a download of KFC or double check KFC.
This path takes me to all the Flash cookies on both of my Win 7 machines, 64 and 32 bit. I have been using History Killer to clean out my Flash Cookies but recently have found some that it did not delete.
C:\Users\John\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash Player
Of course you would change your user name.
nah, i think you're missing some because when i had 3-4 diff profiles in Firefox, Maxa would find several in each profile. these could be the DOM cookies though.
@John at the Falls
Thanks for the tip. :)
Rhiannon
I really don't mind a slight start-up hit for the three extensions on that list that i use - FireFTP, Video Download Helper and AdBlock Plus.
Even if AdBlock added 100% to the startup time, it's worth it.
To configure Flash Player all you have to do is go to the Flash Player Setting Manager page. This can be done by simply going here:
http://www.macromedia.com/support/documentation/en/flashplayer/help/settings_manager.html
This will give you access to various panels to configure flash as well as clear out previous history of websites visited.
Not sure if that is the same as clearing Flash cookies but its worth mentioning.
I'd suggest that this article be updated to remove the information (list of addons) and give some reasons why. Gizmo has always been a source of solid information, and these results and conclusions are just plain flaky.
1. The measurement data is very inconsistent, therefore conclusions are too. Activating some addons actually _improve_ performance in some environments. The baseline results (before activating any addons) varies too much to be a statistically valid reference.
2. The test setup has significant defects, including failure to test addons that should be testable (versioning problems, and FF3 vs FF4), deliberately ignoring the first test result (i.e. only testing with everything cached, which is opposite to normal use).
4. There are at least 13 bug reports open against the testing suite (telos).
5. Very popular addons are not included in the test (e.g. TabMixPlus).
6. The long list is deceptive. The number of items on the list should be determined by impact, i.e. list only those addons which slow startup by x %. Too many at the bottom of the "top 50" list are not actual problems.
7. Startup performance is not ongoing use. To say that an addon slows FireFox implies that the addon slows FireFox each time a page is loaded. This is never tested. Measuring ongoing performance may be even more meaningful than measuring startup performance.
8. The test does not reflect the "real world", e.g. multiple addons are not tested together. Firefox is not repeatedly closed and immediately re-started without doing anything else on the computer (except inadvertently). Many users leave FireFox running for extended periods, including long periods of non-use.
9. Addon developers are not given enough information about the results to determine if and/or where their addon is causing trouble. The reason stated for testing is to encourage addon developers to improve, which creates a "Catch 22" -- how to fix a problem from an empty bug report.
10. The tester (Jorge) is loosing credibility.
The test developer has been requested to remove the results until the test suit is fixed and full testing is available. He (Jorge) refused and did not addressed any of the reasons given in the call to suspend reporting (http://adblockplus.org/blog/on-fluctuations-in-performance-testing-results starting with comment #8).
This suggests he either has a big ego, or doesn't understand test design, implementation, and interpretation, and/or is unwilling to work with the community of addon developers.
@Anonymous123
There are some definite changes at Mozilla where the add-ons are listed and the list is now down to 6 add-ons.
The add-on I use that has caused noticeable slow down while running Firefox is Xmarks. Once it's done syncing everything goes back to normal function for my installation.
There may be add-ons that slow start time, but my usual start up time for Firefox is a few seconds at most, not enough lag time for me to notice.
Rhiannon
This is actually completely misleading. The test has nothing to do with browsing performance, but merely tests the start up times (also, in a flawed way).
http://adblockplus.org/blog/some-more-details-on-mozilla-s-add-on-performance-measurements
http://adblockplus.org/blog/how-reliable-are-mozilla-s-performance-measurements
http://adblockplus.org/blog/overview-of-my-bug-reports-on-add-on-performance-measurements
http://adblockplus.org/blog/on-fluctuations-in-performance-testing-results
KillFlashCookies aka KFC? Not to be confused with the fried chicken chain... I've collaborated with an international organization whose initials formed an esoteric acronym: punch it into google and out shot a load of hard p0rn sites. Happily, they've now changed the name.
great, now i have 4 portable apps to kill flash cookies:
"Flash Cookie Cleaner", "Flash Cookies Cleaner", "Flash Cookies View" and KFC!....also use Better Privacy and Privacy++ in Firefox and just in case, Maxa Cookie Cleaner seems to find some DOM cookies that others may miss...
@Anonymous_46777
Sounds like an excellent portable toolbox to me. :)
Rhiannon
@blobgedout
Yep, same initials. Every now and then I'll look at the folder and say to myself "what's KFC?" and then I remember.
Rhiannon
Click&Clean will delete flash cookies for Google Chrome type browsers. It can also run external programs like CCleaner. But KFC looks like an interesting option to avoid having extra extensions.
https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/ghgabhipcejejjmhhchfonmamedcbeod
@Anonymousgh
Click and Clean looks good, I'll have a look at it. Interesting it works with Ccleaner.
I like KFC because it kills only Flash cookies. Most of the time I don't delete cookies for sites I use often. If I was in an office environment or other people used my computer Click and Clean would be great.
Rhiannon
How does an add-on that slows down FF 0%(??) make it onto the list?
I noticed the in-house bookmarks sync tool slows you down by 0% and the alternative, XMarks Sync, is at no.7 for slowing he browser. It's probably because the in-house system is more attuned to the browser, but it could be because it's a competitor...
It could be a tiny number more than zero but less than 1% or something else entirely. I don't have an answer for that one. Mozilla would likely answer that question if someone asked them.
Rhiannon
@slomo
I noticed that as well. The bar graphic on the Firefox page has 0% sticking out ever so slightly, maybe it refers to something like .05?
Rhiannon
...after rounding down, any amount <0.5%. So a lesser culprit... I wonder how complete their survey was. I guess their choice was based on popularity to allow FF users to check the effects of some favourite extensions. The front page of their article contains some of the main slowcoaches, while those towards the bottom of the list will have relatively little impact on browser speed.
Wooops... They now seem to have updated their Top 50 list. In the wake of several new entries, Facebook Toolbar now brings up the tail at 3%. Presumably, the survey is ongoing...
@Bob
Yikes, I'm going to need to update the article.....
Rhiannon
I guess this TechTreat is something of an update challenge... Blink and it's changed: "In the last 24 hours the list dropped from 50, then to 7, then to 6 add-ons." Only it's now back to a Top 10 with the rest of the Top 50 on the second page. Fast reloaders or slow procrastinators?
@Bob This one does keep changing - when I checked last night there were 6 add-ons and no second page. :O
Rhiannon
It's not hard to imagine some of the methodological issues which are likely to upset some add-on developers (eg Anonymous123 above) and make this official Firefox page strangely unstable. Nevertheless, I reckon it may still give some useful clues on how to put some sparkle back into an overloaded fox.
Post new comment