Firefox 3.6.3 released

[Anupam]

Firefox 3.6.3 has been released. This has been a very quiet update.

This version fixes the security vulnerability which security researcher Nils exploited in the Pwn2Own 2010 contest held recently. You can find details here:

http://www.mozilla.org/security/anno...sa2010-25.html

This release fixes just this single security vulnerability. It is said to be critical... and therefore, all are advises to update to this version, as soon as possible. The download is available officially from the Mozilla Firefox site.

Release Notes : http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox.../releasenotes/

[Kyuzo]

My Firefox updated itself this evening. I really can't say enough about this great software. I know Chrome is supposed to bury Firefox, but since I began using Mozilla, it's been a flawlessly-performing piece of software. I don't believe it's ever once crashed on me and updates quickly and easily.

Thanks for the "heads up", Kyuzo.

[Anupam]

You are welcome .

I agree, Firefox is a great software, and I have used it for years. But, since news was confirmed of vulnerability in Firefox 3.6, I started to use SRWare Iron... and now I am using it more and more. After using SRWare Iron, Firefox feels bloated to me. Also, Firefox is slower than SRWare Iron/Chrome.

Although Iron has crashed on me a number of times, when using bookmarks, and I have occasionally experienced heavy memory usage, I am still using it more than Firefox these days.

Recently held Pwn2Own contest in which Chrome remained unhacked, also pushed me to keep using Iron, which is based on Chrome.

But yes, I do agree, Firefox, with all its add-ons, provides a complete browsing experience. I never had any problems with Firefox anytime, with websites not opening correctly, or crashes or anything like that.

Firefox has been planning to shift to webkit engine. That would be very interesting, as webkit engine is known to be quite fast. It will be quite interesting to see what happens when Firefox gives competition to Chrome in terms of speed. Looking at the Chrome being unhackable, because of its sandboxing feature, we may see that happening in other browsers too. Although, that leads to heavy memory consumption IMO, because every tab is treated as a process... and when the whole browser crashes, like it happened to me a few days ago.. you have to kill process for every single tab... can be quite a pain.

[Kyuzo]

I have had a problem with Firefox lately and I wondered if its "bloat" was the cause or if my current ISP's security suite is the culprit. Firefox used to load in an instant when the icon was clicked upon, but now my Firefox is much slower to load. I had heard of complaints about the program's size, but I'm still not sure.

I have to admit to being drawn to Mozilla since it is an altruistic "underdog" of sorts (I tend to do that...). Perhaps computing is not the place to be a romantic!

[Anupam]

Firefox has always been slow to load at start up, and its a chronic problem now. As the Firefox installation gets older, it gets slower. I think one of the main reason is that Firefox stores the information in Sqlite database, and it takes time to gather that information on startup. So, the more bookmarks, or the more extensions you have, more time it will take for Firefox to startup. Also, Firefox checks for add-ons updates on startup... and that also contributes to the delay. That is my understanding of it.. and I am not sure of what I wrote... but it should be true, if my logic is correct. That's why various utilities which claim to make Firefox faster, use vacuuming of the database of Firefox.

[Kyuzo]

I would imagine you're quite correct. I can't recall exactly, but an (somewhat anti-Firefox, pro-Chrome) article I read mentioned sqlite (I have no real idea of the inner workings of Firefox). Someone in the comments section ( ! ) suggested setting Firefox to work with Windows 98 (I don't recall the term, just right-click the icon and change FF in settings). Although some commented that it worked for them I could tell no difference.

It's no huge bother, just something I've noticed as the program has gone through its revisions.

Regards, Kyuzo.

[Anupam]

Slow startup has always been problem of Firefox since earlier versions. It was said that things would improve with Firefox 3.6, but this was not to be. Speed of loading of webpages has increased considerably, which is quite good, and I think more needed. But, the slow loading remains the same.

I have observed that as Firefox installation grows old, startup time increases. I have also noticed that when I do total un-installation, and re-installation of Firefox, the startup time decreases considerably. So, if it feels that it has become too slow to load up, you can try re-installing it. Take backup of your important things first though, like bookmarks, extensions, themes etc. I use FEBE for backup, works great.

Also might be worth mentioning, that another member had a really big problem with slow startup, ranging to 4 mins . The problem was it seems he had not been cleaning the temp files, and other browser related material regularly... specially the flash related material was the cause. When the flash cookies, etc were deleted, Firefox loaded really quick. So, regular cleaning with software like CCleaner will help too.

Rhiannon had posted article on that recently, on how to deal with flash cookies.

BleachBit, a CCleaner type cleaning software is able to remove the flash related material very well, apart from cleaning other things.

[sa1]

Originally Posted by Anupam

Firefox has been planning to shift to webkit engine.

Where did you get this news? At the very best I know that there's a plan to integrate webkit's javascript engine and firefox's tracemonkey to get the best of both worlds for use on Firefox.
There is no danger to Gecko whatsoever as far as I know and webkit isn't going to replace it.

That would be very interesting, as webkit engine is known to be quite fast.

My views on browser speed:
I agree that Firefox is slower than Chrome but really as far as I can tell speed differences in javascript and rendering performance is close to imperceptible on most sites today, Gmail being an exception being perceptibly slower on IE. The point of javascript performance today in many browsers is to be "future"-ready.(and marketing )
The "future" being when IE upgrades its Javascript performance so that sites can begin using complicated scripting.
The one area where speed differences are perceptible yet is not measured by most benchmarks is application speed. The lagginess, the hangs, freezes,etc and I think that is where Firefox is way behind other browsers except IE.
In that case a switch to Webkit from Gecko isn't going to help even a bit.

[Anupam]

Originally Posted by sa1

Where did you get this news? At the very best I know that there's a plan to integrate webkit's javascript engine and firefox's tracemonkey to get the best of both worlds for use on Firefox.
There is no danger to Gecko whatsoever as far as I know and webkit isn't going to replace it.

Ah yes, that's the correct news!! Thanks sa1, for correcting the news. Don't know where I had read it, and I did not remember the exact words.. that's why I said Firefox was planning to move to Webkit engine. You are correct with the news that you gave . Thanks again.

Originally Posted by sa1

I agree that Firefox is slower than Chrome but really as far as I can tell speed differences in javascript and rendering performance is close to imperceptible on most sites today, Gmail being an exception being perceptibly slower on IE.

I agree, there is not much difference between Firefox and Chrome in terms of speed, but still, there is tiny amount of difference. I can really feel the difference in opening Gmail on Firefox, and on Chrome/Iron. Gmail and Google Reader open way faster on Iron/Chrome than on Firefox. On Firefox, Gmail seems to crawl and then open, but on Iron/Chrome, its like a breeze.

Originally Posted by sa1

The one area where speed differences are perceptible yet is not measured by most benchmarks is application speed. The lagginess, the hangs, freezes,etc and I think that is where Firefox is way behind other browsers except IE.
In that case a switch to Webkit from Gecko isn't going to help even a bit.

I have not experienced hangs, freezes, crashes with Firefox. Yes, its slow to startup, but otherwise, I have not experienced crashes with Firefox. Very very rarely. So, I don't agree with your point that its way behind other browsers. I have had more crashes with K-Meleon, and Iron.

Also, in terms of memory use too, Firefox performs better. Chrome/Iron use sandboxing feature, where every tab is treated as a process, and I have observed, this feature takes more memory for the same number of tabs open... than Firefox.

[sa1]

Originally Posted by Anupam

I have not experienced hangs, freezes, crashes with Firefox. Yes, its slow to startup, but otherwise, I have not experienced crashes with Firefox. Very very rarely. So, I don't agree with your point that its way behind other browsers. I have had more crashes with K-Meleon, and Iron.

Also, in terms of memory use too, Firefox performs better. Chrome/Iron use sandboxing feature, where every tab is treated as a process, and I have observed, this feature takes more memory for the same number of tabs open... than Firefox.

Firefox can't really be blamed for the crashes which are usually caused by some addons. When I used it crashed as often as once in fifteen minutes which I think was because of some conflicts between some addons. I didn't have the patience to switch to safe mode and diagnose my issue. Same could be said about hangs etc. Addons rather than the browser itself are often to blame. But then if a browser itself is incomplete without the addons then it should take steps to prevent conflicts. (And Chrome does that with different processes for each extension.)

About your second point I have to say that increased memory usage on Firefox always seems to come with a slowdown.(Memory leak by some extension? perhaps). However on Chrome/Opera I have to say that high periods of memory usage have not corresponded to a slowdown.
Also in Chrome a tab being closed reclaims that memory unlike in Firefox. So that's better memory management on the whole.