How is it possible that on my high performance workstation with 16 Gb RAM, 4.5GHz overclocked 2600k and ssd, capable of running next to all programs, FIREFOX is sluggish as hell, keeps crashing continuously and is basically unusable?!?
wtf mang
>>55236541
because it's crap senpai
> inb4 30 rupees have been deposited to your google wallet
>>55236541
because you install every single retarded add-on you can come across
>>55236582
not really
>>55236603
What a dumbass.
>>55236569
>>55236582
Not OP guys, but here is mine. In our time, it is outright necessary to browse the web like this, have you tried using the internet on a vanilla browser? - fucking shit experience
In addition to these addons, I have all jscript disabled, no cookies, no browser cache, I use a fork of firefox etc. I have this complaint too, I know that Mozilla and all the devs with their respective forks tried, and thankfully they provide this all for free and open source, but lately I've been sick of the wait time on this browser.
What else is out there that is comparable in its security features, and yet faster?
Something is fucked up on your machine or your setup, OP, there's no other logical reason for it. Been using Firefox Portable for 5+ years now, been upgraded from every version through what I currently use (FirefoxESR 45.2.) with 29 addons/extensions and 14 user scripts, loads in under 2 seconds on an SSD, last crash noted in Health Report was August 2013.
You're fucking doing it wrong, somehow.
>>55236603
There you found your problem
>>55236625
>he doesn't have 5 layers of protection from the NSA/CIA/ILLUMINATI therefore he is retarded
chill autismus maximus
>>55236643
No, I didn't. Apparently you did however.
care to enlighten me?
>>55236603
are you loading thousands of tabs at the same time?
and try disabling that kaspersky thing
>>55236628
i´m not saying use the vanilla browser but i have already seen too many people use nearly hundred addons
>and magically the performance always returns to being good after the majority of the shit was turned off
>>55236652
no sometimes I load just 6 and it freezes/crashes
>>55236716
Try turning your computer off and on again
>>55236716
does it have any kind of pattern?
ie certain websites, websites with many pictures etc.
i´d also recommend you get no-script or a similar script blocker it might help
can you provide the error Firefox throws out?
>>55236541
No it's not possible.
5 rupees for you pajeet.
>>55236603
Adblock: Ok
Classic Theme Resotrer: Whatever rustles your jimmies
FireShot: Are you really taking that much screencaps? Why not wget?
Greasemonkey: Well, which local scripts do you run? Might hit your performance hard.
Kaspersky: God, why?
LastPass: Great, let a FF Plugin handle all your passwords... seems like an great idea
Downloader: Yeah sure, why not (they might call home)
>>55236541
It's Firefox. What the hell do you expect? That's like using qBittorrent and asking why you can't connect to half the peers.
Firefox was never |good|, it was only ever, "Not as bad as IE6." Solution? Use a better browser.
>>55236541
install ubuntu and use ff with just adblock/flashblock/noscript, also disable smooth scrolling.
>>55236541
I tells you why(happened to me too):Old about:config tweaks that don't run well with the latest version.
Delete prefs.js in profile folder so you can keep your profile and settings go to default.
>>55236770
>two lies in one post
Great job Rajesh
>>55236821
>two delusions in one freetard
no surprise there.
>>55236628
>still uses ABE
Since this is a browser shitting thread does anyone know why Chromium does this for like 30 seconds before working?
>>55236739
where do i find error dumps?
>>55236767
>Greasemonkey:
the only script I use is extra flags for int
>Kaspersky
okok, disabled
>LastPass
I'd rather have a plugin that uses encrypted files than saving the passwords on the firefox password manager or even worse use one pass on all websites.
>>55236852
>than saving the passwords on the firefox password manager
Use a master password, it gets rid of the plain text file shit.
>>55236842
looks like it´s to retarded to load the rendering engine
did you try resetting it?
>>55236842
Nope. Should launch in a second or so.
Reinstall.
If that doesn't work:
>/g/ is not tech support
>>55236826
You're lying. Calling me a "freetard" won't change that.
t. FF 47 and qBtittorrent 3.1.11 on Windows 7
>high performance workstation
>16Gb RAM
kek
1TB here
>>55236854
so basically you are saying that it's better to use a small firefox feature from a freeware company to store the passwords rather than trust in a company who's sole purpose is to ensure a maximum level of safety?
>>55236852
it usually throws you a window after it crashed
with some dumb text about blabla send to mozilla
you might have to turn on the botnet in the config of the browser to get that window
or the error is so severe that it plain skips that window
>>55236866
what a lame shitpost
>>55236875
next time it crashes i'll take a screnshot
>>55236872
LastPass is a nonfree as in freedom program that is also a botnet
>>55236860
No lies.
Failfox is bleeding market share for a reason.
Nobody uses qBittorrent on private trackers for a reason.
You not having conscious awareness of those reasons does not change that they are true and that other people have noticed them. Truth does not go through your belief.
>>55236880
Two digit (in GB) amounts of RAM haven't been "high performance" for a decade lad.
>>55236891
noone can argue with the fact that the people developing firefox went totally batshit and started to fill it with shit just so it´s more like chrome
i guess you could say chrome killed Firefox by baiting the sjw devs to strive for a shitty state
>>55236896
*half a decade in any case
Got my 128GB machine in 2011.
>>55236888
lastpass makes all it's money from people trusting in the safety and anonymity of their service.
they have everything to lose from botnetting.
unlike google, if people don't like them spying and decide to stop paying, they go bankrupt.
>>55236924
that´s why it´s not free as in freedom because then people could find the botnet parts
but like this noone knows if they might have a hard-coded master-key for the nsa
>>55236945
well, if you're going to reason like that, then you might as well not use internet anymore, since your ISPs aren't transparent either and who knows, they monitor every single bit and byte that you send.
>>55236990
they not only might they for certain do
that´s why you use encryption
>>55236905
You're not very bright, are you?
They're only trying to be like Chrome because they're bleeding market share to Chrome. How delusional do you have to be to think it actually went like this:
1. Firefox is the King
2. Chrome gets no traction whatsoever because the King is 3000x better
3. Mozilla then decides to rip apart their undeniably perfect browser and start copying every single aspect of the completely broken Chrome for zero reason
Mozilla started copying Chrome because it was better, everyone could see it was better, and everyone was ditching Firefox because there's no reason to stay with a bad free browser when you can download a good one.
>>55236603
Those last two can be done in JDownloader or Youtube-dl
>>55236541
Try reinstalling, refreshing your profile, or start it in safe mode (with add-ons disabled).
Chances are, the problems are on your end, not the fault of Firefox.
>>55237004
they started to rip a browser that they were bleeding market share to i don´t deny that
i just say that that is what initiated the death of Firefox
because they copied it
but failed at that
that´s why Firefox continues to gets worse even though they continue to rip the shit out of chrome
i am not pretending that Firefox is or was a perfect browser all i say is it got far worse after they started ripping out
>>55237043
The issue is just that Google is better at advertising their browser to normies. It comes bundled with other Software (fucking avast). It is pre-installed on every Android phone. It gets recommended every time you visit Google.
>>55236603
>Adblock plus
The slowest adblocker ever migrate to ublock immediately.
>Classic Theme
Resource Hog remove it at once
>Fireshot
shift+f2
Then enter the command "screenshot --fullpage name.whateverfile format."
>Kaspersky
That does jackshit except compare every website you go to to a online database further slowing your browsing experience.
>LastPass
Write a program and encrypt your passwords with pgp keys.
>SoundCloud Downloader
Enjoy your shit sounds
>Youtube downloader
Just download youtube-dl.exe and run it from the terminal it will save you hours and it will do it much better then that shitty plugin that slows down your browser to a halt.
>>55237220
>remove classic theme
>go back to literally ui design cancer
mate it´s not that much of a resource hog
>>55236603
>abp
>>55236541
be glad you aren't using chromium - uses 2x as cpu % on my machine
>>55236628
>Abe
>rp
>noscript
Dude, where have you been for the past 2 years?
>>55236541
>sluggish as hell, keeps crashing continuously and is basically unusable?!?
>4.5GHz overclocked 2600k
There's your problem.
>but muh stability prime95
I don't care how long you run benchmarks flawlessly. In my experience you will always run into some programs that flat out fuck up and crash when things aren't at stock.
>>55236541
i dont know
it works fine on my 9 year old Core 2 Duo with a shit ton of tabs opened
>>55237043
>i just say that that is what initiated the death of Firefox
>because they copied it
>but failed at that
Its death was already initiated by it being worse than Chrome. Let me put it this way: FIREFOX 24 STILL EXISTS. You can download it. You can install it. You can use it. So, if Firefox 24 is somebody's perfect browser, Firefox hasn't lost that market share. Don't come in here and act like any update to Firefox would kill anything that came before it, because nobody is making you update. If Firefox 24 was a Chrome-killer for a certain number of people and 25+ isn't, guess what? They'll be using 24. Mozilla does not need to release 24 20 more times with an incremented number attached for 24 to exist.
The fact is <25 was not working for the majority of people. It was a slow, unstable browser with a bad UI. What choice did they have but to copy Chrome when it's so fucking good?
And no, making a browser only for neckbeards was not a missed "golden opportunity." Firefox gets no money if they make a 0.1% market share browser. Suitable for YOUR needs is not what Mozilla is about. Their business plan only works by capturing normies, and normies don't want a fucking command-line browser. If you want a browser for yourself, fork Firefox and make it, don't cry that Mozilla isn't.
Anyway, considering that Firefox sucked from the beginning, it's not surprising that it still sucks compared to Chrome. Mozilla never had talent. Don't blame the direction, it's just the skill.
>>55237085
Looking for bullshit excuses doesn't make them true.
Internet Explorer shipped with every copy of Windows. What did we do? Install Firefox.
If Chrome got on our machines and was worse than Firefox we'd be overwriting that shit. There's nothing stopping us from moving to a better browser. But we don't move to Firefox. Instead we're sitting here uninstalling the crapware that is Firefox to get our deliciously smooth and stable Chrome.
Chrome is destroying all other browsers for a reason, and sitting there making excuses for the underdogs is not going to close the gap.
>>55237370
>>55237043
>i am not pretending that Firefox is or was a perfect browser all i say is it got far worse after they started ripping out
dude
you should read what i write
you are getting butthurt over nothing here
You are just terrible at configuring it OP.
My firefox is the fastest browser I've used on my shittop that's 10 years old. No I'm not going to hold your hand, all I'm telling you is it can be a lot better and it's up to you.
>>55237458
Worse for your needs != worse for Firefox. You are 1/7.4 billionth of the world's human population, and Mozilla isn't going to get anywhere making a free browser targeting that kind of market share.
Firefox is free and open source. If you want a browser that is tailored exactly to you, make it.
>>55236541
>ITT
LMAO MUH GAYMEN BUILD XDD IDK WHAT THE FUCK IS MEMORY MANAGEMENT :DDDDDD
>>55237514
where did i ever make you believe i don´t have one customized to my liking
my Firefox looks and acts like i want it why are you crying around?
and everything points to it being worse for the majority since the majority is gradually lost to chrome
>>55236603
Literally everything there is useless. Downloaders can be replaced with download helper.
>kaspersky
>last pass
>fireshot
You don't need these
>>55236541
And yet I have half as good pc and it runs smoothly
>>55236603
use ublock origin instead of adblock plus, it can accept the same filters as ABP, its own filters and hosts files.
it is also a lot lighter
Firefox runs like shit on my PC (i5, 8GB RAM) and laptop (i7, 16GB RAM).
>>55237651
I have the same cpu and ram, firefox stable runs flawlessly.
No modifications as well it's bare stock with a blocker.
>>55236603
Yes you do.
>>55237558
>and everything points to it being worse for the majority since the majority is gradually lost to chrome
The utter lack of market share of Firefox 24 points even harder at its failure.
Mozilla decided to try to emulate a success instead of doubling down on a proven loser. The fact that they haven't yet caught up to Chrome doesn't prove it was the wrong move.
All Firefox has to do is one-up Chrome. They can't do that from six steps behind, though.
Is there a possibility of a successful browser that isn't just a carbon copy of Chrome? Yes. Was Firefox 24 that? Not even close. And Mozilla apparently can't figure out what a successful alternative might look like. So what choice do they have but to follow Chrome?
firefox just went shit
since i went ssd firefox startup time increased 3x
>>55236603
>not knowing firefox natively supports taking screenshots
>>55237235
If the UI is such a problem, rice it.
Cause you're not using Vivaldi
>>55240201
you do realize that the purpose of classic theme restore is exactly that?
I've been trying the developer version and it's a lot less sluggish, I guess cause of the multiprocess option. Still quite sluggish, but not enough to make me want to go to Chrome.
Is Cyberfox a meme browser?
>>55236541
I'm running ff in mint with an i3 @ 3.7 ghz and 4 gigs of ram and it's as absolutely fine. Turned off history but running ghostery and ublock. Nothing hangs for me at this time and I've had terrible experiences with firefox. Over the last couple updates it seems to have gotten better but I also installed a new router.
I believe that many of firefox's processes are sequential and it hangs the whole browser up when it is not given what it needs quickly (whenever I've had even a slightly poor internet connection firefox is many many times slower than any other browser).
>>55236541
Because of people like in this pic
When you go from a meritocracy to hiring people because their ethnicity/gender/sexuality quality plummets
>>55236541
I don't have a problem with Firefox crashing but it is certainly sluggish and slower to load a page than Chrome is. Firefox is still the best in terms of extensions though.
>>55241519
not for much longer they are killing the add-on engine
>>55241668
yup which is why i switched to chrome a few months back. i figured if they are slowly going to kill firefox i might as well just make the jump now
>>55236866
>feel for 1024GB meme
>>55236896
Performance doesn't have anything to do with GB.
>>55236541
op is a faggot and a baiter firefox is stil 32-bit that's why it vant use your system to utmostt of its capabilities
>>55243309
that´s plain wrong firefox has a 64 bit version
>>55241393
yes
>people making up excuses
Firefox literally does run like shit, you just don't know better.
I'm waiting for the rewrite before I'll ever use it again.
>>55243309
The 64 bit version of firefox runs no better than the 32 bit version in my experience. It goes to shit well before it hits 4 gigs of memory.
>>55237917
>The fact that they haven't yet caught up to Chrome doesn't prove it was the wrong move.
They haven't just not caught up. They've lost ground. The people who use firefox use it because it does things that chrome doesn't do. Copying chrome doesn't draw chrome users to firefox, it just drives firefox users away.
Ya, Firefox crashes on me every so often, though I I'm running FF with 30 addons, 3 userstyles, and 6 userscripts, plus, let's not forget about plugins like Flash, Shockwave, Silverlight, Java.
It's quite amazing it runs as well as it does with all the crap I have added to it.
That's the price you pay when you want a browser that can be tailored to very specific needs.
is jdownloader really that good?
a while back there was a video i wanted, and i could not download it whatsoever without a massive fuck off work around and though jdownalder may get it, turns out it didn't.
there any one sides fits all downloaders?
>>55245712
That's because they're both still single-process.
You can give nightly a try, works like a charm when it works, my only gripe with it is it doesn't seem to restore sessions properly (using session manager).
works on my machine.
no crashes in 22 days and it's as fast as ever. and i rarely even turn off my pc, so firefox is open most of the time.
show your about:healthreport op
for SOME reason these threads never seem to include the health report
>>55246121
>Flash, Shockwave, Silverlight, Java.
why would you have these enabled? this isn't 2011
>>55237452
firefox for a long ass time was the browser to use because Ie sucked that much dick at its job.
then came chrome.
FF would lose benchmarks to it, but not be worth the switch
Then chrome got good at multimedia, and ff sucked at it.
so move to chrome..
now i'm moving back to ff because chrome bloats like a motherfucker over time while ff does not, and idle firefox doesn't use processing power but chrome does
fuck knows why chrome is using 1gb of vram.
So now i'm using 2 browsers.
Chrome is for anything volatile that will either not be there forever (good for the way it saves things apposed to firefox, it grabs from cache rather then trying to download it from source) and firefox (palemoon) for anything that will be there forever because i can close it and regain all the resources it takes up without issue.
>>55245859
thats one reason i didnt download main ff, i downloaded palemoon.
>>55246431
here are my addons btw, so it's not like i'm running a minimal firefox.
>>55246410
it being single process is my favorite thing about it, i don't have to babysit the fucking program.
>it's another google falseflagging thread
>>55238800
how
>>55236628
Vivaldi
>>55246582
>googling is hard
what are you doing on the tech board
>>55246655
ur a fuckin gaywad
>>55246690
and you are quite possibly retarded, so i will save myself from picking on you.
>>55236603
>Adblock Plus
>FireShot
>Kaspersky Protection
>LastPass
>SoundCloud Downloader
>YouTube Video and Audio Downloader
K E K
E
K
>>55236767
how is adblock ok?
>>55236603
Opinions discarded
>>55236541
>OC 2600k
>high performance
>>55246541
Oh yes, I love it when a single website cripples the entire browser for a minute.
>>55237259
I also use no script, explain?
>>55246793
umatrix replaces noscript and requestpolicy
>>55246843
Umatrix doesn't do clearclick like Noscript does.
>>55246876
no one is forcing you to use it
>>55246729
fag
>>55246891
I am forcing myself to use Clearclick
>>55236628
>still has flash installed
>>55237917
Firefox until version 24 was a success. People left because Mozilla emulated Chrome, because they have decided that normies are of more importance than features.
Anyway, they have NOT been forced to compete with Chrome. They could have stayed a niche browser for people who loving more advanced features, this decision to compete with Chrome and target the same market share segment was only made because of greed. Mozilla is jealous of Chrome's market share.
That would have never been the case with old Mozilla developers as they had a strong loyalty towards the community. Today's team Mozilla has only a strong loyalty towards big money, market share, competing with Chrome.
The user does no longer play any role for them.
>>55237917
Also, market share today is only a joke as compared to the values of Firefox 20-22. The big loss started when money, market share and influence was more important than staying with the users who made Firefox the big famous browser it used to be.
There is ZERO reason to compete with Chrome, as Firefox and Chrome user-bases have been different. Firefox users loved features and complexity, Chrome users loved simplicity and minimalism. Both user bases needs are incompatible.
And Mozilla started to forge Googles concept with their own. Hence users started to run away. The irony is that they picked Google as goal to vote with their feet. And Mozilla is making the bigger mistake to think now that Google is better.
I call that twice the incompetence. First, they ignored their own users needs and second they even do not realize that users switching to Chrome is just a protest vote.
>>55246378
youtube-dl
>>55249084
Nothing you're saying makes sense. Your definition of user is "niche user" and not "average joe" that they're appealing to. In other words you're upset that they're not longer appealing to you.
>>55249730
A big part of the Firefox market share have been niche users. That are the guys who have left since Australis and these are the reason why the market share was falling that much.
Firefox was created in the beginning for the geeks and advanced users. It makes perfect sense. Mozilla just decided at one point that they want to compete with Chrome because they got jealous of it's influence and market share.
Then they became a browser for the average joe. After Australis has hit.
>>55236541
I don't know, must be an error on your end, firefox rus great on my shitbox
>>55249730
They have betrayed their origin and their own target user base. All for number catching to be as powerful and have the same influence as Google Chrome.
Mozilla does not realize they can't win against Chrome. It would have been better they would not have betrayed geeks, as that guys are more of value than the average joe.
Mozilla today is a disgusting gooders company which has no respect for users different needs or choice of options. They are the perfect example what happens when Open Source gets corrupted.
>>55250119
The point is, if you even are unable to have faith in Open Source developers and you are unable to trust them suddenly, who else you can trust or put your faith towards?
>>55249730
Also, projects like Otter or Midori or Qupzilla or Qutebrowser show that you can survive with very few resources and if a developer respects geeks they are going to give respect towards the developer too.
And suddenly Mozilla was not able to do that anymore, after they have done it for so many years?
This is nothing less than corruption, greed and being taken over by marketing guys who care more for numbers than user experience.
Fuck that garbage, fuck it al!
N00bs should not have the power to change the course where software developing is going into the future.
Because if the n00bs are saying where the journey is going, nothing advanced will be around anymore, you only will have your stupid nice web2.0 design and social media crap polluting your software.
Pro users are the ones who realize the usefulness of features and functions. They realize that the concept "One design and function set for all" sucks bigtime and is against the individuality of the different people.
No, the n00bs should all shut the fuck up. Because of them we pro guys will suffer or do it already.
>>55236639
tabs
>>55250119
>Firefox was created in the beginning for the geeks and advanced users.
No it wasn't. It's just a browser. I'm sorry if you believed "IE is for normies" and that you were a hacker for installing and using Firefox, but Firefox is and has always been just a browser. It only ever got any market share because IE6 was really bad, and so Firefox only being "kinda suck" was an improvement.
Now there's Chrome, which is an improvement over Firefox. You desperately trying to hold on to your 10 year old self's idea that you were a computer genius for knowing where the Windows defragmentation utility was doesn't change that Firefox is just a browser and you're not a hacker for using it.
>>55246781
yea, no, that is never an issue unless you have a few hundred tabs open at once with nothing suspended
something like the great suspender needs to go to firefox, but what you describe is largely the plugin container and if you kill that process it un fucks the rest of the browser.
but yea, thats what i want, need to babysit the program some more so in total i don't go over 150 processes, or have this WONDERFUL bug i found in chrome, where the processes refuse to close or give up their resources, that may be the extension sidewise doing it, need to look into alternatives.
off-topic, but what on earth is this half-round element next to the url bar? Seems to be a remnant of the navigation buttons, but I've tried hiding pretty much everything related to those.
Because Firefox is horrible.
And I'm telling this as a Firefox fan. It lags and is slow as shit. But it's the least botnet.
>>55236541
I keep getting random BSOD when watching any streaming video after a while
Tried with palemoon, no BSOD
>>55250520
It's from the URL bar
>>55250680
I mean the image (?) that's currently on top of the identity box icon
>>55237917
>So what choice do they have but to follow Chrome?
Literally every majority of all browsers on the market are copying Chromium or Google's Dependencies. Mozilla copying Chrome prevents the market from choosing viable alternative from Chrome/Chromium. They are actually helping Google because they are saturating the market with Chrome-like browser.
I don't understand why people want this when Google could easily introduced something like Google Play services to Chrorium browsers, and force everybody to run the botnet. The power that Google has over Chrome rivals Microsoft's Internet Explorer monopoly. Mozilla copying their competition does go against Firefox's successful.
Mozilla is suppose to be non-profit organization like FSF, EFF,etc. None of those organization gives a shit if Windows/OSX has market-share. Organizations like FSF decisions are based on what's best for technology, not what's make the most profit.
>>55250855
Completely catering to your 0.000000001% market share taste is not "providing an alternative to Chrome." To provide an alternative to Chrome/IE they have to be in the same league. Becoming a text-based Linux-terminal-only browser is not "an alternative to Chrome" no matter how much that would fit your use case. If you don't have a text-based Linux-terminal-only browser, make one. It's not Firefox's job to fit your needs, and doing so does not make it an alternative, it makes it not so. If Firefox becomes so bad that 99.9% of people couldn't switch to it because Chrome/IE would be better no matter how bad they got, then Firefox is not an alternative to Chrome/IE. It's just a niche browser nobody uses.
>>55251259
What is bad with being a niche browser? Slowly i think you are a fucking simple fag.
Firefox WAS a power user browser, the concept changed when Google was rising towards power.
There was ZERO reason for copying Chrome. Mozilla still would have been able to survive. This decision to be like the competition only arrived when Mozilla decided that market share and money and influence was more of value than user focused functions!
Simplicity, minimalism and a fucking shiny design sucks!
>>55252376
>I was a hacker for installing Firefox
No, you weren't.
>>55251259
2 your information moron, Firefox was surviving very well with functions for a long time. Who wanted functions used them, who not ignored them.
But thanks to that shiny new age mentality which Google introduced, people start to scream bloat when they see one single pixel which is not in line with a perfect design.
If they see a button they do not want, they start to rage. And if they see a full feature set like in Firefox 22, they go on a rampage.
Fuck you simple fags! I can't say how much i despise you and your fucking trend of dumbing down the software to match Chrome!
>>55252407
No, but for using tons of customization features to make the browser fit my need. To make it look like i wanted it.
You simple fags have NO right to deny that from us advanced users. Go to hell cunt!
>>55252413
>2 your information moron, Firefox was surviving very well with functions for a long time. Who wanted functions used them, who not ignored them.
The world wants a browser that is secure and stable, not full of useless functions.
If you want to use them, there's nothing stopping you from using your beloved Firefox 22.
>>55252431
>I'm an advanced user, but I can't even fork Firefox
LOL.
>>55236603
>>55236603
>kaspersky extension
delete this
>>55252407
How about with that... you want Chrome, use Chrome. But stop demanding that every software has to feature the same like Google Chrome does have.
Instead you demand that every software developer introduces the same and becomes a carbon copy of your so much loved original.
People never learn. We already had a situation where we had one single system enforced on a lot of people. That system was called Nazi!
Learn history.
>>55252462
>But stop demanding that every software has to feature the same like Google Chrome does have.
I'm not. The world is.
>>55252449
People want a Firefox which is having tons of features and is unlike the competition. As long as Mozilla does not stop copying Chrome, more users will leave.
>>55252478
>People want a Firefox which is having tons of features and is unlike the competition
Firefox's market share says exactly the opposite. Don't confuse what you want with what anyone else wants.
>>55252476
Mozilla does not need to do that. There are enough users for them to survive with a feature rich concept.
They have gone out of their way to become like the rest. They have not used a perfect opportunity.
Why jumping down a cliff just because someone else is doing it?
>>55252484
People left because Mozilla is removing features you stupid fucking cunt! Fuck off asshole!
>>55252484
Go to Syria and let yourself being whipped by a horde of Islamist scum, perhaps that way you get a brain again fucking minimalist scumbag!
Anti customization fascist, computer Hitler!
>>55252489
>Mozilla does not need to do that.
Yes they do. They do not serve their purpose of being an alternative browser by only catering to a tiny niche.
>>55252501
Nope. Don't confuse you disliking Chrome for anyone else. Chrome is on top for a reason.
>>55252517
Chrome is on top because the majority of the computer users are n00bs.
But that still does not mean a Firefox which is not for n00bs is going to be dead Mozilla had the simple choice. To stay true to the more demanding users or try to defeat Chrome to become number one on their own.
Still they will never be number one. All you authists posting in that thread don't get it. Both the unfriendly mad authist and the Chrome clone argument fraction.
You both lost. Now out of my board!
ITT: denial
Also i see no reason why ricers should be sad that Mozilla does not love them anymore. You have Pale Moon, Seamonkey, otterbrowser and if you are botnet freaks you can go to Vivaldi, Centbrowser, Maxthon or Slimjet.
If you dislike simple Googlezilla Firechrome as much as i did, uninstall it and vote with your brain. Pick a browser which better fits your needs.
That is what i have done too. Is that so hard to do too?
>>55252569
Mozilla doesn't need to beat Chrome to survive. Catering to the 0.0001% would ensure Firefox's death, though.
If you want Firefox 24, use Firefox 24. The rest of us want a Firefox that is a viable alternative to IE/Chrome to keep them honest. Firefox being a slow, unstable, insecure browser for "advanced users" would mean Firefox can't do this.
Before you waste the time here to show disrespect to others with writing tons of moron postings, you could have already installed a replacement browser of your choice.
Also why you start to discuss with anons about such a topic? /G/ is a troll place, you should now that already. It is all about provoke others and be provoked.
Again, go. Go away all of you. Real life is calling your name. And perhaps your mother too? :P
>>55252634
Firefox was never slow. Servo could even feature all the removed features again and it still would be fast and stable. The faster your engine, the more features you can deliver without too much speed decrease.
Your argument is worth nothing. You just hate features and want a minimalist browser. Hell, even i can see that.
>>55252634
Luckily i found with otterbrowser a great replacement. No longer being forced to endure all the crap Mozilla is doing since version 29 is really refreshing ;)
>>55252634
>The rest of us want a Firefox that is a viable alternative to IE/Chrome to keep them honest.
I don't.
I switched to Chromium becasue why would I use a browser that's worse than Chrome in every way?
If Firefox was still a more usable browser overall, I could deal with slightly slower javascript and DOM engines.
But since all browsers have shit interfaces now, I might as well pick the shitty interface that has the best speed.
>>55252634
And if you wonder how they could do that... Browser.html
I have done recently a private analysis of Vivaldi Browser If Mozilla would implement in a future version a non native UI, they could implement customization again in both a cost effective and not too complex resource demanding way.
As Servo is less Ram demanding than Blink, this could be the perfect opportunity to deliver for you the simple browser you always wanted to have and others could have again their optional check-boxes, themes or even UI customization like moving bars around.
>>55252569
I use Chrome because Firefox crashes all the fucking time and Chrome doesn't. Firefox is plenty fast, renders fine, and I actually prefer a lot of Firefox's interface, like the bookmarks, history, tab groups, and downloads. If it just ever got stable, I'd be fine with it.
>inb4 it's your fault because extensions
I use the same basic 3 extensions on both, uBlock Origin, 4chanx (+greasemonkey on ff), and [spoiled]reddit enhancement suite[/spoiled]
>>55252768
It is called Electron. This is what Mozilla should use.
Then they could have again an interface with lots of average joe non-compatible features in an optional way.
And the browser would be stable too. And feature all the latest shiny web standards.
>>55252768
This would even be more simple than making a carbon copy of Blink.
Basically Servo is exactly that. Multiprocess, fast, minimalist API set. Mozilla could save the costs for recreating Blink and could use Elektron with LibChromiumContent.
Open Source Brave is using this, and the browser is the fastest i ever tried. Bad thing it is ads botnet, so no alternative for us free guys.
>>55246742
what's wrong with AdBlock Plus ?
>>55253063
uBlock Origin is better, DESU.
I just reinstalled nightly to get some multiprocess fagfox goodness, and it's horrible compared to chrome.
>>55252768
Have you tried resetting your user profile? (You can do that through Help -> Troubleshooting Information).
>>55250170
As with most things pick your poison
>>55236541
>workstation
>overclocked
wew
>not using superior forks
>>55253634
>one man project
>oudated and slow as fuck
>superior
only on /g/
>>55253647
>slow as fuck
>outdated
haha what? It's being updated continuosly..only because it doesn't use the shitty new firefox engine, doesn't mean it's outdated :^)
>>55253665
>only because it doesn't use the shitty new firefox engine, doesn't mean it's outdated
Current Firefox is still running on Gecko, same as always
>>55251259
>>55252484
>BUT MUH MARKET SHARE.
You don't fucking see Edge or Safari becoming another chrome clone. Because Microsoft/Apple have business strategist that understand you need to stand out from the market to be chosen. It's not about being a niche, but not loosing the market share you already have.
For the last fucking time. Copying Chrome is terrible because literally saturates the entire market with nothing but Chromium clones. There is dozens of browsers that have Chrome-like features like Opera, Vivaldi,etc. Normies won't know the difference, and will just use chrome.
Jesus fucking christ, do you think Firefox would have ever beaten IE by just copying IE? Come on, now!
Why the FUCK does my firefox history keep disappearing in one form or another? At first it completely disappeared cause I was low on storage space and memory (I think). After freeing up some and rebooting the browser a few times it returned, even though I had screwed up the places.sqlite file but somehow managed to recover it. This time all my history except this past month has disappeared even though when i check the places.sqlite file it all seems to be intact. I am low on storage (1st time it was 0 bytes available) but not memory. How do I see all of my history again?
>>55253793
If you don't like Chrome, just use Edge then.
>do you think Firefox would have ever beaten IE by just copying IE?
They did copy IE -- they were able to render web pages on a screen. They then went beyond this. As of right now, Firefox basically can't render web pages on a screen compared to Chrome. So guess what? They have to catch up in order to get anywhere.
>>55253665
>using the smiley with a carat nose
>>55253793
This. That's the reason I stopped using it and just switched to opera.
>>55253821
How do you even run a computer that lacks enough storage space for a simple browsing history to expand by a few %?
>>55254162
You switched to Opera which has Chrome-like features because a browser won't beat another by having similar features?
I don't understand you reasoning. Please expand.
>>55254199
I was torrenting a lot. I have half a gb left atm.
>>55254270
But Firefox was the first thing to fail when you hadn't enough space for more text?
>>55254360
Yes, probably because I had a lot of tabs open. Second was chrome and then explorer itself crashed.
>>55253593
I've done that before, with varying results. It always eventually goes back to being crashy again even when that works. It's easier just to use something that just doesn't crash.
>>55254270
>>55254360
I'm also having a problem where the storage space randomly shrinks and the windows CBS persist log files get bigger than they should.
Because you're lying, I guess. Firefox runs great on my think pad T410.
>>55236541
You installed a shit addon and never close your browser.
Learn to read reviews before installing software and to put away your toys when you're done with them.
>>55236603
>FireShot
>shift+f2 screenshot --fullpage
>>55253980
>So guess what? They have to catch up in order to get anywhere.
They don't need to copy IE/Chrome in for to be better, just like Edge/Safari.
>Just use Edge/Safari.
I shouldn't have to. There is no reason why Firefox MUST copy Chrome. Especially when copying Chrome is against their open standards.
m8 i haven't upgraded past firefox 23, running 14 extensions and my browser handles fine.
>>55236603
Get rid of
>classic theme restorer
>fireshot
>kaspersky protection
>last pass
>sound cloud downloader
>youtube video and audio downloader
Replace Adblock Plus with uBlock origin.
Use the regular theme.
Install Fireshot when you need it, then uninstall
Firefox has a built-in virus scanner no need for Kaspersky.
Remember your passwords.
Install soundcloud downloader when you need it, then uninstall.
Use clipconverter.cc to download from youtube.
Install Thumbnail Zoom Plus.
>>55256020
>classic theme restorer
Why? Is it really a resource hog?
>clipconverter.cc
This, or even better youtube-dl
this is what I use, am I SHIT?
inbr >reddit
>>55256098
>inbr
>YouTube High Definition
Get rid of that at least...
Even simple tasks like browsing openstreetmap is sluggish as fuck with this crapware
>>55236603
>>55236628
>>55256098
>not having flashgot to download vids
wew
>>55256255
>living in 2009
>>55256277
>still works better than anything in 2016
rekt
>>55256342
>works better than youtube-dl
lmao
>>55256360
>limited compatibility vs unlimited
>no mobile
>can't even split contents
WEW
I recommend adding session manager and pocket
>>55256467
>not just using wget
>>55256360
it does actually. youtube-dl is a broken pos on half the sites it supports.
>>55256068
clipconverter forces adware, don't trust it
>>55256506
wget is for loonixkids and archiving websites, no other use.
t. guy archiving /g/ since 2007
Any company that spends 15,000 dorrars to remove the word "slave" from the docs and APIs, has no right to exist
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2015/12/10/mozilla-open-source-support-first-awards-made/
