Prev: Alt.OS.Linux.Slackware FAQ pointer
Next: Installing Slackware on a 2Tb+ device
From: ~kurt on 3 Apr 2008 21:36
Joe <undisclosed(a)undisclosed.invalid> wrote:
>
> I also find seamonkey faster than firefox. The fact that I compile
> seamonkey and use the binary release firefox might be somewhat related but
> not to that point.

When I had compiled Mozilla a while back, it was slow as hell until I found
the correct config options.

- Kurt
From: ~kurt on 5 Apr 2008 14:18
Joe <undisclosed(a)undisclosed.invalid> wrote:
>
> Never had that problem. I use the same options as Patrick's SlackBuild.
>

Well, that was the solution - I had just downloaded the source and compiled
with all the defaults like I would most applications....

- Kurt
From: simonp on 8 Apr 2008 02:51
notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote:
>
> Is firefox just a scam or is it really all that much better than the old
> mozilla. It runs like a pig, for me. Konqueror couldn't even find FP9.
> Mozilla not only ran youtube, but responds faster and resolves pages faster.
> Why is firefox growing and mozilla dying?
>

I had been using mozilla forever, and just upgraded to Firefox
recently. It honestly felt like a downgrade, not only the layout
which felt "dumbed down" but the memory consumption.

So I have switched to Opera, which according to top, looks like
it eats up much less memory and cpu. I find the layout of Opera
to be very elegant, compred to Firefox which seems very
Microsoftish and kitschy. The current flash player for opera
seems to be broken, however, and some secure websites (my school)
don't support Opera (its also closed source). For general
browsing though, its a pleasureable experience.

I will try out SeaMonkey though. How do its features compare to
other browsers? Are the improvements to Firefox being
back-ported to it?

-Simon

--
Spectral Horse Poems
ww.spectralhorse.com
Coins in the Void
From: notbob on 8 Apr 2008 10:21
On 2008-04-08, simonp(a)nospam.com <simonp(a)nospam.com> wrote:

> I will try out SeaMonkey though. How do its features compare to
> other browsers? Are the improvements to Firefox being
> back-ported to it?

I can't say about the improvements. I have switched back to seamonkey/mozzy
cuz I can watch streaming video just fine on my ancient iron. I can't with
FF. I don't know if the FF add-ons (extensions?, plug-ins?)work with mozzy.
I do know the purpose of seamonkey, according to the SM webpages, is to keep
mozzy more like traditional mozzy instead of like FF. This is fine with me,
cuz I agree with you that FF has been dumbed down. Granular control has
been reduced, or at least hidden, on things like cookie control, security
settings, etc.

FF has more add-ons and some are quite handy. NoScript is excellent for
exploring more shady areas of the net, like pron, warez, and hacker sites
which tend to have malicious web scripts (I had a w98 HDD trashed by a
drive-by). Whether of not it will load to mozzy, I can't say at this point.
But, like other software, I'll use both mozzy and FF, depending on the need.


nb
From: No_One on 8 Apr 2008 10:22
On 2008-04-08, simonp(a)nospam.com <simonp(a)nospam.com> wrote:
> notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is firefox just a scam or is it really all that much better than the old
>> mozilla. It runs like a pig, for me. Konqueror couldn't even find FP9.
>> Mozilla not only ran youtube, but responds faster and resolves pages faster.
>> Why is firefox growing and mozilla dying?
>>
>
> I had been using mozilla forever, and just upgraded to Firefox
> recently. It honestly felt like a downgrade, not only the layout
> which felt "dumbed down" but the memory consumption.

FWIW firefox caches web pages in memeory...if you go t0 the firefox site
you'll find instructions on how to reduce the number of pages firefox will
hold in mem. It helps some.

Opera, the longer it runs, the more mem it consumes.

ken


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Alt.OS.Linux.Slackware FAQ pointer
Next: Installing Slackware on a 2Tb+ device