Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Anybody Here Use SeaMonkey (2.0)?

<< < (2/3) > >>

marcdw:
Regarding v2.0 how is it as far as memory usage and/or startup time?
On my older ThinkPad (y'know, those 512MB max machines) I can easily see
how well a program works. Besides the rather large memory footprint of
Firefox its startup time is extremely slow (the same can be said of other
apps based on similar code such as SongBird, Komodo Edit, and to a lesser
degree Thunderbird).

I've been using SeaMonkey 1.1.8 quite often as of late as it seems so
stable. I can browse here, there, and everywhere and memory use
seems to be fairly static.
My once fave default browser, SlimBrowser on top of IE7 (nice and fast),
will see a major memory gobble once I hit flash-based sites and whatnot.

SeaMonkey turns out to be a good compromise between Firefox and IE (plus I get
to use NoScript, something I wish was available on the IE side of things).

So anyway I was wondering if SeaMonkey 2.0 will be using some of that
same code in the aforementioned Mozilla apps that cause them to be so
slow starting up as well as their memory usage.
I reckon I'll just have to give it a shot and see.

Marc

xtabber:
I use both SeaMonkey and Firefox -- Firefox as default browser, but clearing cookies and other info between sessions, and SeaMonkey for email and browsing with persistent cookies -- but the browser I use most of the time is Opera anyway.

The browser in SeaMonkey 2.0 is essentially Firefox 3.5.4 with a SeaMonkey look to it (and SeaMonkey type preferences) and the email client is closer to Thunderbird, so the memory footprint is equivalent to either of those, but if you use both the email client and browser at the same time, you'll see substantial savings.

My checks showed that Seamonkey 1.1.18 browser by itself used about 20MB RAM on startup, Firefox about 32MB, and Seamonkey 2.0 about 30MB for either the browser or email client alone, but only about 38MB for both at the same time. I didn't do any serious testing to see how they compared when actually loading web sites, although sites that worked with Firefox but not SeaMonkey 1.1.x do work with 2.0

One thing to be aware of is that 2.0 stores profile data like Firefox and Thunderbird, not like 1.1.x. If, as I do, you store your data in a non-standard location to allow easy syncing between computers, you'll need to take some extra steps.  On first run, let SeaMonkey import everything from your 1.1.x profile into the new profile location, then move the contents of the new profile folder where you want it to reside and edit profile.ini in %APPDATA%/Mozilla/SeaMonkey to point there. See http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Backing+up+your+information for more information on moving profiles.

marcdw:
Only minutes after posting my questions I found out that v2.0 stable had been released (and today
when running Secunia's security tool it has already labeled v1.1.8 as an end-of-life app  :huh: ).

After installation, configuration, and a reboot (unrelated to SeaMonkey) v2.0 started quick enough
and memory use is still pretty good. No issues with general browsing, mail and news use.

At the moment though it won't replace my 1.1.8. The RoboForm Toolbar does not work with v2
and the RoboForm Bookmarklet (a neat workaround for unsupported browsers as well as for use
in Linux and Mac) doesn't work either but that may be due to NoScript (will disable and test later).
At the moment several extensions that work with 1.1.8 or even the 2.0 betas aren't ready for
2.0 stable like Mnenhy, Launchy, and PrefBar. So far I only have NoScript and FlashGot.
And I kind of liked the old Classic theme.
I use the Calendar extension with 1.1.8. Haven't checked if it's available for 2.0 but word has it
the latest Lightning beta may work.

Thanks for the tip regarding moving profiles as I do keep the profile in a non-standard location.

Marc

dantheman:
Although i too have made the switch from Seamonkey to Phoenix Firefox a long time ago.
Seamonkey2 has proven to be quite impressive. Speed at startup and page rendering is just no.1

But, being able to test latest beta builds of Thunderbird and Firefox with:
"Nightly Tester Tools" to make the dozen extensions work,
http://www.oxymoronical.com/web/firefox/nightly
I think i'll still keep on with TB and Firefox.

Tuxman:
The Nightly Tester Tools are not really necessary for that.

about:config - Boolean extensions.checkCompatibility - set to false. No need to use a separate extension for that.

(Disclaimer: Only tested with Firefox.)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page