Author Topic: Rant: Firefox 3.5.x (Read 23,367 times)

SectorSeven · « **on:** September 25, 2009, 01:57 PM »

Not really a company criticism, but I need to blow some steam off...

What is the deal with Firefox 3.5.x?

I have been trying to run with each and every Firefox release of the 3.5.x line, and each one has its own severe issues that are obvious immediately after using it for several hours.

Slowness, responsiveness and halts are the most common problems for me.

I have read that it has something to do with Flash. I hate Adobe as much as the next guy - but I don't really care - why release one version after another with what seems to be an unsatisfactory level of testing?

Luckily enough, it is quite easy to roll back to the 3.0.x line - which may be a little less friendly in terms of memory footprint, but at least I can rely on it not halting in the middle of me writing a long email.

I am on updated XP and Firefox is running with only a handful of common extensions.

If I have to guess, I would say that there was a serious change in dev team personnel over there and the new guys are still trying to gain control of everything...

I am waiting for 3.6

Innuendo · « **Reply #1 on:** September 25, 2009, 04:11 PM »

Quote from: SectorSeven on September 25, 2009, 01:57 PM

I have been trying to run with each and every Firefox release of the 3.5.x line, and each one has its own severe issues that are obvious immediately after using it for several hours.

Slowness, responsiveness and halts are the most common problems for me.

I'm going to now utter the most useless words that can present themselves in a thread concerning computer problems.

Are you ready?

It doesn't happen on my machine.

I'm running Firefox v3.53 with a profile that hasn't been considered new since the early v3.0x days and I've run every release version and several beta versions of Firefox with this very same profile. I'm running 48 extensions with 19 GreaseMonkey scripts.

Granted everything I have shoehorned into Firefox I suppose I should be experiencing problems, but I'm not. I do, however, use a liberal selection of things like Ad Muncher, NoScript, etc. to ensure that I am in charge of the web content that comes across my screen such as evil ads that do more than just advertise, cross-site scripting and all that other slimy crap web surfers have to deal with these days.

In short, I think Firefox v3.5x is the best version yet & I can't wait for it to get better.

SectorSeven · « **Reply #2 on:** September 25, 2009, 04:51 PM »

Quote from: Innuendo on September 25, 2009, 04:11 PM

I can't wait for it to get better.

I envy you, only I can't wait for it to get good again...

wraith808 · « **Reply #3 on:** September 25, 2009, 06:00 PM »

Just to balance it back in S7's favor... I'm having the same problems. On multiple machines. And on each I delayed upgrading as long as I could... then once I updated, I had the problem. I haven't had the time to look into it, but yes, it's very annoying. And it's not Flash... it happens on non-flash pages.

In short, I think there is a problem, and I think there's something behind it that doesn't happen all the time, but is frequent enough to warrant investigation.

Quote from: SectorSeven on September 25, 2009, 04:51 PM

Quote from: Innuendo on September 25, 2009, 04:11 PM
I can't wait for it to get better.
I envy you, only I can't wait for it to get good again...

Here, here...

Innuendo · « **Reply #4 on:** September 25, 2009, 06:03 PM »

Let me temper my praise with the tidbit of information that I am running Windows 7. There may very well be something at an OS level that is helping me and hindering you if you are running a different OS.

Just a wild-@$$ed guess, though. Shooting in the dark, if you will....

MilesAhead · « **Reply #5 on:** September 25, 2009, 07:58 PM »

I'm running with Minefield 3.6 pre from August 5. It's just before the Firefox 3.6 pre alpha release. I've found it quite stable. So much so that I've quit playing around with other nightly builds and just settled on using this until FF 3.6 comes out.

Using Mr Tech Toolkit with AutoCopy, Better Privacy, deskCut, Download Statusbar, FEBE, FlashGot with GigaGet download manager, Launchy, NoScript, Secure Login, Stay-open Menu, Sync Places and Tab Mix Plus.

Seems as stable as any other FF I've used. Definitely better than any of the other 3.x versions I've tried.

edit: Thing is I don't know if you can find it. That nightly build fpt branch is now populated with the 3.7 pre stuff. Don't know if 3.6 pre alpha is as good as the one I'm using. I'm sticking with this one.

MilesAhead · « **Reply #6 on:** September 25, 2009, 08:25 PM »

btw here's the 3.6pre that was released the day after the one I use. That's as close as I can find. I haven't tried it myself. I like the Aug 5 build. But it may be better than what you are experiencing.

SectorSeven · « **Reply #7 on:** September 25, 2009, 08:30 PM »

So far the stable, public builds were not too stable with me - personally, I will definitely avoid testing pre releases...

MilesAhead · « **Reply #8 on:** September 25, 2009, 08:42 PM »

That's up to you. I'm running Aug 5 build on XP SP2, W7 7077 and Vista64 SP1 and it's quite smooth.

Innuendo · « **Reply #9 on:** September 26, 2009, 04:06 AM »

W7 7077? Why haven't you at least upgraded to the public RC build 7100 candidate?

MilesAhead · « **Reply #10 on:** September 26, 2009, 05:23 AM »

Quote from: Innuendo on September 26, 2009, 04:06 AM

W7 7077? Why haven't you at least upgraded to the public RC build 7100 candidate?

What's the advantage of reinstalling my apps yet another time?

sri · « **Reply #11 on:** September 26, 2009, 08:29 AM »

To the OP: I suggest you try creating a new profile and use it.

http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Managing+profiles

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #12 on:** September 26, 2009, 09:07 AM »

I am not seeing any of these issues with Firefox - in fact I find the 3.5 series rather better than 3.0 from a speed point of view.

I don't worry too much about footprint but I think 3.5 is a bit more compact on my systems.

By the way I am running it on multiple computers using XP Pro, Vista HP and Ult, Win 7 Pro and none seem to have any particular issues.

Not much help but maybe it is conflicting with something else you are using or an addon.

SectorSeven · « **Reply #13 on:** September 26, 2009, 09:36 AM »

@Carol - yes, when I was using 3.5.x pages loaded considerably faster, that I can confirm.
The thing is that in the 3.5 line there seem to be some responsiveness issue, like when you click a link, it sometimes takes some seconds to "think" before it processes the request.

Or in earlier 3.5 releases, FF was halting for half a second every few seconds - it was noticeable when you were typing a long text in a textarea, or scrolling down the page (or doing other long, supposed-to-be-smooth motion).

At least until version 3.5.2, I know I was not the only one experiencing these issues, judging mostly by some long long threads on the Firefox message boards, which were followed by a fix version.

So yes, I am aware that some (maybe most) users do not see these issues - but still it is quite frustrating, as I have a relatively common configuration.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #14 on:** September 26, 2009, 09:45 AM »

Quote from: SectorSeven on September 26, 2009, 09:36 AM

Or in earlier 3.5 releases, FF was halting for half a second every few seconds

Is that just in Firefox or generally on your system? The only time I have experienced that sort of 'stop-go' typing is when I had a driver issue ???

SectorSeven · « **Reply #15 on:** September 26, 2009, 09:58 AM »

Quote from: Carol Haynes on September 26, 2009, 09:45 AM

Is that just in Firefox or generally on your system?

Most definitely only FF, and only the 3.5.x FF and I know other people had it.
I was just now searching google to see if I can find some references, but couldnt find the page I was looking for.

But, there are many pages on Google, when you search for Firefox 3.5 crash / problem / halt and the such that complain about these problems.

I do realize it may be a small thing that is different between a working and non working configuration (like for example, a different anti virus software) - maybe it is BitDefender messing with me again...

One more thing to note here (I dont know why they are doing it): Mozilla seems to consider the 3.0 and 3.5 as two separate lines.
I was using 3.0.12 and a yesterday I got a message asking if I want to upgrade to 3.0.14 (not to 3.5).

Ehtyar · « **Reply #16 on:** September 26, 2009, 11:34 AM »

3.0 and 3.5 are indeed different branches of Firefox. Mozilla considers first-point releases (x.x) to be distinct, only second-point releases (x.x.x) are of the same branch. Each first-point release is built atop a new version Gecko, the Mozilla rendering engine. Firefox 3.5 will not be offered as an update to 3.0 clients until support ends for 3.0. This is simply Mozilla's style of versioning their software.

Under Windows 7 RTM with Firefox 3.5 plus ~40 extensions, I can report no such problems as those detailed by SectorSeven.

Ehtyar.

cmpm · « **Reply #17 on:** September 26, 2009, 11:36 AM »

Sounds like a video card driver issue.
Maybe update the drivers if it needs it.
Or it's an ATI card to which there is no fix,
that I know of.

The longer the web page the worse it is,
is that correct?

There is a rogue copy of flash for Firefox roaming the net.
Try uninstalling flash and reinstall it from filehippo.com.

http://www.filehippo.com/download_flashplayer_firefox/

Same with shockwave.

http://www.filehippo.com/download_shockwave/

MilesAhead · « **Reply #18 on:** September 26, 2009, 04:24 PM »

It's too bad the nightly build branch has gone to 3.7. Trying various 3.6pre builds I noticed from day to day, sometimes the autoupdate would be fine, sometimes things would get flaky. I started downloading and saving full installers for the nightly builds that seemed rock solid. If I got a flaky update, I'd run one of the solid build installs. FEBE and SyncPlaces would make sure I didn't have to reconfigure everything if something strange happened.

One thing about the nightly builds, they have them configured to install in a separate folder(Minefield) and just inherit your profile. If you uninstall Minefield, the other firefox already on your system should work as it did before except on first launch it will take you to the page as if you updated.

As 3.7 goes along you might try a few and see if one stands out as much better than what you have. The changes will be much faster than waiting for 3.5 updates. I know what you mean about the Firefox minority of problems. Seems like when 3.x came out it was totally unusable for me while many others were happily browsing along. I stayed with 2.x for a long time. 3.0x and 3.5x didn't seem any better. That's why when I read about this jit stuff and 3.6pre I decided if any 3.x is flaky anyway, I might as well go for some speed. Worked out well in my case.

I realize it doesn't necessarily mean it will automatically work great on your system. Just with rapidly changing builds you have more shots at the bullseye.

SectorSeven · « **Reply #19 on:** September 26, 2009, 04:27 PM »

Minefield.... how sarcastically appropriate...

MilesAhead · « **Reply #20 on:** September 26, 2009, 04:29 PM »

Quote from: SectorSeven on September 26, 2009, 04:27 PM

Minefield.... how sarcastically appropriate...

I take it as truth in advertising. No warranty.

edit: other than that all I can say is Opera 10 seems pretty solid. Still doesn't have things that have become habitual for me like AutoCopy but at least the password and form entry stuff works well. I don't get into mouse gestures or that hot page whatever it is, so I can't speak to those.

Innuendo · « **Reply #21 on:** September 26, 2009, 05:29 PM »

Quote from: MilesAhead on September 26, 2009, 05:23 AM

What's the advantage of reinstalling my apps yet another time?

Miles, I was thinking more of an upgrade install. Microsoft's upgrade install procedure with Windows 7 is scary good. I did a few upgrade installs during the beta & couldn't tell the difference than from a clean install. It was that efficient.

I, of course, did a clean install once I got my mitts on the RTM. Apple better enjoy getting their shots in now. Once October 22nd comes a lot of the smack they've been talking will be moot points.

MilesAhead · « **Reply #22 on:** September 26, 2009, 09:17 PM »

Afa laying on top of a running OS I think it worked for me twice. Putting Windows 3.1 on the same partition as Dos 5.2, and maybe putting Win98 2nd ed. onto a Win95 partition. Other than that, it's way too flaky. It's more hassle to fix it than to reinstall. I tried W7 64 bit upgrade on my Vista64 just for grins. The start menu was hosed and stuff was really flaky. I laid my Vista64 image back on. Besides, other than the Taskbar I didn't notice a difference. Vista64 with SP1 is pretty smooth.

As close as I can get is the Custom install. Portable apps that are just in a folder I only have to drag a shortcut to use. But anything with registry is stuck in Windows.old.

Besides, Windows Seven 7077 is running great. Sandboxie 3.8 works beautifully. Don't want to fix what ain't broken. When the time runs out then either I'll put XP, or my old Vista 32 bit image back on, buy some 7 or, if I'm really lucky, pull the HD and Network card out and junk it for a new PC with 7 SP1 already on.

Carol Haynes · « **Reply #23 on:** September 27, 2009, 01:51 PM »

Strange - I wanted to upgrade from XP to Win 7 Pro. There is no direct route so:

I upgraded from Win XP to Vista HP (for which I have a license) then to Windows 7 HP (without a license key as I don't have one) and then upgraded to Windows 7 Pro and then activated and licensed (with my MS Action Pack license).

No problems encountered at all. Incredibly smooth every time and the new system works fine.

I do find though you need a good running base system to upgrade from - remove any dodgy drivers and software before attempting an upgrade.

MilesAhead · « **Reply #24 on:** September 27, 2009, 04:37 PM »

Seems we've strayed OT. I may be tempted to try 3.7pre again soon. I tried one of the first builds and it was wicked flaky. If I run into a build that's solid on more than one OS I'll post the link.