Newest Firefox Browser Bashes Crashes (cnet.com) 134
Nobody likes it when a web browser bombs instead of opening up a website. Mozilla is addressing that in the newly released v53 of its Firefox browser, which it claims crashes 10 percent fewer times. CNET adds: The improvement comes through the first big debut of a part of Project Quantum, an effort launched in 2016 to beef up and speed up Firefox. To improve stability, Firefox 53 on Windows machines isolates software called a compositor that's in charge of painting elements of a website onto your screen. That isolation into a separate computing process cuts down on trouble spots that can occur when Firefox employs computers' graphics chips, Mozilla said.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, Please do blame us 3rd world countries for holding you back.
Am from Iran, 3rd world and all the import/export drama.
Re: (Score:2)
The CPUs being dropped are over 15-years old, you aren't going to be able to render and scroll in most web pages with that hardware. The OSes haven't been supported in years by their manufacturers so using them, and expecting to limit the rest of the world from using modern features isn't realistic.
Re: (Score:3)
Because Vista = Server 2008. Some people still need to keep them servers alive for industrial purposes. With browser support fading, it is becoming increasingly difficult to keep these machines alive.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you need to run a modern browser on a dedicated server?
Re: (Score:2)
then update the OS!
local users without security updates, you are looking for trouble, no matter what browser you use...
better yet, install linux, run your app in wine, install freeNX, xpra, LTSP or even tightvnc (test to see what fits better your clients and app) and use it to run your app. Use native linux apps and only use wine for really support old apps
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, bug fixes, McFly.
Re: (Score:2)
TLS 1.whatever support to connect to whatever site/device that runs some shitty java applet?
Basically, the other side of the "keep an old portable version of a browser to connect to SSLvBroken shit like your HP switch" coin.
Re: (Score:2)
I can see dropping support for XP/Vista and 32 bit Macs (those vendors don't support those operating systems. Why would you support an operating system that no longer gets security updates at all?) Are they really dropping support for 32-bit Linux though? That does bug me a bit, but there are also many Linux distros that are dropping 32-bit support as well. Keep in mind, the Linux kernel no longer supports 386 chips either (there is a fork for that).
Even open source projects can't maintain things forever. D
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you support an operating system that no longer gets security updates at all?
If you had enough users, why wouldn't you? While the OS isn't getting patched, the system, sitting behind a firewall (even a residential router) isn't going to magically get compromised. However web browsers (and associated plugins like Java, Flash, and Adobe Acrobat) are a huge attack surface, and an updated web browser will do a lot more for that than an updated OS.
They've compartmentalised the renderer? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apps, apps, apps! LUDDITE !
Re: (Score:2)
No, the operating system is supposed to prevent one process from interfering with another. When an app has multiple security domains then it's up to the app developer to do compartmentalisation. OpenSSH has done this for over a decade, most browsers have done it for quite a few years. Current hardware[1] doesn't provide good mechanisms for doing fine-grained isolation within a single OS process.
[1] The project that I work on aims to address this limitation.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, but firefox was build as monolitic, separate each layer required lot of changes as every layer calls were all over the code. That was one of the reasons google started with chrome, trying to break firefox modules would be slower than rebuild... the problem with rebuild is instability, breaks with existent code and requires a huge amount of resources (just look to the netscape 4.x to mozilla migration)
mozilla have done that slowly and they started with plugins and then pick the next problematic layer (j
Re:A whole 10 percent fewer crashes? Wow! (Score:4, Insightful)
The only reason I haven't dumped it completely yet is because there are some useful add-ons that aren't available for Chrome...
Don't worry, they work hard on phasing out XUL add-ons with version 57 at the end of 2017 [mozilla.org], so that they will have just as few add-on choices as chrome.
Firefox 57 could be the end of Firefox. (Score:1, Interesting)
I can't see how the Firefox 57 release could possibly go down in a good way.
These changes have the potential to be the most disruptive ones to date, probably even worse than the Australis UI changes that drove away so many of Firefox's users earlier.
We aren't just talking about highly annoying UI changes here. We're talking about the risk for broken functionality, and in ways that aren't easily fixed. This is stuff that users can't just ignore or learn to work around.
If Firefox 57 does turn out to be the di
Re: (Score:3)
that is why they want to drop the old add-on support and use a model mostly compatible with chrome.
Current add-ons are too close to the firefox code and they can not mess with the code without breaking add-on or creating never-ending compatibility layers.
With the new add-ons api, this will get more stable and easier to port add-ons back and forward from/to chrome
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What are you missing? I moved from ff to Chrome and didn't find any lack of extensions.
As for updates, if it ain't broke...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with Firefox? My experience with Firefox (on a mac) is quite fine. I'm using it since the demise of Camino, and it's absolutely not worse than Safari or Chrome/Chromium, which I use at work. It is slower, that much is true, but the last crash was a long time ago, while Chrome crashed on me only last week.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...while twirling mustaches...
Autoplay Video Site (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
media.autoplay.enabled == false
Nice try Moz://a. (Score:2)
Nice try, but every time I've upgraded your browser it broke or removed features I use, and added useless junk on top.
I used to upgrade to the latest software as soon as it came out, but it feels like the likes of Microsoft and Mozilla are intentionally trying to train me to treat every software update with utmost suspicion and as a measure of last resort.
Re:Nice try EnsilZah. (Score:1)
Nobody cares about your experiences with Firefox when all you have to say is the same thing people generally say about basically every software upgrade ever: "I don't like change".
Re: (Score:2)
Change for the sake of change is dumb. Software people can't understand the fact that something might have a design end. Has the shape of a hammer changed in the past hundred years? No. Are these changes beneficial to anyone? Has an interface study been done on the results? I switched to Chrome after Firefox picked the "australis" look and became Chrome Junior.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This is exactly how I feel about Adobe as well. Every new version of Photoshop since one of the patches to CS6 all the way through the various CC releases has constantly added new bugs and instabilities to the application. It seems like every company going on these very short release cycles dont give two fucks about stability and literally takes YEARS to fix bugs now instead of months.
10% is a lot? (Score:2)
Chrome crashes on me less than once a month (I typically have to reboot for security patches before Chrome chrashes). Firefox must be crashing a *lot* if a 10% reduction is significant.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It doesn't. It's nothing like Chrome. I use Firefox exclusively, on several different platforms and I tend to keep the programme open for many weeks. I haven't had a crash in years.
No browser crashes... (Score:1)
Firefox does not crash for me under linux, hundred tabs open, many windows.
What usually crashes is the plugin container.
Some dammed java or flash locks up.
Fortunately I can kill the browser or browser window from a terminal.
Never crashes the system.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox must be crashing a *lot* if a 10% reduction is significant.
It's crashing on me a lot. The combination of Fb and G+ punches it right where it counts.
Re: (Score:2)
As I posted above, I haven't had a crash in a long time, but indeed, I don't use fb nor g+.
Re: (Score:2)
Well there ya' go. Stay the fuck off Facebook. (I mean only an idiot... right.) All the Universe is trying to tell you something.
The universe is trying to teach me to abandon my long-term friends? The universe is a fucking asshole. I don't think I'm going to listen to what it has to say.
Re: (Score:2)
As a standalone statistic, 10% isn't very useful, because it's not 10% across the board for everyone. In some ways, it's less impressive than that, and in others, it's much more impressive.
The situation being addressed here is that certain graphics card drivers are notoriously buggy, such that processes that use normal accelerated graphics APIs will randomly crash for certain OS/driver/chipset combinations. Historically, Firefox has had to play whack-a-mole by finding patterns in reported crash data that sa
Great, but... (Score:1)
I haven't had a crash in Firefox in years.
Score:-5, Pwned (Score:1)
Witness BitZtream getting pwned! [slashdot.org]
So? (Score:1)
crashes, what crashes? (Score:1)
I use Firefox on several desktops and laptops at work (Windows and Linux) and I can't remember the last time I had a crash. I usually only have 2 or 3 extensions loaded and maybe up to 20 or so tabs. Memory usage seems to be a bit lower since v52 came out, but that might have to do with dropping support for most plugins.
Firefox 57 sneak peak (Score:2, Interesting)
We at Moz://a are pleased to announce that Firefox 57 will be the Chromium source code with all the icons changed to the Firefox logo. Now we don't have to actually work on our browser we can make fun of extension developers and see all the hard work they done wasted while we roll in the Yahoo sponsorship money.
I track browser crashes using splunk (Score:3)
On 6200 Windows clients and 1900 Mac's. Firefox is above and beyond the most crash prone browser - it even tops IE 11 (Fwiw Chrome > IE 11 > Firefox are the most used browsers in my organization according to software metering).
Re: (Score:1)
Other browsers "don't crash" because they're broken into multiple processes. When one goes down it doesn't register as a crash.
Re: (Score:2)
If a process (like a Chrome.exe tab) crashes - windows/mac logs it. In our environment that log is forwarded on every client and index'd on site.
Even though we have less Firefox usage - it still crashes more than IE 11 or Chrome (they both crash too, but far less - even though there's more usage).
Firefox crashing implies you're using it right. (Score:5, Insightful)
I use Firefox as my main browser, and I understand the problems some people have with it. Thing is, I tend to see Firefox's flaws as emerging from using it with lots of addons as intended. Adblock + noscript + various EFF tools are bound to bork it from time to time. I'm kind of impressed it's as stable as it is. Not to mention I'm the kind of crazy person who has 300 tabs open right now.
I used to use Opera as my secondary, back before they dropped Presto and abandoned their very functional email/rss components. Now it's Chrome with adblock.
It might be ironic that my favorite mobile browser was Safari with adblock. Never had a single problem with it. Plus Apple for all their faults has been willing to tell bloatware peddlers to go hang themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem, as it has been from the very start with Firefox, is that it's fairly monolithic. On Chrome you have an those extensions, but the browser is built in such a way that parts of it crashing doesn't bring the whole thing down.
Mozilla are trying to fix this, but people hate them for it because it will end up breaking most of the old extensions. Combined with breaking the UI they are kind of struggling now.
Bashes Crashes? (Score:3)
Firefox - black screen of death (Score:2)
When Firefox added extra security. They added a huge bug. I now find that I often get a black screen, after which no pages will load properly. I've largely been unable to use Firefox for the past few weeks.
Who cares? It's over. (Score:2)
Check my post history, I've been posting about that browser for a decade. I was THE diehard, I loathed Chrome.
I fought tooth and nail to keep Firefox, I hate many things Chrome does, which FF does better. It looks better, the plugins (I use) are much better, it's a great browser with a little work.
EXCEPT IT IS IMMENSELY SLOW.
and I don't mean "oh golly, that's not snappy" I mean it's SLOW, frequently delays, lag, lockups, freezes, script errors (slow, then error), more slow, lag, it's just atrocious, it's a
Since 52 (Score:2)
Firefox crashes once a day here since version 52 and even with 53. With 51 it was stable. Possibly Quantum is more the problem than the solution?
Re:Good job guys! (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe in 10 or 15 years Firefox will be production ready. So instead of crashing several times daily, it might only crash several times weekly.
Are you sure you're using the same Firefox as me? It crashes less than once a year, and that's on Debian unstable, with 33 extensions and hardly ever below 100 tabs. Firefox does have its flaws, such as dropping sound support [mozilla.org], massive memory use and using lots of CPU even when idle, but crashiness isn't one of them.
If you experience crashes "several times daily", you'd better check your hardware. Or perhaps you're running some bogus DRM scheme.
Re: (Score:1)
In some situations Indexeddb in Firefox gets broken beyond repair. As a consequence, people who encounter this error will not be able to visit pages that used Indexeddb anymore. Not only once of for some days, but never again. The error is permanent and cannot be fixed by a normal user. Users only have the option to switch to another browser or delete the storage folder in the used profile
Re: (Score:1)
What other browser do you recommend? I haven't yet found one that is worse. Firefox may not be perfect, but it is still much better than the alternatives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, THAT makes sense. Linux doesn't have GPU drivers. Software render all the way!
Re:Good job guys! (Score:5, Informative)
In "about:config" change "fayout.frame_rate" from -1 to 60 (or whatever your monitor runs at). For some stupid reason, Firefox renders as fast as your CPU can handle 100% of the time. Even at 60 FPS, it uses ~1% CPU when idle so I'm guessing it was going like 6000FPS when unrestrained.
Re: (Score:1)
In "about:config" change "layout.frame_rate" from -1 to 60 (or whatever your monitor runs at). [...]
Thanks for that. I have my video card fans setup on a temperature monitor and it made no sense they would increase with FF.
Re: (Score:2)
da funk? My CPU load in FF just dropped to below 104%
Re:Good job guys! (Score:5, Insightful)
Why the fuck is this not the default?
dafuq, mozilla...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The browser should render by default at vsync with the -1 setting. Perhaps the detection fails on some platforms?
Re: (Score:1)
In "about:config" change "fayout.frame_rate" from -1 to 60 (or whatever your monitor runs at). For some stupid reason, Firefox renders as fast as your CPU can handle 100% of the time.
fayout.frame_rate = -1 means "refresh at device rate", not "infinite refresh rate" (that's what = 0 does). So setting it to 60 should have no effect on a typical system. See developer comment here. [reddit.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Well maybe thats due to Linux.
My FF52 has been crashing about 4 times a day in the last few weeks.
It's still my daily driver, because it is the only browser that properly support side tabs via the treetab plugin.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Good job guys! (Score:2)
I set FF to just download PDFs, that way I can open them in something that can render PDFs properly.
Don't get me wrong, pdf.js (what FF uses to render in browser) is incredibly useful. Unfortunately it can be slow, and some issues with embedded fonts still seem to exist.
Personally I use Evince on Linux to read PDFs.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm actually questioning what Firefox you are using. Sure the GP sounds like something else is the cause. Multiple times daily is not what I would associated with Firefox. But once a week, easily. Hell one update completely fubared the thing which is when the straw broke my back and I switched away. If I was going to start with a new profile there was no reason not to try an alternative.
Re: Good job guys! (Score:3)
I've found that some (most?) Linux distro's recompile FF to their release packages, instead of simply using the Mozilla provided binaries.
This creates a much more stable browser.
I use Funtoo Linux, and always go the compile route when updating FF. The one time I decided waiting for it to compile would be too long (was in a time crunch) it was a terrible experience. When I later "upgraded" to the self-compiled version it stablized.
I guess a lot of it depends on what your system has for native libs, and compa
Re: (Score:2)
Spotted the guy who has no idea how huge software projects like a web browser works.
Re: (Score:1)
I've had the same results using firefox ESR, it never crashes.
massive memory use
Chrom* uses much more memory than firefox thanks to 1 process x tab model and yet a single tab crash can still bring the entire browser down.
Re: (Score:1)
While Firefox is not exactly super crash-prone, I noticed over the last 2-3 years that it has a nasty habit of gobbling up memory. When I run my machine non-stop over the weekend, it is totally normal for it to eventually reach about 1.5 GB of memory usage (no matter how many tabs I have open at that point) and then strange things happen - like graphics not loading correctly, GUI elements not showing up anymore, web pages freezing etc. So I can totally understand it if people who use Firefox more than me, e
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. I can say a lot of bad things about Firefox, but it never crashes on me. Ever.
I did switch to Pale Moon about 2 years ago, because it's just as stable but way faster. I use Firefox mostly for "broken" web sites that are designed only to work with popular, name-brand browsers.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the stability issue is limited to windows?
My colleagues also complain a lot about firefox stability, but i never have problems with it on Linux (ok, not never, but very very few) while they use windows.
Re: (Score:1)
about:performance is your best friend.
Re: Good job guys! (Score:1)
I use FF, FF Portable and Chrome.
They all work fine and so close to equally fast you may as well say they are equally fast.
Re: (Score:2)
So instead of crashing several times daily, it might only crash several times weekly. Not that you'd want to run it that long without restarting the app since it'll be using all of your memory by the end of the day.
Is there a different Firefox than the one I'm using? The machine I do the majority of my browsing on is a Win 7 box with 16GB of RAM. I haven't seen a crash in at least a year, probably more. I have had 15 separate windows open with 10 to 30 tabs open in each for the last 2 or 3 months. I just rebooted today for updates. I will shutdown and restore my Firefox session when the memory usage creeps up and bogs it down. But the most I've seen it get up to is a little over 8GB of RAM usage. Which is ridiculous,
Re: (Score:1)
... crashing several times daily..
Maybe you forgot to remove the Adobe Flash plugin.