Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla Firefox The Internet

The New Firefox and Ridiculous Numbers of Tabs (metafluff.com) 210

Posted by msmash from the moving-forward dept.
An anonymous reader shares a blog post: I've got a Firefox profile with 1691 tabs. As you would expect, Firefox handled this profile quite poorly for a long time. I got used to multi-minute startup time, waiting 15-30 seconds for tabs from external apps to show up, and all manner of non-responsive behavior. And then, quite recently, everything changed. Right now, more effort is being put into making Firefox fast than I've seen since... well, since I've been working on Firefox. And I've been at Mozilla for more than a decade. Part of this effort is a project called Quantum Flow -- a bunch of engineers making changes that directly impact Firefox responsiveness. A lot of the improvement in this particular scenario is from Kevin Jones' work on bringing the overall cost of unloaded tabs as close to zero as possible. While the major work has landed, the work continues in Bug 906076. Test scenario: I took my 1691 tab browser profile, and did a wall-clock measurement of start-up time and memory use for Firefox versions 20, 30, 40, and 50 through 56. In the result, the person found that Firefox startup time has gotten worse over time... until Firefox 51.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The New Firefox and Ridiculous Numbers of Tabs More

The New Firefox and Ridiculous Numbers of Tabs

Comments Filter:

    • I typically have at least a few hundred open. 1691 doesn't seem unreasonable at all. Needless to say, Chrome can't handle anything remotely like that... try dropping two zeroes. For me, this alone makes Firefox clearly superior to Chrome.

    • But for years FF fanatics told us FF was "fast"! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Here's the thing that's really pathetic about this whole situation: FF users have been complaining about performance problems for many, many years.

      Yet FF's most ardent supporters have always denied or dismissed these complaints, claiming that "FF is fast" or "FF doesn't suffer from performance problems", despite so many users experiencing horrible performance when using FF.

      So if these performance problems allegedly didn't exist, then why the fuck did Mozilla need to create this "Quantum Flow" project to fix

      • Good points, but I would counter with a few things:

        1. This is not the first or only work the Firefox team has been doing to improve performance. You're writing as though this Quantum Flow project is the first performance work they've done ever, or within the past five years. It isn't. The switch to multi-threading has been underway for years.

        2. Firefox's problems today are largely a result of its own success ten years ago. The biggest cause of performance slowdowns is add-ons that have inefficien

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tepples ( 727027 )

          3. Conversely, if you want fastest performance try running without add-ons.

          I don't see how running without add-ons would help performance, as disabling add-ons causes sites to load excessive tracking devices, real-time bidding scripts, animated advertisements, and video advertisements.

    • I think the big problem is that users don't understand what that little star on the right side of the browser bar does anymore.

  • Unstable (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Futurepower(R) ( 558542 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @09:51PM (#54856151) Homepage
    I find that Firefox is unstable when there are many windows and tabs. I've reported that numerous times.

    • I find my brain is unstable when confronted with more than about twenty tabs. I'd report that numerous times, but, you know. Unstable. *falls off chair*

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by swilver ( 617741 )

      I just updated to firefox dev edition 55... and their claim is indeed accurate. It loaded quickly although I only had 800ish tabs open.

      Quite happy that they finally fixed this silly problem. Now chrome.

  • The Tab Groups feature was removed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MrSteveSD ( 801820 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @09:52PM (#54856153)
    I often end up with an unwieldy number of tabs and I've recently been looking at ways of managing them. The situation does not look good though. Tab Groups was removed from Firefox and the impending Webextensions crippling of Firefox is apparently going to make it almost impossible to port over existing addons that allow for tab management.

    • Re:The Tab Groups feature was removed (Score:4, Informative)

      by Black Parrot ( 19622 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @11:24PM (#54856411)

      I group tabs by window, then use "tree style tabs" to put them in collapsible sub-groupings.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AK Marc ( 707885 )
        I would love a system that allowed me to group tabs in a tree-system. "Shopping", with sub groups "motorcycle parts", "Computer parts", "gaming", and groups under those, "Exhaust", "laptop motherboard", "release dates".

        Instead, since nothing organizes tabs in a convienent and visible way, I keep them all open, and ctrl-tab through them as a reminder of what I'm doing in each of those groups/sub-groups.

        • Re: The Tab Groups feature was removed (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Zero__Kelvin ( 151819 ) on Saturday July 22, 2017 @08:16AM (#54857405) Homepage
          Somebody should invent bookmarks!

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by tepples ( 727027 )

            Opening a bookmark on the bus produces a DNS lookup failure instead of the intended document.

            • Not if you open the very few you will need first. I certainly hope that isn't your argument for having 1000 tabs open.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by tepples ( 727027 )

                Heavens no. I typically run Firefox with 12 or fewer tabs. Mostly I get "use bookmarks instead of tabs" from those who recommend that I work around broken suspend by instead shutting down the computer completely, and I get "discard inactive tabs" from those who recommend that I work around unavailability of small laptops that run GNU/Linux by using Android/Linux instead. But the "use bookmarks instead of tabs" and "discard inactive tabs" arguments are again popping up in this context.

                • Well I hate to say it ... but it sounds to me like you are using both tabs and bookmarks appropriately then. :^)

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by AK Marc ( 707885 )
            Task list implies available and in front. I've not seen a bookmark system that works the way I described. When I can tag a page "bookmark, show my tomorrow, and delete bookmark", then bookmarks will be closer.

        • The notion of keeping 1600+ things open and active is fundamentally flawed.

          You have an inbox with 1600+ file folders in it.
          1600+ post-its on your whiteboard.
          1600+ people lined up outside your office.

          Instead, you need a multi-part solution.
          - Daily to do list
          - Daily/weekly/monthly/yearly reminders
          - One or more "workspaces" (i.e. your browser session(s))
          - File system/archives/offline/nearline

          And this needs to be tuned/tweaked regularly.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by rlk ( 1089 )

            If it works, it isn't "fundamentally flawed".

            I don't care for these "workspace" solutions, because it means a heavyweight switch between sessions rather than just jumping to a different tab.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by AK Marc ( 707885 )
              Also, no system recovers "workspaces". The browsers set to "restore last session" will only recover the last "workspace" closed, losing all other "workspaces". I don't see how that could be a good system.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Xolotl ( 675282 )
            My computer handles 1000+ tabs [with negligible effort from me. That is not the case for 1000+ post-it notes (on a whiteboard? you know those are for writing on? anyway ...) or 1000+ people, and neither is it the case for doing a daily to do list or reminders or workspaces (I have 18 browser windows open, why would I need to create sepearet sessions and then spend time changing between them?) etc.

          • That solution isn't likely to be feasible to actually implement, especially with Firefox's plans for limiting what you can do to the UX via extensions. Pale Moon looks like it won't be doing that, but an extension that lets do that smoothly & well (doing the 3rd part with sessions isn't a Good Idea, actually) doesn't yet exist.

            Though, some of the situations, 1600+ whatever there is actually precisely what you need. After all, yes, 1600+ people lined up outside my office might be a bit clunky, it can b

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Instead of tab groups you can just use bookmarks. You can bookmark groups of tabs info a folder, and then middle click that folder to open them all again.

      Tab groups was a nice idea, I used to use it, but performance was terrible. Firefox was taking 30 seconds to open and become responsive even with only one tab, until I realized that deleting supposedly frozen tabs from tab groups would speed it up. Apparently bookmarks are the only way to really close tabs and free up their resources in Firefox.

      • I use tab groups (with a couple of houndred tabs opened) and I'm getting worried about version 56 (or 57, don't remember) getting close, when this extension will not work anymore.

        Several people in this thread suggested bookmarks, including parent, the thing is it hasn't the same workflow, opening a new tab, moving, loading next time, closing, etc is more pratical, and in my mind easier to administer, than bookmarks, which I have a ton but pratically don't use.

        I trully hope that the people at mozilla dec

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Have you tried bookmark folders? I really can't see much practical difference between then and tab groups, besides the thumbnails.

  • Tabs aren't bookmarks (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    You're confusing bookmarks and tabs.

    Read one of those Internet for Dummies books, and you'll figure it out.

  • You're doing it wrong.

  • The good old days (Score:4, Informative)

    by sciengin ( 4278027 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @10:07PM (#54856197)

    So they are going back to how it used to be?
    I recall having hundred(s) of tabs open. Back in 2006 on a single-core centrino Laptop with a whoping 2GB of ram and a terrific ATI x700 GPU.
    No issues were had.
    Then they brought in the UX-torturers, started with their ridiculous high version numbers and it all went downhill from there.

  • Firefox tabs are the new desktop shortcuts (Score:4, Funny)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @10:17PM (#54856221)

    I was always amazed at those people whose desktops were completely filled with shortcuts. I guess they're all using Firefox now.

    I wonder if their houses are stacked floor to ceiling, wall to wall, with old newspapers.

    • If people used desktop shortcuts in the past, wouldn't they have the sense to use bookmarks?

      I more liken this to someone who has opens every document on their computer just in case they need it throughout the day, and then complains that Office uses too much RAM.

  • 640 tabs should be enough for anyone... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Illogical Spock ( 1058270 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @10:22PM (#54856231)

    Said Bill Gates

  • Why load all of the tabs? (Score:3)

    by CanadianMacFan ( 1900244 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @10:42PM (#54856275)

    Why are you loading all of the tabs at startup? Do you really need all of them? If you want to change the behaviour so that only the visible tab is loaded then go into about:config and search for "browser.sessionstore.restore_hidden_tabs" (without the quotes). Change the value to false. The tabs will still be there but will only load when you select the tab.

    Maybe Firefox changed the default behaviour and that is why you see the change in performance.

  • Wall-clock calling captain oblivious (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Razed By TV ( 730353 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @11:00PM (#54856331)
    That you had to do a wall-clock measurement to determine that Firefox startup time has ballooned is evidence of a greater problem. The focus has been on the rapid release schedule with little to no thought towards user experience.

    Pro-tip: Make my shit fast. Make it super fucking responsive. I don't need the shine, I don't need the glitter. That's where I can rely on a mod/extension community to fill in the short comings. I can't rely on them to put in extensive multicore support. Make the engine that everyone wants to use, and worry about what color to paint the car later.

    • Hell yes. I run the beta versions, and bug report when I can and only use FLOSS software like an addict. I admit my ethical preference, and dealing with a Psychology department as often as I do, it's an immense problem that often gets me labelled a zealot. I prefer LaTeX and use point out mathematical flaws and software default errors that result in false logical errors in colleagues' papers like an immense jackass.

      However, even I have to admit that using Chromium, with all its Googley evilness (yes Chromiu

  • It was barely usable for us many-tabs types, until a few years ago when they quit trying to load every single tab when you start it. Now it only tries to open the active tab on each window.

  • Dear Slashdot (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Friday July 21, 2017 @11:28PM (#54856421)

    I managed to put 10 pounds of shit into a 5 pound box and it fell apart. What am I doing wrong?

  • I'm angry with FireFox. I have been using it for many years, and for a long time, I thought it to be the bee's knees, the cat's meow.

    However, their high handed way with security and such has come to the point that I can't trust them. I use Firefox browser in my work. When they block things for security reasons, it stops me from being able to work. I have to manage over 250,000 devices on an internal and secure network. We don't have resources to upgrade those devices - indeed, many of them cannot be upgrade

  • That word would be bullshit.

    I've been using it for over a decade, I've made easily over twenty posts on Slashdot about the performance maybe double that.

    I used it exclusively including 64 bit nightly editions, up to I think version 54?

    I reduced my plugins significantly to about 4 or so.
    I'm an extreme browser (although I peek around 400 tabs around once or twice Year, not 1600) and I can assure you at least up until 2/3 months ago, it still ran like crap compared to chrome (and again, I don't even like chrom

    • Article: Improvements have been made.

      You: In my experience there is plenty of room for improvement, therefore I do not believe this.

      I hope you can see the flaw in that logic yourself. They're improving exactly the thing you say you want improved, and you're being all pissy about it.

      • Except you know, I've been waiting ten years and it's not improved and yet I used nightly versions UP TO 54,.... the article clearly says that things all changed around 51,....

        So yeah, no.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by swilver ( 617741 )

      I tested it just now after I read the story.

      I use firefox dev edition and am on the aurora channel. I had version 54, and I checked for updates, 55 was there. I had 800 tabs open. I let it update, and restart, and yeah, it restarted quick enough that I didn't get bored waiting for it like I normally do.

      A huge improvement.

      • If you hit CTRL TAB, what's your time to switch?

        I found a general lag, anything from 200, to even 1500ms in previous builds.

        (When exceeding 100/150 tabs)

  • That's so turn of the millennium. 1692 tabs is where it's at now. All the cool kidz are doing it.

  • This is what Boomarks are for : keeping a list of frequently visited sites.

    And if you are a tabs hoarder, The Great Suspender extension is your best friend on Chrome : https://chrome.google.com/webs... [google.com]

    On Firefox, you can use Suspend Tab or UnloadTab extensions I think.

  • Diversion of resources... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by QuietLagoon ( 813062 ) on Saturday July 22, 2017 @09:55AM (#54857751)

    ...I've got a Firefox profile with 1691 tabs....

    I'd really not want to see Firefox wasting their precious development resources to make a ridiculous corner case as this one work properly, instead of applying those same precious resources to more pressing issues. Issues that are experienced by a much wider set of users.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Reziac ( 43301 ) *

      Consider that FF's performance has become more and more sucky, and that fixes which goose it this much for megatab users are probably going to do the normal users a lot of good too.

  • I'm running FF52 (LTS) because the "consumer" grade Firefoxen don't allow unsigned extensions, with no saving throw (the LTS ones do).

    The next LTS version (57 IIRC) is going to lose real extensions, with only the stripped down WebExtensions.

    So what is a user to do?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tepples ( 727027 )

      the "consumer" grade Firefoxen don't allow unsigned extensions

      That should not affect you if you apply to have your extensions signed as unlisted extensions. But I imagine there's a good reason why you haven't. What might that be?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rlk ( 1089 )

        Because:

        1) I have a bunch of older extensions, some of which aren't signed.

        2) Sometimes I modify extensions (fix bugs, get rid of annoying behaviors).

        3) I don't want to have to "apply" to someone else for the right to run something on my own computer.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tepples ( 727027 )

          1) I have a bunch of older extensions, some of which aren't signed.

          Extensions listed on AMO before signing was instituted were automatically signed. For extensions distributed off-AMO, fork them pursuant to their free software licenses and submit your fork as an unlisted extension.

          2) Sometimes I modify extensions (fix bugs, get rid of annoying behaviors).

          Then you are a developer, not a "consumer" who only views works created by others. Fork the older extensions pursuant to their free software licenses and submit your fork as an unlisted extension, or use Firefox Developer Edition.

          3) I don't want to have to "apply" to someone else for the right to run something on my own computer.

          Then use Firefox Developer Edition.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by rlk ( 1089 )

            Yeah, that helps me temporarily (but makes a mess of my distro's packaging -- there are a lot of things that depend on firefox). But only until FF56.

  • 1600 tabs is bullshit. (Score:3)

    by Chas ( 5144 ) on Saturday July 22, 2017 @10:01AM (#54857779) Homepage Journal

    Nobody uses 1600 tabs. Sorry, at best, you use maybe, MAYBE 1-3% of those with any regularity. The rest is just masturbation.

    What's REALLY upsetting with the latest versions are the nasty memory leaks and slowdowns in FF since the multi-threading was enabled.

    With just three tabs open (for this example Slashdot, Facebook and YouTube, but I can reproduce the behavior with any number of sites), the browser begins exhibiting multiple tens of seconds of input lag after as little as 5 minutes of browsing. So you click on something and wait, and wait, and wait. And it "eventually" does it.

    It's getting so bad that I'm going to HAVE to stop using Firefox if it continues.

  • The tip of the iceberg of Mozilla development (Score:3)

    by Moochman ( 54872 ) on Saturday July 22, 2017 @11:02AM (#54858003)
    I'm kind of astounded that everyone here is so cynical while at the same time being so ill-informed about the stuff Mozilla is/has been doing the past few years. In addition to "Quantum Flow", they wrote a C++ replacement (Rust) that's concurrency-minded and memory-safe for better performance and fewer bugs, as well as a completely new HTML/CSS rendering engine (Servo) written in said programming language, that's faster than any other rendering engine in existence at this point. All this is coming to Firefox soon. (Although IMHO they might as well just rebrand/rewrite a whole new browser at this point, seeing as Firefox extensions are disappearing and the Firefox's market share has already dwindled). Relevant links: https://www.rust-lang.org/ [rust-lang.org] https://servo.org/ [servo.org] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quant... [mozilla.org]

  • "I've got a Firefox profile with 1691 tabs"

    It must suck to be you. I guess you also have 2321 apps on your iPhone and 4352 open documents in Winword.

    You should read about the x icon in the corner.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Close