Chrome Gets Memory and Energy Saver Modes (techcrunch.com) 30
Google today announced two new performance settings in its Chrome browser: Memory Saver and Energy Saver. From a report: The Memory Saver mode promises to reduce Chrome's memory usage by up to 30% by putting inactive tabs to sleep. The tabs will simply reload when you need them again. The Energy Saver mode, meanwhile, limits background activity and visual effects for sites with animations and videos when your laptop's battery level drops below 20%.
That's supposed to be new? (Score:2)
chrome already reloads with gay abandon, losing state all the way.
This doesn't sound like much of an improvement, just shuffling the idiot memory hog tendencies under the carpet a bit.
And there's still no way to turn off middle-click-jump-around-jump-around-goddamn-turn-it-off-idiot-google that I can find.
Re: (Score:3)
I use Chrome all day, every day, usually with 20-50 tabs loaded and never experienced anything you're describing. I know, about as important of a data point as your complaint, but even with all my co-workers also using Chrome, still never heard of anyone with such a complaint.
Re: (Score:2)
A year ago, I made a terrible mistake, and bought a computer with only 8 GiB RAM.
Even without many tabs open, Chrome unloads tabs all the time. It's maddening.
This doesn't happen on my work computer, which has more memory.
Re: (Score:3)
Granted there are different pages open on each browser, but I don't see Chrome being better than Firefox in the memory department
Re: (Score:2)
The cycle continues (Score:5, Funny)
Google makes a great browser engine
Microsoft copies it, and adds features like hibernating tabs, memory and cpu improvements.
Google copies Microsoft, and fixes Chrome
The cycle of technology innovation continues.
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox for Android had tab sleeping long ago, I think they both got it from there.
Just a shame that Firefox for Android is a battery killer. It's the add-ons. You'd think something like ublock would make it use less battery by blocking stuff, but for some reason it has the opposite effect.
You can't report it as a bug either because if you say that an add-on uses lots of energy they tell you that it's the add-on's fault, when I think the real issue is the way the browser handles them. Chrome aggressively li
Useful... (Score:2)
Please stop (Score:2)
OK, so it can be done. (Score:2)
The Energy Saver mode, meanwhile, limits background activity and visual effects for sites with animations and videos when your laptop's battery level drops below 20%.
This is an admission that it can be done. We can limit visual effects, animations, constant refreshing ads, and all that other nonsense when we need to save power? We can do it all the time. Give us a button that lets us make the choice between:
Re: (Score:2)
constant refreshing ads
I haven't seen an ad in years. Are you surfing the internet without protection? You can catch all sorts of nasty viruses like that. Were you too busy laughing at the teacher putting a condom on a banana to pay attention to when she said "oh and don't forget to install an adblocker"?
- good news! - (Score:2)
I'll be thrilled when the best of these features comes to my privacy protected browser. Unfortunately, patching a Google product that is hostile to users seems much like putting lipstick on a pig.
Darn It! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sad thing is, I can't tell if you're joking
Re: (Score:1)
I remember when Chrome ran on XP with 512MB ram (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
But all those advert scripts need an entire operating system within an operating system to run. So lets arbitrarily drop support for Windows 7 & 8.1 because they typically run on systems with lower amounts of memory. Chrome was and is the worse thing that happened to the web, the glory days of Firefox from between 2004-2008 was a small but happy time, now Firefox is Chrome with a slightly different engine, but is forced to implement Chrome standards lest it gets websites dropping support for it.
Most websites don't use those "chrome standards." But chrome has so much influence with W3C, and of course if W3C doesn't keep pushing new standards, they're out of a job. Just another day in regulatory capture hell.
Re: (Score:2)
Most websites don't use those "chrome standards.
As someone who started a career in web development back in the 90's, let me clue you in. Web sites have always used non-standard crap.
I use a fork of Firefox, I am astounded at how many web sites will just show up blank. No content whatsoever, because it is all dynamically loaded via the latest, fashionable crap that Chrome supports first and Firefox adopts as fast as they can. Even in "normal" Firefox things are often still broken or content is missing.
Don't even get me started on the Healthcare.org fia
Re: (Score:2)
People can always go "Old Skool." You don't NEED javascript and a ton of shit hacks to have a site that can display and submit data. Blame the people setting the specs for "oh shiny" form over functionality. You know, do all processing on the server instead (because you end up having do do it a second time server-side anyway)?
Re: (Score:2)
I remember when Chrome didn't do shit and let through any piece of malware and crashed the entire session when you looked at it funny as well. If you want a browser that doesn't implement modern internet standards, doesn't have tab isolation for security, stability and performance purposes, and doesn't do anything at all to protect the user from the endless array of malware constantly attempting to hijack the browser then I'm sure you can still find a browser that uses 512MB of RAM.
How about reduced data scraping mode? (Score:2)
how does Chrome know my battery level?! (Score:1)
How can I prevent it from knowing it?
I want energy saver mode at 100% battery level (Score:2)
great suspender (Score:2)
great suspender and spinoff have been around for years.