Meet Firefox 4.0.1

By bogas04
in Web Browser Discussion & Support

 Share

Recommended Posts

Collaborator

XP_2600

Posted
Posted
Screenshot, please. And we don't even know what you're comparing it to.

post-130981-0-44221900-1300876964.jpg

Sorry i don't have a screenshot for the RC as i uninstalled and installed the final one, but the tabs edges were more rounded as i remember!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mentor

grayscale

Posted
Posted

What are the other differences between minefield and firefox? (aside from the icon)

post-130981-0-44221900-1300876964.jpg

Sorry i don't have a screenshot for the RC as i uninstalled and installed the final one, but the tabs edges were more rounded as i remember!

IIRC, they made the tabs square in time for RC, maybe you're using beta 12 from back then? Anyway, I remember foxxyn8 releasing a stylish script that will restore the rounded tabs, if it's what you want (look over at the stylish thread). I would've provided you the with the link, but I don't have it cause I like the square tabs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Collaborator

XP_2600

Posted
Posted
IIRC, they made the tabs square in time for RC, maybe you're using beta 12 from back then? Anyway, I remember foxxyn8 releasing a stylish script that will restore the rounded tabs, if it's what you want (look over at the stylish thread). I would've provided you the with the link, but I don't have it cause I like the square tabs.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

The_Decryptor Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Memory usage with three tabs open:

post-130981-0-76839800-1300876813.jpg

The important number here is "WS Private", the Working Set is the total amount of data in RAM, but also counts shared bytes (i.e. bits of RAM shared between multiple processes), private bytes are bytes private to the process (i.e. the actual RAM footprint, not counting shared libraries and such)

Technically I think it should be "Private + (Sharable - Shared)", but it's only like a 6MB difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Collaborator

XP_2600

Posted
Posted

The important number here is "WS Private", the Working Set is the total amount of data in RAM, but also counts shared bytes (i.e. bits of RAM shared between multiple processes), private bytes are bytes private to the process (i.e. the actual RAM footprint, not counting shared libraries and such)

Technically I think it should be "Private + (Sharable - Shared)", but it's only like a 6MB difference.

Thanks, you are right, but even the shared one related somehow to loading the ff process itself, but is it good i mean using 162 mb of memory ? as its sometimes become really slow i guess its something with loading flash or java!.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

remixedcat

Posted
Posted

mine on those 18 tabs in Process Explorer:

post-361542-0-11427200-1300879115.jpg

the other user's for comparison:

post-130981-0-76839800-1300876813.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Syanide

Posted
Posted

I know this has probably been discussed before, but the only thing I'm not super happy with in Firefox is the add-on bar. It takes a lot of space, and I can't disable it because I need some of the add-ons functionality like the Alexa ratings. Is there an add-on to make it just a button in the bottom right corner that would expand on mouse hover, or something similar?

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Syanide

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I forgot to mention, I've tried it, but it wouldn't remember it's behavior (if I hide it, it would just expand after I switch tabs). I will keep my eye on it, thanks anyway.

EDIT: Just saw it has an option to auto collapse after a certain amount of time, will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Collaborator

kilara1988

Posted
Posted

There was a stylish script that autohides the addon bar unles you hover over the bottom right corner.It also cuts it to be as wide as much icons are there.I don't remember where i got the script tho and i don't use it anymore.

PS:I found This autohide script, but i don't know if it is the same.You can try it.

PS2:I found the script i use for addonbar autohide.

#addon-bar {
  position: fixed;
  bottom: -22px;
  right: 1px;
  border: 0 !important;
  opacity: 0;
  -moz-appearance: none !important;
  -moz-transition: bottom .5s 1s ease-in, opacity .5s 1s ease-in;
  padding-top: 22px !important;
}

#addon-bar:hover {
  bottom: 1px;
  opacity: 1;
  -moz-transition: bottom .5s ease-out, opacity .5s ease-in;
}

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

remixedcat

Posted
Posted

Hope it works, if not I'll find some stylish scripts. perhaps greasemonkey scripts?

also I really want the old status bar back. I prefered it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Robbie Khan Reviews

Posted
  • Reviews
Posted

There was a stylish script that autohides the addon bar unles you hover over the bottom right corner.It also cuts it to be as wide as much icons are there.I don't remember where i got the script tho and i don't use it anymore.

PS:I found This autohide script, but i don't know if it is the same.You can try it.

PS2:I found the script i use for addonbar autohide.

#addon-bar {
  position: fixed;
  bottom: -22px;
  right: 1px;
  border: 0 !important;
  opacity: 0;
  -moz-appearance: none !important;
  -moz-transition: bottom .5s 1s ease-in, opacity .5s 1s ease-in;
  padding-top: 22px !important;
}

#addon-bar:hover {
  bottom: 1px;
  opacity: 1;
  -moz-transition: bottom .5s ease-out, opacity .5s ease-in;
}

Excellent thanks!

I made padding-top 6 as I found the top border was too wide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proficient

Gutierrez

Posted
Posted

17% ram used, whats the problem ?

its a ****ing BROWSER, THATS the problem! :angry:

What extensions are you using? If you're using adblock update to the development version.

http://adblockplus.org/en/development-builds

Firefox 4 uses about 60MB with one tab open for me with 4gb total memory.

Same configuration, but using from a cold start 102MB. And Im using only 7 extensions (I try to disable all of them with the same result)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Veteran

protocol7

Posted
Posted

This is pretty close to what I'm looking for. But how can I make it look like the new-style status bar. For consistency I'd like them both to match.

image2tv.png

#addon-bar {
  position: fixed;
  bottom: -22px;
  right: 1px;
  border: 0 !important;
  opacity: 0;
  -moz-appearance: none !important;
  -moz-transition: bottom .5s 1s ease-in, opacity .5s 1s ease-in;
  padding-top: 22px !important;
}

#addon-bar:hover {
  bottom: 1px;
  opacity: 1;
  -moz-transition: bottom .5s ease-out, opacity .5s ease-in;
}

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Robbie Khan Reviews

Posted
  • Reviews
Posted

Mine is not transparent.I don't know why yours is.Maybe you are using some theme or something?

This will make the status, findbar and addonbar as well as sync notifications transparent :)

@namespace url("http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul"); 

#browser-bottombox {
	-moz-appearance: none !important;
	background: none !important;
	border-color: rgba(0,0,0,.35) !important;}

#addon-bar, #FindToolbar{
	-moz-appearance: none !important;
	background: none !important;
	background-color: rgba(255,255,255,.25) !important;
	border-color: rgba(0,0,0,.37) !important;}

#addon-bar[collapsed="true"][sizemode="normal"] #FindToolbar {
	border-radius: 0 0 3.5px 3.5px !important;}

#FindToolbar:not([hidden="true"]) ~ #addon-bar{
	border: none !important;}

#FindToolbar {
	padding: 0px !important;
	text-shadow: #000 1px 1px 2px, #000 -1px 1px 2px, #000 1px -1px 2px, #000 -1px -1px 2px !important;
	color: #fff !important;
	border: none !important;
	border-top: 1px solid rgba(0,0,0,.37) !important;}

#FindToolbar .findbar-find-next, #FindToolbar .findbar-find-previous, #FindToolbar .findbar-highlight{
	color: #fff !important;}

#FindToolbar .findbar-textbox {
	-moz-appearance: none !important;
	background-color: rgba(255,255,255,.725) !important;
	border-radius: 3.5px !important;
	border: 1px solid !important;
	border-color: rgba(0,0,0,.45) rgba(0,0,0,.52) rgba(0,0,0,.57)  !important;
	height: 21px !important;
	box-shadow: 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,.1) inset,
		0 1px 0 rgba(255,255,255,.4) !important;}

#FindToolbar .findbar-textbox:hover {
	background-color: rgba(255,255,255,.8) !important;}

#FindToolbar .findbar-textbox[status="notfound"] {
	background-color: Red !important;}

#sync-notifications {
	-moz-box-shadow: none !important;
	background-color: RGBa(255,255,127,.1) !important;
	margin-bottom: -1px !important;}

#content{
	-moz-box-shadow: none !important;
	background-color: RGBa(255,255,127,.1) !important;}

notification {
	-moz-appearance: none !important;
	background-color: RGBa(255,255,127,.5) !important;
	background-image: url("chrome://mozapps/skin/extensions/stripes-warning.png") !important;
	background-repeat: repeat-x !important;
	color: #916D15 !important;
	font-weight: bold !important;}

notification[type="critical"] {
	background-color: RGBa(255,63,63,.5) !important;
	background-image: url("chrome://mozapps/skin/extensions/stripes-error.png") !important;
	color: #864441 !important;}

notification[type="info"]  {
	background-color: RGBa(112,162,232,.5) !important;
	background-image: url("chrome://mozapps/skin/extensions/stripes-info-negative.png") !important;
	color: #3F3F3F !important;}

notification > * {
	border: none !important;
	border-top: 1px solid RGBa(0,0,0,.37) !important;
	border-bottom: 1px solid RGBa(0,0,0,.37) !important;}

#browser-bottombox .toolbarbutton-menu-dropmarker .dropmarker-icon {
	display: none !important;}

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

+Audioboxer Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted

Fx 4.0 is really growing on me, main browser for now.

Although I do hope they can pick up steam and not leave me hanging on 4.0 for months as Google spit Chrome updates out weekly. I have no browser allegiances so if Mozilla fall behind here I'll happily revisit Chrome in a month to see what they've added.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Contributor

Matchmuchach

Posted
Posted

Ram is there to be used, why do people care? As long as it's not clogging up the entire system it doesn't matter. Every modern system has (more) than 4GB ram, as long as you still have free memory space it just doesn't matter at all. Free ram is nog making your system faster, it's just sitting there doing nothing...

Anyway, my two cents...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Veteran

protocol7

Posted
Posted

Mine is not transparent.I don't know why yours is.Maybe you are using some theme or something?

Nope. No theme at all. It could be Aero kicking in.

I guess I just need to know what the default colours are for that status bar-type popup.

All I have in my userchrome.css is this:

#appmenu-button 
{
background: -moz-linear-gradient(top, rgba(25,143,224,.7), rgba(22,80,129,.7)) !important;
}

#addon-bar {
  position: fixed;
  bottom: -12px;
  right: 1px;
  border: 0 !important;
  opacity: 0;
  -moz-appearance: none !important;
  -moz-border-radius: 4px 0 0 0 !important;
  -moz-transition: bottom .2s 1s ease-in, opacity .2s 1s ease-in;
  padding-top: 1px !important;
}

#addon-bar:hover {
  bottom: 1px;
  opacity: 1;
  -moz-transition: bottom .2s ease-out, opacity .2s ease-in;
}

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

remixedcat

Posted
Posted

The paging file usage is what I care about most since it thrashes the disk. I would rather apps use more RAM then PF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Xtreme $niper

Posted
Posted

I don't know if someone has mentioned it already, but the performance of the supposed "hardware acceleration" is pretty poor on the two machines I've tested it on.

On my co-worker's Windows 7 quad-core i7 machine with a pretty good GPU, his Chrome installation runs this stress test (http://demos.hacks.mozilla.org/openweb/HWACCEL/) better than Firefox itself does. (about 16 fps?)

On my Mac, the Windows 7 VM that I have installed ran the test better than my native OS X side, which was around 18 fps for W7 vs 4 fps for OS X.

Even Safari performed much better at 8 fps. I'm running a Nvidia 330m 512MB GPU.

Ugh. Seems rushed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Robbie Khan Reviews

Posted
  • Reviews
Posted

I don't know if someone has mentioned it already, but the performance of the supposed "hardware acceleration" is pretty poor on the two machines I've tested it on.

On my co-worker's Windows 7 quad-core i7 machine with a pretty good GPU, his Chrome installation runs this stress test (http://demos.hacks.mozilla.org/openweb/HWACCEL/) better than Firefox itself does. (about 16 fps?)

On my Mac, the Windows 7 VM that I have installed ran the test better than my native OS X side, which was around 18 fps for W7 vs 4 fps for OS X.

Even Safari performed much better at 8 fps. I'm running a Nvidia 330m 512MB GPU.

Ugh. Seems rushed.

12fps on my work desktop which is a HP Compaq DX2000 PC (E4500 2.2GHz with 1GB RAM and an Intel 946GZ integrated GPU)

I expect my home PC will max out the 60fps cap...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.