Mozilla to release an official 64bit build of firefox

[colonel_mortis]

This is probably great to see, assuming there really are performance benefits. It will at least allow me to have all my tabs open at once (which will max out the memory). I have been forced to use waterfox before when running a (top secret) script that required about 7GB of ram, but generally I just use the stock firefox.

 

For anyone worried about extensions breaking, the move to 64 bit will not break them (it will break plugins (the things that allow certain media types, like flash, java, unity and for those who play Battlefield, the battlelog game launcher), but they should be fixed to support chrome64 anyway), but the other major upcoming change, codename electrolysis (E10s) which is splitting firefox into multiple processes/threads, will break addons, although mozilla are working on fixing as many of them as possible before pushing it through to release.

[AlexGoesHigh]

This is probably great to see, assuming there really are performance benefits. It will at least allow me to have all my tabs open at once (which will max out the memory). I have been forced to use waterfox before when running a (top secret) script that required about 7GB of ram, but generally I just use the stock firefox.

For anyone worried about extensions breaking, the move to 64 bit will not break them (it will break plugins (the things that allow certain media types, like flash, java, unity and for those who play Battlefield, the battlelog game launcher), but they should be fixed to support chrome64 anyway), but the other major upcoming change, codename electrolysis (E10s) which is splitting firefox into multiple processes/threads, will break addons, although mozilla are working on fixing as many of them as possible before pushing it through to release.

wait, if I understand that last part correctly does that mean they will turn each tab it's own process like chrome? I hope it doesn't turn into a resource hog because of it, that was the reason I leaved chrome

[colonel_mortis]

wait, if I understand that last part correctly does that mean they will turn each tab it's own process like chrome? I hope it doesn't turn into a resource hog because of it, that was the reason I leaved chrome

That's the idea, but it is undergoing extensive nightly testing to fix the memory issues. In chrome, for the most part the issues are due to bugs, leaks and poor optimisation as far as I know.

If you're interested, you can enable it in nightly (nightly only though) by clicking the menu button -> New e10s window, or by going to settings->General->enable e10s

Note that it's not quite stable yet.

[LAwLz]

But here's where you mistake my usage habits: I don't navigate tabs with the mouse. I use keyboard shortcuts to flip between tabs. 

 

The menu bar at the top follows Fitt's Law perfectly. It's far easier to get to that menu than to use the one in Firefox. There isn't any flinging going on on this machine either because it's a trackpad so it's more natural to control than a mouse is.

 

On OS X from your point of view any browser is that bad because of the menu bar. I prefer the tabs on the bottom because I don't have to risk hitting the address bar by mistake. If you really hate the menu bar that much you can also just put all your windows in full screen mode. 

I use mouse gestures and keyboard shortcuts so it doesn't really affect me, but it's still bad for those who do not. What do you do the most in your browser, change tab or open the menu? I am willing to bet that most people change tabs more often than they open the menu.

And yes, I think OS X having the menu bar where at the top is bad for all browsers. I don't really see your point of "don't having the risk of hitting the address bar". With the tabs on top there is no risk of hitting the address bar. It's when you have to aim (because buttons are not at the edges) that the risk of misclicking becomes bigger.

[Builder]

And yes, I think OS X having the menu bar where at the top is bad for all browsers. I don't really see your point of "don't having the risk of hitting the address bar". With the tabs on top there is no risk of hitting the address bar. It's when you have to aim (because buttons are not at the edges) that the risk of misclicking becomes bigger.

I'm a bit of a configuration junkie so I go into preferences a lot.

 

Apple is one of the biggest proponents of Fitt's Law. I'm surprised you don't see the menu bar as a manifestation of that. It's immensely useful in nearly every app besides a browser. I do most of my browsing in Lynx when I'm working anyways. Only when I'm feeling frivolous do I use a graphical web browser.

[Tonylu1595]

Meanwhile I think internet explorer already had this for years.

[Mooshi]

Waterfox has been a thing for awhile and I wonder about the state of some plugins that are 32bit only like Google Voice.

[AlexGoesHigh]

Waterfox has been a thing for awhile and I wonder about the state of some plugins that are 32bit only like Google Voice.

they should get update anyways, chrome is already 64bit and once mozilla releases this to mainstream plug-in devs have zero reason to keep only a 32bit build

[TheProfosist]

Well not so much that I don't use it but it's never my first choice. Outside of Safari sure but I'm almost never outside of Safari. It just feels cluttered and a bit incomplete is all with the way they organize the toolbar. It feels thrown together and the design is still the sort of pseudo-3D depth stuff with drop shadow and gradients everywhere.

Then reorganize it yourself? That the nice thing about FF it's the most configurable of any of the browsers. There are at least 2 great extensions that will add gesture and better shortcut control.

This is probably great to see, assuming there really are performance benefits. It will at least allow me to have all my tabs open at once (which will max out the memory). I have been forced to use waterfox before when running a (top secret) script that required about 7GB of ram, but generally I just use the stock firefox.

For anyone worried about extensions breaking, the move to 64 bit will not break them (it will break plugins (the things that allow certain media types, like flash, java, unity and for those who play Battlefield, the battlelog game launcher), but they should be fixed to support chrome64 anyway), but the other major upcoming change, codename electrolysis (E10s) which is splitting firefox into multiple processes/threads, will break addons, although mozilla are working on fixing as many of them as possible before pushing it through to release.

Great to hear because without my extensions FF isn't FF.

Also I to really with they don't go to a process per tab.

[colonel_mortis]

Then reorganize it yourself? That the nice thing about FF it's the most configurable of any of the browsers. There are at least 2 great extensions that will add gesture and better shortcut control.

Great to hear because without my extensions FF isn't FF.

Also I to really with they don't go to a process per tab.

It can be disabled, but it adds to stability and performance by separating everything (because if one tab is slow or crashes, the rest of the browser can stay up (unless the chrome (non-web content) crashes, in which case it would have crashed anyway).

[Builder]

Then reorganize it yourself? That the nice thing about FF it's the most configurable of any of the browsers. There are at least 2 great extensions that will add gesture and better shortcut control.

Yeah but Safari is reconfigurable too. I just prefer the way it looks.