FireFox 57 is now FireFox Quantum. Mozilla boasts massive performance and GUI improvements

[Morgan Everett]

I’ll give it a go, but when I tried FF a few months ago, it was still dreadfully sluggish, which is why I abandoned it in the first place.

[Sakkura]

5 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

Is the old FFox really pissed poor slow? I've been using the new one for over a day and the speed is the same as using my daily driver Opera.

Do i need to run meaningless benchmark to actually see this "massive performance increase"?

I just did a side by side comparison, and the difference to Chrome and Edge is noticeable, though not what I would call critical - FF 56 on my PC is still a lot faster than any browser on my phone. So I guess it depends how demanding you are, and what you're used to.

[ScratchCat]

8 hours ago, Sakkura said:

Hmm, what? Menu is at the top right for me in FF56, and has been for... a long time.

 

Or are you talking about mobile?

I mean compared to Firefox ~20 and the moving it to the top right as it is today.

It isn't really copying Chrome.

[AlTech]

6 minutes ago, ScratchCat said:

repost

This isn't a repost as the article about FF57 being Quantum from Mozilla came out on September 29.

 

Previous articles have discusses different things about FF57.

[ScratchCat]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

This isn't a repost as the article about FF57 being Quantum from Mozilla came out on September 29.

 

Previous articles have discusses different things about FF57.

edited, meant accidental double post.

[Sakkura]

3 hours ago, ScratchCat said:

I mean compared to Firefox ~20 and the moving it to the top right as it is today.

It isn't really copying Chrome.

Ah okay. I thought you meant as recent change.

[DrMacintosh]

But how does this compete with Safari speed wise? 

[ScratchCat]

1 hour ago, DrMacintosh said:

But how does this compete with Safari speed wise? 

Desktop safari is possibly equal or a slower, however Safari's click to run flash previously made it faster.

However safari does take up quite a bit of memory, not as much as Chrome though.

Edit:

Better than safari in Mozilla performed benchmark:

Benchmark link: http://output.jsbin.com/surane/quiet

[chilicheeseburger]

I'm trying it right now and it really is a big improvement. Feels fast and responsive. I'd even consider switching back to FF from Chrome once some essential add-ons become available. (Mainly Adblock)

[vanished]

23 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

Is the old FFox really pissed poor slow? I've been using the new one for over a day and the speed is the same as using my daily driver Opera.

[...]

I think so.  In the official video showing the comparison of this to chrome, FF57 wins some, and loses some, and FF57 is, by their own admission, over twice as fast as previous versions, so, that math is not hard to do  

[DeScruff]

23 hours ago, chilicheeseburger said:

I'm trying it right now and it really is a big improvement. Feels fast and responsive. I'd even consider switching back to FF from Chrome once some essential add-ons become available. (Mainly Adblock)

Well Ublock Origin has been updated to support 57, its not as popular, but I personally think it does a better job and uses less resources apparently
Also as far as I am aware there has been no controversy of letting ads go through if they payed ABP ( https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/13/12890050/adblock-plus-now-sells-ads )

[chilicheeseburger]

34 minutes ago, Sypran said:

Well Ublock Origin has been updated to support 57, its not as popular, but I personally think it does a better job and uses less resources apparently
Also as far as I am aware there has been no controversy of letting ads go through if they payed ABP ( https://www.theverge.com/2016/9/13/12890050/adblock-plus-now-sells-ads )

Thanks a lot! Installed Ublock now! I was just using Adblock as a synonym for adblockers in general, couldn't find any that worked with FF Quantum yesterday.

(And yeah, I'm aware of the controversy surrounding ABP, I don't mind really... it's just one checkbox like "allow some ads" you have to uncheck.)

[deltron3030]

I swear I saw someone say you could run 57 beta along side with older versions, but when I installed the 57 beta, it seems to have installed over 56. Is there a way to go back to 56 and keep my tabs/settings?

[Zodiark1593]

Just tried FireFox Beta on the phone. Still as laggy and slow as ever, primarily in scrolling. Chrome largely maintains 60 fps when scrolling while rarely breaking from that. Firefox is more like 30 fps scrolling on average.

[ScratchCat]

4 hours ago, deltron3030 said:

I swear I saw someone say you could run 57 beta along side with older versions, but when I installed the 57 beta, it seems to have installed over 56. Is there a way to go back to 56 and keep my tabs/settings?

Uninstall the Beta from the "programs and features -> uninstall programs" section of the control panel. They are installed as seperate applications if I remember correctly.

 

3 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Just tried FireFox Beta on the phone. Still as laggy and slow as ever, primarily in scrolling. Chrome largely maintains 60 fps when scrolling while rarely breaking from that. Firefox is more like 30 fps scrolling on average.

The beta would currently be version 57. On android for some reason the version numbers are different compared to desktop, eg desktop 57 = desktop 58. Try the nightly and then see how Firefox competes.

From what I have tested Firefox for android is still slower than chrome , more so than on the desktop where they are getting closer.

 

Things should move noticeably forward once the GPU based WebRenderer is correctly implemented ( currently not even active in nightly) which should improve scrolling performance by offloading most of the drawing / painting / composition to the GPU ( which is exceptionally good at painting pixels to a screen  )

[JoostinOnline]

I'm still pissed about how little time they gave developers to rewrite extensions.  I've disabled automatic updates for Firefox so I can wait until at least the majority will work.

 

Btw, how much you want to bet they throttled performance on v52 a little?

[Trixanity]

2 hours ago, JoostinOnline said:

I'm still pissed about how little time they gave developers to rewrite extensions.  I've disabled automatic updates for Firefox so I can wait until at least the majority will work.

 

Btw, how much you want to bet they throttled performance on v52 a little?

Didn't they get a year?

[Drak3]

3 hours ago, ScratchCat said:

They are installed as seperate applications if I remember correctly.

They aren't. The first instinct of 57's installer is to import 56's user data and replace it. Only reason I don't use 57 on my main desktop yet.

[Dylanc1500]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

They aren't. The first instinct of 57's installer is to import 56's user data and replace it. Only reason I don't use 57 on my main desktop yet.

I know you can have nightly and Firefox (non beta) installed at the same time. You just cannot have both running at the same time. If you open nightly then try opening Firefox it will open another nightly window and visa versa with Firefox. You are correct that they share user data,bookmarks, history, and etcetera (anything and everything that can be shared).

[Drak3]

Just now, Dylanc1500 said:

I know you can have nightly and Firefox (non beta) installed at the same time. You just cannot have both running at the same time. If you open nightly then try opening Firefox it will open another nightly window and visa versa with Firefox. You are correct that they share user data,bookmarks, history, and etcetera (anything and everything that can be shared).

I've had Firefox and Waterfox both installed at the same time, but 57 wanted to actually replace 56 on my systems.

[Dylanc1500]

Just now, Drak3 said:

I've had Firefox and Waterfox both installed at the same time, but 57 wanted to actually replace 56 on my systems.

Hmm odd, I'll have to try the beta when I get back home. I know that Nightly hasn't had conflict since back when it was called Aurora. Nightly is currently on 58.

[deltron3030]

7 hours ago, ScratchCat said:

Uninstall the Beta from the "programs and features -> uninstall programs" section of the control panel. They are installed as seperate applications if I remember correctly.

I just checked alphabetically, and only firefox prog is Firefox 57 (does not even say beta). Do not see 56.

[PocketNerd]

I'm most impressed by the fact that Mozilla actually showed cases where Chrome was faster than FF Quantum.

I wish more companies would do that.

[The Benjamins]

Fire Fox just updated on my windows server 2012 R2 system, and now it does not display pages correctly, runs slow, and download manager was unresponsive. I had to download and install Opera to update my router.

[JoostinOnline]

10 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Didn't they get a year?

According to developers, they only got a few months with full information.