Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Other Software › Waterfox 31.0: 28 July [Firefox 64-Bit]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Waterfox 31.0: 28 July [Firefox 64-Bit] - Page 213

post #2121 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevindd992002 View Post

So you mean WF is not much faster than FF?

Every version of the different browsers could be slower or faster based on the code and how the browser was built. For example, Firefox is being built using VC2005. Soon that will switch to VC2010. I'm not sure how Waterfox is built or how Pale Moon is built. I do know that Waterfox is 1:1 in code when compared to Firefox. Pale Moon actually isn't 1:1 and deactivates/removes features such as Accessibility and some other things. Speed wise, sometimes Waterfox is the fastest and sometimes it's not. Each version and build changes. I've seen each of the browsers at some point be the fastest and by the next version it's not. But keep in mind that overall the speed difference is by seconds between browsers. You probably won't even see it. I prefer Waterfox because it's a 64bit browser that's identical to Firefox and can handle memory better so you can have lots of tabs open, etc., compared to regular Firefox. That doesn't make it faster but more efficient in memory use. You may use it for a different reason. If you want the fastest, then you need to speed test all the browsers when a new version comes out. Firefox may be faster with version 11, Waterfox may be faster with version 12, maybe another browser will be faster with the next version. It's up to you to find out which is the fastest of them all when each version is released. For me, the best of everything is Waterfox. It's a fantastic build and it runs perfectly and suits my needs nicely.
post #2122 of 6051
just my logic opinion on the YouTube laggy playing ....

as we all Know , google chrome uses flash player BUILD IN in order to play any youtube clips ( or any clips).
firefox uses same player BUT it isnt a build in version , its just installed over windows.

now , i just do a quick test , using COMDO DRAGON and SrWare Iron , both chromium based browsers which uses flash player in the way FireFox does , the one installed in windows ( NOT a build in like google chrome).

i just run any youtube clips and results were perfect like in google chrome.

Conclusion

the problem is IN firefox engine / coding or integration with adobe flsah .
post #2123 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by djkilla View Post

... I'm not sure how Waterfox is built or how Pale Moon is built. I do know that Waterfox is 1:1 in code when compared to Firefox. Pale Moon actually isn't 1:1 and deactivates/removes features such as Accessibility and some other things.

No, Waterfox is not 1:1 with Firefox code and hasn't been since sometime last year. Input about:buildconfig into the URL bar and checkout the differences (and similarities) between the Configure arguments sections of the different browsers.
post #2124 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by cymroly View Post

No, Waterfox is not 1:1 with Firefox code and hasn't been since sometime last year. Input about:buildconfig into the URL bar and checkout the differences (and similarities) between the Configure arguments sections of the different browsers.

Ok. Waterfox and Firefox are the same 1:1 code except Waterfox is compiled into 64bit with optimizations. When you look at about:buildconfig they will be different. Firefox is made to run on basicly everything with any type of hardware. Waterfox has SSE2 and other optimizations for newer hardware. They will be slightly different but the same 1:1 code. For example, lets say I add some tweaks to the settings in Waterfox but not in Waterfox on another computer, or change the settings in Firefox but not in Firefox on another computer, or change the settings in Waterfox but not in Firefox. Does that make them different? No. Because you only changed the settings and not the code. So the code is 1:1.

Read the last sentence in the second paragraph:
http://betanews.com/2012/02/07/waterfox-10-64-bit-browsing-for-your-windows-pc/

Read the description for Waterfox:
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Browsers/Waterfox.shtml

Like I said before, I'm happy there's other browsers to choose from. Each one has its pros and cons. I respect all the creators who put the time and effort to bring us an alternative browser and hope others have the same respect. It's not a competition to see who's better but what works best for you.
Edited by djkilla - 4/24/12 at 10:43am
post #2125 of 6051
"network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server - 8 (The default is actually 6. Bumped this up because there's a speed increase by changing it to 8)"

I have looked into it and you're right. 6 is default, yet I already had it at 8.

"network.prefetch-next" should be left alone and I rationalize it like this: prefetching links doesn't feed you malware, as by common sense if you visit a website with malware the malware will get to you everywhere and by not prefetching a link you are still unsafe.

Mozilla quotes this:
"Link prefetching is when a webpage hints to the browser that certain pages are likely to be visited, so the browser downloads them immediately so they can be displayed immediately when the user requests it. This preference controls whether link prefetching is enabled. "

Also, prefetching the next link will speed up the browsing speed, especially if you are on high speed Internet. Otherwise you might want to disable it, but disabling it with a very fast Internet connection is sort of pointless as today's anti-malware fighters are mostly redundant: Windows Defender, Anti-Virus, Website blocker in the browser. The amount of security layers these days are incredible, so it's best to not go "IP Tables" style.
post #2126 of 6051
Thread Starter 

Hey guys sorry I haven't been replying much, djkilla seems to be doing a good job of that tongue.gif (highly appreciated). I've been working hard trying to implement lockless malloc, and have been hitting some bumps on the road. Hopefully tomorrow or Thursday WF12 will be available.

    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Mavericks" 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Mavericks" 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2127 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by djkilla View Post

Ok. Waterfox and Firefox are the same 1:1 code except Waterfox is compiled into 64bit with optimizations. When you look at about:buildconfig they will be different. Firefox is made to run on basicly everything with any type of hardware. Waterfox has SSE2 and other optimizations for newer hardware. They will be slightly different but the same 1:1 code. For example, lets say I add some tweaks to the settings in Waterfox but not in Waterfox on another computer, or change the settings in Firefox but not in Firefox on another computer, or change the settings in Waterfox but not in Firefox. Does that make them different? No. Because you only changed the settings and not the code. So the code is 1:1.
Read the last sentence in the second paragraph:
http://betanews.com/2012/02/07/waterfox-10-64-bit-browsing-for-your-windows-pc/
Read the description for Waterfox:
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Browsers/Waterfox.shtml

Please don't point me to links that are incorrect and missing important information - like how much of Firefox code is disabled during the compilation of Waterfox. "Waterfox is basically a 64-Bit version of Firefox" < misleading statement.

I'll repeat with some extra emphasis addeed:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cymroly View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by djkilla View Post

... I'm not sure how Waterfox is built or how Pale Moon is built. I do know that Waterfox is 1:1 in code when compared to Firefox. Pale Moon actually isn't 1:1 and deactivates/removes features such as Accessibility and some other things.

No, Waterfox is not 1:1 with Firefox code and hasn't been since sometime last year. Input about:buildconfig into the URL bar and checkout the differences (and similarities) between the Configure arguments sections of the different browsers.
Look for the parts of Firefox code that are disabled during compilation. Compare for yourself please.
post #2128 of 6051
cymroly - Is there a point to this? This info doesn't help anyone. At this point, I'll agree with you. It's not the same. None of the browsers are the same. And that's great! If they were all the same, then why make different browsers, right? So lets agree that innovation is a good thing and everything is different. thumb.gif
post #2129 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlex View Post

Hey guys sorry I haven't been replying much, djkilla seems to be doing a good job of that tongue.gif (highly appreciated). I've been working hard trying to implement lockless malloc, and have been hitting some bumps on the road. Hopefully tomorrow or Thursday WF12 will be available.

Thanks Mr Alex! This forum will keep you busy but there's some good questions to be answered. Always happy to help out when needed. Looking forward to Waterfox 12!
post #2130 of 6051
The point is - clarity. The info will help anyone who's willing to check it for themselves.

You brought me into the thread by using my data that was published on another forum; I'm trying to show you that some of what you have been claiming in the last several months is no longer true. You don't want to prove it to yourself, that's fine - just try not to put your spin on it when someone asks a question.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Other Software
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Other Software › Waterfox 31.0: 28 July [Firefox 64-Bit]