Re: Firefox 3.0 Judged And Found

Disculpa Senora David V. Loewe, Jr, pero did you really mime the following on 6/17/2008 9:40 PM???
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:29:32 -0700 (PDT), lein
<boomer_the_cat@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 17, 3:50 pm, Constance Reeder <consta...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2008-06-17, lein <boomer_the_...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 17, 1:41 pm, Emperor Wonko the Sane <d...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Jun 17, 3:06 pm, "David V. Loewe, Jr" <davelo...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
...to be better than IE, Safari or Firefox 2.x.
--
IAWTP
Run it for a couple of days and see if it, like Firefox 2.x, ends up
with sucking up 800K+ of memory.
800K+ of memory? Does that overwhelm your Columbia 8088 or something?
I wish it was 800K but I meant 800,000K. When my PC gets all sucky,
I go to task manager, sort the processes by mem usage and sure enough,
there's ole firefox at the top eating up every bit it can get. The
good think is that I can kill the process and when I restart it, it
asks if I want to restore the tabs I had.

Well...

I've got 5 windows of Firefox open with 21 total tabs in those 5
windows and I'm using less than 350 M according to Task Manager.

Firefox (even Version 2) is FAR less of a memory hog than Safari.

I had switched to Safari for a few weeks - I really liked everything about Safari; especially the clean interface and the great bookmark system. But I am convinced that the evil bastards in Redmond have jiggered Windows to make Safari hog memory and run slow. I have since reluctantly gone back to Firefox - well, actually not THAT reluctantly, since it's almost as nice as Safari and more reliable and far faster and far less of a memory hog; so I'm quite happy.

Incidentally, I also use Thunderbird as my e-mail / news client and it just rocks.


--
I'm so hip I have trouble seeing over my pelvis.
I'm so cool you can keep a side of meat in me for months.
.