Firefox 105 is here, and it's faster and more memory-frugal
- Reference: 1663756451
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/09/21/firefox_105/
- Source link:
Firefox 105 [1]appeared on Tuesday, and while this isn't a show-stopping release, there is some new stuff that is well worth having. It's not quite [2]five months since Firefox 100 came out , which is long enough for Mozilla's rapid development cycle to have made some substantial changes in the browser.
Some of the new features are relatively small, but will make some users' lives better. If you have to print a page, there's a new option to print just the current page – handy for tickets and other documents with loads of irrelevant small print tacked on the end. Here at the Reg FOSS desk, we're rather traditionalist and favor a plain old three-button mouse, but we hear that trackpad handling on Windows and macOS has been improved and there are some new multi-finger gestures in this version. Apparently this doesn't work on Linux just yet, but we can't say that we've noticed.
Firefox 105 is leaner and meaner, and remains both more efficient and way more customisable than any Chrome-based browser.
Memory handling has been tightened up, and the browser now handles low-memory situations better on both Windows and Linux. It should remain quicker and more responsive when short on RAM, and avoid crashing if it runs out of space, as there is improved protection for the main process.
Both memory usage and user interface are areas where Firefox retains an edge over Google's Chrome, especially if you routinely use lots of tabs. Chrome spawns a new process for each tab you open, which is good if you have lots of RAM and browsing the web is one of your principal uses for your computer. Since almost all of Google's services are web-based and web-centric, it makes perfect sense for the company.
[3]
Firefox also uses multiple processes, via a technology Mozilla calls [4]Electrolysis , but its approach is more cautious. There's one master process, and multiple background ones too, but not generally one per tab. [5]According to Mozilla, its multi-process model only [6]uses 10-20 per cent more RAM than its old single-process model, and around [7]half that of Chrome. Also, if you haven't used a tab in a while, Firefox [8]automatically unloads it from memory.
[9]
If you're a heavy user and routinely have many dozens of tabs open, we highly recommend giving the Fox another try – especially alongside a vertical tab bar, such as [10]Vertical Tabs .
[11]Document Foundation starts charging €8.99 for 'free' LibreOffice
[12]There's no place like GNOME: Project hits 25, going on 43
[13]W3C overrules objections by Google, Mozilla to decentralized identifier spec
[14]Firefox kills another tracking cookie workaround
We gave the new version a quick spin on Ubuntu, macOS and Windows 11. If you installed your own copy, as we did on Windows and Mac, it should update automatically – pick Help|About to prod it into checking. If it was included with your OS, which will be the case for most Linux users, you may have to wait a little while. Ubuntu users can jump the gun by grabbing the new version from [15]Snapcraft , or open the Software app, go to the Updates tab, and click the Refresh control at top right.
The release of the new version also means that Firefox 102 becomes the new Extended Support Release, or [16]ESR for short. It replaces Firefox 91, which has been the ESR version since late last year, when it was [17]causing some issues for the Debian maintainers . ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/105.0/releasenotes/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/03/firefox_100_released/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Yys1F7Gzo0k2w6H68s2NZQAAAI0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis
[5] https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2016/04/11/the-why-of-electrolysis/
[6] http://www.erahm.org/2016/02/11/memory-usage-of-firefox-with-e10s-enabled/
[7] http://www.erahm.org/2016/02/12/are-they-slim-yet/
[8] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/unload-inactive-tabs-save-system-memory-firefox
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Yys1F7Gzo0k2w6H68s2NZQAAAI0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/vertical-tabs/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/20/libre_office_macos_fees/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/17/gnome_project_25/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/01/w3c_overrules_objections/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/30/firefox_tracking_cookie_loophole/
[15] https://snapcraft.io/firefox
[16] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Release_Management/Calendar
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/10/debian_firefox_issues/
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Vertical Tabs
I might even give this one a crack, as opposed to typing like I’m smoking it.
Re: Vertical Tabs
Strange that Liam chose to recommend the barely known Vertical Tabs extension instead of the much more popular, tried and tested, and refined Tree Style Tabs (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/tree-style-tab/). It's as if he doesn't use what he promotes and only copied the top result for "vertical".
Re: Vertical Tabs
To be fair if you do a search for "vertical" on the Firefox add ons page, tree-style-tab is not shown. If I wanted vertical tabs and did not know about tree-style-tab, how would I find it? It's a bit like the supposed millions of apps on the Google Play store. Why do I keep seeing the same apps rather than some new ones?
Re: Vertical Tabs
I still prefer the original Panorama/Tab Groups extension which got brought into Firefox and then [1]unceremoniously dumped in Mozilla's continual efforts to turn the GUI into an empty interface with just one button in the middle.
There is a [2]similar extension , but it's less polished than the original because WebExtensions is gubbins.
[1] https://www.ghacks.net/2015/11/08/mozilla-to-remove-tab-groups-panorama-in-firefox-45/
[2] https://www.ghacks.net/2020/04/27/view-thumbnails-of-your-tabs-and-organize-them-with-panorama-tab-groups-for-firefox/
But does it support the extensions that stopped working in mobile version 69 yet?
That ship has sailed
I'm afraid.
Yes, with some fiddling, so things like Tab Mix Plus for multi-row horizontal tabs work again: https://github.com/onemen/TabMixPlus/#readme
Though not via Snap, but Snap FireFox has a ton of problems, like saving downloads to '/tmp/' actually being saved to some other folder under the real '/tmp/', so I've moved all our Ubuntu machines off the Snap and onto old school .tgz installs direct from Mozilla.
All very well but
I'm probably going to waste yet more time finding out why all my menu & bookmark text is suddenly 72 point again. Mozilla keep changing the knobs that let you control non-web text sizes and don't document it clearly . Bloody annoying and no, I don't have a 96 DPI screen, not do I want shouty menus. Just stop fucking around with it!
[I want a steam coming out of ears icon.]
Keep at it, Moz! We need there to be someone challenging the big G at their monopoly. As it stands, I admit that FF is not quite as snappy as Chrome. However, this is a price I'm willing to pay for not being in thrall to the ad-slinger.* It would have to be actually unusable for me to switch to Chrom(e/ium)(/Edge/other skin).
(*Yes, I know you're going to tell me FF is supported by Google's money. I don't care: it [1]lets me [2]use the [3]web without [4]wanting to [5]gouge out my eyes .)
[1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/ublock-origin/
[2] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/noscript/
[3] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/privacy-badger17/
[4] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/clearurls/
[5] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/decentraleyes/
Can't say I've noticed any difference in performance between Chrome... well in Edge guise it seems slightly slower than FF but that may just be all the ads loading.....
Performance
In my experience as a webdev and after hours of profiling I find that Firefox is better at static stuff, in one memorable example I had a page with other a million elements and Chrome took 30 seconds to parse it all whereas Firefox measured in mere milliseconds! When it comes to dynamic stuff Chrome takes the lead, it's JavaScript engine is superior although in my subjective experience it also crashes more often.
Just updated now. It certainly reloaded itself much faster than I remember the last update.
My gripe
It really has nothing at all to do with Firefox, but how we've come full circle and a lot of sites are only bothering to test with Chrome. Reddit, for example, has had a known bug for YEARS, in its comments. Pasting into a comment box with Firefox is completely borked, and despite there being a ticket open in Bugzilla for Firefox, it doesn't seem like it's high on anyone's priority to try to fix. Don't really blame them, Reddit's the one that is using a broken bit of JavaScript and should be the one fixing it, but... yeah. Their support staff is well aware of the issue, have been for years, and they seem about equally invested in fixing it as Mozilla.
It is nice to know that Mozilla is still plugging away and providing a non-Chromium alternative for those who want/need it.
Re: My gripe
Is that in Old or New Reddit? I only ever use the old version, and I've never noticed a problem.
Re: My gripe
To be fair to Microsoft here, their new whizzy Playwright UI test automation tool supports Firefox out of the box.
But does it still block sites arbitrarily?
Amateurs!
"Chrome spawns a new process for each tab you open"
Pah! How 20th century. Modern development requires that each tab gets its own Docker container.
-A.
Wow, an engineering-focused release
This sounds worth upgrading for.
Vertical Tabs
I’m going to go d this one a crack I think.