Rapid Development - Firefox 7.0x is here

[uncleyap]

when 6.x is only just a month old.

I am seeing update notice for 7.0x right now.

That is fast!

 

[uncleyap]

I have just updated (one of mine) to 7.0 and this post is my 1st use of it.



so web hear say about it is cut and pasted below:

<hr>

http://mashable.com/2011/09/27/firefox-7/

Firefox 7 Is Here: Will It Stop Hogging Memory & Let You Browse Faster? [REVIEW]
Christina Warren 2 days ago by Christina Warren 60
inShare454
Share on Tumblr
email
share

Mozilla’s rapid release schedule for Firefox continues with the arrival of Firefox 7 for Mac, Windows and Linux.

Firefox 7 comes less than six weeks after the release of Firefox 6. Mozilla moved to a more rapid release cycle with a more streamlined, frequent and incremental upgrade cycle a la Google’s Chrome browser, after Firefox 4 launched back in March.

As a result, most of the changes have taken place under the hood. Mozilla boasts that Firefox 7 uses less memory and performs faster.

Firefox 7 also improved its support for cutting-edge web technologies, including hardware-accelerated Canvas for HTML5 animations. That means that web apps and browser-based games should get better performance.
Memory Improvements: Your Mileage May Vary

The Firefox 7 team says that the latest version of the browser uses less memory, a reduction of anywhere between 20% and 50%. In a blog post at Mozilla Hacks, Firefox developer Nicholas Nethercote details the memory improvements. He says the benefits will be most noticeable for users that:

Keep Firefox open for a long time
Have many tabs open at once
Use Firefox for Windows
View pages with lots of text
Use Firefox while also using other memory-intensive programs

In our tests, using a mid-2010 MacBook Pro with 8 GB of RAM running OS X Lion, we were unable to ascertain just how much better Firefox 7 used memory as compared to Firefox 6. However, we did pit it against the most stable release of Google Chrome.

I opened up the same browser pages in Firefox 7 and in Chrome. They included Mashable, Variety.com, Google+, Facebook, Mashable‘s backend website and Hulu.com. On Hulu, I played a video in high definition.

To take Flash out of the equation, I then removed the Hulu tab from both browsers. These are the results.

As you can see, the main Firefox app uses the same amount of memory in both tests. The “plugin-container” process is actually what Firefox uses to sandbox some plugins, like Flash, so that even if that process crashes, the rest of the app stays in place.

Mozilla’s tests indicate that peak memory usage for Firefox 7 is lower than its predecessors and that sustained usage is more consistent. We haven’t had enough time to test whether memory usage continues to increase the more time a tab or window is left open, but we’ll assume this is true.

For Mac users, Firefox 7 is still no match for Google Chrome, at least when it comes to memory usage. To be fair, Apple’s own browser, Safari, has memory performance issues with OS X Lion, and Firefox 7 could perform better in Mac OS X 10.6 or earlier. Firefox has historically had better Windows performance, especially when it comes to memory usage, and we expect those are the users that will really see the benefits.
Is the Rapid Update Cycle Working?

I’m conflicted about Mozilla’s rapid-release approach to Firefox. As nice as it is not to have to go months or years between major updates — especially when it comes to support for newer HTML5 and JavaScript technologies — I have to wonder if this process isn’t too rapid.

Because Firefox has historically been such a version-number driven product, users are conditioned to expect major feature improvements every time a release is introduced. On the flip-side, Google doesn’t make a big deal about the version numbers of its Chrome browser. Users just know it as Chrome.

Part of the reason that a rapid update cycle works for Google Chrome is that the updates take place completely in the background. Because of how Chrome plugins are designed, most will continue to work with new versions. Firefox has a much larger and more complex add-on environment and as a result, there will always be add-ons that are incompatible with the latest release.

While I firmly believe that the move to more rapid, consistent improvements is good for the browser ecosystem as a whole, I’m not convinced that the Firefox team has figured out the best way to alert users about updates or that that the messaging behind how these updates work is on target.

What do you think of Firefox 7? Let us know in the comments.
Print Story Email Story Reprints
We recommend

New iPhone 5 Clue: Will It Have a 4-Inch Screen? Mobile
iPhone 5 Has Aluminum Back in Leaked Case Pics Mashable
Apple iPhone 5 Launch: Here’s What to Expect Tech & Gadgets
No, You Aren’t Going to Quit Facebook Social Media
Apple Surprise: What “One More Thing” Will Tim Cook Announce at the iPhone 5 Launch? [POLL] Tech & Gadgets


From around the web

The Best Sunglasses of 2011 Beauty and Style
Ann Demeulemeester Spring 2012 RTW Fashion Etc.
Rosetta Stone in Iraq Rosetta Stone Blog
Nintendo Stumbles to Worst Profit in 27 Years CFOWorld
Apple set to unveil iPhone 5 on Oct. 4? Atlanta Business Chronicle

[what's this]
Topics to follow

Google chrome
Google chrome 3,733 followers
Follow
Firefox
Firefox 2,029 followers
Follow
Browser
Browser 208 followers
Follow
Browsers
Browsers 63 followers
Follow
Firefox 7
Firefox 7 3 followers
Follow

More Stories in Apps & Software

Amazon Kindle Fire Just Hijacked Android
Amazon Kindle Fire Just Hijacked Android 11
Quora Launches an iPhone App
Quora Launches an iPhone App 4

Top Related Stories

Facebook Rolls Out Official Like Button Extension for Chrome
Facebook Rolls Out Official Like Button Extension for Chrome 21
Happy 3rd Birthday, Google Chrome
Happy 3rd Birthday, Google Chrome 43

60 Comments
To leave a comment on this story, please log in with Facebook or Twitter

Techanol Follow

i thought chrome takes more memory usage. because my chrome mostly crashes when i opens more than 10 tabs and firefox dint even crash even working 20 tabs.
http://www.techanol.in/
2 days ago Reply 2
farjah96 Follow

Is there any issue regarding the addons from the oldversion firefox, will it be compatible to the new one? I gave up my older firefox due to can’t handle more than 20 tabs as of the moment experimenting chrome. http://piefae.blogspot.com
1 day ago Reply 0
Robert Davey Follow

I stop using Firefox once I started using Chrome, but will check it out. My last Firefox version was 4
2 days ago Reply 2
Jamezs Gladney Follow

Same here. I find it ‘lighter’
1 day ago Reply 2
SoyMarketing Follow

Same here…
1 day ago Reply 1
Scott Dunsmore Follow

Memory killer.
2 days ago Reply 0
Farer Lychnis Follow

Is this available now ?
2 days ago Reply 0
Farer Lychnis Follow

It’s a little bit cool as I think.
I’m using 7.0 now.
2 days ago Reply 2
Stuart_Weidner Follow

OK, great article. I am wondering though, does anyone else have trouble watching videos on youtube with Firefox, I am using firefox version 5.0.1 and it doesnt show the play or pause button that allows you to navigate through videos by fast forwarding or rewinding a video.

I had no idea my firefox browser was so out of date? Firefox 7 is here and I’m still running 5?
2 days ago Reply 0
Satish Gadhave Follow

Youtube works just fine with Firefox, no matter its 5 or 7. I suggest to recheck your flash version. As player runs on flash, keeping it up to date matters.
1 day ago Reply 0
Clover Thompson Follow

I love firefox and hate chrome. Chrome eats my computer where firefox lets me run my three social sites, hulu and netflix together without crashing.
2 days ago Reply 3
Anne Thomas Follow

I gave up on Firefox about 2 months ago when it just got too bloated to do much of anything :(
Reminded me of why I gave up IE years ago..
2 days ago Reply 1
Kari Rippetoe Follow

I did the same thing – stopped using IE and started using FF. That was 4 or 5 years ago. I loved FF, but now it slows down to almost a halt if I have more than 10 tabs open. Then there are the constant and nagging reminders to download the latest update (and when I try to, it just sits and never updates).
1 day ago Reply 0
Andy Riches Follow

If you guys are getting stopped up when you are doing such simple things on your computers, you have some pretty darn bad computers. As for Firefox, they went way wrong with Firefox 4 and up. I use Firefox 3.6.22 and it blows Chrome out of the water. Upgrading to 3.6.x is the only way to go with Firefox in all honesty.
2 days ago Reply 0
CGregz Follow

As a fan of 3.6.22, i understand. The web developer tools on FF are solid, and so much more effective than Chrome. Other than that, though, it can’t hold a candle to chrome.
2 days ago Reply 0
chingweitweets Follow

I’m not sure the RAM numbers you show are correct. In my experience, Chrome is a memory hog too. Remember that Chrome starts a separate process for each tab (and in the Mac Activity Monitor shows up as separate entries for Google Chrome, Google Chrome Renderer, Google Chrome Worker). On my system, if I add up all the Chrome processes’ RAM usage, it comes out higher than Firefox 7.
2 days ago Reply 2
Christina Warren Follow

Yeah, that screenshot was just shows the highest processes but even looking at everything, in my test, Chrome came out ahead. Way ahead. But your point about how Chrome handles its memory is totally valid.
2 days ago Reply 0
Максим Афанасьев Follow

So proof screenshot is like this http://vault.pmpc.ru/vf/28091112/38d143e9046d712281c142a68.jpg
(in FF and Chrome opened my favorite 10 sites)
and problem Firefox is not in memory at all.
1 day ago 0
Josef Higgins Follow

While I can’t speak about developer tools on browsers, I can say Chrome on my notebooks run much faster and stable than any browser available. I constantly have 20+ tabs open and Chrome extensions galore installed, all the while running multiple (resources + data hogging) applications running. All of this and my notebooks moves flawlessly, always. That’s what impressed me about Chrome a few years back and it’s only gotten better with each new release.
2 days ago Reply 0
James Shanahben De Castro Follow

Self-update is a must
2 days ago Reply 0
Nicholas Fargher Follow

So far I hate it. I installed and now it crashes EVERY time I open it.
2 days ago Reply 1
Jason Bourgeois Follow

Same here. Very annoying. I had to completely uninstall and reinstall 3.6.12 just so i could download an alternate version. Right now I’m using 7.0 Beta 6 and it’s more stable than the regular release 7.0. The latest 6.0.2 release I was using before was also severely unstable for me for some reason, and then 7.0 took it to a new level and wouldn’t open at ALL.
1 day ago Reply 0
Mohd Luqman Follow

I want to update but I learn from past experiences that updating means disabling all adds on, so no. Will update perhaps after several weeks.
2 days ago Reply 2
Le Cooper Follow

Its no Chrome
1 day ago Reply 0
Mike Weisz Follow

So far… no. And ever since FF6, with my machine (AMD hexcore w/ 16gig ram), it seems to chug/freeze at times worse than ever for no reason at all. Not sure what more FF could possibly want from me.
1 day ago Reply 1
Tim Shelburn Follow

I want Firefox 8!
1 day ago Reply 0
James Trageser Follow

FF is getting worse!
1 day ago Reply 0
Brendo Tron Follow

Here I am, just upgraded to FF7, and, after the same amount of time, I’m back up to over 1.2GB of ram used.

When Firefox STARTS, it’s using over 500MB. I really don’t understand how this is possible.
1 day ago Reply 0
Lauren Manchester Utd Follow

I like more google chrome. Has a better resolution, at least it works better on the site i visit
http://manutdnetwork.com/
1 day ago Reply 0
Caroline Boodoosingh Follow

Updating!
1 day ago Reply 1
K Mur Follow

As a web developer, I prefer Firefox over Chrome since Firebug is a significantly better add-on then the developer tools Chrome has to offer.

Performance wise Chrome does seem faster but I don’t have as many add-ons installed as I do on Firefox. Majority of the add-ons installed are developer based so it can hinder the performance a bit.

Also you will notice if you are streaming netflix, youtube, pandora or slacker radio the plugin-container will start to hog memory resources, I would constantly see a Norton system message.

Lets hope 7.0 fixes that.
1 day ago Reply 0
arenaut Follow

Don’t forget Opera. I gave up on Firefox after memory issues with FF6 and Chrome was no better on a range of MacMini’s MacBook Pro’s and a Mac Pro Tower with 8GB of Ram. No such issues with Opera.
1 day ago Reply 0
Vostok Follow

I’m sorry but I’m still not using it. I was an avid Firefox user before Google Chrome came out. The thing that bugs me is that Firefox uses way too much memory compared to Google Chrome. It’s bloated and sluggish to put it in simple language. When I fire up Chrome, my memory is around 700 MB. When I open up Firefox, it jumps up to 1.35 GB after 1 page of browsing.. for example visiting mashable.com. Just unacceptable. I’m not a big add-on user either.. I just had “ad-block plus” installed in Firefox.. that is now available in Chrome too so no reason for me to go back to Firefox. Also, Chrome feels a lot “lighter”.
1 day ago Reply 0
davidnathaniel Follow

Firefox 6 creeps up to 1.9GB of memory on my end and won’t let it go unless I force-quit it, even after closing all windows and tabs!

I was so frustrated by the memory hogginess of Firefox, I switched to Chrome! What a difference!!!
1 day ago Reply 0
BonnieLowe Follow

Didn’t take much prompting for me to jump from IE to Firefox when the fox first came on the scene. (I really hated IE.) Now I’ve recently started using Chrome. Still use both… but I’m finding that many websites just function better when viewed with Chrome. So I’m very close to leaving Firefox behind. It was cool when it was new… but I think it’s getting left behind as Chrome gains momentum. I do tend to keep my browser open for long times, with several tabs open at once. The only thing I wish Chrome would do is prompt me with an “Are you sure you want to close all 342 tabs?” type of message when I accidentally click the wrong x. ;-)
http://ProfitBasedMarketing.com
1 day ago Reply 0
Fred Faulkner Follow

Wow, that was fast.
1 day ago Reply 0
lightfallsup Follow

[short answer is no]
1 day ago Reply 0
THERCOM1 Follow

Não vejo nada de interessante no firefox por todo lugar que se está navegando aparece bandeira na frente da tela.
1 day ago Reply 0
Carlo Borja Follow

we’ll see.
1 day ago Reply 0
Minho Doh Follow

파폭7 나왔습니다. 언넝 까세요.
1 day ago Reply 0
Ron Edrote Follow

Fast and the Furios Firefox 7
1 day ago Reply 0
Francois Mathieu Follow

Firefox 7 beta made me switch to Chrome.
1 day ago Reply 0
Pete Perry Follow

i don’t understand why anyone would use FF. Ever.
1 day ago Reply 0
zakkforchilli Follow

There was Flash still probably running on Variety or Facebook for small ads? that’s possible.

You should have thrown photos of Safari memory MURDERING ass on here.
1 day ago Reply 0
John Morrison Follow

Running FF7 on Puppeee (a eeePC derivative of Puppy linux) and it’s using (the FF and plugin container combined) 59mb of RAM. This is 3 tabs open (FB, mashable, and a page with a lot of scripts running) Youtube videos run smoother than in FF6, which is nice.
1 day ago Reply 0
zly_1990 Follow

Yeah, I can confirm FF in Linux uses much smaller RAM than that reported in Windows. I once opened around 60 tabs when browsing danbooru and firefox(6) only used 500mb. On starting up, firefox only uses 50mb.
Firefox has about:config feature which chrome does not have. If every options are hard coded, it is no wonder chrome can be that fast, but this leaves many heavy users with no options.
One more thing, Chrome used a lot of HDD space. Chrome will store cache files in home folder. It does not have the feature to clean cache automatically when closing. Firefox does. Thus, after a few month, chrome can eat up up to giga bites of HDD (Personal experience).
about 20 hours ago Reply 0
caesar castro Follow

useful browser indeed
1 day ago Reply 0
melanconium Follow

FF7 tends to become better than Chrome. A friend of mine affirmed it starts faster than the last version of Chrome. About memory Mozilla made promises and has respected them.
I was ready to quit FF for Chrome until I finally installe FF7 bêta and now I enjoy the final version.
I’ve just got a crash (with the bêta) when I wanted to empty historic.
BTW I recommend Firefox users to install the Omnibar (plugin) to get the same searching speed than Chrome (it’s pleasant to integrate Google search directly in address bar).
Basically FF 4 to FF 6 was a mistake. I hope they’ll continue to do better job from now.
1 day ago Reply 0
HanQ Kim Follow

i don’t care, as LONG AS IT LETS ME USE MY GOD DAM ADD-ONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1 day ago Reply 0
Wazbir Hazarika Follow

Chrome crashes very often. Firefox FTW!
1 day ago Reply 0
ZeroOne3010 Follow

In this pace we’ll see Firefox 43 by next summer… They’ll soon realize that it’s a bit stupid to increment the major version number this quickly. I have been a happy Opera user for probably more than 10 years already. I only use Firefox for web development because of Firebug, but Dragonfly seems to be gaining.
1 day ago Reply 0
Satish Gadhave Follow

I think firefox’s rapid release cycle is fine but they dont have to change version numbers like 6 to 7 directly. Instead, they can release it as 6.1, 6.2 etc.
What they add/update are small changes, no need to change complete version for that.
1 day ago Reply 0
Mike Lazarus Follow

How will developers support the faster browser upgrade cycles?
1 day ago Reply 0
Paul Santosh Follow

it may be slow, like the previous versions
1 day ago Reply 0
James Nichols Follow

i fit the model they they set forth and see no memory improvements what so ever.
1 day ago Reply 0
ShareMyCode Follow

Now, the HTTP protocol is hidden. The solution here

http://www.sharemycode.com/item/view/77/mozilla-firefox-7-some-changes
about 15 hours ago Reply 0
Ken Wintersgill Follow

for firfox lovers
about 15 hours ago Reply 0
practravelgear Follow

“I would constantly see a Norton system message.”

I’m using AVG and am getting the same kind of warnings after the upgrade. My new version of Firefox is using even more memory than before, despite only having a few add-ons. With six tabs open, no video, it’s at 253mbs. 4X what anything else is using.
about 7 hours ago Reply 0
James Trageser Follow

DEFINITE IMPROVEMENT!
about 4 hours ago Reply 0
Jonathan Santeramo Follow

I love Firefox 7. I have confirmed that for me, it uses less memory than Firefox 6. I also love that Firefox 7 submits performance data, which I opted into. That way, I’m helping out Mozilla and the future development of Firefox.
about 3 hours ago Reply 0

 

[Alamaking]

I dun see the diffs

 

[Forvendet]

I dun see the diffs

Agreed. Waste of time to download.

 

[krafty]

yey...already upgraded days ago

 

[Alamaking]

Agreed. Waste of time to download.

Mine auto download, just need to restart application, LOL

 

[uncleyap]

Until they solve the memory leak issue, Chrome it is.

According to my 2nd post (What's new in 7.0) they said the main purpose is to fix this memory issue.

 

[vamjok]

According to my 2nd post (What's new in 7.0) they said the main purpose is to fix this memory issue.

so many problem and yet you keep recommending it.

you are no diff from the 60.1%.

Chrome is the TRUTH,
Chrome is the WAY!

 

[HedgeTrader]

so many problem and yet you keep recommending it.

you are no diff from the 60.1%.

Chrome is the TRUTH,
Chrome is the WAY!

Can you trust the uncle always recommend you vote SDP LOL

 

[grunt72]

Beta 8 is already OUT!

WTF

 

[uncleyap]

so many problem and yet you keep recommending it.

you are no diff from the 60.1%.

Chrome is the TRUTH,
Chrome is the WAY!

The FF problem is the least for me among all the browsers I have got.

• Opera
• Chrome
• konqi
• konqueror
• sea monkey
• IE
• Epiphany
• lynx
• Emacs
• Netscape
• FF

All other browsers gave me more problems than FF. :Z

 

[tititata]

I have been using FF since version 2 and now 7.01. I can tell you it really sucks on speed esp. if yiou ipen more than 7 tabs and leave it open for some time. Initially I thought it was due to several plugins I installed but my investigation tells me it is the problematic FF core. Chrome is by far the best (forget about IE9, it sulks big time in speed and website rendering compatibility). Chrome is really speedy but unfortunately there are not many useful plugins to support it, unlike FF. So bite the bullet, I used both FF and Chrome.

 

[uncleyap]

I have been using FF since version 2 and now 7.01. I can tell you it really sucks on speed esp. if yiou ipen more than 7 tabs and leave it open for some time. Initially I thought it was due to several plugins I installed but my investigation tells me it is the problematic FF core. Chrome is by far the best (forget about IE9, it sulks big time in speed and website rendering compatibility). Chrome is really speedy but unfortunately there are not many useful plugins to support it, unlike FF. So bite the bullet, I used both FF and Chrome.

It would be confusing and leading to unnecessary arguments when BROWSER SPEED is vaguely and too generally discussed. There are several different aspects of speeds, and they each measures differently for different OS environment even. I use Linux and not MS.

• downloading speed
• uploading speed
• rendering speed
• processing / execution speed
• others

downloading speed can be even more broken down into more than one aspects, but in general is the requesting of data from web servers and pulling them down to your computer. text and scripts and cookies included.

uploading speed is like you sending your email attachment or upload big video to youtube.com

rendering speed is to redraw your browser window / screen refreshing with the new images and contents received, re-arranging them when style-sheet is arrived and scripts came in to change variables

execution speed is running scripts and calculating (this part I think FF sometimes sucks)

there is also another part but browser not fully responsible, which is JVM (non-script Java) run time doing it. These can be grouped with plug-in interface like others e.g. flash adobe PDF Acrobat etc. These can hang or crash browsers too.

I noticed on some websites they will faster when I disable Java scripts, because they writes tricky scripts that loads some other scripts and contents. Some news sites over do this so much until I Tak Boleh Tahan. They did for self protection, that their pages' contents can not be even saved nor cut and pasted.

If you checked memory consumption, browsers also consume lots. In old days our whole computers were only 128MB/256MB these days one browser running can alone eat 400MB or more. It eats memory like one whole OS of the old days. So bulky how to be fast? Massive items not possible to run fast just like heavy humans! :p

Opening more pages and loading more plug-ins are like putting on weight in browsers, if you want them to be fast, then make them lost weights. I install plugins that will me my browser run faster by blocking out e.g. flash, I also block scripts. I don't let the website builders and advertisers abuse my computing resources for their purposes. I only want to see specifically what I want and I am not impressed by lots of animations etc.

When I say FF is fast, I refer to the speed of it rendering and pulling data out of web for me. The upload is not fast enough for me, and I know that they can still do better. The scripts are doing shits behind our backs and I don't trust them! Plug-ins are not part of the FF, flash etc are from other companies like Adobe. They only pull speed down - the apparent browsing speed to user but not fully responsible by FF.

Those who says Chrome runs faster it is only because Chrome did not have the compatible plug-ins so they fly without the extra weights put on!



I don't run windows, will never install IE9. Not interested also!
:p

 

[vamjok]

majority of us do not need that extra weight. This is where chrome ruled, THEY UNDERSTAND THE MARKET.

 

[uncleyap]

majority of us do not need that extra weight. This is where chrome ruled, THEY UNDERSTAND THE MARKET.

I am also a chrome user.
For me it is slower than FF, I got to use it when I need simultaneous logins to a same site with 2 different A/Cs, e.g. web hosting control panels for different owners. I do IT for different customers' webs, I need to admin login, each client is a different A/C, with multiple browsers I need not logout and login repeatedly. To have more logins I will use opera & konqi and sea monkey. So I have many browsers.

Read these news about Chrome! Got eliminated by MS anti-virus!

http://news.google.com/news/more?hl...sult&ct=more-results&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQqgIwAA

<div id="mc-wrapper" class="main-content-with-gutter-wrapper"><div id="mc-inner"><table id="mc-main-table" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td id="mc-left"><div class="section"><a name="articles"></a>
<span class="first-story"> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNFtYtAEmnr1uO2bMeLsGKKJgp4FWg did-468df831156e14dd article" href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hmaNagJd5Em0Ncg7kPvRxUbnk5Ng?docId=CNG.b8d311ad4223657f5870feb8a7ea6ba2.151" id="MAA4AEgAUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft anti-virus program evicts Chrome browser</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-4294967300 ">AFP</span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;4 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> SAN FRANCISCO — Microsoft raced to fix an anti-virus program that targeted Google's Chrome browsing software as a malicious threat and kicked it off computers. Microsoft said the case of mistaken coding identity lasted about three hours and affected <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> </span>

<div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNHDTHYIzCVhgFflXC0i6igEmSdeBg did-37d245bf80d68c87 article" href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/09/microsoft-security-tools-deleting-google-chrome-from-windows-pcs.html" id="MAA4AEgBUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft security tools deleting Google Chrome from Windows PCs</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-669628 ">Los Angeles Times</span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;9 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> Hundreds of Google Chrome users (at least) found their Internet browser of choice removed from their Windows PCs on Friday after Microsoft deleted the Web-surfing app. And no, Microsoft didn't start pushing out Chrome because it's gaining market share <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNEdyGBkws0SnzSn3YXCjzH_-3jGTg did-b74c0fce0f361d53 article" href="http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2011/09/microsoft-anti-malware-tool-mistakenly-snuffs-google-chrome/" id="MAA4AEgCUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft Anti-Malware Tool Mistakenly Snuffs Google Chrome</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-669490 ">Wired News</span>&nbsp;- <span class="author-link"><a href="/news/search?gl=sg&amp;pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=en_sg&amp;hl=en&amp;q=author:%22Cade+Metz%22&amp;scoring=n">Cade Metz</a></span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;10 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> Microsoft's Security Essentials anti-malware tool has mistakenly identified Google Chrome as a password-pilfering trojan — and actually removed the browser from many users' machines — but a fix for this rather amusing false positive is now <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div>

<div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNFMgEw4h3xpJE8u6fFVGchLQmxbLQ did-cbba35104396c033 article" href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9220435/Microsoft_kills_Google_Chrome_with_bad_malware_signature" id="MAA4AEgDUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft kills Google Chrome with bad malware signature</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-669686 ">Computerworld</span>&nbsp;- <span class="author-link"><a href="/news/search?gl=sg&amp;pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=en_sg&amp;hl=en&amp;q=author:%22Gregg+Keizer%22&amp;scoring=n">Gregg Keizer</a></span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;12 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> Computerworld - Microsoft scrambled earlier today to revise an antivirus definition file that deleted Google's Chrome browser from users' PCs. &quot;Wow, that's certainly one way to win the browser war,&quot; said Andrew Storms, <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNEjWkra4wagE-OmFyNAAZmw3KFedQ did-1f1141a1a278d0a9 article" href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoftpri0/2016366880_microsoft_fixes_security_update_that_some_users_sa.html" id="MAA4AEgEUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft fixes security update that removed Google Chrome</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-669659 ">The Seattle Times</span>&nbsp;- <span class="author-link"><a href="/news/search?gl=sg&amp;pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=en_sg&amp;hl=en&amp;q=author:%22Janet+I.+Tu%22&amp;scoring=n">Janet I. Tu</a></span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;14 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> A thread on the Google Chrome Help forum this morning included a number of the browser's users who said they no longer had the browser on their computers after acting on a Microsoft Security Essentials notification. Microsoft's Security Essentials <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNE0orYQUWXKOSTS9eumnzOXQjiANg did-be358d6c70c8600d article" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/30/microsoft_nukes_google_chrome/" id="MAA4AEgFUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Pandemonium as Microsoft AV nukes Chrome browser</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-669440 ">Register</span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;15 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> Users of Google's Chrome browser are in an uproar after antivirus software from Microsoft classified it as virulent piece of malware that should be deleted immediately. On Friday, a faulty signature update for both Microsoft Security Essentials and <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNF3J3KX-MNfWAr-OrKc2j1ltS_sXw did-62013264cf972b67 article" href="http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/users-report-microsoft-security-essentials-removes-google-chrome/4006" id="MAA4AEgGUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Users report Microsoft Security Essentials removes Google Chrome</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-669441 ">ZDNet (blog)</span>&nbsp;- <span class="author-link"><a href="/news/search?gl=sg&amp;pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=en_sg&amp;hl=en&amp;q=author:%22Ed+Bott%22&amp;scoring=n">Ed Bott</a></span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;16 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> Summary: Hundreds of users on Google Chrome Help forum this morning reported that Microsoft security products were identifying Chrome as a password-stealing Trojan and removing it. <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNGkDR0rzLeWlv40uNTColf71rjw1A did-c99095e10644985c article" href="http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/security-bullet-in-10000166/microsoft-tool-may-be-removing-chrome-10024469/" id="MAA4AEgHUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft tool may be removing Chrome</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-669442 ">ZDNet UK (blog)</span>&nbsp;- <span class="author-link"><a href="/news/search?gl=sg&amp;pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=en_sg&amp;hl=en&amp;q=author:%22Tom+Espiner%22&amp;scoring=n">Tom Espiner</a></span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;16 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> Microsoft Security Essentials appears to be removing Chrome from Windows machines, according to complaints on user forums. The false positive in Microsoft's security tool may be identifying Chrome as a Zeus <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNHQLXT8xlRlRWJtebjP6fzquimsKg did-38ccb457ffb1e24a article" href="http://mybroadband.co.za/news/software/35070-microsoft-security-essentials-nails-chrome.html" id="MAA4AEgIUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft Security Essentials nails Chrome</span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-782907 ">MyBroadband</span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;2 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> AFP is a global news agency delivering fast, accurate, in-depth coverage of the events shaping our world. SAPA-AFP provides news to the South African market... Microsoft raced Friday to fix an anti-virus program that targeted Google's Chrome browsing <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div> <div class="story cid-8797756684000 l-en headline-story thumbnail-false "> <h2 class="title"> <a target="_blank" class="usg-AFQjCNHre41QpXA8c7j3icFc3k-VaKCvOA did-52059a0312b05803 article" href="http://technology.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474980440010" id="MAA4AEgJUABgAWoFZW5fc2c"><span class="titletext">Microsoft Treats Google Chrome as Malware, Deletes the Program from User's <b>...</b></span></a> </h2> <div class="sub-title"><span class="source source-pref sid-829390 ">Gather.com</span>&nbsp;- <span class="author-link"><a href="/news/search?gl=sg&amp;pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=en_sg&amp;hl=en&amp;q=author:%22Shawn+Drew%22&amp;scoring=n">Shawn Drew</a></span>&nbsp;- <span class="date">&lrm;2 hours ago&lrm;</span></div> <div class="body"> <div class="snippet"> Relations between tech giant's Microsoft and Google may not have always been rosy, but this latest incident is sure to further exasperate their issues. On Friday morning, an update to Microsoft Security Essentials mistakenly flagged Google Chrome as <b>...</b> </div> <div class="sources"><span class="source-link"></span></div> </div> </div>

<div class="filter-link"><a href="/news/story?gl=sg&amp;pz=1&amp;cf=all&amp;ned=en_sg&amp;hl=en&amp;q=microsoft+chrome&amp;ncl=dM8CWQxA1ussPfM3RRuFTH4jUYPvM">All 30 related articles&nbsp;&raquo;</a></div></div>

 

[Alamaking]

SO 7.0.1 is out, whats new? LOL

I dun like FF history, the list is too short, if i want longer history, i need to choose full history. Safari let you scroll 1 week old links until they keep it to the archive.

 

[Alamaking]

 

[uncleyap]

SO 7.0.1 is out, whats new? LOL

I dun like FF history, the list is too short, if i want longer history, i need to choose full history. Safari let you scroll 1 week old links until they keep it to the archive.

I clear all history, I set FF to dump everything including cookies when I close it. If I need to mark a URL to return in the future I will use bookmark. I have temp bookmark folder and & can delete them all when I think I don't need them.

Searching the browser history isn't convenient nor fast to me, I would use search engine to dig out what I want. Digging into browser history will give me headache, because even wrongly clicked URLs or mistyped URLs remains in the history. E.g. if you surfed say sammyboy.com lots of threads will be registered in history. You typed sammyboy.com lots of suggestions of it will come out. If you cleared history, then only your bookmarked URL will appear in your list. More brisk mah...

Similar to browse history, the FF will scan your bookmarks for words you typed into URL line, if there were matches, they will show up to suggest to you, and if you picked the URL FF will go.

 

[Alamaking]

Cannot say like that lah, sometimes you do need histories to find a link. You went to a link, then after 1 month later you need to dig it up to confirm some infos, thats when its useful, I've no issue on FF, i thought their history section could do better.

 

[uncleyap]

Cannot say like that lah, sometimes you do need histories to find a link. You went to a link, then after 1 month later you need to dig it up to confirm some infos, thats when its useful, I've no issue on FF, i thought their history section could do better.

It depends on your web usage and habits, each user have own unique style. For myself, it is headache for me to go and dig my own browser history of a month, 5 days of that enough to bore me mati liao!

My habit is to bookmark instantly anything that I consider of potential value of a future reference. After a certain time if did not find them useful, I also delete them. I got a hang of effectively using search engine to dig what I want out of the web, so I won't be too worried if I need to dig out the same things more than once, I would be able to find them. I also Gmail to myself any important URL that I might need when I am away from my own browser bookmarks, so I can dig certain things out from Gmail. These are usually tech ref, to be used when I solve technical problems, or setup say servers.