The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Amazing Firefox Add On

    Discussion in 'Windows OS and Software' started by Jayayess1190, Mar 12, 2010.

  1. Jayayess1190

    Jayayess1190 Waiting on Intel Cannonlake

    Reputations:
    4,009
    Messages:
    6,712
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    216
  2. kobe

    kobe Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    374
    Messages:
    2,629
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Hey fix your link, when I click on it, it takes me to some wildlife site. So, I have to manually copy and paste the link in my browser to make it work.
     
  3. Jayayess1190

    Jayayess1190 Waiting on Intel Cannonlake

    Reputations:
    4,009
    Messages:
    6,712
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    216
    Link fixed.
     
  4. xTank Jones16x

    xTank Jones16x PC Elitist

    Reputations:
    848
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Interesting.

    Has anyone had any gain when using it yet?

    I'm trying it out now, will have to keep an eye on FF for a bit to see if it works.
     
  5. fonduekid

    fonduekid JSUTAONHTERBIRCKINTEHWLAL

    Reputations:
    1,407
    Messages:
    3,396
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Thanks for this.

    I tried this one and here are some preliminary 'results' I saw.

    According to Task manager (working set memory), without memory fox, FF with 33 tabs took around 300,508 k.

    Then I installed memory fox, and task manager showed FF using 229,805 k, with the same 33 tabs.

    Does it make any sense or give good vibes?

    PS., If it is of any use, among those 33 tabs, 3 were youtube, 4 reader, 1 bbc, 1 cnn and the rest general websites.
     
  6. The_Observer

    The_Observer 9262 is the best:)

    Reputations:
    385
    Messages:
    2,662
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    It reduced my memory usage by 75%(About 250MB to 5x MB).Thanks for this one!
     
  7. jojoinnit

    jojoinnit Notebook Consultant

    Reputations:
    118
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    If this works, praises be upon you. But what is it reducing to make it work? *shifty eyes*
     
  8. Kocane

    Kocane Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    395
    Messages:
    1,626
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    56
    It works, but i noticed if i played a game at the same time while running firefox, it gave a little stutter ones in a while :\
     
  9. H.A.L. 9000

    H.A.L. 9000 Occam's Chainsaw

    Reputations:
    6,415
    Messages:
    5,296
    Likes Received:
    552
    Trophy Points:
    281
    I'd be willing to bet it pages a few tabs to the HDD. When flipping through the tabs pretty quickly, does each webpage just snap into view and is instantly scrollable/interactive or is there kind of a lag? I use Chrome exclusively so I can't try this one... but I'm interested none the less.
     
  10. DarkSilver

    DarkSilver MSI Afterburner

    Reputations:
    378
    Messages:
    2,249
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Thanks for Sharing this Awesome and Marvelous FF Add-On.
    + REP!
     
  11. xTank Jones16x

    xTank Jones16x PC Elitist

    Reputations:
    848
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Note: Same tab's where open. I let FF set for about 30 seconds - 1 minute before checking.


    Firefox without Add-On

    - Working Set (Memory): 110k
    - Memory (Private Working Set): 77k


    Firefox with Add-On

    - Working Set (Memory): 68K
    - Memory (Private Working Set): 43k
     
  12. LIVEFRMNYC

    LIVEFRMNYC Blah Blah Blah!!!

    Reputations:
    3,741
    Messages:
    2,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Wow, I see a major decrease.
     
  13. dyusem

    dyusem Notebook Guru

    Reputations:
    0
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    I too see a major decrease in used memory even though FF 3.6 was a great improvement in and of itself over previous versions.

    For instance, I typically have 10 windows and ~40 tabs open at one time and I was using ~250,000K of memory prior to MemoryFox and that is now effectively educed by half to ~125,000K while running MemoryFox!

    Looks like MemoryFox is on to something...nice work!!!
     
  14. ViciousXUSMC

    ViciousXUSMC Master Viking NBR Reviewer

    Reputations:
    11,461
    Messages:
    16,824
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    466
    And... saving memory does absolutely nothing unless you were running out of memory in the first place.

    Kinda reminds me of all those "OMG Vista uses up XXXX amount of memory XP only uses 1/5th of that!" it took a long time to make people understand un-used RAM is wasted RAM and if FF was doing something with that RAM your now not using to make it run faster/better I would consider this a counter productive add-on.

    At best if there is no loss of functionality its not helping you or your system one bit unless again you only had like a single 512mb stick of RAM installed and were hitting a page file.
     
  15. xTank Jones16x

    xTank Jones16x PC Elitist

    Reputations:
    848
    Messages:
    1,276
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Not unless you are a heavy multi-tasker like myself.

    More often than not, I am running FF while using MSN, Itunes, and sometimes run Diablo 2 while I watch a Youtube video or two *not the same time as Itunes :p *, while having my other task bar applications running (I only close them to do heavy gaming anyways).

    I see it as, the less RAM you use isn't a waste, but better accommodates your system to use that RAM for other applications you may be using.

    I haven't noticed any performance loss either, so for me this add-on is good. Not necessary of course, but good if you like to know you are using less resources on your system.
     
  16. LIVEFRMNYC

    LIVEFRMNYC Blah Blah Blah!!!

    Reputations:
    3,741
    Messages:
    2,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    But when you have memory gadgets and/or taskbar apps that are in plain site all the time, you tend to get a little anal about stuff. :p