Re: Straw poll: What browser do you use?
On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 22:54, Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Kelly Clowers wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 23:45, Bret Busby <bret@busby.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Iceape can be convenient, especially beinfg a suite, so it is easy to
>>> click
>>> on a mailto link, and open up the integrated email composer. But, iceape
>>> appears to be devoid of memory management, and it appears to have a viral
>>> use for memory, progressively increasing memory usage if the browser is
>>> left
>>> open, and it does not free up the memory that it has been using, when it
>>> is
>>> closed in an orderly manner (that is, on the odd occasion that it is
>>> deliberately closed, rather than the all too frequent crashes). Also,
>>> iceape
>>> does not have the facility for saving sessions, either deliberately, or,
>>> when the application crashes.
>>
>> Sure Moz has session saving. And it's memory management has always been
>> as good or better than FF. If Iceape doesn't then they are really messing
>> something up.
>>
>>> If iceape and iceweasel both were able to save sessions, and, to provide
>>> a
>>> means of splitting sessions into bookmark folders/sets, for each browser
>>> window open in a session, so that a user can, on opening a new session of
>>> the browser after a crash, and select options of a new, separate session,
>>> or
>>> restoring the complete old session (or, similarly, for a previous saved
>>> session that was not saved due to a crash), or, open in a browser window
>>> (the existing browser window or a new browser window), a single browser
>>> window (from a bookmakr set from a previous saveds session), it would be
>>> good.
>>
>> It's kind of hard to understand what you want to do, but it seems like
>> Mozilla
>> (and FF?) do pretty much all of that.
>>
>
> You say Moz (?) but, if you refer to Seamonkey, that is diifferent (from
> what I understand) to iceape, which has, from what I understand, some of the
> Mozilla stuff that makes Mozilla software what it is, removed.
The only thing that should be removed is the name.
<snip>
>
> However, the memory cache keeps increasing, as does the actual memory usage,
> and, because it is iceape, when, as previously stated, the application is
> closed, whether by crashing or in an orderly manner, the memory that it has
> taken up, is not released, so, after using iceape, the ssytem has to be
> rebooted after iceape has closed, to free up the memory that had been used
> by iceape.
Ok, if it doesn't free memory on closing the application, then that is a *real*
memory leak, and it should be an RC bug.
> I have had to disable javascript, to get iceape as stable as possible, as
> the "Block pop-ips" does not work,
The built in pop-up blocker doesn't work? That's another serious regression
from upstream.
> and automatically refereshing web pages
> make iceape viral within the system, as it increasingly devours memory, like
> a flesh-eating disease.
>
> That might be a good analogy for iceape - reather than viral, a flesh-eating
> application.
>
> One thing that might be worth remembering here - you have referred to Moz
> (?) and FF(?).
>
>
> If in that, you refer to Seamonkey and Firefox, iceape and iceweasel are
> different to the Mozilla products.
>
> Similar, but different.
They are supposed to be identical, except for the name and a few bug fixes.
Although, I guess they are really old versions. If iceape is still SM
1.x, not 2.0,
it wouldn't have session saving. Current FF and Moz have session restore
even without crashing. But memory management was fine in SM 1.x and
Mozilla 1.8, so that's still a regression , not a new feature they
haven't caught
up with yet.
All in all, it seems like my decision to use upstream (despite my dislike
of the Mozilla Foundation) was the right one, and not just because of
freshness issues.
Cheers,
Kelly Clowers
Reply to: