Print
Mozilla is working on an uncharacteristically big feature addition for the upcoming release of Firefox 3.6.4. The Firefox team has been hard at work to develop a component segmented system similar to the one that makes Chrome so crash resistant. Now the so called "out-of-process" plug-in feature is expected to roll out in the next release.
An out-of-process plug-in would run as its own process separate from Firefox itself. For example, in the Windows task manager you would see Firefox.exe as well as a process for each plug-in . In this way, a crashing component would not have to bring the browser to its knees. Firefox could endure crashes of Flash content or Java much as Chrome does.
The 3.6.4 release is planned for a May 4th rollout. Frankly, the sooner we see this the better. With the rapid pace of Chrome development and adoption, the folks as Mozilla can't afford to wait. If you just can't wait, the most recent nightly build has the feature enabled. So, any Chrome users planning to give Firefox another go with this feature?
Comments are closed on this article
Keith E. Whisman
April 09, 2010 at 1:20am
Firefox 3.7.5pre Alpha that I've been testing for about a month now has had this since Feb 2, 2010.
Also if you start up the latest beta of Chrome Browser and open task manager you'll find 13 Chrome processes. So just imagine you can crash 12 times and still have Chrome running LOL...
Cooketh
April 09, 2010 at 12:27am
I don't like this feature.
The more processes an application runs the more memory and processing it consumes.
I remember when Chrome used to open up a seperate process for each tab you had open, it was hell.
I like firefox as it is. If it ever crashes, which is generally rare, it restores you previous webpage(s), which fine because no program is crash proof.
And because no program is crash proof, to try and make a program use more resources to resist crashing is silly. Do a better job at coding, don't copy another browser's methods and get lazy.
baskinghobo
April 09, 2010 at 8:02pm
You don't like this feature because you have a bad computer. Firefox runs much better with this feature. Either upgrade your computer or disable it in about:config
CTskifreak
April 08, 2010 at 11:38pm
The 3.7 alpha that's floating out there has this as well, along with a few other changes. Both of those versions have been stable, except this version in the article actually works with my add-ons, unlike the 3.7 Alpha 2, where I think only AdBlock works
Neufeldt2002
April 08, 2010 at 10:04pm
Funny thing this chrome browser. On my sons PC it is faster than firefox, on my PC it is slower. Slower to start, run, browse, everything. Not sure if I will try chrome again or not, maybe once things settle down.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I wanted a signature, but all I got was this ________
Nickompoop
April 08, 2010 at 8:22pm
I'm a fan of pretty much any Google software, and Chrome is the only browser for me unless it starts turning into Internet Explorer, which I heavily doubt.
aviaggio
April 08, 2010 at 7:51pm
Maybe you guys were using old versions of Chrome? It very rarely crashes on me (but I have on occasions had an extension crash, but it didn't take down the browser, just like ti's supposed to work).
Chrome is also many times faster on my laptop, which is 3 years old, an by no means a speed demon. So I'm not sure why you guys were having issues cause I'm not.
dethdeks
April 08, 2010 at 7:15pm
the whole "chrome is more crash resistant" is bs my buddy has chrome on his pc which he just finished formatting it last week and chrome crashes more times in an hour then firefox does for a whole week on his system.
winterlude
April 08, 2010 at 7:05pm
I started using Chrome from it's inception since I use Gmail and Google docs and I love that I can type in searches directly into the address bar without needing any addons. But for whatever reason, Chrome became such a resource hog on my laptop that I couldn't multitask. It also crashed a lot and took ages to shut down (often locking up). I've got an old laptop (2005), so maybe Chrome flies on a newer system, but Firefox is far more responsive and robust for my low spec systems. Chrome got so bad (crashing within 30 seconds of opening every time) that I abandoned it. Firefox does take a lot longer than chrome to start up, but I can actually multitask with Firefox, or just minimize it and work on something else. With Chrome, even with flashblock on and nothing but a few tabs open, my CPU was usually at 100%, my RAM would max out causing my hard drive to crank, thereby grinding my system to a halt.
Chrome seems to perform better on my desktop--both just as reliable and faster than Firefox--but it's my laptop I mostly use. But Chrome is definitely a resource hog and seems to get more bloated each update. As a result, I've lost my enthusiasm for and curiosity about Chrome OS.
I don't know if browsers do it (like OS's), but it would be nice if they optimized for a system's specs (i.e. use less RAM if a system is light on resources etc.)
Anyway, now that I've sorted all my favorites again, I don't think I'll be switching back to Chrome unless Firefox starts getting twitchy. I've been back to Firefox a month now and no crashes.It's nice to be able to have dozens of tabs open and still have a responsive system!
Winterlude
1337Goose
April 08, 2010 at 6:39pm
Before Chrome became popular, Opera was my primary browser on Linux solely because whenever Flash crashed (and it did so often because of the inability of my processor to execute the LAHF instruction) it would take down Firefox with it. Opera, it appeared, was unaffected. Opera was also natively able to use 32-bit extension on my 64-bit machine in the event that the 64-bit versions were unstable.
I'm a little disappointed that Mozilla is so late to this game. It feels like Mozilla is lagging behind the curve: Chrome themes are better than Firefox personas, Chrome is faster and more secure. Although I feel bad condemning the browser that started the Open-Source browser revolution, I feel as if the browser doesn't have the same glory it did two years ago.
~Goose
aviaggio
April 08, 2010 at 6:36pm
"So, any Chrome users planning to give Firefox another go with this feature?"
No multithreading and horrendous app load times = no.
Danthrax66
April 08, 2010 at 5:51pm
Chrome is still better, and they implemented this first making Mozilla a bunch of copy cats (or is it copy foxes?) :P
