vinifera Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 (edited) there is one PC my parent uses, it is kinda weak for this new "modern" browsersits spec areCPU Athlon XP 2600+RAM 1 Gig + page fileOS XP SP3my parent simply can't use anything else but Firefox and these newer are resource hungryso if anyone know which one was last that was light as 3.6 and 4 ?mind you Pale Moon doesn't exist for Athlon XP on purpose Edited March 5, 2014 by vinifera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flasche Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) there is one PC my parent uses, it is kinda weak for this new "modern" browsersits spec areCPU Athlon XP 2600+RAM 1 Gig + page fileOS XP SP3my parent simply can't use anything else but Firefox and these newer are resource hungryso if anyone know which one was last that was light as 3.6 and 4 ?mind you Pale Moon doesn't exist for Athlon XP on purposeYou could try the new k-melon beta here its based of of firefox 24.2 esr, but it is still in the beta form and does have issues still.Here's a screenshot I took with the processes showing.K-Meleon.bmp Edited March 6, 2014 by Flasche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinifera Posted March 6, 2014 Author Share Posted March 6, 2014 yeh that one is too broken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponch Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 On Firefox site, for fixing issues like FF being slow, they advise you to... upgrade to last version. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/products/firefox/fix-problemsPersonally, as basic user of a browser, I haven't seen any major change in the 20+ major updates since FF 3.x.There are also portable versions for you to test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinifera Posted March 6, 2014 Author Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) its not about slowness, but resource consumptionfor example Pale Moon is fantastic comparing to ordinary FFbut I cannot run it on that PC so I aim at any previous FF that is as light as Pale Moon (or FF 3.6 or 4) Edited March 6, 2014 by vinifera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j7n Posted March 7, 2014 Share Posted March 7, 2014 I am using Firefox 27 now on my computer with 890 MB of RAM, when for whatever reason I cannot use Opera. I haven't noticed that it would be slower.Web sites themselves, on the other hand, are [much] more bloated, and consuming memory. Look at this one, since the upgrade of the forum engine, and compare it to say Hydrogen Audio. Those sites also "need" the latest browser for basic things like text input to work, whether we like it or not.I've disabled a few things in my Firefox, such as 'safebrowsing' and the autoupdater (for negligible impact), and moved the cache.disk.parent_directory to a temporary partition to decrease the effect of fragmentation. I'm also using an older version of the Flash plugin, put into the program directory (again, no autoupdater for the Flash). If you can accept that some sites will be disabled, try running the browser without Flash at all.Look into an advertisement blocking solution that is not built in to Firefox (using memory and CPU for JavaScript) – but instead a redirecting hosts file, DNS or a small proxy server, and keep the blacklists for advertising, and script-heavy sites up to date. This last thing will reduce the resource usage of the browser the most, assuming we cannot turn back time and return to classic, efficient websites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whocares02 Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I can recommend chrome as browser. On an old Pentium-3 With 800Mhz and 700MB memory, it really showed performance-differences: Even old opera (version 7) was slower than newest chrome! I used some portable-version to make sure it won't put weight on the system. I think it was called chromium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flasche Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 I can recommend chrome as browser. On an old Pentium-3 With 800Mhz and 700MB memory, it really showed performance-differences: Even old opera (version 7) was slower than newest chrome! I used some portable-version to make sure it won't put weight on the system. I think it was called chromium.If chrome is the way then chromium is the answer. Chromium is better because for it is open-source and has unwanted junk removed, like auto updating. If you still want Firefox/Firefox-like vinifera you could try the new beta release of K-Meleon. It is said to fix some issues, and I'm going to try it now. Also you could just use Firefox 3.6.28 and change its user-agent string. 3.6.28 rendered all the sites I used with the fake Firefox 24 UAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinifera Posted April 6, 2014 Author Share Posted April 6, 2014 k-meleon is terrible nowuntil they fix it, its a no go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flasche Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 (edited) k-meleon is terrible nowuntil they fix it, its a no goK then how about Comondo IceDragon. I just found the little bugger and did some tests. You would like it. Seems to use an anonymous search.Specs belowWindows 7 / Vista / XP – 32/64 bit128 MB RAM40 MB Hard Disk SpaceIce dragon.bmp Edited April 7, 2014 by Flasche Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whocares02 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Comodoa also has a chrome-based browser just called dragon. Both are for secure surfing. Downside: nobody knows what features are actually integrated by comodo. Hands off stuff like this! I doubt it's faster anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flasche Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Comodoa also has a chrome-based browser just called dragon. Both are for secure surfing. Downside: nobody knows what features are actually integrated by comodo. Hands off stuff like this! I doubt it's faster anyway.Try it out. I particularly don't use Comondo stuff. (only downloaded to get that screenshot) I personally found it faster than firefox during my little test surfing. I also heard some good reviews about the chrome version, so that is why I posted the firefox version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whocares02 Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) mmm...sounds not too bad actually. Ever tried it on an old machine? Best performance-test you can get.Edit:I don't like comodo-stuff as well. I somehow remember trouble when trying to uninstall it. Edited April 7, 2014 by whocares02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flasche Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 mmm...sounds not too bad actually. Ever tried it on an old machine? Best performance-test you can get.Can try it out on my dual boot me linux 2001 computer. I'll reply to this post when I download it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinifera Posted April 7, 2014 Author Share Posted April 7, 2014 Comodo was as heavy as normal FF to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now