64 BIT Firefox for Windows

You may be aware by now that since yesterday the 64 bit versions of
Firefox has been released so if you have machines with more than 4GB of
RAM then it is time to make a switch to make sure all your available ram
is useable by FF.

Good luck and keep up with good safe computing.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/



--

/*This post contains rich text (HTML). if you don't like it then you can
kill-filter the poster without crying about it like a small baby so that
you don't see this poster's posts ever again.*/

/*This message is best read in Mozilla Thunderbird as it uses 21st
century technology.*/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2015-12-16 12:54 PM, Good Guy wrote:

You may be aware by now that since yesterday the 64 bit versions
of Firefox has been released so if you have machines with more than
4GB of RAM then it is time to make a switch to make sure all your
available ram is useable by FF.

Good luck and keep up with good safe computing.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/

Until yesterday, I was using Opera. It actually surprised me to
discover that the version of the browser I had installed was the
32-bit one; I was sure that the website would have detected that I was
using a 64-bit processor and offered me that one. "No problem," I
thought, "I'll go download the 64-bit edition from Opera directly."
The problem though is that even though a 64-bit edition of Opera
exists, it is impossible to find on the website itself. As such, I
switched over to Firefox which makes it rather easy to find what you
want. I don't regret it as the browser is excellent and have since
decided to give them a monthly amount to support their work.


- --
Slimer
EFF & OpenMedia member / IFAW, Mozilla & PETA supporter
Matthew 7:12: "In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you
want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWcaa6AAoJEIwFfgf/rr+u6YIH/iOR8H6k+9IpSOS2/HM6ARtW
+ZW0G0cz694MdUv/Xu0azwR0ArfcpBsQdY/TtNkPeLZckgCyuB/BUzlHIQkWijJV
1O+xCJ4ixsXbhRRMWo9Gc8yYo6UBkG3lrkmQyzRDbDK1+Rqf6N Kdrw9FS2lmCYgQ
nRo8T/fD+FYb491VkJ6NJ5qo4JBvOUYrghdCQofFp/EfD6idgINu9hDIcszIC2iJ
WAKu8/URSNmApzCzgeMzkoKgigRo+voRX3JJpeCvajHvVxoZhCXuNzi1 Ef94/5W7
QsGoi9gY/PUlmvPWePQxjOHOx4P/tQSCxU41c9BcmWevLtxiA8pxUzgfdG1XYX4=
=R9Cp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Good Guy wrote:

You may be aware by now that since yesterday the 64 bit versions of
Firefox has been released so if you have machines with more than 4GB of
RAM then it is time to make a switch to make sure all your available ram
is useable by FF.

Good luck and keep up with good safe computing.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/

Whether this is a good idea, really depends
on your usage pattern.

If you use the 32 bit version, it cannot use more
resources than can be addressed by 32 bits. That
caps Firefox, and prevents it from using all of
your RAM (when you're trying to do other things
at the same time, like use Photoshop perhaps).

As to whether 64 bit code runs faster than 32 bit code,
that depends on both the processor and on the type of code.

When a problem is math-intensive, the speedup on
64 bit can be impressive. The GMP library for
example, runs 64 bit code at 1.7x the speed
of the same package compiled for 32 bits. That's
a nice improvement.

However, if the code is "branch heavy", such
as Firefox, you might expect a 5% to 10% improvement.
And in the case of older Core2 LGA775 processors with
macro-fusion in the instruction pipe, the 64 bit code
can actually run slower than the 32 bit code, so
you wouldn't see the expected improvement in that
case. AMD processors on the other hand, treat the 32 bit
and 64 bit streams identically, so then you would
see your 5% to 10% improvement on branch-heavy 64 bit code.

So your decision to run 32 bit or 64 bit, is partially
one of wishing to cap resources, and "keep Firefox
in its cage". And that's the course of action I plan
to follow.

If you are the person who keeps 70 tabs open on
Firefox, then the 64 bit version is likely tailor
made for you.

And once they have 64 bit executables, the staff
at Mozilla will never have to fix another memory
leak on Firefox. They can ignore their
memory usage telemetry for good...
So what if your machine starts swapping,
when you open the Yahoo news page :-)
It's not their problem, it's your problem.

Paul

"Paul" wrote in message
...

And once they have 64 bit executables, the staff
at Mozilla will never have to fix another memory
leak on Firefox. They can ignore their
memory usage telemetry for good...
So what if your machine starts swapping,
when you open the Yahoo news page :-)
It's not their problem, it's your problem.

Paul

That's rather insightful, my friend. You seem to understand 'progress.'

On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:54:33 +0000, Good Guy
wrote:


You may be aware by now that since yesterday the 64 bit versions of
Firefox has been released so if you have machines with more than 4GB of
RAM then it is time to make a switch to make sure all your available ram
is useable by FF.

Good luck and keep up with good safe computing.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/

I threw out FF ages ago because it offers no advantage over IE11.

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:17:54 +1100, Peter Jason wrote:

I threw out FF ages ago because it offers no advantage over IE11.

And you're free to BELIEVE that, no matter HOW wrong and stupid is it.

On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 21:28:49 -0800, The New Other Guy
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:17:54 +1100, Peter Jason wrote:

I threw out FF ages ago because it offers no advantage over IE11.

And you're free to BELIEVE that, no matter HOW wrong and stupid is it.




Seeing is believing. The IE11 favorites sit in the usual Windows
Explorer and not some obscure database of a 3rd party. Dead links are
removed easily with...
"C:\Program Files (x86)\AM-Dead Link\dead link.exe"
And IE11 doesn't need the plethora of gadgets & gimmicks dumped on to
the user to keep him amused. I used to use FF, but now I'm saved.
If a stoopid person can see all this, why can't you?

On 18/12/2015 06:17, Peter Jason wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:54:33 +0000, Good Guy
wrote:


You may be aware by now that since yesterday the 64 bit versions of
Firefox has been released so if you have machines with more than 4GB of
RAM then it is time to make a switch to make sure all your available ram
is useable by FF.

Good luck and keep up with good safe computing.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/

I threw out FF ages ago because it offers no advantage over IE11.

I have all major web browsers on my PC's, but my current favorite is
Chrome. FF is my second favorite though.

On 18/12/2015 06:47, Peter Jason wrote:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2015 21:28:49 -0800, The New Other Guy
wrote:

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:17:54 +1100, Peter Jason wrote:

I threw out FF ages ago because it offers no advantage over IE11.

And you're free to BELIEVE that, no matter HOW wrong and stupid is it.

Seeing is believing. The IE11 favorites sit in the usual Windows
Explorer and not some obscure database of a 3rd party.

So, how do you sync favorites across your devices?


Dead links are
removed easily with...
"C:\Program Files (x86)\AM-Dead Link\dead link.exe"


Looks like AM-DeadLnk has been discontinued.


"The following reason is given on the official program website:

As bookmark management in browsers got more complex over the years, it's
no longer recommended to use external tools to delete bookmarks."

http://www.ghacks.net/2015/04/08/boo...-and-crippled/


And IE11 doesn't need the plethora of gadgets & gimmicks dumped on to
the user to keep him amused. I used to use FF, but now I'm saved.
If a stoopid person can see all this, why can't you?


You call them "gimmicks". I call them secure browsing, as I mostly use
Chrome and FF add-ons that make my browsing more secure.

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 16:17:54 +1100, Peter Jason wrote:


I threw out FF ages ago because it offers no advantage over IE11.


Each to his own, of course, but personally I find FF *much* better
than IE11.

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:16:30 +0100, edevils
wrote:


I have all major web browsers on my PC's, but my current favorite is
Chrome. FF is my second favorite though.



As I just said in another message in this thread, each to his own. But
personally, I think Chrome is the worst of all browsers.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2015-12-18 9:16 AM, edevils wrote:
On 18/12/2015 06:17, Peter Jason wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:54:33 +0000, Good Guy
wrote:


You may be aware by now that since yesterday the 64 bit
versions of Firefox has been released so if you have machines
with more than 4GB of RAM then it is time to make a switch to
make sure all your available ram is useable by FF.

Good luck and keep up with good safe computing.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/

I threw out FF ages ago because it offers no advantage over
IE11.

I have all major web browsers on my PC's, but my current favorite
is Chrome. FF is my second favorite though.

Until you realize that Google spies on you and sells your private data
to the highest bidder, its offering is pretty nice. If you want to
avoid Google but want the same browser, use Opera.

However, the 64-bit version of Firefox has just been benchmarked and
it runs circles around the other at least for the Unity test. It's
worth trying again.

- --
Slimer
EFF & OpenMedia member / IFAW, Mozilla & PETA supporter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWdC9ZAAoJEIwFfgf/rr+u5dgH/ieG6AUEZ2f1TNFiTr91N1l3
FIp4pRviV7kM3UChS73d9ztsxSK2BPakk54OzwSBJJBypnf2A8 YIUePSS4vhh7ve
BBde/HmjnHt9FWz2q8uBMUvetgM0S2EmBFqjJxH7kqcWXcoHNaAQ3xk u6b4QjXyy
Hqb7HiNE3Vc1ZTcQ18U7Tap+pFKMGYPKErd++5JMWcCgMAH7SS VNnEEf21Ol1oas
VSRHJM/FrdvmkiyJzWcZESeBCBdd7Q6aX/G69Eo12o9o1PwgF2jFFiZdoH0y6p8v
LQIFvr9ZrlgoyrpS/ikEqS4dq9DPIjfi7PGk/ZOfNvxVseXuIaVzw9+bmyzsZvY=
=N7kT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 18/12/2015 16:30, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:16:30 +0100, edevils
wrote:


I have all major web browsers on my PC's, but my current favorite is
Chrome. FF is my second favorite though.



As I just said in another message in this thread, each to his own. But
personally, I think Chrome is the worst of all browsers.


http://www.itpro.co.uk/web-browsers/...net-explorer-2
[...]
Chrome, by contrast, has a raft of third-party extensions, many of which
have become essential. It's also unmatched in first-party integration.
If you're already part of the Google ecosystem, via Gmail, Google Drive,
Android, or any combination of the three, then the way Chrome blends in
with these tools will be supremely convenient.

Firefox also offers various third-party plugins, although its selection
is slightly lacking in comparison to Google’s. It makes up for this,
however, by being more intuitive to configure than Chrome. The options
are laid out in easy-to-navigate menus, and described with simple language.

If you’re the kind of person that likes to juggle multiple, high-level
tasks, the amount of plug-ins and services that integrate with Chrome
makes it a perfect fit. Those who are less experienced, on the other
hand, can use Firefox as a stepping stone to these more advanced tasks
without getting bogged down in complex jargon.
[...]

On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 17:13:15 +0100, edevils
wrote:

On 18/12/2015 16:30, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:16:30 +0100, edevils
wrote:


I have all major web browsers on my PC's, but my current favorite is
Chrome. FF is my second favorite though.



As I just said in another message in this thread, each to his own. But
personally, I think Chrome is the worst of all browsers.


http://www.itpro.co.uk/web-browsers/...net-explorer-2
[...]
Chrome, by contrast, has a raft of third-party extensions, many of which
have become essential. It's also unmatched in first-party integration.
If you're already part of the Google ecosystem, via Gmail, Google Drive,
Android, or any combination of the three, then the way Chrome blends in
with these tools will be supremely convenient.

Firefox also offers various third-party plugins, although its selection
is slightly lacking in comparison to Google’s. It makes up for this,
however, by being more intuitive to configure than Chrome. The options
are laid out in easy-to-navigate menus, and described with simple language.

If you’re the kind of person that likes to juggle multiple, high-level
tasks, the amount of plug-ins and services that integrate with Chrome
makes it a perfect fit. Those who are less experienced, on the other
hand, can use Firefox as a stepping stone to these more advanced tasks
without getting bogged down in complex jargon.
[...]


Thanks. I haven't looked at Chrome for a while. Maybe it's time to do
so, when I get a chance.

On 18/12/2015 17:13, edevils wrote:
On 18/12/2015 16:30, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:16:30 +0100, edevils
wrote:


I have all major web browsers on my PC's, but my current favorite is
Chrome. FF is my second favorite though.



As I just said in another message in this thread, each to his own. But
personally, I think Chrome is the worst of all browsers.


http://www.itpro.co.uk/web-browsers/...net-explorer-2

[...]
Chrome, by contrast, has a raft of third-party extensions, many of which
have become essential. It's also unmatched in first-party integration.
If you're already part of the Google ecosystem, via Gmail, Google Drive,
Android, or any combination of the three, then the way Chrome blends in
with these tools will be supremely convenient.

Firefox also offers various third-party plugins, although its selection
is slightly lacking in comparison to Google’s. It makes up for this,
however, by being more intuitive to configure than Chrome. The options
are laid out in easy-to-navigate menus, and described with simple language.

If you’re the kind of person that likes to juggle multiple, high-level
tasks, the amount of plug-ins and services that integrate with Chrome
makes it a perfect fit. Those who are less experienced, on the other
hand, can use Firefox as a stepping stone to these more advanced tasks
without getting bogged down in complex jargon.
[...]


Besides

"Google Chrome is the best-designed browser out there. Its minimalist
design is elegant and uncluttered, containing exactly what it needs to.
While it wasn’t the first to do tabbed browsing, it’s possibly one of
the best, and the Omnibox feature, combining search functions with URL,
was a widely-aped revelation."


And

"Security-wise, Chrome is among the best browsers out there – the fact
that Flash is built-in and automatically updated means that
vulnerabilities are kept to a minimum."


Having said that, Chrome has its own weak points (memory usage, for
one), and FF is a very good browser too, like the review says.