ANyone here tried firefox 3.7a5 and/or 4beta? I'd be interested in finding out everyone's experience because I found that when I ran the below web test, 3.7 got 60fps and 4b got about 22 fps! Flying Images You can find 4 here: Index of /pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk And 3.7 here: Index of /pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/3.7a5-candidates/build1
View 1 RepliesJust installed the latest 11.04 64bit ubuntu, using std cd install alongside windows7, ticking the "add all extras" option, to ensure I got all the latest drivers etc.. The pc is brand new
Acer emachines E644 - AMD 2 Core C-50
3Gb DDR3 mem
500 Gb hard drive
Pre-installed: 64bit Win 7 home premium I've literally changed nothing in win7 other than using wubi to install ubuntu 1st time around (ubuntu appears as a win program - and was un-installed as such). Note: It is too late to now check, but......... under wubi/win7 I had no sense that the browser firefox was running slow - i didn't do a speedtest.net cos of other priorities (and it seemed fine). On advice, I started again (new partitions etc). The Problem: Ubuntu is now 25% slower (broadband) than Win7! Actually, it feels worse than that - more like it was on my previous lap top that had 512Mb ram running xp. Here are the results after switching os's a couple of times.
[Code]....
Firefox managed one spurious result of 5.89, but the graph (on the speedtest display) was absolutely all over the shop (like it's overall results). Compare that to iExplorer - total stability, and in fact, more like 30% faster + a much better ping. Anyway, I guess you know all this, I've seen that plenty of others have noticed this speed drop in the past, so:
I've been trying to make Linux my only OS and have run into another snag - this time with Firefox. I realize I could try Opera or Chrome but for this thread I'm concerned with Firefox.I still dual-boot and while I've always notice that Firefox doesn't scroll as smoothly as it does in Vista, this latest issue is a concern:
I'm on the BOD for a different club forum (hobby) and need to print a list of the new registrants for various reasons. Firefox initially presents the list in portrait mode but I need it to be in landscape. Generating the initial "print preview" then changing the "print preview" from portrait to landscape takes substantially longer than in Vista on the same box...it's 30-40 seconds in Vista and nearly 2 minutes in Linux - that's a huge difference!!
As I mentioned it's a dual boot so the hardware is the same and it shouldn't involve the HPLIP service as it's a preview.I don't know if this is an openSuse issue, Kernel issue or something else.
Just read a post on this page (scroll down about half way) and it seems like all mozilla based browsers are still slower in linux vs wine and/or windows! [URL]...I thought after almost two years this would've been fixed (there's been earlier reports besides the link I gave above). Heck I thought it would be a problem with a specific version release and/or releases? I think this is a bit ridiculous after this long and I'm almost wondering if it's been around longer than 2 years when anyone even cared to take notice! Oh and did I already mention that compiling it doesn't make a difference? You probly knew that already. I'm running bleeding edge Gentoo with window maker (march=prescott sse sse2 sse3 mmx mmxext blah use flags and cflags) and Slackware 13.1 (alot of stuff compiled and/or recompiled from source-optimized with same flags as gentoo and even more flags (and less package features) when things are stable and ok. Yes compiling is pain on a overclocked Celeron D lol. Well not too painful
Thanks to google-chromium and/or chrome we don't have to worry about speed issues but come-on this is almost sick! Firefox windows via wine way faster than a native linux build? WTF... That's like almost embarrassing. Has anyone found anything to resolve this issue. Perhaps it's a simple yet overlooked setting that no one bothers with?
To that link above one of the posters mentioned it's the DNS cache setting that fixes the speed issue, but then others posted back saying it doesn't resolve this issue so obviously that's not the case. There's definately a flaw with the mozilla code under linux since even epiphany (which is very lightweight in comparison to regular firefox) suffers performance issues as well as others.
It's a bit upsetting I.M.O. (in my opinion! lolz) that this issue isn't resolved yet after all this time? I mean common. What about people who have no choice but to use Firefox. I have to use firefox by force when I play QuakeLive! (the plugin is not made for any other linux browser).
Even besides that point. Mozilla was made in the first place to be light weight, fast and secure vs internet explorer. It has severely changed since then (remember when it was the only tabbed browser available? It was sweet back then!). Now it just seems bloated and awful. Thankfully not terribly awful on Windows but compared to Google-Chrome (especially Safari which is MacOS only but still) it gets smoked in terms of speed, memory use and simplicity. At least not as bad as Internet Explorer (lol @ internet explorer. OMG the slowzyynessz and heeuuchggeneesszz).
So yeah being an open source browser and running terribly on an open source O.S. vs a closed source one. What's gonna' happen? Has this already been mentioned and fixed somewhere that I never looked or is it completely hopeless and just better not to use it for those of us that are bothered by it.
OpenSuse 11.2
LXDE (Latest version)
It used to have a lightening speed. But now every application is taking few seconds to start, even on Konsole, the commands take some seconds to get typed ! (I literally have to wait for cursor to move and commands to get typed on Konsole). Folders are taking some seconds to get opened !
I rebooted the computer but that proved to be useless.
Here the ps output:
Code:
anisha@linux-uitj:~> pstree -Apuh `id -anisha`
id: invalid option -- 'i'
Try `id --help' for more information.
init(1)-+-acpid(1054)
[Code].....
Im experiencing a strange problem with 10.04. When it first boots up its reasonably quick (as snappy as Gnome ever has been) but after its been running for a day or two it gets ununsably slow and has to be rebooted.
I dont see how it can be anything to do with my hardware as it runs OK when first started. Ive monitored RAM usage and it doesnt seem to differ much. There's always the same amount unused.
I have been running opensuse 11.2 successfully on my IBM NetVista 1.8 GHz for a year or more. Response is quick, no problems.
Downloaded the DVD for 11.3 and installed it (new install replacing the / system partition but leaving /home intact, renamed /home...kde4 to .kde4old). Install was fine, but on final boot the response of 11.3 was noticeably slower than 11.2, I would estimate about half speed. I tried compiling a new kernel to see if it improved, but the kernel compile was taking for ever so I stopped it. Editing the kickoff menu was close to impossible - saving a change resulted in "Updating system configuration" which would crawl to 100% and then start over again; after the 5th iteration I cancelled it.
In fact this got so bad (slowness, odd errors) that I am in the process of restoring 11.2. This new install of 11.2 is noticeably faster again than the 11.3.
My system has a good hard drive and 1GB memory. Am I underpowered for something in 11.3? I could not figure that there was anything specifically different in 11.3 that could be disabled to restore the speed of 11.2.
My system (opensuse 11.2, kde 4.x) got significantly slower after a year of usage. Its response time is higher, boots longer. Filesystem is ext3 and is not fragmented. Number of daemons loaded on startup hasn't changed.
View 9 Replies View RelatedHas anyone noticed an increase in runtime for sort? I'm having to sort large, 30+ GB text files, and I've noticed a substantial increase in the time needed to sort files in 11.4. Files that take maybe two hours to sort under previous conditions now take multiple hours.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI installed amarok recently on 11.4 and it was slowing things down so I un-installed it but things are still slower than they were before. I un-installed all the mysql stuff that was was downloaded and installed during the amarok installation but this hasn't really helped either.
View 9 Replies View RelatedI'm using openSUSE 11.2 64bit in Dell E6400 with Intel video chipset. I can play x264 720p files without any problems in Windows 7, but in openSUSE, I could play it in Totem, but it is very slow (lots of stopping).
In addition, in songbird, if I use the mediaflow add-on,the scroll becomes really sluggish.
In general, I feel like openSUSE is showing less ram usage but higher CPU usage than Windows 7. Is my video card driver is messed up? I really like openSUSE a lot but so it is disappointing....
I am using OpenSuse 11.2 (64 bits) with KDE 4.3.1. My hard disk partition contains 3 areas : / + /home + swap. Frequently the / area is filling with, I suppose, temporary files until it is full (15 Go) and that in a very short time, typically about 5 mn. Then, these files are cleaned by the system, when disk space is needed I suppose. The point is that during this time, the system goes slower and slower until the "cleaning". That seems to occur only when Firefox (3.5.6) is running so I suppose that these files are temporary internet files.
View 9 Replies View Relatedcurrently on an acer aspire 5532, and using mozilla and google chrome. webpages take about 10-12 seconds to load using the ethernet, wifi its about 2-3 seconds. using eth0 loading videos - broadcast yourself. in chrome, will sit at "resolving host" for about 10 seconds before bringing up the page. you would think eth0 is faster than wlan0, but for browsing the web its slower. i tested the speeds at speedtest.net - the global broadband speed test and both wlan0 and eth0 get the max speed my internet provides.i never downloaded drivers for the ethernet card or wifi, they worked so i didn't try to mess with them. but perhaps that is my problem?
code:
# lspci
00:00.0 host bridge: advanced micro devices [amd] rs780 host bridge
[code]....
recently I have installed a brand new machine with 11.2. Machine boots so incredibly fast so I decided to upgraded another older machine from 11.1 to 11.2. Upgrade went fine but old machine boots significantly slower. On new I see message "doing fastboot" and few seconds later KDE starts loading. Amazing. On old I just experience regular boot, speed is comparable to old 11.1.What am I missing after upgrade? Same kernel, almost same set of services. Both machines are pretty regular PCs/x86_64, however old one have faster/better hardware (more cores, more GHz, more RAM, 2 disks in software raid-0).
View 1 Replies View RelatedI've been using 11.04 64bit for a few days now and overall it's very nice. Only thing I've noticed is the boot up time is slower than 10.04.
Is there a way to speed it up?
I'm running an Acer Extensa 4420 laptop.
I am doing backups and restores to and from a backup server machine in the garage (in case of fire or theft) using rsync, and the LAN is running much slower than I think it should. Best consistent speed I get is 40Mb/s. The lights on the interface cards indicate it's in Gb mode, and the interfaces are fairly new. The router is a Netgear WNDR3700 the top-of-the-line consumer-grade router. Hardwire only, using Ubiquiti ToughCable and ToughConnectors, less than a 50' run.
View 12 Replies View RelatedI have a dual boot machine with Fedora 12 and XP SP2.
Recently I tested download performance using www.speedtest.net. Using seamonkey on XP, i got 22 Mbps on my Comcast ISP. Not bad! However I then tried the same test on Fedora 12 with F12 seamonkey and got 16 Mbps. Thinking it must just be seamonkey, I tried the F12 Firefox and got 12 Mbps
This seems like a pretty big difference. I checked around on google and found several threads decying slower mozilla performance on Linux. I tried the suggestions to turn off ipv6 support, but there was not much improvement.
Is there way to tweak it in some way so the speed is back, because before F13 World of Goo played perfectly and now in F13 it is playable but not "fluid" as before? Also if it is because of changes in F13 considering graphics what to expect in future, would performance be back?
View 1 Replies View RelatedSince I use my computer for some intense processor calculations, without any fancy graphical needs, I decided to apply a mild OC on the BIOS settings, to speed thing a bit up.I own an AMD Phenom II 1055T (2.8GHz) cpu. I changed the base freq from 200 to 203, and changed the multipliers of the standard and boost freqs to x15 and x16.5, so now the BIOS reads 3045 MHz and 3349 MHz for both speeds.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have bought one of the new Logitech wireless mice for my laptop, but it seems too "fast" - a small movement results in massive movement on the screen, its much faster than the old corded mouse I am using with my desktop.
View 1 Replies View Relateduser@user-laptop:~$ sudo dd if=sd_backup of=/dev/sdd bs=4M conv=noerror,sync
205520896 bytes (206 MB) copied, 28.564 s, 7.2 MB/s
247463936 bytes (247 MB) copied, 57.1285 s, 4.3 MB/s
260046848 bytes (260 MB) copied, 73.2388 s, 3.6 MB/s
289406976 bytes (289 MB) copied, 104.121 s, 2.8 MB/s
[Code]....
How come dd gets slower after copying this 8GB file? What can I do about it?
I am comparing distros of Linux on a computer with VERY low specs. I have a CLI only version of Ubuntu 9.10 running A-OK, but when I run lwm or just X the video flickers (which I believe is due not to the video card/driver but to the resources used). I have tried this with two video cards with the same result.
When I run puppy it flies with no setup.
I know that Puppy is designed for older systems (2.4 Kernel and all that), but is there any other reason why Ubuntu would be slow in comparison.
I am using the nv driver with a Riva TNT PCI Video card.
Not sure if i am correct but I was under the impression from all sorts of posts & videos that 10.04 was supposed to have a fast bootup. I have upgraded from 9.04 jaunty bootup is quite a bit slower than on the old version and is quite tedious is this correct? are there any logs i can upload to see if i have an error some where?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI carelessly didn't apply a couple of updates correctly a few days ago which led me to reinstall Ubuntu 10.04
But, since the reinstall the boot has gone from blindingly fast to average.
what would of caused this? It's a shame, the boot cycle was one of the outstanding highlights of Ubuntu,
I've installed Ubuntu Maverick on a testing machine, a Samsung N510 (Atom N280/2 GB RAM), and I've been quite surprised that I haven't been able, due to slowness, to reproduce MPEG2/DIVX videos (using VLC).When I subsequently installed Windows XP, the videos were playing fluidly.Now, I also noticed, although this may potentially be biased, that the overall responsiveness of the system is a bit slower than when I use Windows XP (drawing speed of objects).I remember having the same feeling I switched (years ago) entirely from Windows to Ubuntu.
Why is video decoding so much slower on Ubuntu?Providing that the second point (desktop system speed) is not biased, is gnome inherently slower than Windows XP's GUI? Why, if so?
Why is Ubuntu slower and more unstable than Fedora on my laptop? I thought, as it is a more popular distro, it wouldn't be. I've only used it on my laptop for a couple of days and I already had at least 3 default software crashes. On Fedora, I had about one crash per two weeks. Ubuntu is also slightly slower. Opening the Social broadcast messages window took so long to open, that meanwhile, I totally forgot that I opened it.
View 6 Replies View RelatedI have EastLink cable Internet and I have the fastest residential service money can buy, I get speed test results of 30mbps down and 2mbps up, that being said, my Internet was lightning fast on windows and Mac but when I installed Ubuntu, which is my favourite OS, my Internet is very slow and laggy. Sometimes it could take several minutes for a web page to load and some torrents download at 1-2 MBps and some download at under 100kb/sec, some web pages load instantly, some take longer.
I've searched other forums I found was turning off IPv6, I am not really sure what that is but I followed the steps provided and shut it off but did not notice much of a difference. I am basically a beginner when it comes to Linux, I use the OS for my day to day school and entertainment. I listen to music, watch movies, do school work and such since I am a university student. I really love Ubuntu and don't want to be forced to go back to Win blows, I really don't like windows at all so I would really like to solve this issue and stick with this operating system.
I have an older IBM P3 laptop im running ubuntu on. And im wondering if there's a way to change the desktop environment to one which would use less system resources. Im currently running the default. I've used other distros way back in the day that would allow you to use KDE. Can KDE be installed and would this be a better option for an older computer?
View 6 Replies View RelatedI'm posting this here because I have no idea how to address this issue. I have an Ubuntu 11.04 with Windows XP on VirtualBox, Firefox 5 on both machines (virtual and real).I thought my connection was slow when I realized that the browser in VB was much faster than the one in Ubuntu.The problem doesn't seem to be on firefox because Chrome also is slow (I haven't checked Chrome in XP-VB).When I type an address in Firefox Ubuntu it takes a long time to show the page and sometimes the whole browser gets stuck for somewhere around a minute.
View 1 Replies View RelatedThe dvd rom drive is quite noisy if used at full speed, but it can be reduced at the cost of speed, which, depending on what you're doing, does not make much difference (like listening to music or watching a movie). Adittionaly, it may (that's just a reasonable guess) extend its lifetime. It can be manually reduced with the following command:
eject -x N /dev/cdrom (which won't actually eject it) Where N is the number of the speed you want. I've read that 4 is OK for music and 12 is OK for movies. (Reference: Setting CD-ROM and DVD-ROM drive speed to reduce noise ) Everything is fine, but is it possible to have lower speed set by default on fstab or something, or the fastest speed is always the default?