Thread: Which browser is the least resource intensive?
View Single Post
Old 06-05-2008, 10:23 AM   #22
Kane Knight
Ron Paul 4 EVA
 
Kane Knight's Avatar
 
Posts: 152,467
Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Kane Knight makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xero Limit 126 View Post
Except I use FF2, mostly because of a few key addons.

I find FF2 on my system slow as fuck and find Opera more responsive, though I've only messed with it a little bit so longer sessions may give worse results. Just going by what I've heard.

Also haven't tried FF3 since the second or so beta but it was the same problem as 2.

Sure, FF is more responsive and less of a resource hog than IE, but that doesn't make it efficient.

If it weren't for the addons I'd dump Mozilla in a heartbeat. They pretty much fucked it up somewhere after 2.0.
Everyone, and I cannot stress everyone enough, says you're wrong. What's more, they actually bring numbers to the table regarding speed and resource use. I'm really not sure where you heard this from, but it sounds pretty unreliable.
Kane Knight is offline