MozillaZine

Build Suggest?

Discussion about official Mozilla Firefox builds
Vomit
 
Posts: 11
Joined: November 27th, 2002, 2:11 pm

Post Posted April 2nd, 2003, 9:17 am

I've been using a nightly that came out just after 0.4 was released for months now. Every time I try to upgrade to a new nightly (or even when I tried 0.5) performance is terrible. Doing anything takes an age, pages load slowly (if at all) and it's getting quite annoying.
I want to be able to take advantage of some of the new features, so could someone please suggest a good stable build that runs quickly.
The most recent one I tried was 20030319, and I had the same problems as before.

If it helps, I run WinXP pro (and SuSE 8.1, which has a fine nightly running).

Thanks for any help.

EDIT: Also, if it helps, the last stable build I had with good performance (and that I'm using now) is 20021125

old Neil Parks
Moderator
 
Posts: 0
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 5:00 pm

Post Posted April 2nd, 2003, 9:52 am

When upgrading, don't try to install a new version on top of an old one. Del the old one completely (or rename the directory that it's in) and start fresh.

Close Phoenix, go into your profile directory and delete file XUL.mfl .

If that doesn't help, try creating a new profile.

DizzyWeb

User avatar
 
Posts: 637
Joined: March 27th, 2003, 9:56 am

Post Posted April 2nd, 2003, 11:50 am

If you're updating from a .4 nightly to a .5 nightly I definately suggest you make a new profile.
Remember to backup your bookmarks.html, you can put it back into the new profile directory, but do make sure Phoenix is NOT running when you do so. Else it'll overwrite it with a default one.

Vomit
 
Posts: 11
Joined: November 27th, 2002, 2:11 pm

Post Posted April 2nd, 2003, 12:37 pm

Old profiles are NOT the issue. I delete both the Phoenix App Data directory and the main Phoenix directory entirely before attempting to use a new build.

Vomit
 
Posts: 11
Joined: November 27th, 2002, 2:11 pm

Post Posted April 5th, 2003, 2:34 pm

I know bumping isn't a good thing and apologise in advance (sorry, it won't happen again), but I really need a new version of Phoenix for XP. PLEASE suggest one that'll actually perform anywhere near as good 20021125 - my current build (yes, it's been that long).

STONE POWER D

User avatar
 
Posts: 29
Joined: November 5th, 2002, 2:25 am
Location: ATLANTIS

Post Posted April 5th, 2003, 2:54 pm

3/20 is a good one,but im using 98se.so don't know for sure if it will be totally sweet under xp. but alot of people like and use this build and im sure some of them would be using xp.just read best build thread and 3/20 under xp is the way to go.

daihard
Folder@Home

User avatar
 
Posts: 16633
Joined: November 17th, 2002, 6:27 pm
Location: Lynnwood, WA

Post Posted April 5th, 2003, 3:12 pm

Vomit wrote:I know bumping isn't a good thing and apologise in advance (sorry, it won't happen again), but I really need a new version of Phoenix for XP. PLEASE suggest one that'll actually perform anywhere near as good 20021125 - my current build (yes, it's been that long).

I use 2003-03-20 on XP Pro. It performs very well for me. YMMV, but I'd recommend that build.
Kubuntu 8.04 (kernel 2.6.24-25-generic) / KDE 3.5.10
CentOS 4.8 (kernel 2.6.9-78.0.22.ELsmp) / KDE 3.5.10
Mac OS X 10.6.1 (Snow Leopard) / iPhone 3GS (32GB black)

willll

User avatar
 
Posts: 2577
Joined: November 30th, 2002, 11:39 am
Location: Washington, DC

Post Posted April 5th, 2003, 4:41 pm

daihard wrote:
Vomit wrote:I know bumping isn't a good thing and apologise in advance (sorry, it won't happen again), but I really need a new version of Phoenix for XP. PLEASE suggest one that'll actually perform anywhere near as good 20021125 - my current build (yes, it's been that long).

I use 2003-03-20 on XP Pro. It performs very well for me. YMMV, but I'd recommend that build.
Whaaa!!!! YMMV? What the hell is that? How many unintelligible acronyms can you use? Also I don't think that upgrading to that nightly will work as he tried the nightly from the day before. If all the newer builds are running slowly on your machine I assume that it has nothing to do with phoenix itself as performance has been increasing for all of the rest of us. It seems as if it some strange idiosyncracy of your machine that would not be fixed on a day to day basis. I can't help you, as all the phoenix builds run fine on my xp box and I'm not good at determining browser performance; I can't even tell the difference in speed between IE, mozilla, and phoenix. Actually, maybe if I had could somehow get the 20021125 build from you then I could see if their were any notable speed differences on my box.

Relativity_17
 
Posts: 420
Joined: March 19th, 2003, 12:47 am
Location: Sometime in 2008

Post Posted April 5th, 2003, 5:22 pm

YMMV: Your Mileage May Vary

Heh, dumb lil me managed to figure that out in about 10 seconds, but really reading through a post shouldn't involve pauses to figure out what a group of nondescript letters should stand for. :P

I have to admit, its been a pain to upgrade to the latest nightlies. I used an old build from way back in Nov 2002, and it had *everything* operational. But speed and new functions drew me to finally try out the nightlies that were being pumped out, supposedly with increases in speed, and now smooth scroll. Yes, mileage does vary with everyone's computer, so I suggest taking the more recent builds and downloading them to test yourself. Find one that works for your computer, not for someone else's. But yeah, you'd want a narrower search parameter... I've heard good mention from:

3/19
3/20
3/31

Read the nightly build threads that have been posted in the past few weeks. They contain a useful summary of everything that's good/bad about that particular build, and really, that's why they're there.

Long live the nightly threads! :)

ehume

User avatar
 
Posts: 6743
Joined: November 17th, 2002, 12:33 pm
Location: Princeton, NJ, USA

Post Posted April 5th, 2003, 6:27 pm

I can understand staying with a November build. I call my 2002-11-14 my "Golden Build" - - a trouble-free build, that was. I like it so much I leave it sitting on my hard drive in a fully-installed form.

If the new builds are slow, stay with your 2002-11-25.
Firefox: Sic transit gloria mundi.

Vomit
 
Posts: 11
Joined: November 27th, 2002, 2:11 pm

Post Posted April 6th, 2003, 1:18 pm

ehume wrote:If the new builds are slow, stay with your 2002-11-25.


But 20021125 doesn't have the tasty new features (4 and a half months worth!) and doesn't work with most new extensions (believe me, I've tried). Meaning I'm stuck with a sub-standard Phoenix.

I just tried 20030320 since that's what most people recommend. It's eating up way too much processor time to be usable. Any time a page is loaded, it eats 100% of processor time (so music stutters along for a minute or two).

If no-one else is having this problem with the builds, are there any suggestions to help fix my computer? Any help would be appreciated, I just want to be able to appreciate the silky goodness of new Px on XP.

STONE POWER D

User avatar
 
Posts: 29
Joined: November 5th, 2002, 2:25 am
Location: ATLANTIS

Post Posted April 6th, 2003, 2:44 pm

Vomit wrote:
ehume wrote:If the new builds are slow, stay with your 2002-11-25.


But 20021125 doesn't have the tasty new features (4 and a half months worth!) and doesn't work with most new extensions (believe me, I've tried). Meaning I'm stuck with a sub-standard Phoenix.

I just tried 20030320 since that's what most people recommend. It's eating up way too much processor time to be usable. Any time a page is loaded, it eats 100% of processor time (so music stutters along for a minute or two).

If no-one else is having this problem with the builds, are there any suggestions to help fix my computer? Any help would be appreciated, I just want to be able to appreciate the silky goodness of new Px on XP.

im no techno,but whenever i have problems i can't work out the simple solution for me is format c:

ehume

User avatar
 
Posts: 6743
Joined: November 17th, 2002, 12:33 pm
Location: Princeton, NJ, USA

Post Posted April 6th, 2003, 3:39 pm

STONE POWER D wrote:
Vomit wrote:
ehume wrote:If the new builds are slow, stay with your 2002-11-25.


But 20021125 doesn't have the tasty new features (4 and a half months worth!) and doesn't work with most new extensions (believe me, I've tried). Meaning I'm stuck with a sub-standard Phoenix.

I just tried 20030320 since that's what most people recommend. It's eating up way too much processor time to be usable. Any time a page is loaded, it eats 100% of processor time (so music stutters along for a minute or two).

If no-one else is having this problem with the builds, are there any suggestions to help fix my computer? Any help would be appreciated, I just want to be able to appreciate the silky goodness of new Px on XP.

im no techno,but whenever i have problems i can't work out the simple solution for me is format c:
That's fairly drastic for Win XP, given the need for activation. Places I would look for problems are your registry and Task Manager. Doing a crtl-alt-del to bring up TM is something I do frequently to make sure the machie isn't running something unnecessary.

Next uninstall Mozilla and Netscape. Then peruse your Registry for leftover entries that relate to Mozilla. Sometimes you can find things that are bollixing up the works. For example, I once rescued MS Office by deleting every single reference to it in the Registry. Ditto a misbehaving Moz that wouldn't act right despite repeated installations and uninstallations. This job can be made easier and safer with JV16 Power Tools registry tool (formerly RegCleaner).

I would try installing Px with no Moz in your environment. That might help. Good luck.
Firefox: Sic transit gloria mundi.

Dunderklumpen
 
Posts: 16224
Joined: March 9th, 2003, 8:12 am

Post Posted April 7th, 2003, 1:05 am

Vomit:

Something must be wrong with your XP-installation. I am using 20030320 under Windows 2000 and have´nt had the problems you have. To me this sounds like you have a problem with one or more of these things (only guessing since I don´t have to much information) :

. to many things loaded at start-up
. a problem with the registry
. to little RAM
. a virtual memorythat is to small
. a heavily fragmented harddisk

I checked this build of Phoenix and it went to about 60% usage, but only for a very, very short time when I loaded a page. The same page went to over 49% with IE.

I would suggest that you check you registry and also check that you do not load to many things at startup. Also check that only the things you do want to be running actually are running. Open the Task manager to see how much rersources you are using. A good program to check your computer with is Spybot - Search & Destroy. With it you van check presence of spyware but also what you are loading at startup. You will find the software at: http://security.kolla.de/ and it´s freeware.

Another great piece of software is Registry Medic - make a backup copy before you start and READ the instructions and the information first. Any changes to the registry can completely f*ck up any computer but properly used Registry Medic can bring back the speed you had when the operating system just had been installed. It will delete any traces of old, deleted software and try to correct any errors. You will find Registry Medic at www.downloads.com (just search for it).

For XP to run well I sould suggest at least 256 Mb RAM - preferably 512 - sure it will run on 128 Mb RAM but if you use memorytough software such as videoediting software or graphical software you sure will need a lot more.

You should also try to let Windows set the size of the Virtual Memory, automatically - but if you are running out of diskspace the system might not be able to do so. In that case the system will have to use RAM and the processor much more heavily than it actually have to. The Virtual Memory is used a swap and fast access software memory.

Check with Microsoft about the size. If I remember correctly Windows automatically sets the size to about 1.5 times you RAM.

Finally - defragment your harddisk. This is a common cause for computers using a lot of processing power, working a lot slower than expected since files are all over the place.

I hope you can figure out what to do and if I haven´t been that clear on some things - bare in mind that this is not my native language :-).

Vomit
 
Posts: 11
Joined: November 27th, 2002, 2:11 pm

Post Posted April 7th, 2003, 6:57 am

I don't get how it could be insufficient memory, too many programs running, etc. Since the old Phoenix and every other program I have will happily run with dozens of things open at once, whereas new Px installs can't have anything running at all.
I regularly search for spyware and use norton utilities to keep my registry clean. The registry is really the only suggestion that might be it. I'll check it tomorrow.

Return to Firefox Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests