Web Browsers

[Anonymous]

No.
Open the package manager, uninstall firefox-esr and install ff-version 69.

[Member wasp]

The problem with Firefox-esr is all the RAM consumption:
(With two tabs open)

838.6 MiB + 135.8 MiB = 974.4 MiB firefox-esr (5)

Is there a way to make it less resource-hungry?

• This reply was modified 1 year ago by wasp.

[Member VW]

How about you ask at https://support.mozilla.org?

“These are the times that try men's souls" - Thomas Paine

[Member greyowl]

Anonymous wrote:

No.
Open the package manager, uninstall firefox-esr and install ff-version 69.

Thanks for the instructions.
If I install FF 69, will it update automatically like FF-esr does?
If not, how will I go about keeping it updated?
Thanks

• This reply was modified 1 year ago by greyowl.

Dell Latitude D610 laptop (1.86 GHz, 2G RAM, 32 bit) - antiX 17

[Member caprea]

Yes, it will get updated.
The problem with FF 69 is that it needs pulseaudio installed for sound, but you can workaround that, by starting FF from terminal with
apulse firefox

Then sound should work without having pulseaudio installed, it does here flawlessly.
If you like to start FF from the menu or from elsewhere with the “apulse firefox” command , you sure will get help here to rewrite the menu to do so.

[Member VW]

The problem with Firefox-esr is all the RAM consumption

Wrong! Firefox is a modern browser designed to run efficiently on modern computers. Support for old and ancient machines is not a realistic option for Mozilla who get their financial support from users. Thus Firefox is designed to use a lot of Ram, considering memory is inexpensive and easily installed in modern machines.

You could always try browsing using a Text-based_web_browser and the pulseaudio question doesn’t even arise

How about Lynx? An ancient browser for an ancient computer.

“These are the times that try men's souls" - Thomas Paine

[Forum Admin rokytnji]

Meh. 6 of one. 1/2 dozen of the other. Being a dude who used to play musical hardware. I’d get ram and hard drive specs bumped up. Then cpu would next scream in conky and on window manager and in htop . Video steaming looked like one of those Windows error multi-casting displays.
Pretty soon. You try and figure out what text browser and then use streamlight and hope your cpu settles down.
When one plays with old hardware or just has no choice because of environment.

Be prepared for frustration. But the stuff you learn will be priceless as you learn the computer ropes of driving these beasts.

• This reply was modified 1 year ago by rokytnji.

Sometimes I drive a crooked road to get my mind straight.
Not all who Wander are Lost.
I'm not outa place. I'm from outer space.

Linux Registered User # 475019
How to Search for AntiX solutions to your problems

[Moderator masinick]

I’ll tell you this: the somewhat aging in appearance, but still pretty functional in most respects, Seamonkey Internet Suite is still a solid workhorse that can get the job done unless your system is so resource constrained that it doesn’t work for you; for me it’s worked well for years.

It isn’t always my daily workhorse; I’ve been shifting around over the past two years; Brave on some systems (most often on my phone), use it on the computer too, but the recent one that has impressed me most – at least on my Dell Inspiron 5558 laptop is the snapshot version of

Vivaldi

. It *seems* more responsive than some other browsers, PARTICULARLY on my antiX 19 “runit” instance, though it runs well on other distros and on my phone too. But on this specific instance, (and I’ve not figured out exactly why YET) it is much more responsive to shifting between tabs, posting forum entries, in short, doing the kinds of things I do most often on my laptop, so it’s getting more use on this particular distro instance, at least right now.

Brian Masinick

[Member seaken64]

Brian, I tried installing Vivaldi on my P-III on antiX-19 and MX-Fluxbox-19.2. I couldn’t get it to work. I think it requires SSE2. I did install it on my P4 in MX and it works fine.

SeaMonkey remains my favorite on the old machines. But I had to hold on to version 2.49.4. When I let it update to 2.5x it no longer worked. Probably the same SSE2 problem.

On my newer machines I mostly use Chromium and Firefox.

Seaken64

[Member greyowl]

I have recently started using Slimjet 32 bit on a Dell Latitude D610 laptop with antiX 17.

I previously used PaleMoon and Firefox.

PaleMooon started having problems with jerky scrolling of web pages which others experienced as well and could not find a fix.

Firefox started using increasing amounts of RAM and then freeze up when it stayed on for extended periods of time.

Slimjet doesn’t have these problems. It is very responsive and and seems a bit faster in opening web pages. Initially, I had some problem with setting it as the default browser. We fixed it with help from Xecure on antiX forum. The problem was connected to Palemoon interference with antiX.

So, I’m still getting to know Slimjet and finding it works well.

Dell Latitude D610 laptop (1.86 GHz, 2G RAM, 32 bit) - antiX 17

[Member seaken64]

@greyowl,

does SlimJet support NoScript or similar? I have had best results with SeaMonkey with NoScript on. I tried some others like uBlock, but I found that NoScript works best for me. I think SlimJet is not based on the same Mozilla engine? Have you compared SeaMonkey with SlimJet?

Interestingly SeaMonkey works really well in my Virtualbox Virtual Machine when compared to my Pentium-III actual hardware. I set the VM with a single core and 512MB of RAM to compare to my setup the P-III. But I don’t even need NoScript loaded when on this VM. It’s just snappier. I guess it says something about the processing power of the P-III (not as good as the VM on a modern iCore).

Seaken64

[Moderator masinick]

@Seaken64: “Slimjet is a fast, smart and powerful web browser based on the Blink engine. It is built on top of the Chromium open source project, on which Google chrome is also based. Slimjet integrates a lot of powerful and convenient features to help users maximize their online productivity. Slimjet also includes many options and settings so that users can customize the browser to best suit their own personal preference.”
https://www.flashpeak.com/

Brian Masinick

[Moderator masinick]

seaken64 wrote:

Brian, I tried installing Vivaldi on my P-III on antiX-19 and MX-Fluxbox-19.2. I couldn’t get it to work. I think it requires SSE2. I did install it on my P4 in MX and it works fine.

SeaMonkey remains my favorite on the old machines. But I had to hold on to version 2.49.4. When I let it update to 2.5x it no longer worked. Probably the same SSE2 problem.

On my newer machines I mostly use Chromium and Firefox.

Seaken64

It’s on my Dell Inspiron 5558 (64-bit_ laptop that I find both Flashpeak Slimjet and Vivaldi. For old 32-bit systems, I’d agree with you that Seamonkey is effective. It works effectively on newer hardware too; the only thing Seamonkey doesn’t seem to do is feature the most current Web browser features – it still works though, and for such a full-featured tool, compared to the latest, newest browsers it’s fast and efficient. So Seamonkey is recommended for older equipment; I definitely used it often on my old 32-bit equipment.

Brian Masinick

[Member greyowl]

seaken64 wrote:

@greyowl,

does SlimJet support NoScript or similar? I have had best results with SeaMonkey with NoScript on. I tried some others like uBlock, but I found that NoScript works best for me. I think SlimJet is not based on the same Mozilla engine? Have you compared SeaMonkey with SlimJet?

Interestingly SeaMonkey works really well in my Virtualbox Virtual Machine when compared to my Pentium-III actual hardware. I set the VM with a single core and 512MB of RAM to compare to my setup the P-III. But I don’t even need NoScript loaded when on this VM. It’s just snappier. I guess it says something about the processing power of the P-III (not as good as the VM on a modern iCore).

Seaken64

I haven’t tried SlimJet with NoScript. I have been using uBlock which works well.

I used SeaMonkey with NoScript on a Dell Latitude D600 with XP. It worked better than any other browser at the time. It was faster, more stable, and used less RAM. The only thing that I missed was the ability to Pin Tabs. Do they have the Pin Tab feature now?

Dell Latitude D610 laptop (1.86 GHz, 2G RAM, 32 bit) - antiX 17

[Member seaken64]

Thanks @masinick and @greyowl,

I did some research and experimented this morning with SlimJet. It does support NoScript and a lot of other Chrome extensions. But it does not run on 32-bit computers that do not have SSE2, such as P-III and AMD Athlon. So, just like Vivaldi, SlimJet does not work on my P-III’s. but it does work on my P4’s.

I don’t think SeaMonkey has “pinning” of tabs. But I don’t know for sure as I’ve never used that feature in a browser. I think SeaMonkey is old school so it probably does not support a lot of newer features that people expect in a browser.

There are very few browsers that run anymore on non-SSE2. 32-bit is still pretty well supported but if the processor does not have SSE2 it is difficult, or impossible, to use a modern browser. So far SeaMonkey 2.49.4 has proven to be the best option. But that is now also “old version”, SeaMonkey now at 2.53.3. PaleMoon-nonsse2 27.9.4 is also “old version” with Palemoon now at 28.12.0.

NetSurf is current but limited and does not do a lot of the things people expect in their browser.

Time is running out for old browsers on old computers.

Seaken64

[Author]

Posts