-
I agree. This has been my experience also. Either refresh with F5 (Firefox) or revisit the replies after viewing the main AskWoody.com page.
I always check the “Remember me” box, so once logged in, I stay logged in for a week or more. Eventually I get logged out (which I don’t always realise at first) and have to log back in again. Maybe there is a time limit on how many days you can stay logged in, even with “Remember me” checked.
Dell Precision 3630 w/32 GB RAM, 500 GB (C:), 1 TB (D:)
Window 10 Pro x64
Internet: FTTC (Fibre to the Kerb)5 users thanked author for this post.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Just a point of clarification …
From what you (and others) say, I gather that KB2952664 is the code patch and KB3150513 is the database that the former patch needs(?) to function. So if you have KB2952664 installed (any/all versions), but KB3150513 is NOT installed, then KB2952664 will not function (whether the latter is installed as a freestanding patch or as part of the October rollup). And that is why you are stressing that you can HIDE KB3150513. Is this more or less correct?
I am currently Group B, but have been considering moving to Group A at some stage. However, news that KB2952664 functionality has now been incorporated into the monthly rollup has made me think again. But if the functionality can be disabled simply by not installing KB3150513, then it may be OK. At least until MS decides to put that into a rollup as well !!
Along with many others, I say thank you for all you do for this group, and all your patience in answering the same questions over and over (I hope that my question does not come under this banner!).
Dell Precision 3630 w/32 GB RAM, 500 GB (C:), 1 TB (D:)
Window 10 Pro x64
Internet: FTTC (Fibre to the Kerb)1 user thanked author for this post.
-
-
Are you not using the portable version? Portable here. Only problem I had was related to “reduce memory” frequency of 500ms (default). @Klaas Vaak recommended 600,000ms (10 min interval) and that seemed to work.
I have downloaded and tested both installed and portable versions. Not sure I can detect any difference. I was running on the installed version (set to autostart with Windows) when I struck the problems when rebooting. How would doing the same with the portable version make it different?
I initially ran with the default frequency of 500 ms to see how it went before changing anything. It seemed logical that running the API twice a second would introduce noticeable overhead, but I was surprised to find that any overhead was undetectable. So for now I have left the default setting. It certainly keeps memory usage down. What was the problem that you had with this parameter?
Dell Precision 3630 w/32 GB RAM, 500 GB (C:), 1 TB (D:)
Window 10 Pro x64
Internet: FTTC (Fibre to the Kerb)1 user thanked author for this post.
-
-
Further to my #208799, I have run successfully for a couple of days after installing Firemin. I had it set up to autostart at boot time (so I wouldn’t forget). Then after a couple of days, I had occasion to shut down and restart the PC. Startup was very slow – in fact I am not sure it ever fully started. When I tried to start Firefox, Windows Firewall blocked it (I have never seen that before). I overrode the block and FF started. However, some websites just displayed a blank page. And I could not get the password manager Dashlane to start at all – at least not its display window (according to Task Manager it was running). The only thing new since the previous boot was the installation of Firemin (and the toggling of the two flags in about:config).
So I opened up the Firemin options and reset the flag to prevent autostart of Firemin at boot time, then restarted. It booted normally. No firewall blocks, Dashlane started normally, and FF is running normally (and back to its old tricks of chewing up memory at an alarming rate!). With everything running OK, I started Firemin manually – it is now doing its job and everything else still seems OK.
Of course one instance of rebooting with Firemin autostart is not conclusive – it could just be a coincidence that something else went wrong at that time. I will have to repeat this whole process to be sure, not something I have time to do right now. Wondering if anyone else has seen this with autostart of Firemin at boot?
Dell Precision 3630 w/32 GB RAM, 500 GB (C:), 1 TB (D:)
Window 10 Pro x64
Internet: FTTC (Fibre to the Kerb)2 users thanked author for this post.
-
Also my experience! I made the about:config changes referred to and got the same result: initially only two processes briefly, then only one. The memory size of the one process still got up around 1.6 GB, the same as the largest of the previous seven processes – but the other six processes amounted to a few gigabytes on their own, so overall a significant cut in memory usage. And it is easier to follow FF in Task Manager when it has only one process.
It would be interesting to know: if you can run FF in one process (as in older FF versions), why does Mozilla now run it using up to seven processes (other than copy-catting Chrome)? Is there some advantage? What is the trade-off in switching back to one process? One wonders …
After gaining some memory back with the above change, I downloaded and installed Firemin as recommended by several posters. What a difference! FF memory usage has dropped from around 1.6 GB to less than 100 MB! (Using the default 500 ms frequency.) Much of the time FF memory usage is less than that of Firemin itself at 31 MB. If fixing the memory leakage is so simple, one wonders why Mozilla hasn’t used the same Windows API (but possibly because FF is largely platform independent and the API is specific to Windows?).
Anyway, thanks again to all who made these suggestions. Overall memory usage of my 8 GB desktop has dropped from 80%+ to less than 50%, and performance has improved correspondingly.
Dell Precision 3630 w/32 GB RAM, 500 GB (C:), 1 TB (D:)
Window 10 Pro x64
Internet: FTTC (Fibre to the Kerb) -
Re Moon Tester Tool: Thanks for reminding me about this. I glossed over this when I first started using PM and then forgot about it. I will look into it when I get time.
Re Memory Usage: I checked memory usage in Task Manager while I was checking out password management in Pale Moon and Waterfox. Both of the latter operate with a single task as FF used to, rather than the plethora of tasks in FF Quantum and Chrome. However I was shocked to see that both PM and WF had memory usage of over 2.2 GB (and they were just sitting idle). That’s more than 25% of my installed RAM, and is comparable to FF Q when you add up the usage in all of the separate FF tasks. So maybe I have a particular problem with my system if others don’t see this.
Dell Precision 3630 w/32 GB RAM, 500 GB (C:), 1 TB (D:)
Window 10 Pro x64
Internet: FTTC (Fibre to the Kerb)1 user thanked author for this post.
-
As I recall, old Firefox had a rudimentary password manager built in, however it was generally regarded as not very secure. Which is why I upgraded to a specialist password manager (RoboForm was considered the best at the time – cost USD $30 in 2010). I just checked that Firefox still has its password manager, so do both Pale Moon and Waterfox – I assume that the latter two inherited it from FF. Maybe the security of these features has improved over the last eight years, although when the merits of password managers are discussed I don’t recall any built-in browser managers being mentioned.
Having paid for RF all those years ago, I still keep it around and it is still OK. I have since installed LastPass and Dashlane, both of which are free (for personal use at least). Dashlane is particularly good (LastPass not so much IMO). However, RF has a feature I haven’t seen in the others – it can be used to log in to applications as well as websites (for example VeraCrypt containers).
Dell Precision 3630 w/32 GB RAM, 500 GB (C:), 1 TB (D:)
Window 10 Pro x64
Internet: FTTC (Fibre to the Kerb)
Author
