Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win PC

A place where you can chat about anything that isn't to do with games!
User avatar
Xyga
Posts: 7181
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Location: block

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by Xyga »

Eno wrote:
Ed Oscuro wrote:about:memory is just a stopgap solution - and also useful for memory diagnostics which don't likely help much here - I only use it if I'm worried about the browser crashing and want to keep a session going (which doesn't happen anymore). Clearing your history and restarting the browser will do the job better.
That's why I suggested it, not as effective but less disruptive than a full restart. Though you could argue that any disruption at all is bad enough, which is fair.
That [Minimize memory usage] button should be available from the toolbar.
Or they should make it a built-in automatic/dynamic feature.

EDIT: The Memory Fox addon isn't too bad really, and it's automatic/dynamic.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
User avatar
Despatche
Posts: 4253
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 11:05 pm

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by Despatche »

Ed Oscuro wrote:Flash is one of those programs that I wouldn't expect to be smart about updates. Despite doing pretty much nothing in updates except patch security flaws over the years, I'm sure there's a lot of settings that get fucked with every update, so I'd seriously consider uninstalling it and trying again.
but how do i get around nearly every "modern" site ever requiring the latest flash?
Rage Pro, Rage Fury, Rage MAXX!
User avatar
Ed Oscuro
Posts: 18654
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: uoıʇɐɹnƃıɟuoɔ ɯǝʇsʎs

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by Ed Oscuro »

Xyga wrote:That [Minimize memory usage] button should be available from the toolbar.
I haven't heard of it giving any advantage over just restarting the browser.
Despatche wrote:
Ed Oscuro wrote:Flash is one of those programs that I wouldn't expect to be smart about updates. Despite doing pretty much nothing in updates except patch security flaws over the years, I'm sure there's a lot of settings that get fucked with every update, so I'd seriously consider uninstalling it and trying again.
but how do i get around nearly every "modern" site ever requiring the latest flash?
Flashblock + Noscript.
User avatar
cools
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: South Wales
Contact:

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by cools »

I genuinely can't remember the last time I needed flash for anything I've found on the web. And 99% of the time JavaScript is disabled as well with no real adverse effects. If a site requires it I go elsewhere if possible.
Image
User avatar
Xyga
Posts: 7181
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Location: block

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by Xyga »

Ed Oscuro wrote:
Xyga wrote:That [Minimize memory usage] button should be available from the toolbar.
I haven't heard of it giving any advantage over just restarting the browser.
Just thinking it would be more convenient if it was default.
Because what I forgot to tell you is that I don't keep anything in my browser, no history, bookmarks, cookies, cached pages, passwords...
Nothing at all ! So restarting is not really a convenient option for me...
cools wrote:I genuinely can't remember the last time I needed flash for anything I've found on the web. And 99% of the time JavaScript is disabled as well with no real adverse effects. If a site requires it I go elsewhere if possible.
I need flash very often unfortunately... but Java; almost never as well. Plugin not even installed in my browser actually.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
HydrogLox
Posts: 1164
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 3:35 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by HydrogLox »

Xyga wrote:
cools wrote:I genuinely can't remember the last time I needed flash for anything I've found on the web. And 99% of the time JavaScript is disabled as well with no real adverse effects. If a site requires it I go elsewhere if possible.
I need flash very often unfortunately... but Java; almost never as well. Plugin not even installed in my browser actually.
"JavaScript is to Java as hamburger is to ham; both are delicious, but they don't have much in common except a name."

More and more "modern" sites are moving towards the Single-page application model which need HTML, CSS and JavaScript to work. JavaScript (ECMAScript) is supported by all major browsers and does not require a plugin. Disabling JavaScript basically limits you to static HTML pages and sites that reload the entire HTML page any time you interact with it. Most modern web frameworks use JavaScript in one form or another - in 2012 JQuery (a library written in JavaScript) was reported to be used by half of the web sites on the internet (now at 59%). Nowadays disabling JavaScript would be even more crippling than blocking Flash.

"Finding a low memory browser" was for a 4GB Lenovo Yoga Pro 2!.

The Avant Browser claims:
Lowest Memory Usage Web Browser
Avant Browser is the lowest memory usage web browser on Windows platform. Memory usage is one of the most important factors to measure a browser's performance. We strived to avoid all possible memory leaks in Avant Browser and give you the best
Don't know if it is worth your time fiddling with it though.
Xyga wrote:Only fresh installs + adblock and shockwave. Nothing else activated without asking.
AdBlock Plus’s effect on Firefox’s memory usage
An even more extreme example is this page, which contains over 400 iframes. Without ABP, Firefox uses about 370 MiB. With ABP, that number jumps to 1960 MiB. Unsurprisingly, the page also loads more slowly with ABP enabled.
User avatar
Xyga
Posts: 7181
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Location: block

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by Xyga »

Holy crap, I knew ABP was kind of heavy but this is insane.
Can't stand browsing without it though...

I'll give a try to Avant just for fun. Thanks.
Strikers1945guy wrote:"Do we....eat chicken balls?!"
User avatar
cools
Posts: 2057
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: South Wales
Contact:

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by cools »

HydrogLox wrote:More and more "modern" sites are moving towards the Single-page application model which need HTML, CSS and JavaScript to work. JavaScript (ECMAScript) is supported by all major browsers and does not require a plugin. Disabling JavaScript basically limits you to static HTML pages and sites that reload the entire HTML page any time you interact with it. Most modern web frameworks use JavaScript in one form or another - in 2012 JQuery (a library written in JavaScript) was reported to be used by half of the web sites on the internet (now at 59%). Nowadays disabling JavaScript would be even more crippling than blocking Flash.
Indeed, however I find it less irritating to find an alternative site offering the same function than using a site requiring JS for basic function.
Xyga wrote:Holy crap, I knew ABP was kind of heavy but this is insane.
Can't stand browsing without it though...
Adblock/Ghostery/NoScript/Flashblock make the general web usable for me.

It may be a bit zealous, but I've had too many times where a page has auto reloaded whilst I'm trying to either input or click on something and I've ended up clicking the wrong thing, or where the back button hasn't functioned correctly.
Image
ZellSF
Posts: 2715
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 11:12 pm

Re: Lightweight internet browser alternatives for an old win

Post by ZellSF »

There are lighter weight ad blockers available for Firefox (I know they exist, I don't know specific names). That said I use adblock plus and have never seen memory usage near 1 GB.

Flashblock is unncessary with Firefox 29, you can tell it to block flash and you can tell it to keep a whitelist without using a third party extension.

And if a browser uses RAM, it's for a reason. If you use any ram optimizer extension, chances are you'll slow down your browser by making the next request for that data either be from hdd or network. Which is understandable if you have something else running that needs to be faster than your web browser, but not in other scenarios.


Edit: also Avant is Trident (meaning based on Internet Explorer code). I'm guessing the entire engine, like Internet Explorer on XP, is no longer supported.
Post Reply