Written by Dinth the 15 Feb 09 at 12:43.

One of reasons why Firefox is so slow on Linux, is that Windows version is compiled with PGO - https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Building_with_Profile-Guided_Optimization . Ubuntu devs should compile firefox packages with PGO enabled to speed up Firefox on Ubuntu

One of reasons why Firefox is so slow on Linux, is that Windows version is compiled with PGO - https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Building_with_Profile-Guided_Optimization . Ubuntu devs should compile firefox packages with PGO enabled to speed up Firefox on Ubuntu

Written by Dinth the 15 Feb 09 at 12:46.

Propably compiling Firefox with ICC would greatly speed up this application.
It is a trouble when user must do compiling with so unusual compiler on his own, but Ubuntu devs can easly do it and put binary packages in repository, or at least PPA.

Propably compiling Firefox with ICC would greatly speed up this application. It is a trouble when user must do compiling with so unusual compiler on his own, but Ubuntu devs can easly do it and put binary packages in repository, or at least PPA.

Written by Dinth the 15 Feb 09 at 12:52.

There are avalible native 64bit Java and Flash versions on Suns and Adobe websites. ATM they are in beta state, but there are pretty much stable, so why dont package them to repo or at least PPA? This would greatly speed up Firefox on 64bit systems - now, sometimes nspluginwrappers takes 50% of cpu power when playing video from some sites.

There are avalible native 64bit Java and Flash versions on Suns and Adobe websites. ATM they are in beta state, but there are pretty much stable, so why dont package them to repo or at least PPA? This would greatly speed up Firefox on 64bit systems - now, sometimes nspluginwrappers takes 50% of cpu power when playing video from some sites.

Written by AndrewLuecke the 16 Feb 09 at 13:19.

Its simple, profiling tools on Ubuntu are WAY behind.

Ubuntu should join in on the Systemtap project so that we have a better tool available to help identify the reasons why Firefox is so slow on Linux.

Doing so will also speed up every other program in the repos.

Its simple, profiling tools on Ubuntu are WAY behind. Ubuntu should join in on the Systemtap project so that we have a better tool available to help identify the reasons why Firefox is so slow on Linux. Doing so will also speed up every other program in the repos.

Written by lutimdale the 18 Feb 09 at 04:37.

There probably aren't as many developers testing the linux version as this isn't the biggest install base.

There probably aren't as many developers testing the linux version as this isn't the biggest install base.

Written by JanMalte the 19 Feb 09 at 06:56.

Support the development of the swiftweasel project.
This is an pgo compiled version of firefox.
http://swiftweasel.tuxfamily.org/

Support the development of the swiftweasel project. This is an pgo compiled version of firefox. http://swiftweasel.tuxfamily.org/

Written by danielrmt the 26 Feb 09 at 20:11.

I have been using Epiphany for the last months, and I really enjoy it. I still miss some Firefox extensions, but it's ok. I think it is a good choice for Ubuntu. Maybe not now, but when it gets a stable webkit support.

I have been using Epiphany for the last months, and I really enjoy it. I still miss some Firefox extensions, but it's ok. I think it is a good choice for Ubuntu. Maybe not now, but when it gets a stable webkit support.

Written by brownbat the 14 Mar 09 at 02:20.

The "support x browser instead" options are tanking, but I wanted to give everyone an option to vote down (or up?) Google's browser too.

The "support x browser instead" options are tanking, but I wanted to give everyone an option to vote down (or up?) Google's browser too.

Written by flammon the 14 Mar 09 at 22:18.

I love GNOME and use it every day, have been since pre 1.0 but I think that its weakest part is GTK/GDK. Qt is faster and GPL so perhaps it is time to start porting. Firefox is mostly written in C++ so using Qt shouldn't be a problem.

The project has already begun and I'm anxious to see the results.

http://browser.garage.maemo.org/news/10/

I love GNOME and use it every day, have been since pre 1.0 but I think that its weakest part is GTK/GDK. Qt is faster and GPL so perhaps it is time to start porting. Firefox is mostly written in C++ so using Qt shouldn't be a problem. The project has already begun and I'm anxious to see the results. http://browser.garage.maemo.org/news/10/

Written by sanketmedhi the 15 Apr 09 at 09:24.

Edit: I take this back. I upgraded to Janty 9.04 and Firefox works like a charm with the Flash 10 driver!

I have been using Ubuntu 64 bit versions for several years. And what I still don't like is that my system slows down pathetically when the browser tries to load a Flash or Java applet which are used on most pages on the Internet today, not to mention ads.

Although, its not exactly Ubuntu's problem that the sources providing these plugins do not entirely support x86_64 platforms, users should have the freedom to choose whether or not to use these packages and how to use them.

There should be a meta package that installs firefox32 and removes firefox64 on 64 bit versions of Ubuntu. Also, plugins for Firefox like Flash, Java, Adobe Reader, Shockwave, etc. should be replaced with 32 bit versions without any intervention.

Edit: I take this back. I upgraded to Janty 9.04 and Firefox works like a charm with the Flash 10 driver! I have been using Ubuntu 64 bit versions for several years. And what I still don't like is that my system slows down pathetically when the browser tries to load a Flash or Java applet which are used on most pages on the Internet today, not to mention ads. Although, its not exactly Ubuntu's problem that the sources providing these plugins do not entirely support x86_64 platforms, users should have the freedom to choose whether or not to use these packages and how to use them. There should be a meta package that installs firefox32 and removes firefox64 on 64 bit versions of Ubuntu. Also, plugins for Firefox like Flash, Java, Adobe Reader, Shockwave, etc. should be replaced with 32 bit versions without any intervention.

Written by Cé the 1 Mar 09 at 09:08.

I think firefox should be run as a very limited user, so it can only destroys its own files.

I think that limited user should only be able to write to
/user/cedric/Desktop/
/user/cedric/normal locations for caching and so on

This way the normal user can read and use the files from firefox, but firefox can't destroy the files of the normal user.

Best regards,
Cedric

I think firefox should be run as a very limited user, so it can only destroys its own files. I think that limited user should only be able to write to /user/cedric/Desktop/ /user/cedric/normal locations for caching and so on This way the normal user can read and use the files from firefox, but firefox can't destroy the files of the normal user. Best regards, Cedric

Written by aysiu the 3 Mar 09 at 00:02.

AppArmor allows you to restrict what directories an application can access and it's installed in Ubuntu by default, but, as you can see from the community documentation, it's not so easy to configure:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/AppArmor

There should be a nice little AppArmor config by which you can select with your mouse an application from a list of applications (Firefox being one of the available apps), select again with your mouse a directory you want to limit it to.

This wouldn't be restricted by default, but it should be just a couple of clicks away for those who need it.

AppArmor allows you to restrict what directories an application can access and it's installed in Ubuntu by default, but, as you can see from the community documentation, it's not so easy to configure: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/AppArmor There should be a nice little AppArmor config by which you can select with your mouse an application from a list of applications (Firefox being one of the available apps), select again with your mouse a directory you want to limit it to. This wouldn't be restricted by default, but it should be just a couple of clicks away for those who need it.

Written by aysiu the 3 Mar 09 at 00:07.

It's great to prevent applications from damaging your personal files, but that stuff should be backed up on some external media anyway.

It's great to prevent applications from damaging your personal files, but that stuff should be backed up on some external media anyway.

Written by Thelasko the 24 Mar 09 at 14:54.

From the Novel website:
"Novell AppArmor is an access control system that lets you specify per program which files the program may read, write, and execute."
With the default installation AppArmor only protects CUPS. There is a movement to make it protect Firefox by default. More information can be found here.

From the Novel website:<br> "Novell AppArmor is an access control system that lets you specify per program which files the program may read, write, and execute."<br> With the default installation AppArmor only protects CUPS. There is a movement to make it protect Firefox by default. More information can be found <a href="http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1008906">here.</a>

Written by Thelasko the 6 Apr 09 at 19:59.

When AppArmor loggs a violation, users should be notified via the new Ubuntu notification system. They can then have the option to allow or deny such connections. This is similar to the way the popular Windows firewall ZoneAlarm works.

When AppArmor loggs a violation, users should be notified via the new <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/253">Ubuntu notification system.</a> They can then have the option to allow or deny such connections. This is similar to the way the popular Windows firewall ZoneAlarm works.