Comments on: Think Firefox 3 is fast? Try Firefox Minefield

Firefox is outdoing itself with Minefield, which sets new speed records.

[oedenfield]

"won't affect an existing Firefox install"

I would rather create a new Firefox profile for use with Minefield. Also since Minefield is the latest nightly build, it would be updated everyday and I've seen quite a few nightly builds that can hose a profile.

[Dalkorian]

Creating a profile specifically for using alpha software is a very sensible precaution. I'd also recommend frequent backups, just in case.

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that the world isn't out to get me. ;-)

[SJ2571]

So run it using www.sandboxie.com and keep your PC's state untouched.

[xxdesmusxx]

I <3 Minefield, but I definitely would not suggest "normal" users try it out. I've literally had days when a particular nightly build will break something completely random in Firefox, and you're stuck until the next days build is released. Using the "Nightly Tester Tools" you can make all of your extensions work just as they would on Firefox 3.0, but it certainly increases the potential instability of the browser.

[1kenthomas]

Um, you could just revert to the previous release :P

[Brian5780]

Um...is it just me, or did you forget to mention two very important factors regarding minefield? Don't get me wrong, I have been using it for a few days now, and I think it's amazing! It's just that you might want to mention to people that it's a 64 bit browser, and is intended for use with 64 bit operating systems to see it's full power. Also, there's that highly annoying fact that you can't run Flash on it because there's no Flash Player plugin for 64 bit browsers. Gotta love when Adobe just ignores everyone on the planet and charges us $2500 for the same software we bought 18 months ago, and all they did was rearrange the icons.

[MaggieRed]

You nailed it on several points, especially the Adobe factor.

[JoyceNgo-218335993631273378369]

Don't forget, it costs a lot to upgrade the Adobe products and once again only get rearranged icons.. Hhehehe

[xxdesmusxx]

@Brian5780

It's just you. I've been using Minefield on a 32 bit system with no problem, and therefore my flash plugin works just, etc etc. Just saying...

[rapier1]

I believe the point Brian was trying to make is that the full potential won't be seen on 32 bit OSes, not that it wouldn't work.

[notamorningperson]

"it leaves Google's Chrome browser in the dust ... pegs Minefield as 10 percent faster than Chrome..."

Huh? 10% faster IS NOT leaving anything in the dust... please keep sensationalism in its place

[ffclone]

Remember this is with computers though. 10% is leaving it in the dust.

[rapier1]

10% is 10% is 10%. What matters is if it exceed the threshold for 'just noticeable difference' in terms of the user experience.

[this1!]

rapier, yes 10% is 10%, but ffclone makes an amazingly good point, it is relative to what it is your talking about, example, if your a body builder, and your max is say 300 pound bench press, if you add in ten percent, and make 330, you could easily tear a muscle, were as 10% more of a 24oz bottle of coke, isnt really gonna refresh me all that much more.

[imacpwr]

EXACTLY...!! People wet themselves with expressions like "blistering speeds" and "leaving in the dust" when in reality we're only talking about milliseconds difference..!!!
REALITY CHECK: The human eye would NEVER notice a speed increase of 10% of a millisecond..!!!

[1kenthomas]

Note: without running deep tests, FF 3.1 with JIT-enabled seems as faster or faster than Minefield; and a heck of a lot more stable!

[norcalrivercat]

This makes my dsl internet feel like a T1 line! It's definitely fast.

[chillincool]

Dsl is faster than t1 guy =P t1 is only 1.544 mbs.

[BeeJiggity]

Dsl CAN be faster than a T1, but most people get something less than a Mb. Stick with cable, where 50Mbps, 75Mbps and 100Mbps is on the way.

[imacpwr]

That's the common misconception of faster browsers, increased line speeds. What we are talking here is the speed at which the browser draws the page it downloaded, not the speed at which the page was downloaded.

[JoyceNgo-218335993631273378369]

My DSL is slower than T1. It's 768kps

[dsltillidie]

DSL will blow cable internet out of the water as far as consistency any day of the week. The more solid increased speeds are on there way for dsl too. But the speeds they will give you will be the real speed and not just the posted supposed speed.

[tipoo_]

so will minefeild be firefox 3.5 or something like that?

[yacoubean]

It will be Firefox 3.1, which some others noted below is out in Beta already. Although I think you have to enable the faster JS engine in 3.1 beta, it's off by default.

[The Conundrum]

Minefield is whatever the latest nightly trunk build is, thus the name. The Firefox 3.1 beta is not Minefield, it's code named Shiretoko. It includes the new super-fast Javascript engine (Tracemonkey), but it is disabled by default.

[tipoo_]

i hope mozilla eventualy does the whole separate threads for each tab and add-on thing that chrome does, its fantastic for dual, tri, and quad core users.

[twolf2919]

What's the difference between Minefield and Firefox 3.1 beta1? The speed this article talks about is due to the new SpiderMonkey javascript engine - which I think can be used in this Firefox beta (although I think by default it's off, but if you go to the mozilla site, I'm sure it describes how to turn it on).

[The Conundrum]

The javascript engine is called Tracemonkey, and you're right, it's turned off by default. It can be enabled in about:config.

[oce.net]

The biggest issue and the greatest benefit of using Minefield- which I've been using since the fall last year- is that there are new builds- sometimes twice a day. These new builds often fix issues common to normal builds of Firefox- Flash bugs, scripting issues, etc. But they also tend to create those same issues on occasion. Hardware shouldn't be an issue in your use of Minefield- I'm on a 32-Bit Vista HP laptop with Core 2 Duo 1.73 Ghz Processor- and 2 GB of RAM.

A big note of warning: There is a really annoying/odd habit of Minefield to crash/kill itself when it has an update waiting for a long period of time- or is ready to download an update. As every update has its fixes and flaws- this can create an issue when you want to stick with a build that seems to work.
Usually its able to save your tabs from the lost session- but occasionally it won't- creating problems.
This form of Firefox really isn't for the faint of heart.

Also; many sites also have issues recognizing it as a modern build of Firefox- blocking you from using sites like ABC.com, Hulu, and NBC.com on occasion.

[weaselander]

Just installed and watching Hulu now

[Solaris_User]

I'm using 3.1b and it's really fast. It's hard to tell if its faster than Chrome but both are an improvement.

[gshappell]

Minefield seems quick, not noticeably faster than google chrome however. Oh yeah, thanks for making me have to reload all my add ins, it was awesome. Apparently it isnt as separate a install (despite the different directory) as you were lead to believe.

[Solaris_User]

Your firefox profile is the same..

[jamullian]

It IS fast - but it would be neat if it would identify itself as something different in the Help/About screen, so I could be sure it really is a different version I'm using, not 3.03

[funyun2]

It's a little bit faster, but it doesn't make up for the lack of add-ons.

[1kenthomas]

Turn compatibility checking and version control off :P

[gatuus]

No mater if you win by an inch or by a mile.. WINNING IS WINNING

=P as...|@#|@

[jasonefmonk]

Badly quoted. Sorry.

[smcgrail70]

What about ActiveX? Does Minefield or any other cross platform browser support it, or is Microsoft still keeping that to themselves?

We're using Sharepoint @ work, but are having a problem catering to the Mac and Linux users due to this.

[Michael Buehler]

Minefield and other non-MS browsers do not directly support ActiveX for the following reasons, among others:
1. ActiveX is not a true standard - it is Microsoft proprietary technology
2. ActiveX depends on COM, OLE and other Windows APIs that do not exist on other platforms
3. ActiveX is an enormous security concern
4. ActiveX controls are generally only compiled for Intel x86 compatible processors

This does not mean you have utterly no options. Take a look at WINE / Codeweavers' Crossover Office, which will allow you to run Internet Explorer 6 on your Intel (or compatible) Mac/Linux workstations. Crossover Office is simple, and should do the job basically out of the box, however it is not a free product. It is based on WINE which is Open Source, and will also run IE 6/Active X, though it requires some manual configuration. Keep in mind, that Crossover Office will only work on x86 (Intel) architecture based machines. If your Mac/Linux boxes are PowerPC or some other architecture, you're stuck with emulation.

[jasonefmonk]

Got bored, just ran a few speed tests. (23/10/08)
Safari vs FireFox vs Minefield
All measurements are in seconds (s), rounded to the nearest 10th.
Each browser had the listed page loaded three times. Between each test the browser was reset (all "private data cleared", caches, etc.). The final number is the average (arithmetic mean) of those three tests. All browsers had the latest updates, no plugins, other browsers closed. TextEdit open.
Run on a MBP with OS 10.5.5 "Leopard" and in a new user account.

www.nytimes.com
Safari - 4.6s
(5.3, 3.9, 4.5)
FireFox - 5.9s
(6.8, 6.3, 4.7)
Minefield - 6.2s
(6.8, 5.6, 6.1)

www.cnet.com
Safari - 2.5s
(3.1, 2.2, 2.3)
FireFox - 3.7s
(3.8, 4.3, 3.0)
MineField - 2.8s
(3.0, 2.7, 2.7)

[jasonefmonk]

Rumour has it that Safari is fastest on a Mac because it has access certain CoreServices or files that the other browsers don't. However looking back over the test still makes me want to use Safari more.

[imacpwr]

Were you using an hour glass as a measuring tool...?

[gwhiz2K]

Interesting that Safari is so fast on a Mac.. I just timed my PC version (latest), and it took a full 10 seconds from the browser appearing on screen to loading its home page (Google). It's almost too slow to be usable, which is I guess probably ok since it's mostly used on a PC by developers for testing. Still, you'd think they'd optimize the code a little better. I also notice that Safari is almost as slow on my old Mac G4 (used for testing).

[gwhiz2K]

Just did a PC test (quick one, not as thorough as jasonfmonk above).

I should also point out, further to my above comment, that Safari was faster once it was initially loaded. It loaded both pages (cnet.com and nytimes.com) in just under 3 seconds.

Google Chrome is similar to Safari in that it has a huge wait time when first starting up (27 seconds for cnet.com), but was less that 2 seconds for nytimes.com

Firefox 3.03 was well under 2 seconds for both.

IE7 was also well under 2 seconds for both.

Opera 8.02 was just over 3 seconds for both.

[frankwick]

I've used Minefield for over a year. It's stable for everyday use, but most FF plugins don't work. So if you like Forecast Fox or something, it won't work nativly with minefield. Minefield auto-updates itself everyday but 90% of the daily changes are not noticeable with everyday browsing. Sometimes, big changes land.

I know that IE7 really bites in some speed tests, but I honestly don't see an issue with daily browsing. It's as fast as FF or Minefield and uses a lot less RAM than Safari. I use IE7 for 75% of my browsing and Minefield for the rest.

[GRobLewis]

I just downloaded a version of Minefield that supports the new trackpad gestures for the recent MacBooks (pinch, twist, swipe). Works great.