Update Mozilla Firefox Windows Vista
Olegario Benford
ClearType is enabled by default on modern versions of Windows, and in Vista and 7 the default fonts are specifically hinted for ClearType. So, in short, ClearType is enabled by default and looks fine whereas the fonts rendered by Direct2D look over-antialiased and horrific.
The hardware acceleration seems to be speeding up page rendering. However, the font rendering is simply horrible. The menus, tab text, down to font on various web pages. As the result, I have noticed some CSS rendering issues on several websites.
I have returned to FF3 as the result.
Btw, if canvas is being accelerated now or in the near future does that mean we have to optimise GPUCPU transfer to reduce bottleneck (caching as texture rather than drawing/uploading each frame, use atlas textures, etc ?)
I am getting 90FPS with Windows 7, Sony Vaio, 3gb ram and 1gb video card. How to activate Compositing acceleration as you mentioned its not enabled by default. I wanna give a try to use the GPU fullest with Firefox Beta 5.
Installing the hardware acceleration platform update for Windows 7 improved the quality of (font) rendering for hardware acceleration with Firefox 4, restoring ClearType alike quality. You can download the update at Microsoft download:
I believe Direct 3D and Direct 2D were preferred in Windows over standard OpenGL due to the fact that, starting with Windows Vista, Windows no longer has native OpenGL support. The current implementations of the OpenGL for those systems are of the sole responsibility of each GPU manufacturer and are distributed within their own card drivers.
There is a videos where IE9 beta is compared to Firefox 4 beta 5, and of course Firefox fails miserably compared to IE9.
The website they use to compare IE9 to other leading web browsers is:
The bad news, for Microsoft that is, contrary to their video I saw on the first link, Firefox performs excellent. And they somehow limit the number of frames that can be displayed in most of their tests. (60 fps in my case, probably because my LCDs refresh rate is 60 Hz). I thought it was illegal to make false statements against competitors products, at least as far as i know, it is illegal in my country.
In my pc I use ubuntu 10.04 32 bits and a ATI Radeon HD3200 with the lastest proprietary driver and Firefox 4b7 is doing 2fps. Even with the open source driver fps is low. Both Opera 10.62 and Chromium 7 do 6fps in this same machine and OS.
Oh, and one last thing, why use XRender instead of OpenGL for content in Firefox? XRender is pretty basic for a hardware acceleration means. It works with plenty of drivers, sure, but it lacks a lot of things OpenGL can do for rendering content to make it faster AND look that much better.
Hey, man. When did the chromium developers developed this feature? In my chromium 7, in the same ubuntu 10.04 with a radeon hd3200 where firefox 4.0b7 does 2fpx and chromium (without this parmeter) does 6fps, now with this parameter in command-line it (chromium) does 45fps! woow! Very fast!
i7 @ 1.6 ghz nvidia 330M, i dont know what the chromium developers are doing but its insane. Slower than Firefox on Windows though but Chromium linux is a solid 100fps faster than anything else around for me O.o
However, IE 9 destroys firefox in some of the microsoft tests (speed reading IE9 gets 60 fps, FF4 gets 3 fps) and is slightly better in some of them (psychedelic browsing IE9 gets 1815 rev/sec, FF4 gets 1171 rev/sec). Anyone know why this is?
I think the FPS speeds of Firefox 4 would be improved if Mozilla ditched XRender on Linux and went ALL OpenGL, personally. Of course, this being open source, someone could easily write a patch for it and make it that way.
Direct2d is only available on windows. Theres no full featured stable 2d acceleration on linux. Its actually much harder to write code to do the 2d stuff that the 3d stuff because your making texture not sampling them.
However on my Linux x86 laptop with an ATI FireGL and the xorg server it was so slow that I had to switch to console and kill it. I suspect that there are ways of setting up my server, but I cannot be bothered at the moment.
Right now I get without any acceleration 50-60 fps using the old Firefox 3.6. So I would expect from Firefox 4 at least the same values without acceleration and some huge number with hardware acceleration. I just find it funny because fps improvement from 50-60 to 80-90 fps is actually small comparing to the hype which is all around.
I have, however, moved on from Firefox, finding it vloated and slow compared to most other browsers, switched to Chromium a bit, stayed on there a few months, but now am using Konqueror in Webkit mode (I am a Linux user.). It works great.
I used to use chrome until I needed a brwoser that could release cache properly on a page refresh. Firefox still has considerable cache issues. Unfortunately IE sucks completely, but has the best settings for ignoring cached data.
If I evaluate the acceleration of the system for web development, then i would be needing high speed system to cater the various development activities taking place in development of a website and all the performance of a developer depends on the hardware acceleration.
Someone mentioned above that displays can only do 60 fps. While that is probably not technically true I belive the human eye stops being able to detect any flicker at around that frame rate. Maybe a little higher.
It would be nice if all this were simple and clear, but it is not. I know enough to ask the right questions but not enough to know the answers off hand. Do a little research if hardware acceleration is important to you. And do a lot of research before you spend money on new hardware
i reccomend you all NOT to activate the HW accel on firefox,(my fav browser) because it STILL SUCKS REAL BAD
use google chrome 10
DO NOT USE internet explorer, unless you are a virus collector and love the slow browsing it provides
And in my experience loading a large website with each application limited to 100KB/s of network usage, Internet Explorer came out on top. I tried loading sites in the browsers all side-by-side and loading one at a time. Internet Explorer kept coming out on top with an average of a 10.5 second load time for a website at about 1MB. Chrome, which is currently my default, had an average of about 11 seconds. Firefox, however, kept loading and loading until I stopped counting at 20 seconds. I tried again and again. the lowest it had was about 18 seconds, but almost every other time it surpassed 20 seconds.
And to anyone who would dare bring up the standards argument, IE9 is fast catching up, and what it does support it supports better than other browsers. As far as compatibility with advanced websites, IE and Chrome are about the same. However, Firefox was alright on most HTML cases but a lot of the CSS-heavy sites I tested it on, it kept screwing things up. As for Firefox 7, it is a bit better on speed and performance, but still has a lot of bugs that drive me away. And I seriously doubt that any time soon Firefox will catch up to the speed, performance and reliability of IE and Chrome.
Yeah i read it in no where there you will find mention about fps or frames per second. maybe its easier for you to read that the mtv website loads with 60/30 fps on gpu acceleration on/off rather than lets say 103/56ms. i find the later easier to understand.
Canvas accelleration should arrive soon to Firefox as Chrome has added HW acceleration for the canvas element on Mac too and a software backend for WebGL (SwiftShader) and it would be sad if Mozilla lagged on these useful features for the future of HTML5, especially for the HW accelerated canvas.
I have been trying to find out which adobe reader I can install for Win Vista 64 bit but have been unsuccessful. I am trying to update it because my Firefox Browser is blocking me from using the current version 10.1.13.16 and won't let me use Adobe Reader ver 10.1.13.16 because they said it's vulnerable and should be updated. if anyone knows which version I can update to I would greatly appreciate it.
Another Vista user here. Firefox is definitely not blocking me from using the current version 11.0.18 (there is nothing "current" about version 10.1.13). The pesky plugin checker appears to have been removed from the latest Firefox 50.0, but it certainly used to report that even 11.0.18 was "outdated." That might be because Firefox plans to end support for all NPAPI plugins except Flash Player before long: -plugins-in-firefox/#more-2327. To be clear, Adobe Reader 11 never officially supported Vista, but always officially supported Server 2008 (which is basically identical to Vista), and it does work on Vista. I should mention that my Vista is 32 bit. If there is anything unusual about my Vista installation that allows Reader 11 to work well, it is probably either (A) absolutely no trace of older Adobe Reader products or (B) no corrupt system files. Here's a good discussion of PDF options for Vista: -acrobat-reader-for-vista/
Frustrated by Internet Explorer, fed up with its security scares, or looking for a more streamlined and safer browsing experience? Why not try the freeware Firefox browser from Mozilla. (Notice the multiple tabbed windows, and the dedicated SOS Search function built into the menu bar).
Firefox (www.mozilla.org/products/firefox) runs under Windows 98 through to Windows XP (as well as on Mac OS X and several versions of Linux), and compared with Microsoft's IE (Internet Explorer) I find it faster, safer, and easier to use. In fact, I wish I'd swapped over a long time ago, since it's revolutionised my web browsing experience in various ways.
The most obvious is Firefox's tabbed browsing: as well as the usual 'Open Link In New Window' option, you can instead 'Open Link In New Tab', which lets you open as many tabbed pages as you like within one Firefox window. This is not only more convenient in many cases, but also uses less system resources than opening the same number of individual windows. It's great for SOS forum browsing, because I can open new windows for the PC Music, Music Recording Technology and Studio Design & Acoustics conferences, and then open dozens of tabs in each window to keep each batch neatly together while I read through them. You can even specify a group of tabs as your home page.
d3342ee215