Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mozilla Announces Firefox 48 for Desktop With Multi-Process Support

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,490
37,778



Mozilla announced the release of Firefox 48 for desktop yesterday, introducing a long-awaited multi-process feature to the browser along with a handful of interface tweaks.

Firefox 48 is the first version of the browser to include Electrolysis (or e10s), a multi-process feature Mozilla developers have been working on for over seven years.

firefox.jpg

Multi-process Firefox separates web content and UI processes, so that when a web page is consuming a large amount of processing power, other open tabs, buttons, and menus don't become unresponsive. Mozilla says it will be activating the feature behind the scenes in a staggered rollout for Firefox 48 users over the next few weeks.

While Safari and Chrome browsers have offered a similar feature for some time, this version of Firefox is also running Mozilla's Rust language, which is designed to offer performance comparable to C++, but without the latter's susceptibility to security flaws. Firefox 48 also blocks Adobe Flash Player by default, as the big online media companies like YouTube increasingly switch to HTML5.

Elsewhere, Mozilla has improved the Awesome Bar, which now offers more relevant search suggestions, while the Discovery Pane has been redesigned to make it easier to read. In addition, Reading Lists have been merged into Bookmarks and Synced tabs have been relocated to the History Panel.

Lastly, version 48 also ships security improvements that enhance download protection in Firefox, such as flagging uncommon downloads that appear to mimic popular installation packages for malicious purposes.

Firefox 48 is a free download for the Mac, though users of older Mac system should be aware that it drops support for OS X versions older than 10.9 Mavericks. [Direct link]

Article Link: Mozilla Announces Firefox 48 for Desktop With Multi-Process Support
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2016/08/03/mozilla-announces-firefox-48-mac/
  • Like
Reactions: JKAussieSkater, 997440 and Michaelgtrusa
JosephAW said:
What are the system requirements? Still running snow leopard here.
Click to expand...
.....

  1. Support for Mac OSX 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8 ends. Firefox will continue to function on those platforms, but won't receive new features or security updates anymore.
.....
Click to expand...
http://www.ghacks.net/2016/08/01/firefox-48-release/

(thanks @redheeler) Edit to add below from mozilla :
.....

The Firefox version 48 release in August 2016 will be the last Firefox version to receive new feature or security updates on OS X systems that are no longer supported by Apple: OS X 10.6, 10.7 and 10.8. Starting with the Firefox version 49 release in September 2016, Firefox is no longer supported on OS X systems below 10.9.
.....
Click to expand...
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-osx



You'll need Fx ESR at Fx 49 to get security related updates.
.....
Mozilla also offers a Firefox version called Extended Support Release (ESR) for schools, universities, businesses, and others who need help with mass deployments. Firefox ESR releases are maintained for one year, and so Mozilla will continue to support it on OS X 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8 “until mid-2017.” Firefox ESR 45 will be the last version that supports these old OS X versions.
.....
Click to expand...
http://venturebeat.com/2016/04/29/m...t-for-os-x-10-6-10-7-and-10-8-in-august-2016/
 
Last edited:
I can't get over the fact how terrible the interface feels compared to most other OS X apps. As if it never left the Mac OS 9 era. Trashed it immediately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD
n-evo said:
I can't get over the fact how terrible the interface feels compared to most other OS X apps. As if it never left the Mac OS 9 era. Trashed it immediately.
Click to expand...

Even though FF is my secondary browser, I will say you're 100% correct on the GUI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD
multipasser said:
People still use FF? It kept getting slower and slower. Chrome ftw.
Click to expand...

I use all five browsers side-by-side — Safari as my primary, Firefox for one of my work apps, Brave for another, and Chrome and Opera to do various website testing in. It's silly for people to think they must choose and use only a single browser for all web browsing in this day and age. Each has its strengths, and running them side-by-side can improve productivity.
[doublepost=1470231862][/doublepost]
n-evo said:
I can't get over the fact how terrible the interface feels compared to most other OS X apps. As if it never left the Mac OS 9 era. Trashed it immediately.
Click to expand...

I think the Mozilla team realized that and the interface improved drastically many versions ago. It now feels much more "native" on the Mac. Still not 100%, and they bring over some Windows conventions, but overall, it's a huge improvement to how it used to be, and it actually looks and feels pretty good these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orbital~debris, B4U and max2
DoubleU said:
Go to Safari > Preferences > Advanced - Show full website address
Click to expand...

Sadly, that only works for a tiny subset of URLs (for instance, Google Docs). For everything else, it shows the URL in blue but autocompletes the title, which means I can't grab the URL and edit it -- which is a necessary part of how I use a browser.
 
n-evo said:
I can't get over the fact how terrible the interface feels compared to most other OS X apps. As if it never left the Mac OS 9 era. Trashed it immediately.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it looks clunky as...

I think it looks wrong on Windows 10 too. I only think it suits a Linux desktop using GNOME or something.

I like to try out new browsers and personally use Vivaldi nowadays. Feels like a good browser for power users.

I think Opera is finally brought back to decent feature parity with the competition again too after the Chromification, but that's right as they got sold to that fishy Chinese consortium. Cloud password sync to Chinese owners, naah I'll pass...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michaelgtrusa
how do I know if I got the multi-processor version or not? it says not everyone will get it.


FireFox is a great free open-source alternative and I am grateful for it. No tracking or hidden code, or money milking schemes from them. Thanks Mozilla team!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexGraphicD and orbital~debris
MacBH928 said:
how do I know if I got the multi-processor version or not? it says not everyone will get it.


FireFox is a great free open-source alternative and I am grateful for it. No tracking or hidden code, or money milking schemes from them. Thanks Mozilla team!
Click to expand...
.....
Find out if Multi-process support is enabled
multi-process-firefox.png

The easiest way to find out whether multi-process Firefox is enabled is the following one:

  1. Load about:support in the Firefox address bar.
  2. Locate "Multiprocess Windows" under Application Basics near the top.
It should read enabled or disabled, and gives you a direct answer about the state of multi-process functionality in the browser.

Enabling Electrolysis in Firefox
If multi-process support is not enabled yet in Firefox, you may enable it manually. This is true even if you run Firefox 47 Stable as the functionality is already there.

Before you do so, you may want to run compatibility checks for add-ons though. If you don't run add-ons, about 40% of Firefox users don't according to Mozilla, you may skip the step.
.....
Click to expand...
http://www.ghacks.net/2016/07/22/multi-process-firefox/

Edit to Add : You should be aware that Mozilla has acknowledged that multi-processing will increase memory usage. They're limiting its implementation and expecting future improvement.

.....
A common concern is that switching to a multi-processes architecture will dramatically increase Firefox’s memory usage. This is not the case. While multiple processes will have a greater memory footprint than a single process, the impact should be limited: we’re currently seeing multi-process Firefox use 10-20% more memory, however, it still uses half the memory of Chrome with the same sites loaded.

To ensure we don’t consume too much RAM, the first release of e10s will only use a single additional process for web content. We’ll add more processes in subsequent releases, as we become more memory efficient.
.....
Click to expand...
https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2016/04/11/the-why-of-electrolysis/
 
Last edited:
splitpea said:
15 years worth of muscle memory and customizations. Plus I don't trust Google with my privacy and can't use Safari's URL bar.

Speaking of which, anyone know a way to get Safari to fill URLs instead of page titles when auto-completing in El Cap?
Click to expand...

Privacy = XXX?
 
Firefox 48 is a free download for the Mac, though users of older Mac system should be aware that it drops support for OS X versions older than 10.9 Mavericks. [Direct link]
Click to expand...
No it's supported, but is the last one to be. Runs a bit better than version 47 on this old hardware (2006 white iMac).
Firefox 48-10.6.8.png

keysofanxiety said:
Yuck, Chrome is even worse.

Firefox on Windows/Linux, Safari on OS X.
Click to expand...
Or OS X < 10.9. Even now that it's soon to be unsupported it'll still be the most current option. At least until Snow Leopard Webkit makes a comeback, then it's back to Safari.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacTech68 and 997440
Relentless Power said:
I only use Safari on OSX. Firefox is manageable, but sluggish. Chrome struggles as well.
Click to expand...

Technically I agree, but you're comparing base installations. Firefox and Chrome can be configured and tuned to be much better, but Safari is as good as it's gonna get. Like I've said before you can't pay me enough to use Safari.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michaelgtrusa
rshrugged said:
http://www.ghacks.net/2016/07/22/multi-process-firefox/

Edit to Add : You should be aware that Mozilla has acknowledged that multi-processing will increase memory usage. They're limiting its implementation and expecting future improvement.


https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2016/04/11/the-why-of-electrolysis/
Click to expand...
I got the disabled one, how can I get the mutli-core one?


I don't understand RAM and browsers. There were days where I would run Adobe Flash, Photoshop and multi-tab browser on a 768mb. Now 1 browser with text and images will eat 5GB of RAM, how is that even possible? Thats larger than a full DVD quality movie. Heck, its larger than an HD movie in digital format.
 
MacBH928 said:
I got the disabled one, how can I get the mutli-core one?
Click to expand...
I haven't done it but the instructions are HERE. It's very important to read them in full. You need to check if your add-ons are compatible; if you use accessibility features you'll supposedly be prevented from enabling multi-process; etc... As always, make sure you back-up/clone before mucking about. I'm waiting, myself. I have a couple of extensions that aren't, or are unknown to be, compatible.

MacBH928 said:
I don't understand RAM and browsers. There were days where I would run Adobe Flash, Photoshop and multi-tab browser on a 768mb. Now 1 browser with text and images will eat 5GB of RAM, how is that even possible? Thats larger than a full DVD quality movie. Heck, its larger than an HD movie in digital format.
Click to expand...
The OS and Apps use more resources, no doubt. But modern OSs, including OS X, optimize their memory usage far better than the past. Part of that optimization includes actually using the memory available in a smarter way (including overcoming its limits to an extent) rather than let it go to waste. RAM is fast. Some good reading on what the memory pane in Activity Monitor means HERE.

More specifics concerning efficient memory management because of OS X's virtual memory system HERE.
 
Last edited:
multipasser said:
People still use FF? It kept getting slower and slower. Chrome ftw.
Click to expand...

No kidding, though maybe this will help. Probably won't fix ugly much though.
[doublepost=1470344771][/doublepost]
splitpea said:
... and can't use Safari's URL bar.

Speaking of which, anyone know a way to get Safari to fill URLs instead of page titles when auto-completing in El Cap?
Click to expand...

Yeah, Apple can't be trusted much for UI/UX anymore either. We all have to watch as they destroy what was once great, chunk by chunk. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back