firebirdForum: Apps Topic: firebird started by: juan Posted by juan on Dec. 03 2003,01:48
I installed firebird but when running it , it runs very slowly. I don't know if it might be due either to my internet conection or my hardware. I do have a dial up 56k conection and my machine is an old Pentium 75 133 mhz with 32 MB ram. with a linux partition of 500 MB.juan Posted by cbagger01 on Dec. 03 2003,03:07
Other than Dillo and Links, you could try and see if installing the Opera web browser will help your browsing speed.I have used the scripts mentioned in the post below to install Opera on a Pentium 60Mhz PC with 40MB of RAM. I don't know if it will work with only 32 MB of RAM but you are welcome to try them out and see if it works: < http://damnsmalllinux.org/cgi-bin....=2;t=90 > Posted by John on Dec. 03 2003,04:20
You know, Links-Hached is really a capable browser. I often find myself using it as my first choice before Dillo and Firebird. There are curtain things I really like about it, like the way it does text search, the ability to change user agents, being able to see header info, and also the speed of switching from source to rendered html again, and it renders better than Dillo.Dillo is by far the fastest though, it makes all other graphic browsers seem sluggish in my opinion. Can you tell that I'm a fan of lite gui apps? Posted by Gilbert Ashley on Dec. 03 2003,14:35
Dillo is definitely the fastest, and I use it sometimes for local file viewing, but its' renedering is quite poor, so I use Opera7.22 for online browsing. I have a 323MB 233mmx and Opera does great. It takes a few seconds to load but has good speed for browsing. Opera 5 and 6 are faster but quite buggy, although 6.12 is better. I like Opera 7 because it has good cookie management, history function and a built-in mail client. There's another small(650K) and fairly functional browser called browsex that works pretty good- better rendering than Dillo but not very configurable.
Posted by Gilbert Ashley on Dec. 03 2003,14:36
Juan, forgot to say, be sure you are using a swap file, at least 8-16MB. I use a 256MB swap partition share with my other linux distros.
Posted by John on Dec. 03 2003,14:59
The smallest Browsex 2.x binary I've seen is 3.9M. I can't seem to find the source anywhere. Posted by jdblockmd on Dec. 03 2003,23:16
I have had the same problem with firebird. I am running DSL on a Toshiba Satellite 225cds with pentium 133 and 32Mb. Of course the smaller browsers run faster because of the lower resource usage. When I used to run win95, IE would run very slowly also due to its size. Firebird is a big app with lots of resource requirements more so than Dillo, Links. Not sure about Opera, but I figure that would run the same as firebird. The drawbacks to dillo and links is they cannot run new java protocols like java 2 which some web sites utilize. If anyone has any ideas of how to add these to links I'd love to hear it.
Posted by cbagger01 on Dec. 04 2003,01:15
On an old computer, I would rank the following speed performance:Dillo = fastest Opera 6.12 = fastest full-featured browser Firebird = slower than Opera 6.12 but still good Opera 7.22 = much slower due to all the newly added bloatware Mozilla = slow enough to the point of being unusable FYI, both Firebird and Opera have built-in javascript support. Full Java support can be added to Opera as a plug-in. Go to their web site for details: < http://www.opera.com/linux/docs/plugins/install/#java > Posted by John on Dec. 04 2003,03:50
Straying off subject, but I thought Galeon of the Gnome1 days was a very good browser and was more responsive than Firebird.
Posted by Gilbert Ashley on Dec. 05 2003,09:03
On my 32MB RAM 233MMX even Opera 7.22 runs much faster than firebird. I like firebird but just can't wait so long for response, otherwise I would probablz use it. Galeon in older gnome is quite comparable to firebird, very elegant looking and great features, but it requires mozilla to also be installed as it uses mozillas rendering engine. At least firebird stands alone.Sorry John, you're right about the size on browsex. It unzips to about 9.5 MB. Better in that case ti use Opera. The nice thing about browsex id that it's a single binary, can be run from anywhere without installing. If I had more RAM I would use firebird, even though it still is a bit buggy. But Opera 7.22 also has a good mail client and a pretty good download manager that saves all the info and allows resuming/retransferring of files. I still think Opera is the best all-round browser for linux. Posted by curious on Dec. 05 2003,14:15
I know it requires bunch kde stuff, but I have run Konqueror on my older computer (75mhz pentium running Knoppix cd with fluxbox desktop). Takes forever to load Konqueror, but it surfs much faster than Firebird on DSL. By way Mozilla was unusable on same setup. Konqueror has come long way. I dual boot win95 with DSL on this same 75mhz computer on 300mb partition. I dont have much room so installed IE5.5 (really slow on old computer) then CrazyBrowser, then ieradicated IE5.5 to save space. Enough IE files left for CrazyBrowser to run. Smaller total install than Kmeleon. Ok and about as fast as Kmeleon, but I like Kmeleon better. (In winXP on fast computer, I like CrazyBrowser better.) Oddly in windows on old machine, full blown Mozilla acts like Konqueror on linux on old machine. Takes forever to load, but surfs fairly well thereafter. Now recently I have been experimenting with BeOS5 (download about size of DSL). Comes with Netpositive browser which is about like links-hacked on DSL, even a little less advanced however it is smoother when scrolling. There are very few browser options for beos. Pretty much just an old beta of Opera3.62 and a very slow port of an old version of Mozilla. Recently ran across an unofficial port of Firebird 0.7 for it, said to run reasonably fast, but so far I cant get it installed and no documentation and no answers on beos boards. Hoping it would be faster than Firebird on DSL. |