Firefox is a memory hog - Can I do anything about it?

[ScottRNelson]

Switch to Ubuntu.

I could get by with Linux, but my wife can barely use Windows and it would be extremely difficult to try to teach her how to use a different OS.

So thanks, but no thanks.

 

[berth]

This is totally inaccurate. It depends on the use of the computer. A lot of people don't need more than 8GB. Saying memory is cheap also depends on the person and situation. I will never purchase additional RAM for my laptop even though it has 4GB because I see it as a waste of money as it rarely uses up over 3GB.

In computer terms, memory is (usually) the cheapest thing that can be done to improve the users experience on a computer.

My wife uses a 6 year old (I think?) MacBook with 8G of RAM and is perfectly content with it. She runs essentially Chrome and Excel on it.

Mind, MacOS is also very aggressive at striving to reduce both overall memory pressure, power usage, and even disk usage today. I don't know what, if anything, Windows does in that regard nowadays. MacOS is mostly used in laptops today (plus iOS in the phones and tablets, there's crossover at the kernel level), so resources are always tight.

Modern Chromebooks (a custom Linux kernel running, essentially (and only), Chrome) ship with 2-4Gs of memory. I think even on these 2G can be tight if you're using any of the advanced web apps (Office 365, etc.).

If 4G works for you, then stick with it, for sure. I'm as much a curmudgeon when it comes to computers as the next guy, having spent far too much money over the years on rapidly obsolete computer hardware.

The lawn I want those whippersnappers off of is broad, and deep.

But memory, yes. Memory is the most efficient bang/buck thing you can add to a computer that you're unhappy with to make it perform better (unless you're ot of space for your photo's and videos, that's just simple storage).

My NeXTStation shipped with 8M back in the day. It was borderline usable. I quickly boosted it up to 20M to make the machine much more usable. (And, yea, that was costly -- probably $400 at the time, which is why I didn't upgrade it to 32M. [Yes, I spent $500 to upgrade my 128K Mac to 512K back in the day as well.])

 

[rodr]

Agreed that more memory is an easy solution. Upgrading to SSD will probably speed things up a bunch also.

I could get by with Linux, but my wife can barely use Windows and it would be extremely difficult to try to teach her how to use a different OS.

My wife is, shall we say, not very computer savvy. I put Linux Mint on her laptop and she's fine with it. It's all about the apps, not how you run them. Honestly I think Windows is more complicated, always getting in your way with forced upgrades and shit.

 

[byke]

SSD has always made the biggest improvement in performance on my computers over the years.

 

[WorldSBK]

Agreed that more memory is an easy solution. Upgrading to SSD will probably speed things up a bunch also.

My wife is, shall we say, not very computer savvy. I put Linux Mint on her laptop and she's fine with it. It's all about the apps, not how you run them. Honestly I think Windows is more complicated, always getting in your way with forced upgrades and shit.

Sure. Installing more memory and SSD is an easy solution that works until Windows and other processes install more and more useless bloatware on your computer.

With Linux, you install what you need, not a boat-loaded of craps that Windows installs for you.

Glad to hear you gave it a try with Linux
.

 

[NorCalBusa]

Agreed that more memory is an easy solution. Upgrading to SSD will probably speed things up a bunch also.

Just plug and play an SSD? Or do you have to move programs files and re-engineer other stuff?

 

[NorCalBusa]

Sure. Installing more memory and SSD is an easy solution that works until Windows and other processes install more and more useless bloatware on your computer.

With Linux, you install what you need, not a boat-loaded of craps that Windows installs for you.

Glad to hear you gave it a try with Linux
.

Hmm, I'm making a new word based on this:

bloat·load
/ˈblōtˌlōd/
noun: bloat-load

- the useless and unwanted software that accompanies new computers, phones and tablets.
"a bloatload of apps"
informal

 

[ScottRNelson]

Just plug and play an SSD? Or do you have to move programs files and re-engineer other stuff?

You have to specify what goes on it that needs the faster access.

Back when I used to work, I had a 12 processor (Xeon) 24-thread computer that I used for big compiles and simulations. Adding an SSD pretty much doubled the speed of that machine. It took some configuring to get it to work correctly. I wouldn't expect to even be able to tell a difference adding an SSD to my home computer, though.

 

[NorCalBusa]

You have to specify what goes on it that needs the faster access.

Back when I used to work, I had a 12 processor (Xeon) 24-thread computer that I used for big compiles and simulations. Adding an SSD pretty much doubled the speed of that machine. It took some configuring to get it to work correctly. I wouldn't expect to even be able to tell a difference adding an SSD to my home computer, though.

- Everything is on the native c: hard drive (as built by Dell). Office 16/365, Adobe, all others are all installed on c: and data files are in various folders in My Docs (on c.

- So I bolt in/connect the SSD, boot the machine, I'd expect it recognizes the new drive and handshakes with it. ?

- Now what? What gets moved and how? What should go to the SSD (programs?) and what should stay (data?), both? Some?

I seem to recall you can't just Move program files, some taller management is involved like Reinstall?

 

[ScottRNelson]

I seem to recall you can't just Move program files, some taller management is involved like Reinstall?

Ask somebody who says you should get an SSD. I stopped working in 2015 and installed the SSD a year or two before that. Can't remember anything about that sort of thing anymore. But it requires more work than plugging in a few wires and rebooting, that's all I know for sure.

 

[berth]

It all depends on what you're trying to improve with the SSD.

When most folks talk about the SSD, they talk about replacing their main drive with one, vs simply supplementing the system with an external one.

For certain use cases, the external SSD can be an improvement, but, honestly, that's only if you're moving a lot of data around (say photos and videos) on the drive.

With your OS, libraries, and applications on your legacy drive, you won't see much of a benefit from an external SSD.

Now, you can install the OS and such on the external, and make it your "boot" drive, thus gaining the advantages, but then it's an external drive that you need to drag around with your laptop. If the laptop is really just a desktop and doesn't move much, this isn't a big deal. But if it's ported, it's one more dangly bit to manage.

There are SSDs that would work as a drop in replacement for the drive in your laptop, plugs in to the same cables, fits in the same space. I do not think there is a heat issue with SSDs vs a normal hard drive.

Swapping one out, mind, is an exercise for the reader as it would involved opening the laptop, etc. This may or may not be straightforward (depends on the laptop). I'd google a video for you model and see how much of a pain it is.

It would also require you to have a backup of your system so you can restore the drive (as well as a mechanism to restore it).

Many folks install the SSD as an external drive, install the OS on it, then transfer their files and applications over manually. After that's done, they install it in to their machine.

Unfortunately, I am not the person that can detail the operation beyond these high level steps, I haven't touched Windows in any real way in over 10 years. On my Mac, this process was straightforward.

If you machine has 4G of RAM, you will likely notice an improvement with an SSD. Since you have so little RAM, you have little file buffer. When you load applications and such from disk, you pay the price for those loads each and every time (vs a machine with excess RAM which can buffer those files for you, but you'd still experience the load the first time you accessed the file). With the SSD, those load times should be noticeably reduced.

Another thing folks due is they will get an empty external drive enclosure, install the SSD in their machine, install a fresh OS, and put the existing drive in to the empty enclosure and then plug it in. This way all of your legacy data is on the external drive, readily available to transferring or using in place. I can't speak as to whether applications will work properly from the external drive or not. They should, but I don't know, and some applications may not.

If you can live with that, that's likely the fastest way to upgrade to an SSD.

 

[rodr]

Ask somebody who says you should get an SSD. I stopped working in 2015 and installed the SSD a year or two before that. Can't remember anything about that sort of thing anymore. But it requires more work than plugging in a few wires and rebooting, that's all I know for sure.

There are utilities to move Windows from your hard drive to the SSD, where your intent is to completely replace the drive (it usually is). However they seem to be finicky. The SSD vendor will generally give guidance for that.

Last year I did this drive replacement on a laptop that dual booted Win 10 and Linux, and ended up having to completely reinstall Windows from installation media. The license was still good as it recognized the hardware. The result was fine, it just took a while.