<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:series="http://unfoldingneurons.com/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Close Firefox Daily</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pcmech.com/article/close-firefox-daily/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pcmech.com/article/close-firefox-daily/</link>
	<description>Helping Normal People Get Their Geek On</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 13:07:33 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://www.pcmech.com/article/close-firefox-daily/comment-page-1/#comment-31674</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 06:03:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pcmech.com/article/close-firefox-daily/#comment-31674</guid>
		<description>Wow, then try out Firefox 3.7 (agreed I&#039;m posting 6 months in the future) but it&#039;s gone from 3.0 (a giant leap from 2.0) up to 3.5 (about ten times faster) to 3.6 and 3.7 in testing (about fifty times faster - subjectively). Running tests on my system show some 150 times (not percent) speed increases, and the lowest increase I found was 4 times faster.  

I can handle the maths for a 400% increase, but  times is just a little mindblowing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, then try out Firefox 3.7 (agreed I&#8217;m posting 6 months in the future) but it&#8217;s gone from 3.0 (a giant leap from 2.0) up to 3.5 (about ten times faster) to 3.6 and 3.7 in testing (about fifty times faster &#8211; subjectively). Running tests on my system show some 150 times (not percent) speed increases, and the lowest increase I found was 4 times faster.  </p>
<p>I can handle the maths for a 400% increase, but  times is just a little mindblowing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jah</title>
		<link>http://www.pcmech.com/article/close-firefox-daily/comment-page-1/#comment-8697</link>
		<dc:creator>Jah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:13:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pcmech.com/article/close-firefox-daily/#comment-8697</guid>
		<description>good tip. sometimes it really gets out of hand. i am currently switching between FF2 and FF3 beta. I am a tab fiend and leave tabs open or just dont wanna bookmark them(I know I would never get back to the page, lol). With around 20 or 30 tabs open, FF2 consumes about 200-350MB memory(I have quite a few addons) and in FF3 with the same tabs open, it takes 100MB. It could be that half my addons are disabled but FF2 is still a major memory hog. Good news is that pretty soon, one will not have to worry about it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good tip. sometimes it really gets out of hand. i am currently switching between FF2 and FF3 beta. I am a tab fiend and leave tabs open or just dont wanna bookmark them(I know I would never get back to the page, lol). With around 20 or 30 tabs open, FF2 consumes about 200-350MB memory(I have quite a few addons) and in FF3 with the same tabs open, it takes 100MB. It could be that half my addons are disabled but FF2 is still a major memory hog. Good news is that pretty soon, one will not have to worry about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
