Re:Show HN: Save Memory in Google Chrome
by tomkarlo on Monday March 11, 2013 @01:05PM
(#5358059)
You don't open 100 apps on your computer and then complain about memory usage. Running 100 tabs at the same time, all of which may be running live JS processes, is about the same. It's a perfectly valid usage pattern but it's also going to eat a lot of memory. It's not like driving with your parking brake on, but it's like loading your car up with its maximum passenger capacity and then complaining that it's accelerating more slowly.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Show HN: Save Memory in Google Chrome
by kintamanimatt on Monday March 11, 2013 @01:18PM
(#5358152)
I've done it before with earlier versions of Firefox on a system with fewer resources that yielded a substantially lower memory footprint.
It is very possible to do a lot with less memory.
It's possible, but there are always competing goals - speed, security, reliability, features, memory usage. When capacity on one is growing quickly (and cheaply), it's not surprising it doesn't get the same priority as some of the others. In particular, I'm not sure how many extra users you'd get by reducing memory footprint versus adding features.
But this has been discussed ad nauseam, and it's unproductive to keep complaining about it. The fact should be obvious, at least by now, that sandboxing uses more resources. If you're fine with that, great! If not, do something to fix it or use a different browser.