Firefox vs Konqueror vs Epiphany

[cryogenic]

I'm running FC3 and have all three browsers installed on my system...From what I've found, Konqueror is infinitely faster than Firefox...Epiphany seems to be every bit as snappy as Konqueror, but Firefox justseems to be laggy and take forever to switch tabs, redraw pages, etc.I've tested under both Gnome/Metacity and KDE. Same deal on both.Anyone else seem to think Konqueror is markedly faster than Firefox?

On a side note, Konqueror as a file manager seems a LOT more robust than Gnome's file manager (can't remember what it's called)

 

[American Zombie]

Do you have pipelining enabled on Firefox?

 

[NetRyder]

That's strange. I do remember that Konquerer and Epiphany were slightly quicker than Firefox under Linux, but I don't recall Firefox being laggy at all.

Have you tried to look for any optimized Firefox builds for Linux (try Google...I haven't checked)? I use Moox's M3 builds (optimized for the SSE2 instruction set available on P4's, P-M's, A64's etc), and it definitely feels snappier than the official build on my 2.4GHz P4.

P.S. Gnome's default file manager is called Nautilus.

Edit: Sorry. Should have mentioned that Moox's builds are for Windows. That's the reason I asked you to check if there are any similar optimized builds for Linux.

 

[X-Istence]

The reason why Firefox might seem less snappy than the other two on even a modern system, is the fact that one uses XUL to then translate that into GTK2 which then displays it on screen, Ephiphany and Konq don't have that. Also, Firefox has a bigger memory foot print.

If you run KDE then Konq will always be extremely fast, as it uses Qt which is allready loaded. Ephiphany will be just a bit slower, and Firefox a lot slower. I noticed that, until i switched to gnome as my desktop management thingie of choice, and Firefox suddenly started within 3 seconds again, and it seemed to be a lot faster. I guess it all depends on the libraries that are loaded on the system.

 

[cryogenic]

Well, I normally use Gnome as opposed to KDE. I did notice that Konq was stupid fast under KDE, which makes sense as you said that QT is already resident in system memory. I even tried FF under Windowmaker and it was a *little* faster, but since WM doesn't populate your menus with installed apps like KDE and Gnome do, I ditched it quickly. At any rate, under Gnome it seems that Epiphany is faster than Firefox.. and under KDE, Konq is faster than Firefox. I think the problem is the simple fact that FF isn't coded specifically for one or the other so it gives up a little bit of speed there. As of right now, I'm toying with both KDE and Gnome and I can't decide which I like better. Konqueror > Nautilus by a LONG shot. However, Gnome uses file-roller by default for archives, KDE uses ark which is complete trash in my book. Gnome has much nicer themes and the overall layout is better. Plus, the dock apps are more plentiful. FF doesn't seem to be much faster in one over the other... plus I have about 10 extensions loaded so that may be choking it down a little bit too.

 

[X-Istence]

I personally noticed Firefox being a lot faster under gnome than in KDE, but then again that is not an extensive test.

I prefer Ephiphany though, it is a no frills browser, which just works.

 

[Tuffgong4]

Have you tried to look for any optimized Firefox builds for Linux (try Google...I haven't checked)? I use Moox's M3 builds (optimized for the SSE2 instruction set available on P4's, P-M's, A64's etc), and it definitely feels snappier than the official build on my 2.4GHz P4.

I was going to start a thread asking about this and I hope I don't make the thread starter mad by saying this but I think Moox's m3 builds have made my firefox slower. I just feel a lot of things got messed up when I installed it

 

[cryogenic]

I personally noticed Firefox being a lot faster undergnome than in KDE, but then again that is not an extensive test.

I prefer Ephiphany though, it is a no frills browser, which just works.

I have to agree, though.. Epiphany is wicked fast under gnome and runsflawlessly. It's a no-fuss no-frills browser that works. Pages loadinstantly. I honestly think that FF runs better under Windows than itdoes under Linux. I think Epiphany and Konq are kinda like Safari andare faster for the same reasons.. they're coded specifically for gnomeor KDE just as Safari was designed specifically for OSX. I wouldn'tmind seeing a few extensions for Epiphany or Konqueror, though.

 

[vern]

I don't use any of the other browsers aside from Firefox so I can't really comment. But I do however notice that although the Windows version of Firefox is more responsive than it's Linux counterpart, it suffers from bad memory management ... at least in my experience. Firefox on my Windows desktop could be open for days and in that time, it's memory consumption balloons to over 100 megs. The Linux versions of Firefox doesn't seem to suffer the same ailment.

 

[cryogenic]

In my experience, Firefox sits at around 55-60MB of RAM on my Linux box... On Windows, it just keeps sucking down the RAM until you finally look at it and go "HOLY JESUS!" and close it. I've seen it well past 100MB on several occasions in Windows.. never so on Linux. However, vern.. you do owe it to yourself to try out Epiphany under Gnome or Konqueror under KDE and see just how much more snappy they are than Firefox.

 

[j79zlr]

I refuse to use KDE, so I can't really compare Konqueror, but I do use Gnome and Firefox runs just as fast as Mozilla, Opera, or Epiphany. I am using compiled software optimized for my P4 though, I am assuming you're using binary packages/rpm's since you are on FC?

You can always compile FF yourself, be forewarned, it takes a long time.

The main reason I don't like Epiphany is that it lacks customization, there isn't a lot you can do about what goes where.

 

[NetRyder]

I guess it's a matter of personal preference like anything else.
Epiphany and Konquerer were a little too barebones for me. Firefox's extensibility is the primary reason I use it under Windows. Some of the stuff I do in Firefox on a regular basis were just not possible with the other two browsers.

 

[Xie]

While my box was borked and was surfing w/ Knoppix I noticed that Konquerer was blazing fast under KDE.

 

[cryogenic]

I do agree that in fact Epiphany is barebones, but it works pretty well. I still think Firefox is overally the best browser, mostly because of all the extensions and themes available for it. It does seem that the more plugins you add, the slower it gets. I have a habit of loading it down with a fair number of plugins, so I think that's part of the reason why it bogs down so much. As far as KDE vs Gnome, I like Gnome's layout a LOT better plus the ability to use whatever WM I choose. However, KDE's configuration tools are better than Gnome's. Needless to say, I may have to try compiling Firefox myself and see if it makes any difference. I'll probably have to uninstall the old one since FC3 seems to put it in a nonstandard location (same with Thunderbird).

 

[vern]

I have tried both Epiphany and Konqueror, but working on Windows most of the day, I like having the same environment when I do use Linux. I also prefer Gnome over KDE, so any day to day browsing will exclude Konqueror. Epiphany although nice and light doesn't really have all the features I want. The responsiveness gained by using another browser is just not enough to warrant any kind of switch aside from the occasional dip.

 

[NetRyder]

I have tried both Epiphany and Konqueror, but working on Windows most of the day, I like having the same environment when I do use Linux. I also prefer Gnome over KDE, so any day to day browsing will exclude Konqueror. Epiphany although nice and light doesn't really have all the features I want. The responsiveness gained by using another browser is just not enough to warrant any kind of switch aside from the occasional dip.

This is exactly how I feel too.

 

[cryogenic]

I agree... While it's nice that Epiphany is so much faster, I miss nothaving the extensions that firefox offers. I just wish Firefox could beoptimized in the same way that Epiphany is. It's kinda the same waywith KDE vs Gnome... KDE has its advantages but they don't outweigh thepro's of Gnome itself. I gave KDE a shot just to see what it's like andwhile it's neat, I'll still be going back to Gnome + Firefox. Obviously my intention wasn't to start any sort of wars here.. I wasjust trying to figure out if I was imagining things or if I was reallynoticing that Konq & Epiphany were that much faster. I agree thatoverall, it's not worth it. I suppose for mom & pop checking theiremail and such, Epiphany and Konqueror will do great.

 

[NetRyder]

cryo, did you try looking for an optimized build like I suggested earlier? It might help.

 

[cryogenic]

I haven't been home yet to test it out.. I'll be home tomorrow and I'll try that out and see how it works. Worst case scenario, I'll just compile from source. The only thing that sucks is because FC3 puts Firefox in a weird location, I'll have to uninstall the rpm version and install my own.