Speed up your browser

[Tugmistress]

Here's how to speed up youre firefox 10x faster

1. Type "about:config" into the address bar and hit enter. Scroll down and look for the following entries:

2. Alter the entries as follows:

Set "network.http.pipelining" to "true"
Set "network.http.proxy.pipelining" to "true"

set "network.http.pipelining.maxrequests" to some number like 30. This means it will make 30 requests at once.

3. Lastly right-click anywhere and select New-> Integer. Name it "nglayout.initialpaint.delay" and set its value to "0". This value is the amount of time the browser waits before it acts on information it recieves.

the link for IE is http://www.regxplor.com/tweak11.html

[NickInTheNorth]

or even better simply install fasterfox from http://fasterfox.mozdev.org/ which does it all for you with a nice gui interface

[Riffman]

I don't really see how it needs to be any faster? Pages load within a click anyway.

[gollach]

set "network.http.pipelining.maxrequests" to some number like 30. This means it will make 30 requests at once.

I think that's a bit selfish. What you are doing here is increasing the number of requests you send to the server that holds the data you want. I wonder how many people have to do this before the server falls over and nobody gets what they want?

[Tugmistress]

I think that's a bit selfish. What you are doing here is increasing the number of requests you send to the server that holds the data you want. I wonder how many people have to do this before the server falls over and nobody gets what they want?

it's a choice not an order? nobody is forcing you to follow it, but personally it has made a difference to my speed and i changed mine to 8 from 4.

[gollach]

it's a choice not an order? nobody is forcing you to follow it, but personally it has made a difference to my speed and i changed mine to 8 from 4.

I know that you're not forcing anyone to do this. I am simply pointing out that there is a downside to one of your suggested changes. In making a difference to your own speed you can affect more than just other people who are trying to access the same site as you. For example, would also affect people accessing any other site sharing hosting on the same server because you are asking for a larger slice of the bandwidth available to the server. In my opinion that is selfish.

[NickInTheNorth]

a well managed server will limit the requests from each client

[hotrod4]

I know that you're not forcing anyone to do this. I am simply pointing out that there is a downside to one of your suggested changes. In making a difference to your own speed you can affect more than just other people who are trying to access the same site as you. For example, would also affect people accessing any other site sharing hosting on the same server because you are asking for a larger slice of the bandwidth available to the server. In my opinion that is selfish.

Dont see why its selfish.Someone comes on with info that is in the public domain informing people on how to speed up their browser.As they are sharing the info how can that be selfish ;)
Not everyone will want a faster browser so its all down to choice, the poster was just passing on the info being helpful.
Personally I use faster fox but thanks for the info,I appreciate not retaliate!!!!

[Metalattakk]

Dont see why its selfish.

Obviously not.

It's selfish in that using this method forces the destination server to accept many more simultaneous requests from your browser than industry standards recommend.

Effectively, many instances of this could cause the server to fail, meaning that for a slightly faster browsing experience, you are happy to deny everyone else their slightly slower browsing experience. That is selfish is it not?

(Gollach explained this already. :roll:)

Although I have to say I haven't found any online documentation that mentions this scenario, nor any indication that NickInTheNorth is wrong in his statement that well-managed servers would limit connections. That for me seems an entirely sensible thing to assume.

Any well-run server would also be running an intrusion detection/prevention system, and perhaps continued multiple requests would be flagged as a DOS and get your IP banned from that particular server.

Is it worth the slightly faster experience?

[NickInTheNorth]

using fasterfox you can set it to optimised (fasterfox default setting) which whilst speeding up the individuals browser is within the RFC specs for browser performance. That I think is perfectly fair.

To use some of the faster settings may cause problems and should be carefully considered.

[NickInTheNorth]

I should also add that pipelining can be beneficial to the operation of the internet as a whole by reducing the number of TCP/IP packets required to fill a request.

Prefetching can be limited on a server by including the following text in robots.txt


User-agent: Fasterfox
Disallow: /

[Rheghead]

If someone wants to be all holier than thou, why don't you do the generous thing and slow your browsers down for the sake of the rest of virtual humanity.:roll::lol:

[Metalattakk]

By the same token, it'd perhaps be a good idea for some people to disconnect from the internet entirely, thus saving the rest of us from their inane opinions.

;)

[NickInTheNorth]

or perhaps it would be better still if people knocking a genuine and helpful suggestion made themselves fully aware of all the facts surrounding the issue of "browser speed" before offering unwarranted criticism.

[Metalattakk]

or perhaps it would be better still if people knocking a genuine and helpful suggestion made themselves fully aware of all the facts surrounding the issue of "browser speed" before offering unwarranted criticism.

Perhaps so. In the interests of the truth, can you either confirm or deny that the following recommendation could cause problems with server stability and would breach the RFC standard settings?



set "network.http.pipelining.maxrequests" to some number like 30. This means it will make 30 requests at once.

[NickInTheNorth]

From memory the relavant RFC is 2616 - dealing with HTTP/1.1

It allows a client which uses HTTP/1.1 to establish a persistent connection. Once such a client has established a persistent connection it is permitted to pipeline it's requests. That is send multiple requests on the one connection without waiting for the first request to be fulfilled first. This means that the server will need to deal with less concurrent users han was the case with non persistent connections using HTTP/1.0

In short pipelining should not of itself cause any problems server side. And allowing a pipelining figure of 30 is not (as far as I remember) in any way "in breach of standards".

[hotrod4]

metalattak

Not really.Lots of people "tweak" things above manufacturers standards. If they didnt then there wouldnt be any other browser made other than IE.
After all Firefox,Opera etc is faster than IE does that mean firefox users are selfish to want a better browsing experience than those on IE?

There is lots of ways to speed up connections beyond windows preset limits,after all how many people have items and just leave the presets alone without adjusting it to personal preferences? not many I bet.

I do agree with you though maybe more people should disconnect so we wouldnt have to read inane comments ;)

[NickInTheNorth]

try reading and understanding what actually happens. The number of requests does not increase, nor are they simultaneous. They are sequential. All that happens is that a second third fourth etc request is made before the previous request is fulfilled.The server still deals with requests in the order the requests are made. Using one persistent connection, and reducing the number of data packets sent to fulfill a series of requests. Overall LOWERING the total internet bandwidth consumed.

[Metalattakk]

NickInTheNorth -

Thanks for explaining the ins-and-outs in such straightforward terms. After scouring the interwebnet for ages I couldn't find it put as succinctly as you just have.