Filed under: Internet, Windows, Mozilla, Freeware
Browser tip of the day: Faster Firefox Builds
Today we've got the best kind of tip for you - how to make your Firefox browser faster. Now, this one's not for the faint of heart, but it is completely doable, and I've personally been using it for months with no problems. What am I talking about? MOOX builds. MOOX is a developer that takes the Firefox source code, and makes optimized builds for different classes of processor. These builds can be installed on top of your current "officially" downloaded version, and contain all of the same source code; the only difference is that certain compiler switches are set to take advantage of technologies that are present in different processors, resulting in a browser that runs optimally fast for your machine, rather than one that is "one size fits all".
Here's how to take full advantage of MOOX builds without risking your current Firefox setup.
2. Make sure to read the M descriptions, which describe the differences between each build, and which processors they are meant for.
3. Navigate to the Firefox builds page, and download the M build that is appropriate for your CPU. We recommend sticking with the release builds.
4. Take a complete copy of your Firefox directory (usually C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\) and set it aside. This is simply so that you can backtrack if anything goes wrong.
5. Run the MOOX installer executable, which will ask you where to unzip the files to. Since you already have a copy of your current Firefox directory, simply unzip MOOX to your Firefox folder (making sure of course that your browser isn't currently running).
6. You're done. Start Firefox and note the icon has turned from blue and orange to two-tone blue. Also note the added zip in your browser's step. Now buy me a beer. (Okay, buy MOOX one!)
MOOX tries to keep up with the Firefox build releases, but this is only a hobby for him, so sometimes the MOOX builds are somewhat behind. Until recently his site said he'd be taking a short hiatus from making builds, however thankfully he appears to have had time to create 1.0.6 builds.



Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
wormeyman said 4:57PM on 8-02-2005
Moox's builds are not faster that has already been proven with speed comparisons i just wish i could find the link :(
Reply
tevetorbes said 5:52PM on 8-02-2005
#1:
I think you are talking about this link:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html
The test claims that the MOOX build loses in all but one of the tests administered, beaten by the non-optimized windows build nearly every time.
Reply
Jason Clarke said 6:02PM on 8-02-2005
Ahh, yes. I suggest trying the MOOX build appropriate for your processor notwithstanding these results. Unfortunately, given the errors reported for MOOX builds on the howtocreate comparison, I'd venture to guess the wrong build or a bad build was being used. MOOX builds are faster on my computer. YMMV.
Reply
Varg said 8:28PM on 8-02-2005
I _seriously_ doubt that a build optimized for AMD to use SSE would be slower. It might not be faster but definently not slower.
Reply
John Doey said 9:03PM on 8-02-2005
Agreed. If your expecting these builds to be measureably faster your not going to be happy. They have never been shown to be faster overall in any benchmark. Trust me if it was possible to see significantly faster startup, rendering etc we would all be using them.
IMHO the speedups are just wishful thinking, but hey if it makes you "feel" like its faster than no harm done.
Reply
Benny said 11:04PM on 8-02-2005
Well you can at least "feel" like it's faster knowing that its optimized for your processor.
Reply
Chris Meller said 10:18PM on 8-03-2005
I certainly haven't done any *real* tests. All I did was install the thing and start it up. It's my considered opinion that it at least APPEARS to load more quickly than the default Firefox. I guarantee you that it is not slower, as these tests indicate. I also do not get any errors. If the author had read the MOOX site, they'd have realized this is likely the wrong build, as suggested already.
Reply