I restarted my computer after the power went out. Once it rebooted I found out that all of my bookmarks in Firefox are now gone. Even more troublesome is that now every time I open it, all of the toolbars I disabled keep reappearing.
File corrupted by having the bookmark file being manipulated at the same time as the power outage?? Look to see where on the HDD bookmarks are stored in Firefox (I don't know).
yeah, firefox is very weak to power outtages. i can't really help much since i use linkstash to organize my bookmarks, and even before that i always keep backups of them.
If you're using Windows XP, then you should be able to find Firefox's bookmarks here:C:\Documents and Settings\[username]\Application Data\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\********.default\In that folder, Firefox keeps your current bookmarks file (bookmarks.html) and a backup copy of that file (bookmarks.bak).In addition, there should be a subfolder there named "bookmarkbackups", where Firefox keeps several recent daily backups of your bookmarks file. So, just figure out which one of those is the most recent non-corrupt one, and use it to replace bookmarks.html in the parent directory. And save a backup copy somewhere else, while you're at it.As for the other problem, maybe reinstalling Firefox would help. New version came out yesterday anyway.
Valodim said, October 20, 2007, 05:34:15 amyou could also use opera. I have never experienced a loss of bookmarks, not even open tabs Opera eats memory like there's no tomorrow. Thanks for the input y'all.
Valodim said, October 20, 2007, 05:34:15 amyou could also use opera. I have never experienced a loss of bookmarks, not even open tabs I was wondering who was going to suggest that.
It's always me. Urza, Planeswalker said, October 20, 2007, 08:09:46 amOpera eats memory like there's no tomorrow. It does evidently use slightly more memory, that's right. And you care... why? Does your RAM usage ever go above 80% while you aren't doing any really resource-intensive stuff, like gaming? Unless you have 512 or less, the ram usage of applications is hardly an issue nowadays, besides windows' memory and swap managment has become quite acceptable with the years Ah well. Not going to argue much here, just sayin'.
actually, apps like firefox and opera are built on the idea that unused ram is wasted ram, so they eat ram on purpose, after all, not many of us use critical applications while browsing the web.
Renzo [a.k.a. Shin Orochi Sachavaca] said, October 20, 2007, 10:55:32 pmIt's funny, I switched to Opera because -for me- it seems like Firefox is the resource hog biatch. Opera eats much more RAM than Firefox.
but, does it really has any negative effects ? i have got firefox using over 500 mbs of ram (ona 1 gb machine), and it does not affect the performance at all.
Recently,Firefox started crashing whenever opening some specific websites (GamingW,for example),so i had to switch to Opera.Still crashes after updating,disabled all plugins,flash player,etc. but still doesn't work.Opera is pretty good,but it's widgets are nowhere near as good as firefox plugins,and it runs faster than firefox,although it does use more ram
Yeah, that's something weird too. Opera uses about 80,000-120,000 memory, and Firefox around 40,000-60,000 most of the time. But thing is Opera seems to be faster. Which why is apparently a complete mystery to me.I like both, and use both though, so I'm not complaining either way. I just use one or the other depending on which sites won't work properly on the respective browsers.
Siu Wong said, October 22, 2007, 04:33:47 pmYeah, that's something weird too. Opera uses about 80,000-120,000 memory, and Firefox around 40,000-60,000 most of the time. But thing is Opera seems to be faster. Which why is apparently a complete mystery to me....completely different rendering engine? K.O.D said, October 22, 2007, 03:38:23 pmOpera is pretty good,but it's widgets are nowhere near as good as firefox plugins,and it runs faster than firefox,although it does use more ram Widgets are completely useless, yes. However, most of the stuff people use as extensions in FF is already in Opera, and Opera is compatible to FF plugins, and Greasemonkey scripts.From a developer perspective, (imvho) Opera has better to work with w3c compliance and does not unnecessarily nag about some errors like FF does (for example, in FF a XMLHttpRequest fails if the header data returns "text/html" instead of "text/xml" as content-type... duh. ), however Firebug is great and the Opera Dev Tools are seriously lacking (yet).But they are both good, it's mostly a matter of taste nowadays.
I don't like Firefox since it's derived from Netscape... who were a bunch of punk bitches. I very much disapprove of Linux distros installing that browser as default.
Renzo [a.k.a. Shin Orochi Sachavaca] said, October 23, 2007, 04:05:50 amThats biased. We don't know how many tabs are open in each browser. LOL +1
there was only one each. One for here in firefox and one for Higher End GFX for opera.VinnyJ said, October 23, 2007, 06:26:32 amYou probably have it to automatic.Vinny's probably right. Opera peaked at 11mb. And epsxe was running in the background.
VinnyJ said, October 23, 2007, 06:26:32 amYou probably have it to automatic.automatic is the only true setting there are OSs around where you can flag some memory pages as unimportant, so the system knows it can reassign it if some other application requests more ram. that works great, for things like web content that is handy to have in ram but not important enough to block it for other applications since it can just be reloaded. allows for WAY more efficient ram usage... but duh. windows. but hey. "Minimum Requirements: 1GB RAM (2GB for Vista)" <- you see that around quite often. lollington.
