Jump to content
Comet Forums

New CometBird Really Slow - Other Problems

Recommended Posts

It looks as if this new version is very slow. I switched from Google Chrome to this because it handled having many tabs open much better than Chrome; however, it now appears to:

  1. Take a long time to load on initial startup
  2. Take a long time to start to respond after system brought back to life after being in sleep mode.
  3. It has many, many more hangups and times when it just seems to not respond very well.
  4. Often hangs up on new forms and often won't let me enter all the data until I defocus that window and come back.
  5. Just, overall, seems to be very problematic and it's defeating the reason I switched to CometBird in the first place for..

I hope that you can work these issues out soon!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your suggestions, they will be forwarded to the development team. If there is any improvements, you will know from the changelog of a future version

And you may downgrade to a prior version like 3.6, that stable version works well with certain plugins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Cometbird is substantially based on Firefox. Fundamental issues like memory usage and internal plugin handling will have to wait until, if, when FireFox gets around to handling them.

Many, many people don't like the 4.X versions of either browser, and have gone back to 3.6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and it's very slow when playing facebook flashplayer games. It's even slower than IE. It's actually the slowest among the 3 browsers that I use, and I'm using 3.6 (since unhappy with ver 4). Firefox and Cometbird should consider this, since there are millions of Facebook users. Don't want them to ditch firefox/cometbird.

Other than this issue, cometbird is still the best for me.


Uninstalled Cometbird 3.6.16... then installed 3.6, and it's faster!

Edited by stomachl (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I am a person that reverted back to the old 3.6 comet bird.. and I'm still having issues.

I want to first start off by saying I just bought a new PC. It just became a month old yesterday. I also run virus scans weekly, even if it's not needed.. I do it.

Now, the specs of my PC.

Processor: AMD Athlon II X4 645 Processor 3.10GHz


Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit

HDD: 2.5TB

My issue. It eats a lot of Physical Memory.. if I keep allocating more Mem (currently a gig is allocated, was at 8800mb) it just eats more and more.. today it was sucking up over 900,000k of RAM, sending my Physical RAM use from 10% to 48%, with 3 tabs open.. I wasn't running anything like YouTube, Netflix.. etc. One was the YM homepage.. one was my facebook page, and the final one was an online shop that doesn't use any flash, was just a very simple website. Right now, with just this one page open it's at 150,100k.

I also disable plug-ins when I'm not using them.. such as ones for online gaming and such, and only leave what is needed for browsing some websites, such as Java and Flash. And still Comet bird, he is one hungry date for my computer.. O__O

I get lots of lagging, jerkiness, and some type of "resetting" I would call it.. where I am typing and the page blinks and my cursor is gone and I have to click again to resume typing.. this doesn't happen on anything else on my PC.. it only happens in Comet Bird. I tried the latest version too thinking maybe 3.6 just isn't up to par with a 64bit system.. but that one was even WORSE! lol!

Comet bird 3.6 is going to get really FAT if it doesn't stop eating so much RAM.. O___O

Not to mention the sluggish, draggy.. and insanely frustrating slowness when it comes to facebook games.. like another poster noted.. I don't want to put IE on my computer, any more than I want to swallow nail polish remover.. lol.

Just out of curiosity, if the people here are obviously using FF to make CB.. what's the point of copying it if they lack the capabilities to fix the flaws the people at Mozilla can't? I would think the point of making a browser based on another one would be to improve on it in a large way.. not just carry over the same issues. I mean this as a legitimate question, I'm not belittling the devs that work on CB.. I'm just genuinely curious.

Edited by akikofujishima (see edit history)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current version is 7.x, and not much attention/effort is going to be put into version 3 at this point.

There were those who had issues with FF4, and consequently with CB4, but that's a while in the past now. Nothing stops you from using version 3 if you want to, but there won't be any support for problems with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stable browser. That was, what, umm, cello? Cello was pretty stable. Lynx was too, come to think. You can revert all you want but the fact remains, nobody's going to go back and work on version 3 now. The issues you report are far from widespread. Most people don't experience the problem. This hints at a problem with your system or its configuration. Do you experience the same issues with the equivalent versions of Firefox?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all due respect, not all of us are idiots and are very aware that there is not going to be support for previous versions of the browser. My post was actually in response to someone suggesting that reverting would make for more stability, and it was to prove the point that that's not always the case. :) But also, you would think with all the new version releases that seem to be coming out like daisies on a grave, that something with the memory eating would change, or improve, when in fact it hasn't. <_<

I had switched to Comet Bird from Firefox, because I wanted Firefox without all the issues.. and CB used to be that and I was in love and told everyone I knew how kick@$$ CB was.. but now, lately it's been just as unstable and slow as it's parent browser.

My computer is configured just fine, I've been using computers since the early 80s and the internet since the early 90s. Not all of us are 15 year old noobs, or old farts that buy a computer without even knowing what it does or how it works. This is actually the first time I haven't built my PC from the ground up (little difficult with a computer curious 5 year old running around)..lol. :D Some of us are actually old school geeks that live and breathe for tech.. lol!

I did try the new Comet Bird and it actually ate a lot of Physical Memory too.. with 6Gig, there should not be lagging.. but there is, and a lot of it. That plug-in container is a curse on humanity! :lol: Not to mention the occasional CPU guzzling.. 4 cores and all being used and CB is sucking up 48% of my CPU... you've got to be joking.. O__O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cometbird is developed from Firefox, and as much as the code and settings are tweaked, it is what it is, a modified version of that browser.

You said you didn't have problems with a prior version, then you're welcome to use that prior version, but if it now gives you problems, specifically problems that others don't have, then it would indicate the problem is elsewhere on your system. We cannot diagnose that for you, if it is the case.

As for the constant new versions, that is solely under the control of mozilla, cometbird is updated when firefox is, and I think we all wish they would have just fixed version 4, instead of issuing 5, 6, 7 and now 8, but we have no control over their version updates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your response, in December, was to a suggestion made in May and applicable to the situation in May -- when 4.x had just come out and many people were finding it quite unappealing. Now, in December, versions 4, 6, 7, 8 and Aurora have been released and the situation is quite different.

You act as if your memory issue was a widespread and long-unresolved issue. I have experienced no such issues and am not aware of others who have. System configuration problems are fairly common, and if most people do not encounter an issue, then system configuration is the most fruitful area for investigation for those who do. If most people on most systems encountered these kinds of memory issues, this would be widely publicized by a press that loves to pounce on such issues when they actually exist. But most people have been able to use both FireFox and CometBird without those problems. No one can make you re-examine your own system, but you'll understand why your complaint isn't being taken all that seriously if you don't.

I would suggest that you treat this as a Firefox -- not CometBird -- issue, and that you spend your time trying to track down FireFox memory issues and their solutions. This approach is somewhat more likely to produce a working solution, than your present course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume you're on Windows 7 or Vista.

On my system (XP SP3) it uses about 60-73MB with a single window open and about 420MB with 25 tabs open, on a site which displays at least one photo per page.

Invariably almost all of the high memory usage complaints I've heard about CometBird, were from users of Windows 7.

I couldn't tell the link between the two, but there's gotta be something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I had mentioned in a post if it was a possible issue with Win7 x64 compatibility, and that may be why the other techs are not seeing the complaints.. because anytime I look up issues with Mem, it's full of complaints having to do with Firefox/Comet Bird (that's how I ended up here). I just went back to the actual Firefox and for some reason it's just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windows Seven is coded to use ram if you have it. I've even managed to exhaust 8GB on my laptop. I admit it takes some careless use to do it, but I've had over 100 web pages open in three different browsers, memory intensive flash games running in all three, photoshop running with a dozen projects each well over 100mb in size, bitcomet running and music playing in a media player.

It's pretty amazing a laptop can do all that, I know winXP never could, but the point I was making is that it will use the memory if you allow it to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...