Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Users and developers helping users with technical Pale Moon issues (Windows and other non-Linux O.S.). Please direct questions about the Linux version to the appropriate Linux board.

Moderator: trava90

Forum rules
This board is for technical/usage questions and troubleshooting for the Pale Moon browser only. The main focus here is on Pale Moon on Windows. Please direct your questions for Linux, Android and Mac to the dedicated boards.
Technical issues and questions not related to the Pale Moon browser should be posted in "technical chat"
Please keep off-topic and general discussion out of this board, thank you!
Post Reply
NoelC
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 18
Joined: 2017-10-02, 15:29

Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by NoelC » 2020-03-29, 14:36

On multiple systems I now notice I have to wait before my home page shows.

I have fast, modern workstations with SSD arrays on Win 8.1 and Win 10, even one without antivirus software running. I normally don't have to wait for most things to start (Photoshop and Visual Studio being exceptions).

I'm sure that in recent history Pale Moon would cold start and show me my home page or even (a blank start page) in 1 second or less. Now the first or nth Pale Moon window takes multiple seconds to show. I feel this slowness where I didn't before. I'm a UX designer and Quality Engineer. My threshold for "gee that seems slow" is 1+ seconds. Pale Moon is now showing its UI is (best case) 1.5 seconds, worst case (cold start) I've seen 4 seconds.

What has changed lately to slow it down?

-Noel

NoelC
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 18
Joined: 2017-10-02, 15:29

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by NoelC » 2020-03-29, 14:42

Just measuring with a stopwatch, I'm actually seeing 5+ seconds now for cold start before home page is rendered. I've just measured it with a stopwatch repeatedly.

Internet Explorer (I don't use, but it's a reference) cold starts and shows the same (simple, not multiply sourced) home page in between 0.8 and 1.0 seconds.

I don't believe I have changed any settings that have mitigated this change. I've noticed the slowdowns after the recent sets of updates, though I can't pinpoint which one(s). It's the kind of thing you tend to overlook for a while then go "hey, this didn't used to make me wait".

-Noel

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Off-Topic Sheriff
Off-Topic Sheriff
Posts: 7195
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Insulting you on the internet.

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2020-03-29, 14:50

You are really complaining about a handful of seconds? Well, as you may or may not know 28.9.x is essentially Pale Moon 29 with a few things backed out. There wasn't supposed to be a 28.9. However, ONE thing that isn't backed out are dozens of changes bringing us closer to gaining WebComponents.. Specifically the Custom Elements bit and changes surrounding shared support code to make it happen. While Custom Elements its self is disabled and effectively useless without the Shadow DOM to back it up and prefs enabled.. The code is still there and is pretty raw. There are also additions to the javascript engine and other bits and bobs throughout the codebase.

We needed to get some of this stuff out now for web compatibility and not everything that has been added and changed since Pale Moon 28.8 has been refined or perfectly tuned yet. Even if it was adding more code DOES have a cost. Still, it could be a fuck ton worse than some additional startup time.

Sometimes function for the time being outweighs absolute efficiency. We will make up the difference one way or another in the course of continued development.

Internet Explorer is a useless point of comparison since half of it is ALWAYS loaded into memory in the form of shared support code. Sure it is true that IE7+ isn't nearly as integrated as it once was but it isn't fully independent either. It also isn't even HALF as complex and feature rich or web capable as we are.
Image
- thEre iS No wAY oUt of HErE.. iT'll bE DArK sOON.. -
https://binaryoutcast.com/ | Freenode #binaryoutcast | http://thereisonlyxul.org/

NoelC
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 18
Joined: 2017-10-02, 15:29

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by NoelC » 2020-03-29, 15:16

>You're really complaining about a handful of seconds?

Yeah, when one pays dearly for high-end equipment to be able to keep one's mind on work that's being done near the very limits of human capability, a few seconds do actually matter. If a multi-monitor desktop is instantly responsive for virtually everything, and you're starting a web browser to look up a problem solution or reach a company information site, it causes a loss of concentration to wait long enough to start to wonder if something's gone wrong.

For now the workaround is to keep at least one browser window opened and minimized, but it's deplorable to have 5 seconds of startup time on a well-tuned supercomputer. Think systems built with dual top-end Xeons with e.g., 96 GB of RAM, RAID arrays of flash drives, super-fast GPUs. Even Microsoft Word cold-starts and is ready for action in 1.5 seconds.. Nothing reasonable should take 5 seconds to start!

Bloat must not be allowed to fill the space provided.

-Noel

NoelC
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 18
Joined: 2017-10-02, 15:29

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by NoelC » 2020-03-29, 15:18

Can the new "WebComponents" features be disabled via configuration to see if they are indeed responsible for this unreasonable delay?

-Noel

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Off-Topic Sheriff
Off-Topic Sheriff
Posts: 7195
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Insulting you on the internet.

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2020-03-29, 15:41

Did you not read what I said?

Also for the record, Pale Moon for me takes one to two seconds without ABPrime but with ABPrime it is between 3-5 seconds but this has been consistent with running ABPrime all the way back to when it was ABL 3.5 (the ill-fated version everyone hated) and that was on 2014 era hardware instead of the 2018 era hardware I have now. So your fancy ass high end machine MUST be inferior to my own which doesn't have near the specs you cite.

The only thing bloated here seems to be your sense of entitlement.
Image
- thEre iS No wAY oUt of HErE.. iT'll bE DArK sOON.. -
https://binaryoutcast.com/ | Freenode #binaryoutcast | http://thereisonlyxul.org/

User avatar
back2themoon
Board Warrior
Board Warrior
Posts: 1685
Joined: 2012-08-19, 20:32

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by back2themoon » 2020-03-29, 15:53

NoelC wrote:
2020-03-29, 15:16
Yeah, when one pays dearly for high-end equipment to be able to keep one's mind on work that's being done near the very limits of human capability, a few seconds do actually matter. If a multi-monitor desktop is instantly responsive for virtually everything, and you're starting a web browser to look up a problem solution or reach a company information site, it causes a loss of concentration to wait long enough to start to wonder if something's gone wrong... it's deplorable to have 5 seconds of startup time on a well-tuned supercomputer.

Bloat must not be allowed to fill the space provided.
If the "problem" is THAT critical to you, then set Pale Moon to start with Windows. I'm sure a well-tuned high-end supercomputer will be able to handle that.

He said they'll try to improve it in time. Defining "bloat" a major part of PM29 (and the FREE work of the developers) is asinine at best.

By the way, I haven't noticed any discernible startup difference with the latest version. It's loaded with extensions and runs on a superCPU from 2008. I did not use a stopwatch - there's a limit to paranoia.
Safe Mode / clean profile info: Help/Restart in Safe Mode
Information to include when asking for support - How to apply user agent overrides
How to download videos

Windows 10 Pro • Pale Moon x64 • Interlink x64 • Emsisoft Anti-Malware

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 26648
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: 58°2'16"N 14°58'31"E
Contact:

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by Moonchild » 2020-03-29, 15:56

You've also not mentioned what you mean with "lately" -- since which version?
Also, which homepage are you talking about?
"There will be times when the position you advocate, no matter how well framed and supported, will not be accepted by the public simply because you are who you are." -- Merrill Rose
Image

NoelC
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 18
Joined: 2017-10-02, 15:29

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by NoelC » 2020-03-29, 23:45

Hi Moonchild, I didn't post my web page because I didn't (and don't) want to be accused of spamming your site. It's a simple site with about 10 HTML components and and a couple of images that are all sourced from the same base URL. Probably one of the few pure sites remaining on the web. I'm sure the browser will do the same thing with any site chosen. It's not the home page I'm pointing to responding poorly, because if that were the case Internet Explorer or Edge would be slow to display it as well.

As I mentioned, I don't know exactly when the slowdown started. I've been busy with work and as with anything on a computer, one tends to overlook occasional delays because, I don't know, maybe the net is temporarily slow or a compile has used up the cores. I finally had it happen enough times to make me realize it's more or less a given with a Pale Moon cold start now and so it prompted me to write.

I mentioned (and then was told) a workaround that can work (starting a copy of Pale Moon and leaving it running), but I'm not really into having programs laying around taking up resources just to work around problems.

What I AM into are the published concepts of privacy and efficiency behind Pale Moon, and in letting authors know if there's a problem.

Note the first sentence on https://www.palemoon.org/technical.shtml: "This browser aims to strike a balance between features and speed/resource use."

Since the program got a good bit slower I figured you would like to know. I'm willing to be patient if, as stated above, this is some kind of temporary thing.

Oh, and it occurred to me to mention I have only two extensions: uBlock Origin and eMatrix, which don't affect my home page at all and if anything should be speeding things up overall in general because they block a boatload of crap sites from ever being contacted. I suppose it's possible a recent updates has made Pale Moon less compatible with them; they haven't changed lately. But I'll try temporarily disabling/removing to see if anything gets better.

Those of you who feel comfortable criticizing a desire to have software be efficient are respectfully requested to ignore this thread. Please understand that there's a reasonable chance I know at least as much as you do about computing.

-Noel

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Off-Topic Sheriff
Off-Topic Sheriff
Posts: 7195
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Insulting you on the internet.

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2020-03-30, 00:36

NoelC wrote:
2020-03-29, 23:45
Those of you who feel comfortable criticizing a desire to have software be efficient are respectfully requested to ignore this thread. Please understand that there's a reasonable chance I know at least as much as you do about computing.

-Noel
You aren't gonna win any points with this statement. It completely underminds your position. Also, you do not get to decide who gets to reply to your threads or posts. Personally, I will respond as I see fit.

Thus far you have not shown any advanced knowledge or special skills only that you think your status symbol machine means a damn. It doesn't. You have shown an extreme sense of entitlement and selfish arrogance.

Additionally, you have demonstrated quite a bit of ignorance of basic computing in your pointless comparisons and assumption that whatever it is must be our fault when every countering indication based on my own report of mid-tier 2018 hardware and of back2themoon's old ass 2008 hardware running Pale Moon seems to show otherwise. Simply ignoring it and most of what I said if not rejecting it. Also, being evasive about specifics doesn't help either.

Thus far I am not impressed. Nope, not impressed at all.
Image
- thEre iS No wAY oUt of HErE.. iT'll bE DArK sOON.. -
https://binaryoutcast.com/ | Freenode #binaryoutcast | http://thereisonlyxul.org/

vannilla
Keeps coming back
Keeps coming back
Posts: 946
Joined: 2018-05-05, 13:29

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by vannilla » 2020-03-30, 01:07

NoelC wrote:
2020-03-29, 23:45
and eMatrix
This extension does a lot of things at startup and it's the prime suspect for your slowdown.
Try with a new (temporary) profile and see what happens.

User avatar
Moonchild
Pale Moon guru
Pale Moon guru
Posts: 26648
Joined: 2011-08-28, 17:27
Location: 58°2'16"N 14°58'31"E
Contact:

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by Moonchild » 2020-03-30, 07:31

Both extensions in fact will perform tasks on startup. So aside from IE (which hasn't been developed for years now and is lacking most of the more complex standards support) always having a large part of itself pre-loaded because it's part of the shell, you're also comparing it to Pale Moon with extensions. Apples and oranges. Maybe melons...? I dunno, definitely not the same ;-)

As for your "criticizing" remark: please don't self-define a complaint as a "desire to have software be efficient". All of us here have a desire to have Pale Moon be efficient, and it is. A few seconds to cold boot an application that is more akin to a game than to a "regular" desktop application is actually not bad at all. In just about every case it won't take that long, though, especially if application prefetching is trained efficiently through use. Even on systems with considerably less power than what you hinted at.

And if you think there is a specific regression here that you noticed (after ruling out the obvious suspects) then vagueries about when exactly it regressed won't help us if there's actually a bug here. We'll need to know a lot more in that case, both about your environment (start with posting troubleshooting information...) and the exact behavior that regressed and when.
Not that I should have to explain this to someone claiming to be as knowledgeable as the people so far having an interest in this thread.
"There will be times when the position you advocate, no matter how well framed and supported, will not be accepted by the public simply because you are who you are." -- Merrill Rose
Image

NoelC
Hobby Astronomer
Hobby Astronomer
Posts: 18
Joined: 2017-10-02, 15:29

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by NoelC » 2020-03-31, 04:17

The program starts in well under 1 second after being initiated. The noticeable extra time for me was a full 4 additional seconds between Pale Moon opening with a white pane and rendering the first content, and as it turns out the uBlock / eMatrix add-ons are indeed responsible. I suspect the databases they use have been growing. Without these add-ons the application cold-starts and renders the page in 0.8 seconds. Now that I know this I'll look into what can be done about it.

I'm sorry for blaming Pale Moon for a problem I caused.

Some of my systems in the office open to about:blank, so I did not notice the increase right away. My work-from-home systems are set to open to a page I can see. The delay bothers me so much that I can say with certainty that with the add-ons installed it used to be MUCH faster. So be it. Now I can go bother those folks about inefficiency.

Thanks for hanging with me and for the help and useful info in this thread. I have no desire to debate or fight and as a rule I don't candy coat things to try to win points. Sorry if I have ruffled any feathers, and thanks to everyone for taking the time to share your opinions.

A parting thought: Let's all try to be especially tolerant of others' stress levels in this time, and not forget that we are generally the lucky few who have professions that actually CAN be worked at home.

-Noel

User avatar
loxodont
Astronaut
Astronaut
Posts: 600
Joined: 2014-07-26, 23:03
Location: Mare Serenitatis

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by loxodont » 2020-03-31, 05:13

NoelC wrote:
2020-03-31, 04:17
Now that I know this I'll look into what can be done about it.
I've only uBlock installed in most profiles and nMatrix in one - not both in one, but I don't use "Automatic Updates" on start and my PM launch times circle around 2s on +10 years old mid-tier hardware. Of course, manual updates for both take some seconds.

User avatar
New Tobin Paradigm
Off-Topic Sheriff
Off-Topic Sheriff
Posts: 7195
Joined: 2012-10-09, 19:37
Location: Insulting you on the internet.

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by New Tobin Paradigm » 2020-03-31, 06:21

Extensions aside, some of it might be us and the unrefined new code but if it is that will improve as it always tends to. It is a constant balancing act and one should expect such things occasionally. Especially when adding new capabilities.

One way, aside from code refinement and optimization, that helps make up the difference is to continue code clean up of junk we don't actually need. But both are needed to really make that difference and both are always done, like application cold start, you just have to wait for it. ;)

As for ublock, only so much can be done for longer and longer filterlists. Keep in mind that in ublock's case that the core of it isn't specifically designed for us and never was. Gorhill designed ublock as an extension with a common core and frontend code for several browsers. While the code is now split into pure webex and the so called legacy versions the older code hasn't gotten much specific work done to make it the best it could be for us and without outside contribution it won't.

And that is the limit of fair and unbias assessement I am willing to make regarding Gorhill and ublock. Just so we are clear.
Image
- thEre iS No wAY oUt of HErE.. iT'll bE DArK sOON.. -
https://binaryoutcast.com/ | Freenode #binaryoutcast | http://thereisonlyxul.org/

User avatar
gepus
Lunatic
Lunatic
Posts: 480
Joined: 2017-12-14, 12:59

Re: Pale Moon Slower to Start than Before

Post by gepus » 2020-03-31, 08:05

I'm using uBlock with Pale Moon and to launch the browser takes 1+ seconds. (I don't have 96 GB of RAM but only 8.)
However, enabling without any discernment too many of the available lists (many of them trying to accomplish similar tasks) will lead to perceptible slowdowns and even break some sites. No AdBlock extension is a jack of all trades device. I noticed some clueless users using even more than one such extension simultaneously.
As for eMatrix, its heavy use alongside uBlock is something I wouldn't recommend to the average user. Advanced users can do it without the need to ask in forums for help if some issues occur.

Post Reply