How many styles is too much?! (Performance-wise)

edited June 2009 in Stylish
I have a pretty big list of styles. I'm wondering how that's affecting my performance? As in, speed of loading websites. Also, would merging some styles work (dunno how checking when to activate a style works, if it works per-style, maybe merging several styles into one would remove the need to check for more styles than I virtually need)?
Here's my list of styles, to those who wonder.


* Adblock Plus - Use spiffy new icons
* Arrow Cursor On Text
* Awesome Bar Background Color Based on Type (WOW) *
* Bold Text Awesomebar Popup
* Bookmarks Toolbar - Link Icon on Bookmarks Hover
* Bright Focus (for buttons, links, and textboxes)
* Browser9 - Hide top ads
* Center Images
* Creation Asylum - Width & Banner Margin Fix
* Demonoid.com - ??? Skin
* EatMyBrowser.com - Hide top options till hover
* FMyLife - Border Around Posts
* FMyLife - Hide Big Ad
* Facebook - Alternative "Hide" button colors
* Facebook - Alternative Composer Colors
* Facebook - Change Story Top Borders
* Facebook - Combine Filter Lists
* Facebook - Emphasized Show More Stories Link
* Facebook - Fade & Separate Idle Friends
* Facebook - Greenization (disabled)
* Facebook - Hide "Connect With Friends" Box
* Facebook - Limit Highlights Box Height
* Facebook - Limit Stream Height (disabled)
* Facebook - Move Filter List to the Sidebar (+Wider Stream)
* Facebook - Presence Bar - Fix Width
* Facebook - RTL New Note
* Facebook - Story Hover Effects
* Facebook - Theme: Slick
* Faecbook - Transparent Presence Bar Till Hover
* Firefox - Hide HTTPS Favicon Label
* Gmail - Gbar customization
* Grooveshark - Full Width
* HideMyAss! - Hide Header
* MsgHelp Forums - Prettier Quote & Code Tags
* MySpace Messaging - Bigger buttons
* Netload Cleaner
* Popups, Menupopups, ContextMenu : Cleaner
* Prettier Tooltip
* Rapidshare - For Non-Premium Users
* Schmownce - Fix Posts
* Stylish - Edit Window beautified
* Stylish - Manage Window beautified
* Stylish - Statusbar Menu beautified
* Stylish nostalgia icons (disabled)
* Userstyles.org >> Elegant blue
* Wikipedia - Highlight Hebrew/English Extra Languages
* Wikipedia Spacious (disabled)
* YouTube - Big Video Edition
* YouTube - Restyled Comment Form
* meebo.com - Boxed Window Title Buttons
* myYearbook - 2 column layout mainpage
* myYearbook - Fit friends feed to content
* myYearbook - Seperation between feeds

Comments

  • i have about 140 and i don't notice any difference between my usual firefox and a clean version when browsing (starting firefox takes longer, but that probably has more to do with my 40 extensions)
  • Also, it cannot be said generally. it depends a lot on what the specs of your computer are, how your firefox and internet are set up, and what other programs are running in the background.
    whether or not performance is impaired too much for your taste, you can just check by disabling stylish completely (whether "Turn all styles off" or disable stylish as extension shouldnt matter) and see if you actually notice the difference
  • edited June 2009
    130+ styles (some are huge!), see no difference. Of course, it's an almost new fast puter and fast connection.
    It reminds me posts on MoZine about exts. Somebody with 20 exts. would ask the same Q and then some with 100s would say no, no change here. I see people say 3.5 is faster, very fast in fact! I tried. Saw no difference, probably 'cause my 3.0.10 isn't all that slow and i can't trace mil.secs? ;-)
  • well if you want a fast browser you dont use FF, especially for JS/AJAX sites. Opera or Chrome are faster than FF, especially once you have a few extensions installed in the latter one.
    but that is why we (i) use firefox: the extensions. couldnt do any web development without that stuff
  • You must have been reading my mind. I was going to post that same question. For the last week, I've been thinking of that same thing. I think it does cause a problem. I use SeaMonkey and I have a ton of chrome styles. I have over a hundred of them. Since the beginning of this year, I've noticed SM getting slower and slower when starting up. I disabled Stylish and SM was fast in loading.
  • edited June 2009
    Thanks for the replies guys. Tbh I think my huge amount of extensions IS what's limiting my performance a lot... But I find most extensions non-expandable ): sucks. lol
    That's browser performance in general though... Not how fast pages load really. Maybe I'm just considering it slow cause my 3 most visited sites are Facebook, Google Reader and myYearbook, which are all pretty slow with all the JS running around. :P
  • Posted By: makondo130+ styles (some are huge!), see no difference. Of course, it's an almost new fast puter and fast connection.
    It reminds me posts on MoZine about exts. Somebody with 20 exts. would ask the same Q and then some with 100s would say no, no change here. I see people say 3.5 is faster, very fast in fact! I tried. Saw no difference, probably 'cause my 3.0.10 isn't all that slow and i can't trace mil.secs? ;-)
    I'm still trying to decide if enabling javascript.options.jit.chrome (off by default) has made a difference. javascript.options.jit.content is default-enabled, and I've got too much else to do to try to benchmark the results if I turn it off. Since 3.5 really is dramatically faster, I'm guessing that not seeing any difference in jit.chrome is down to Fox' own UI being frankly a hell of a lot less demanding than, oh, Google Reader. (Which is why I use Liferea instead.)
  • I'd wanna use Minefield, but %80 of my extensions don't work for it, and for some reason extensions.checkCompatibility =false in config won't work. So Stylish, TMP, and plenty of other extensions won't work.
  • The only difference i ever notice is, like ChoGGi said - Fx start time. It seems a bit slower the more styles you have (especially if some are 'huge'). After that - absolutely no diff. Exts., on the other hand, do make diff. TMP is one (but in 5 yrs. of using it, it's a keeper anyway. I just know that when it was TM, or even early stages of TMP, it was smaller and faster. But people never quit requesting to make it a browser on its own ;-). I'm sure AdBlock and No-script would slow Fx down too (but personally have never used either). And of course, there some veeerrrryyy slow sites.
  • Generally I don't think it's the number of extensions that matter, it's what they do. If you have a ton of Google styles, I doubt it would do anything to your performance unless you were on Google. On Google, it really depends on what the style does. Some things will improve performance, others will degrade it. I don't think combining styles will help here.

    There's also the hit on startup for loading up the styles. If this is a concern, you can move them to userChrome.css or userContent.css, but I don't know how much that would help.
  • something that can cause FF3 to slow down is the constant updating of the various .sqlite files. With stylish now using sqlite, there is now a minimum of 11 of them . . . , but all this is for another story.
  • edited June 2009
    How can I know how many styles I have, of course without manually counting myself?
    I have about 50 styles residing now, being 10 disabled.
    I don't notice any slowness caused by styles.
    Posted By: makondo130+ styles (some are huge!), see no difference. Of course, it's an almost new fast puter and fast connection.
    It reminds me posts on MoZine about exts. Somebody with 20 exts. would ask the same Q and then some with 100s would say no, no change here. I see people say 3.5 is faster, very fast in fact! I tried. Saw no difference, probably 'cause my 3.0.10 isn't all that slow and i can't trace mil.secs? ;-)
    Not hard fact but Firefox seems to cut off a lot in terms of memory usage. About half, I would say. Really nice for people who have slow computer with low memory but still want to install tons of extensions which consume much memory.
  • Posted By: Wai WaiHow can I know how many styles I have, of course without manually counting myself?
    I have about 50 styles residing now, being 10 disabled.
    Why do you ask when you know how many you have? Stylish 1 introduced the Copy Style Info button, which copies info about your installed styles to the clipboard. I don't know exactly, but if it doesnt include a number count, you can just paste it into a text editor and see how many lines there are.
    Posted By: Wai WaiNot hard fact but Firefox seems to cut off a lot in terms of memory usage. About half, I would say. Really nice for people who have slow computer with low memory but still want to install tons of extensions which consume much memory.
    Actually, Firefox (at least version 3.0.10 which im using) is a real space-hog. the thing is that it doesn't clean out its used RAM for closed tabs, but keeps them in the cache (for potention re-opening them). People with slow comps really shouldnt use FF but instead, as i said before, a more memory-efficient browser
  • Posted By: Hen AsrafI'd wanna use Minefield, but %80 of my extensions don't work for it, and for some reason extensions.checkCompatibility =false in config won't work. So Stylish, TMP, and plenty of other extensions won't work.
    That's fairly bizarre. The one extension I can't get working-- one way or another --is Tamper Data. I'd guess the underlying net code has changed too much in between. TMP works fine, but you'll want the experimental build from the forums. FEBE, I think, works with Fox, but only partially, again unless you're using an experimental build. There may be a couple of other extensions where you have to visit the support page to find a 3.5-compatible build.

    Everything else (so far) will at worst cause Fox to complain that the extension's incompatible (even if it's enabled, and works), or that extension checking is disabled (which you can hide with *plug* Add-on compatibility checking *really* disabled.
  • edited June 2009
    Posted By: HKKWhy do you ask when you know how many you have?
    I roughly counted it myself. It turned out I have 56 styles in total. Pretty close to my estimation.
    Your trick does the job but Stylish custom does it better. It does the count for you *accurately*. (I only know it by now ;)
    Posted By: HKKActually, Firefox (at least version 3.0.10 which im using) is a real space-hog. the thing is that it doesn't clean out its used RAM for closed tabs, but keeps them in the cache (for potention re-opening them). People with slow comps really shouldnt use FF but instead, as i said before, a more memory-efficient browser
    Well slow computer can still run Firefox. If speed is of utmost important to some people, try those tips:
    - install as few addons as possible, or not install at all
    - don't open many tabs. IE still use a lot of memory if you are opening a lot of windows. Keep all your browsing in as few tabs as possible.
    Posted By: AloisThat's fairly bizarre. The one extension I can't get working-- one way or another --is Tamper Data. I'd guess the underlying net code has changed too much in between. TMP works fine, but you'll want the experimental build from the forums. FEBE, I think, works with Fox, but only partially, again unless you're using an experimental build. There may be a couple of other extensions where you have to visit the support page to find a 3.5-compatible build.

    Everything else (so far) will at worst cause Fox to complain that the extension's incompatible (even if it's enabled, and works), or that extension checking is disabled (which you can hide with *plug*Add-on compatibility checking *really* disabled.
    Install Mr.Tech toolkit. Then you can mark the seemingly incompatible addon as compatible.
    What it does is to simply change the max version.
    Most addons are not working because the developers aren't smart enough to update that number. ;)
    They work magically when you change that number. Awesome! :D
    Second method is, install the dev builds if they are available.
    My transfer is smooth so far.

    PS: I haven't transferred all addons though but it has nothing to do with compatibility.
    I have installed way too many and it appears it's the reason why Firefox ate up too much memory.
    I'm picky this time. Prove that you are really useful to my life if you want to survive in my new Firefox. ;)
    I'm trying to keep Firefox below 200,000K with 30 tabs opened.
    Posted By: makondoThe only difference i ever notice is, like ChoGGi said - Fx start time.
    Even though the perceived speed may not be changed (I remember there are cases when perceived speed seems faster but actually the total load time is longer), the speed and memory usage seem to improve by large.

    Take a look at this test. Look for Firefox 3.5 RC:
    Windows Web browser performance test results June 8, 2009.

    The performance has been doubled. Awesome!
    It also beats down Opera by a large degree.
  • For people who are worried about performance, try writing or installing quality styles only.

    This document tells us how to write efficient CSS.
Sign In or Register to comment.