I switched to ublock a few months ago and miss AdBlock, just because I was familiar with adding rules (for example, I knew how to permanently unblock youtube annotations with adblock, but not ublock).
I want to switch back but just want to know, is it true about the whole memory thing?
Is it true that ublock uses less memory than AdBlock?
Re: Is it true that ublock uses less memory than AdBlock?
Ever since uBlock switched ownership, some of the images on its wiki are broken, and most of the benchmarks were run with what is now an old version of uBlock, but as a Chrome extension, it definitely does use less memory for the extension process and contribute less memory to the page processes than ABP: https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/ ... y-compared
I don't know how the Firefox extensions compare in terms of performance, but I know that uBlock isn't quite as user-friendly on Firefox as on Chrome, because of issues that have not yet been resolved in porting the extension (ABP for Chrome does not have that kind of issue, because it was based on an extension that Palant & Co. took over, rather than being ported from Firefox). I'm thinking that once the latest version makes it onto AMO, the benchmarks should be run again, with Firefox.
I don't know how the Firefox extensions compare in terms of performance, but I know that uBlock isn't quite as user-friendly on Firefox as on Chrome, because of issues that have not yet been resolved in porting the extension (ABP for Chrome does not have that kind of issue, because it was based on an extension that Palant & Co. took over, rather than being ported from Firefox). I'm thinking that once the latest version makes it onto AMO, the benchmarks should be run again, with Firefox.
There's a buzzin' in my brain I really can't explain; I think about it before they make me go to bed.