Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Sweet hack for FF and IE users. Make web pages load much faster.
metacafe.com — Make web pages load lightning fast.. A must-see tweak for Firefox and Internet Explorer users. Most browsers are configured for dial-up.. Tweak the settings to boost surfing speeds and minimize page load times...
Four20- 3784 diggs
- digg it
- Four20, on 10/12/2007, -2/+46Oddly enough in my FF the setting was already set to TRUE, and instead of my max connections being set to 4, like it said, it was set to 8.
I went ahead and put that to 10, and I do see a little improvement, especially when loading pages with lots of small images.- darkzealot89, on 10/12/2007, -5/+137do you have fasterfox? that extension might have done that for you
- sasgold, on 10/12/2007, -1/+64The max number of requests that firefox can pipeline at once is 8 so there is no reason to set the number above this. You can see for yourself at http://kb.mozillazine.org/Network.http.pipelining.maxrequests
- Jader2toesbumpy, on 10/12/2007, -323/+4@ darkzealot89
Dude yes he has Firefox thats what FF stands for. Even though the devs preferred abbreviation is Fx - xenixninja, on 10/12/2007, -9/+48There is no reason to increase your request unless you want to end up hammering the site.
- ButtholeSurfer, on 10/12/2007, -20/+78fasterfox != firefox
- 350Zed, on 10/12/2007, -5/+74@Jader2toesbumpy
He said "Fasterfox", not "Firefox"... try and keep up with the thread. - hattrick35, on 10/12/2007, -7/+57@Jader2toesbumpy
In the words of the great Scott Evil, "You're an idiot." - friend18, on 10/12/2007, -29/+4Mine was already set to true and 8 as well. Changed it to 10 also. I think I notice an improvement.
- smith, on 10/12/2007, -8/+29So you have no frame of reference here, Jader2toesbumpy. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...
- fak3r, on 10/12/2007, -7/+62This is old as heck, and as someone who's played with Fasterfox, that does this for you, I can recommend against it. First of all it's rude to set the pipelining that fast, I've seen how it bangs on my Apache, then ff can't handle too many connections depending on file size on the remote server, so it can end up slowing you down, lastly, some websites will blacklist you if you hammer the site like that while surfing, I've had that, and the 'warning' msgs that tell you to turn off fasterfox if you want to access the site! wish I had the code to detect that, I"d like to put that into practice.
moral - defaults are default for a reason, feel free to experiment, but if you too far out on the branch, look out below. - Four20, on 10/12/2007, -13/+7no fasterfox here. just a fresh default install of FF 1.5 via ubuntu repos
i haven't even taken the time to change all the settings and extentions for FF yet - jrandyw, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11@FAK3R
Man, I wanted to flame you so bad...but then I set my fasterfox back to defaults, and what do you know, some of my slow loading pages are fixed. I only had problems with a few sites, so I wouldn't say disabling fasterfox made my browsing much faster, but it did fix the slow load problems I've had with certain sites. - LordSamu, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7This worked great for me. I'd never seen it before. Thanks for the post, things are so much faster now.
- chubbstar, on 10/12/2007, -12/+33is this even a hack? all yer doing is changing settings...
maybe its just me but changing settings in an open source program dosent really fit my definition of "hacking" - Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11"First of all it's rude to set the pipelining that fast, I've seen how it bangs on my Apache. . ."
HTTP Pipelining is a GOOD thing... for everyone.
"The pipelining of requests results in a dramatic improvement in page loading times, especially over high latency connections (such as satellite Internet connections).
Since it is usually possible to fit several HTTP requests in the same TCP packet, HTTP pipelining allows fewer TCP packets to be sent over the network, reducing network load."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_pipelining - omaryak, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Found an extra setting on Call for Help's Web page from G4 TechTV (Canada):
http://www.g4techtv.ca/callforhelp/extremetips/0156A.shtml - ThreeDee912, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3This 'hack' is really old and puts stress on the servers. Instead of connecting normally to the site, it makes dozens of connections to the site, which may end up slowing your connection instead of speeding it up! If everyone on Digg started doing this, sites would feel the /. and Digg effects even faster... Not good.
- jvicinanza, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Who cares about hammering the site. I just want speedy access to the sites I visit. Frankly I have many other things to worry about.
If the site cant handle the traffic then they should upgrade the servers.
I wonder how much Digg is effected. Looking at the number of Diggs this story has received tells me that there will most probably be a large number of diggers adopting this hack.
Maybe we should all send a few $$ to help out the poor long suffering sites that we visit. Lets call it a browser tax.
- franksmith, on 10/12/2007, -6/+26No such setting available in IE 7
- cderry, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I also didn't have it. Create a new d-word with the names:
MaxConnections Per1_0Server
MaxConnections PerServer
....and set them as a decimal to 10. - AdamalNZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I also couldn't find the registry key. Searched the whole thing for it. Interesting, as the version of IE they use in the video is IE7....
Worked fairly well on Firefox though.
- cderry, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10I also didn't have it. Create a new d-word with the names:
- lickmygiggle, on 10/12/2007, -3/+159Best surefire way to speed up browsing: Block ads.
- thinkdj, on 10/12/2007, -42/+7U are soo right man .. try Adblock - Plugin for Firefox .. Rockz
- darkzealot89, on 10/12/2007, -3/+80Even better, Adblock PLUS
subscribes you to anti-ad feeds so 99% of ads are never seen. Also allows you to block Java and Flash ads too! - Easty, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Even better than that ^
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
Pretty much an extensive list. - dreamlayers, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1You can also block other pointless connections such as statistics scripts.
- EXreaction, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Adblock can block Flash ads as well(don't know about Java, I don't ever recall coming across a Java ad).
I tried Adblock plus once...it had so many sections removed by default I was removing a lot of things that were not ads. So I went back to Adblock and just add rules whenever I find a new one(it is really not that hard, most ads come from a few domains, so just block those entire domains) - JurneyAhed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Is there an AdBlock Plus equivalent for Opera? I know it's got similar functionality built-in, but it requires manually blocking each ad (from what I understand).
- rubah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Exreaction: export your filters in Adblock, then when installing Adblock plus, don't suscribe to anything, just have it import your adblock filters. that's what I did. The interface is a little better, but it doesn't seem to ignore when you add filters like adblock started to do. I would click the adblock tab on flash ads but they'd never go away, so I'd have to set the filter manually.
- Raveren, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Off theme, but the HOSTS file (usually in C: WINDOWS system32 drivers etc) can also be used to prevent software from looking their home page up whether the serial you provided is legal/blacklisted :)
- Phil246, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@raveren
It can also be used by bad software to prevent you finding ways to remove it, for redirecting to advert laden sites, for phishing or for antivirus apps etc from being able to look up the right place for their autoupdates.
The hosts file is an extremely powerful tool for both good and bad
ps, what you suggested falls under bad since its naughty :P - EvilPenguin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2JurneyAhed - there are userscripts you can install with a preset list of content to block, I use it myself. The only drawback to this is that the script is only ran when the page finishes loading, so you see the ads while the page loads, and then they dissapear.
http://userstyles.org/style/show/299 - antispammer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1http://hostsman.abelhadigital.com/ hostsman is the best program to block thousands of ad servers.
- triblinator, on 10/12/2007, -23/+30Will someone tell me how to do this for Opera? I wouldnt give up Opera even if FF was 5 tiems faster. Please, it seems like a great thing!
- triblinator, on 10/12/2007, -5/+33got it! ok for anyone using Opera: type about:config into the adress bar. Then go to "preformance" and change max connections server from 8 to 10... honestly I have seen no difference. yet. But i didnt set the "network.http.pipelining" to true; Opera seems not to have such an option. Anyone know if there some synonymous term in the Opera settings?
- Ulquoirra, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10You might have to restart for it to work
- triblinator, on 10/12/2007, -27/+10@Ulquoirra, how would I restart a program like Opera? I Xed it out and reopened already, but since Opera saves all tabs it hardly seems like that is restarting the program, since restarting might end you up with all blank tabs. So I guess I restarted but cant know for sure. Oh well... I like it as it is anyway.
- CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -15/+45Yes. Digg them down for describing how to do it on a browser that *isnt* firefox. Nice job, asshats.
- Scout, on 10/12/2007, -39/+9They're being dugg down because the title of the entry clearly states FOR FF AND IE USERS. Then you want to know why their comments like " I wouldnt give up Opera even if FF was 5 tiems faster" are being dugg down? Get with the program.
- Bamborzled, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4@triblinator
"but since Opera saves all tabs it hardly seems like that is restarting the program"
Firefox gives you the option to do that too. - blastradius, on 10/12/2007, -23/+5The Boston Globe just called: "Stop using Opera!"
- Infideler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Ok, so I've been doing this with opera since 1997:
Goto Tools > Preferences > Advanced > Network > Max Connections to Server/Max Total Connections
It's the same as going through about:config > preferences
I have both maxed out at 128 on NYC CableVision Boost. - triblinator, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Opera crushes the living daylights out of FF I dont care what anyone says. It saves all your tabs (only if you want it to) so when you X out the box and turn off your comp, when you get back on the next day woot.com, digg frontpage, my gmail (logged in) and pandora are all already open. its great!
- TSSaloic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@triblinator
FF will do that, all you have to do is:
Go to Tools,Options,Startup,When FF Starts, Drop down to Show all my windows and Tabs from Last time.
- intrktevo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+36Fasterfox.. http://fasterfox.mozdev.org/ or https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1269/
- camkerr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22yeah fasterfox does all the changes that the video showed, plus more.
- nrgamble, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/faq#spell-abbreviate
- chaosmachine, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2why not ff?
- Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2like it wasn't explained to you in the link... Firefox is one word not two. You only abbreviate/acronymize the first letter of a word. Bingo, Firefox = F. The x is filler to make it a TLA or Two Letter Acronym. Also they manage the program and are asking you to use Fx. What is so tough about that?
- kingace, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Calm down, guys. If he wants to call it FF, or FxF or Fxxx, does it really bother you that much?
- Avalontor, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1@Kingace
Who was not calm? You can tell who is calm and who is not from words wandering around in the Ethernet?. Wow! anyways, Chaosmachine asked a question and I answered him. Did I answer it wrong? No, I took the answer from the Firefox website. So what's your beef? - ryodoan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I understand the reason they want it to be Fx, but I think that FF is easier to understand.
It makes more sense to me at least to take the first letter from each syllable than the first and last letter in the name. - kingace, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Avalontor:
I can tell people are overly upset when they write long rants about unimportant things. Kind of like your comment.
- Raian, on 10/12/2007, -15/+8So that us Apple boys and girls don't get too jealous... here is something similar for Mac OS X from Apple-- in a nice, neat little installer package.
http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/broadbandtuner10.html- CoachZed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"Not recommended for Airport connections."
What's that all about? I'm guessing 75%+ of mac users are on a wireless network now. Is this tweak not compatible? - whitesaint, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4@Ralan
What the video said to do worked fine for me on Firefox for OS X.
@Coach
75%? are you crazy? - adiosk8, on 10/12/2007, -21/+3OS X has firefox you tard
- angelp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I was able to make the changes to Firefox on my Macbook just fine.
- ricksite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is a different tweak from the Firefox/IE tweak. Apple's tweak apparently doesn't work well with wireless. I am guessing this is due to the fact that it is a tweak for high speed connections and wireless isn't "high speed" enough. It probably doesn't work well with dialup either. Does that mean they shouldn't release it? I see no problem here.
- justgeorge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4THANKS - I know you guys love FF - and I don't hold that against you, but I much prefer safari - so this was well useful.
- M4cb0y, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2In Mac Pilot there's also an "Optimize for Broadband" option under Network
http://img428.imageshack.us/img428/4431/picture5nk6.png - broomett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2CoachZed's comment is very typical of Digg. Making absurd predictions based on absolutely nothing factual. 75%? You really are out of touch with reality.
- CoachZed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"Not recommended for Airport connections."
- Recoil42, on 10/12/2007, -14/+60By increasing the amount of maximum connections you use, you're putting undue strain on webservers, and DECREASING the amount of users they can serve simultaneously.
Yes, it will speed up your connection a slight bit. But it's selfish. Don't use this. The internet will thank you.- Smigge87, on 10/12/2007, -7/+33Afraid of tube blockage? Just send a powerball down it.
- dattaway, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20Not to worry. The Apache webserver has a whole section of settings to limit the maximum number of connections and make others wait.
- ricksite, on 10/12/2007, -15/+3How is the load on the web server increased? It has to serve the files one way or another.
- bixing, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4Yeah hi, it's almost 2007.
If your server can't handle this then you should probably get with the times :) - xutopia, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Every decent web server I know has options to limit concurrent connections from one source. If your server cannot handle it, set it up so it can. There is no excuse here.
- BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5ricksite is right. While you are increasing the load for the time you are downloading, you also spend less time downloading. The total data transferred is the same, so there is no effect on total data transferred through the tubes.
- covertbadger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11ricksite is not right. Upping the number of simultaneous connections uses extra resources on the server (sockets and threads are not free). It has nothing to do with bandwidth usage.
- bixing, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0Yeah, but this is a non-issue. You're arguing about old technology.
If your servers are anything decent, then it's not really a problem.
Hell, I have my server on a crappy old Athlon XP 1800 and the bandwidth will max out before the connections to the server ever will (well, to a point, but trust me, Firefox isn't gonna be the cause of it).
Plus there should always be load balancing, if it's really that important to you.
We're not talking rocket science, here. Any decent amateur admin will have no problem with this, really.
So it's beyond me why people are even treating it as if it's a big issue. Yeah, if you're running your ***** on grandma's Pentium 1 that you tossed Linux on, then expect some hangups. (and no, I'm not saying linux is the cause of it) - thinkdj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0That is indeed a great insight .. I never thought about the load the servers would have to take .. Now we have the reason why IE and Firefox isnt shipped with the tweaked values !
- konspence, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2@smigge87's comment:
I cannot believe another tube joke just got 20 diggs. - devinbunker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Ok, everyone seems a bit confused about what the tweak really does. Here's a quick tip: the Firefox tweak and the IE tweak do two different things!
The Firefox tweak involves turning on HTTP pipelining and increasing the number of requests that your browser will SERIALLY send to the web server over a connection without waiting for a response. This consumes very few additional resources on a web server, and is generally recognized as being a "good thing" for everyone. It is turned off by default in Firefox, though, due to compatibility concerns; some older or non-standard web servers don't like it. Assuming you don't mind having the occasional website break, THE FIREFOX TWEAK IS OK.
The IE tweak, on the other hand, has nothing to do with HTTP pipelining; it works by increasing the number of PARALLEL requests that your browser will submit to a web site by opening more simultaneous connections to a web server. This is not a good thing, as each additional connection to a web server can require significant additional resources; on a standard Apache/PHP web site, it could take anywhere from 5-20+ MB of RAM per simultaneous connection. This is especially problematic when you have a large HTTP keep-alive timeout, where each connection will intentionally sit idle for a long time doing nothing after the request was served. Thus, THE IE TWEAK IS BAD.
- Vakon22, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8This hack is fairly old. It still works very well.
But an average to below average user could just install the "Fasterfox" plug-in. As intrktevo had pointed out already It makes these tweaks a lot easier without having to do about:config.
Enjoy :) - PhantomBantam, on 10/12/2007, -10/+68Changing a setting is now considered a hack? Dude. I have a sweet hack. Double-click on an icon on your desktop, and if it's an application it will open up.. Yeah. Sweet hack, huh?
- a55h4t, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0I can't believe I clicked on something labeled "sweet." That's one level above "phat."
Oh yeah...this is wack...
- a55h4t, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0I can't believe I clicked on something labeled "sweet." That's one level above "phat."
- elck03, on 10/12/2007, -16/+5don't click the link...he's using metacafe to make money...screw that
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -13/+52Why the hell is this a video? Lame 2 da maxx0r.
- rhettnyedotorg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2and it's bee dugg to death, to boot.
- ktan91, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Selfish? you are taking away connections.. but the server is suppose to handle it and if it doesn't.. they limit the amount of connections you can have anyways.
- CompIsMyRx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8If you use Linux, try Swiftfox. It is an optimized build of Firefox for each processor, so it starts faster and loads pages quicker (it comes with pipelining on by default).
- KnightMareInc, on 10/12/2007, -10/+4These very very old tweaks dont need to be on the front page.
- anteyekon4myst, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5Thanks man it worked for me. (FF)
- TheProfessional, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14These can actually be pretty harmful to web servers (creates too much of a load for ones that can't handle it) and it is generally considered 'not nice'.
- ricksite, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4Can you explain exactly why this is bad? Saying that it is "not nice" doesn't mean much to me.
- covertbadger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Each additional simultaneous connection comes with a cost to the server. A tcp connection takes up resources, and if it's a naive server implementation that creates a thread per connection, then increasing the number of simultaneous connections per client makes a colossal difference to the resources needed by the server.
The HTTP RFC actually recommends the maximum connection rate per client should be 2.
I actually have my client set up for 10 connections - I know it isn't nice and I know why it isn't nice; I just don't care. - Toloran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@ricksite
The reason it "Isn't nice" is that instead of a single connection trying to get a single thing at a time, you have multiple connections trying to get multiple things all for a single user. It increases the load on the server and can cause it to go down (which is in essence what causes the digg-effect).
Think of it this way: You try to play a game on your computer. Depending on your computer it may or may not slow down a bit. However, what would happen if you had two instances of the game running at the same time? The machine would probably slow down. What about four? Or five? Or more? Each instance of the game would bog your computer down even more until it eventually crashed from the load.
That is basically what you are doing: instead of running the single "game" (normal single connection) you are running multiple copies of the same "game" at once (multiple connections). So from the server's perspective you are treated as multiple users connected to the site instead of just one. So if the server can only handle 1,000 connections, if everyone used this method to improve load time, only 100 people could be connected at once (instead of the usual 1000). - ricksite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Toloran, thank you for answering my question but I think there is a misunderstanding of how pipelining works. With pipelining, the browser doesn't make multiple connections to get multiple things at the same time. The browser makes one connection to request multiple things at the same time. This reduces overhead of the client and the server because multiple requests can often be sent in the same packet. The way you describe pipelining is actually the way a server works without pipelining. Without pipelining, the browser will make multiple requests (and connections) to the server simultaneously. If 1000 people make 5 requests from a website, the server will need to serve up 5000 requests. Pipelining doesn't change this but as opposed to traditional means, it will lower the overhead to the server.
- AmunRa666, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Very nice!!!
- shadowsurfr1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14In Firefox, it's much easier to type in about:config and in the search box, type in "pipe". That would only bring up the 3 pipelining values, and nothing else. No more sorting through hundreds of "network" entries.
- Justin6512, on 10/12/2007, -13/+8woooww, sooooo olllldddd!
- 9mmCensor, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Great. Now we have articles for old tweaks (this is not new), being offered in the least practical way possible. But at least someone is making some money.
- LoraxLorax, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1If I recall correctly Firefox has hard-coded the upper limit to avoid this nastiness. If you use a workaround, you are fairly likely to get blocked by any server where you request so many simultaneous connections.
- kob0724, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2That works amazingly!
- bixing, on 10/12/2007, -13/+25Am I the only one highly annoyed with the whole, "You'll be hurting other people's servers with this"? As if it's my responsibility to make sure your server is okay.
I mean, I have broadband, so I'm gonna set my stuff so that it utilizes my connection to the full potential.
It's not my job to look after your servers to make sure they're stable or up-to-date enough to handle it. We've been long outside of the era of 28.8 modems, for about 10 years now, and technology needs to be adjusted as such.
If your server can't handle the traffic... then here's a violin for ya.- MrUnderbridge, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7"Am I the only one highly annoyed with the whole, "You'll be hurting other people's servers with this"? As if it's my responsibility to make sure your server is okay."
Yes, probably because you're among the minority of selfish assholes. - bixing, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Cry more, nub.
- DarkStalker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5When your favorite websites start going down because they can't handle the load and the extra resources required, here's a violin for ya.
- MrUnderbridge, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7"Am I the only one highly annoyed with the whole, "You'll be hurting other people's servers with this"? As if it's my responsibility to make sure your server is okay."
- someguy9, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1also enable
network.http.proxy.pipeline to true - broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I don't get why Metacafe makes videos of everything when in almost every instance, video is NOT the best way to get their message across.
- nikoniko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Because the video producer gets paid $5 for every 1000 views, provided some conditions are met. To qualify, a video must reach 20000+ views and have a rating of 3 or better. This video poster has already made $139 thanks to Digg and a few other sites.
- broomett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6OK...then let me rephrase it...why do people still submit annoying MEtacafe links to Digg when it is usually crap, or something far better explains with simply text?
It is getting fairly obvious that the Metacafe submissions getting to the front page all the time is not a coincidence anymore. A little gaming is going on.
- Nano324, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Does anyone know any other tweaks for increasing
browsing speed?- cakenoob, on 10/22/2007, -0/+3read faster.
- Chris1974, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5I don't understand how this increases the load on an server.
1 connection for 20 seconds = 20 seconds of load.
4 connections for 5 seconds = 20 seconds of load.
10 connections for 2 seconds = 20 seconds of load.
As far as it shouldn't be on the home page because it is an old tweak. I visit dig all the time and thing was new to me.
If you want to have digg grow to be more mainstream, we have to stop being a bunch of pissy, techno elitists and let the digg systems work.
I you don't think it is a good story, digg it down and save comments for people to have something useful to add.- inmatarian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7That's because it's frontloaded. 10 Connections at once from a single user will cause slower connections for 9 other users. Basically, this makes the Digg effect even more dramatic, since instead of a swarm of a million users all at once, it turns into 10 Million connections all at once.
- Felshadow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1although its not really a hack...because its just changing settings, i noticed a decent amount of improvement from this, have fun :P
- iOsiris, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Increasing the connections causes unnecessary stress on the server side. (Though it does increase the speed somewhat). IMO it does more harm than good.
- hiPpymIck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2for some quite afew sites this makes my ffox browsing faster
preview appears without click or delay instantly quite often
you can expand preview if youwant or just quick dump it
http://www.cooliris.com/Site/index.html
link is to homepage with demo gotta learn to use it i think its pretty straightforward
plus its extrafun on youtube!!... as they say :'why click?'
i think i rave about this -its freeware even posted a story
what do others think? - chazuk, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Just so I don't kill servers i set it to 8.
Happy? - evancweeks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2If you didn't know about this 1 and a half years or so ago when it came out (hell, maybe even before that), then you have not been using Firefox for that long.
- cfuentea, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3boring and OLD story, no digg!
- Darkness123, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6They should of put a disclaimer before they told people to use regedit I can hear the screams of some people who have f*ed their PCs right about now. lol
- Zhay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The fact that only IE users would be editing the registry counter balances the possibility that they may mess up their computer. If they mess up their PC, they are a tool, and thus, deserve it.
- thesimo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1it deffo made digg load muuuuuch faster, even while downloading with other apps
- SilverhammerMBA, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0Best way to speed up internet without having to download process-hogging accelerators: the mvp hosts file.
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
A built-in windows feature that not enough people know about - deehaw, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1didn't notice much increase at all, though i did install adblock plus, that helped to load pages quicker as it got rid of all the annoying flash and javascript ads.
- mattc908, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0So If your using Safari just download this http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/broadbandtuner10.html install it and bang it should make safari fast, well I did notice it speed up.
- DM01, on 10/12/2007, -8/+21) Don't use IE, 2) The Extension "FasterFox" for FF does this plus some, 3) old.
- mrsexzzmaleman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This may seem ignorant, but what were those other two things he tweaked that he didn't go over in the video?
- artman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Thanks. They were all set to the lowest defaults. It does work. No complaints. I have Digg as my homepage and it loads a lot quicker. Other sites too.
This is new to me so shut up know-it-alls. - inmatarian, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Digg Users, please don't use this advice. Pipelining only causes weaker servers to crash faster.
- sjbdallas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9That MetaCafe site seems a little obnoxious to me. They show all kinds of stupid tweaks but in the form of videos. There are all kinds of apps that will record your screen but these guys are using handheld cameras over someone's shoulder. Kind of small-time in my opinion.
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Hrm... My IE settings were already set as per the video. I won't bother with the Opera settings because of what was written above.
Nice try. - mpeters13, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Digg.com has truly allowed me to master time travel. I've somehow traveled a year into the past.
- doshindude, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0fasterfox already does this.
- spr33, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Speed up Firefox, use an optimized build.
http://weblog.pigfoot.org/pigfoot/2006/11/27/un-official-firefox-rendering-test/ - kingkilr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It's like Draino! It clears the Tubes!
- rovertly, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2i set 'network.http.pipelining.maxrequests' to infinity. my internets are blazing fast now.
-
Show 51 - 77 of 77 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
