Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

Netscape 6.1b and large bookmark files Web Browsers
I've been using NS6.1 Beta almost since it first came out and really like it. It's fast, stable and works on all the Web sites I use, including my online banking. However, lately it started to become very sluggish, both starting up and rendering pages. So slow, in fact, that I thought it had locked up and did a Force Quit.

Not wanting to lose the use of this browser, I decided that the cause might be some preferences or the cache becoming corrupted. I deleted my user profile folder (saving off my bookmarks file, of course) and re-ran NS6.1, causing it to rebuild the profile. It came up quite snappily and was its old self again. I was vindicated!

However, that was not to be. I copied in my bookmarks file and restarted Netscape. Suddenly it was back to its old, sluggish self. It then dawned on me that the likely cause was that my bookmark file had too many entries or was too large for the browser to easily manipulate. To test this, I removed the file, restarted Netscape and let it build a default bookmark file. Lo and behold, it was running quite nicely again. I'm going to edit my old bookmarks and clear out some unused entries, but this still sounds like a bug to me. The exact same file in IE works fine.
    •    
  • Currently 1.50 / 5
  You rated: 2 / 5 (6 votes cast)
 
[3,020 views]  

Netscape 6.1b and large bookmark files | 3 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'Netscape 6.1b and large bookmark files' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Try Mozilla
Authored by: seedy on Oct 19, '01 11:13:02AM

Go to Mozilla.org and grab either 0.9.5 for X or a Nightly Build. NC 6.1 is based on 0.9.3 (I think) and is almost unusable on 10.1 compared to the nightly I'm using right now.

As an added plus, they made the New Tab command Cmd-T instead of Ctrl-T.

It won't have the AIM sidebar and a couple of other features, but it will only be an 11 meg download.

Also, you can place aliases of your Bookmarks file, renamed appropriately(Hotlist.html, Favorites.html), in your iCab and Explorer prefs, and they will all use the same bookmarks. You may need to use Tinkertool or the Terminal to make them visible in the User/Library/Preferences.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Re:Try Mozilla
Authored by: tomsinclair on Oct 20, '01 01:46:18PM

After looking at my bookmarks files, I found that it had bloated up to 113,000
entries and took up 15+ MB! I used pico to open it and found that my bookmark
entries had been duplicated and reduplicated, making my file blow up so big.
It may be a bug in NS6.1 (which I understand is based on Mozilla 0.9.3, not the
latest version.)


I had been using Mozilla before (I'm an OSS fan) but I couldn't get to my
online banking site or Cisco's online curriculum in addition to lack of
Flash/Quicktime support.

However, based on your comments, I grabbed 0.9.5 and found that it does
everything NS6.1 did, just faster. I quickly rebuilt my bookmarks list (Manage
Bookmarks works much more smoothly than in NS) and the new tabbed windows
features is aweswome!

Thanks for the tip!



[ Reply to This | # ]
It's not a bug, its a feature
Authored by: Chas on Oct 19, '01 03:23:48PM

Well, not really. It is a bug. But it's an ancient bug, I recall seeing this many years ago in the earliest releases of Netscape 4. Netscape and Mozilla will just choke when your bookmark file is too large. But there is an easy fix. Netscape bookmark files have one excellent property, they are fully formed web pages. You can take them out of their standard location, store them somewhere else, load them from your local hard disk, and bookmark them in your new bookmarks file. I have two huge bookmark files containing hundreds of links, I just put them in a safe spot on my local hard disk, and bookmarked them. My bookmarks menu is relatively short now, with two quick jumping-off spots for my mega-lists, and the browser runs at full speed.



[ Reply to This | # ]