A Look at the Newly Released Mozilla Firefox 0.9 799
SilentBob4 writes "Mad Penguin is one of the first to review the latest Mozilla Firefox release, numbered 0.9. According to the reviewer, there's a lot to be thankful for, as this release is far more stable than its earlier versions and sports some new features along with a new interface. My new all-time-favorite line: 'Look out Internet Explorer... your days have been numbered for some time now, but Firefox 1.0 will surely leave you shaking on your already shaky foundations and standing in a small warm puddle'. Nicely put."
Great browser, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, the most feature-rich products do not always get to be standard-setters. <thinking>countless examples</thinking> It often takes loads of marketing hype and product leverage to leap over the competition, something that Firefox doesn't have in spades.
I love Firefox. The best it can do--at least IMO--is raise the bar for commercial browsers. I do hope I'm wrong on this point, however.
You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:5, Interesting)
We are getting close (Score:5, Interesting)
So, part of our reason for seriously considering moving is that we've had a number of trojans on those machines exploiting IE holes. This combined with the pain of downloading MS patches on dial-ups is leading the IT department to lean toward a FireFox standard. One of the things that had been holding us back was problems with the iNotes client in FireFox 0.8. It works in 0.6, not 0.8. Well, it is working again in 0.9.
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:5, Interesting)
I helped push the use of Firefox on the vast majority of machines where I work. The amount of malware finding its way onto the systems of users who don't know any better has been substantially reduced.
I found it harder to push the use of Mozilla on users (just for testing) than it was to push FireFox when we decided to go with that browser. Users seemed to be put off that Mozilla looked different enough to "scare" them where Firefox looks more modern and has more similarities to IE which helped ease the transition. In fact not a single person complained once FireFox fired up.
This isn't to say Mozilla is a poor browser but to users who don't have an understanding of why using an alternate browser to IE is a good thing, superficial changes seem to matter much more than any functional feature.
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:5, Interesting)
Still, the whole complaint of entering your password again is tiny compared to the risks of IE. It's the *same* password that people use to log in. It's not like they have to remember a *new* password which is understandably a much bigger complaint.
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:4, Informative)
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:5, Interesting)
People are now doing XPI versions of the dreaded ActiveX "Do you want to install Weatherbug" type things. Thankfully, there's a whitelist now, but we'll see how far it stays put.
Re:You most certainly are (wrong) (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or including the browser with the OS. Hell, even I know better than most users, and I use Safari on my mac because a) it came with it b) has the best OS integration and c) it pretty much works.
Camino is a close second, it might be better with future releases. I'm not sure if I have the newest Firefox on my mac, but the one I have doesn't even create a window. Mozilla isn't that pretty on osx either.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Informative)
I've actually very recently switched from Safari to Firefox as my Mac default. Every so often I miss SnapBack -- but all the major features are very comparable, the rendering engines seem equivalent in speed, and Firefox's typeahead link selection can really be a great thing. The bookmark importer that I found even set up the toolbar bookmarks about the same way mine were set up in Safari, so I don't notice the UI change as a dramatic difference. Once Firefox is set up as the browser default it's just as "integrated" with the OS as Safari is. And, Firefox's current iterations are quite pretty.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Informative)
I also like how if you open a bunch of tabs it reports all the dead tabs one after the other instead of having to go to each dead tab to OK the error message. And it is very nice to have the "Open in Tabs" in each bookmark folder instead of as a toggle in the bookmarks manager.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Thankfully Apple did do a good job and making sure the look was very clean without any bad pixel/widgets that you wouldn't expect to be that way. For example, whenever I theme anything else (whether it be windows, gnome, kde, whatever) I always end up with some application with a weird looking widget.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:3, Informative)
I don't kn
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
one thing should be point out, it should be a professional web developer, not the one just finshed online training of http://www.w3schools.com/ [w3schools.com], which only tell you something about IE.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
My company works in the financial industry, and has the normal people you would expect visiting their websites. Bankers, high level management, marketing, etc. Over 90% of our browsers are IE. The only browser we are forced to support on every single page is IE. Once in awhile we can let slip a feature that will display oddly in Mozilla or Safari, but IE we're forced to have 100% compliance with. We therefore all have many versions of IE installed on our machines and do our day to day development using IE. While I wouldn't mind having another browser compete with IE once again, I don't see Mozilla or any other browser competing any time soon for the standard population.
Technies maybe, but Bankers? No chance.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
But, as this week's Slashdot saying goes, there's the rub: people don't want to be told they're wrong, and web sites that patronise their audience get their window closed. Any commercial organisation's web site is likely to be focused primarily on one thing, and one thing only: sales. Achieving those sales is incompatible with trying to "educate" their users, and very unlikely to achieve a better return in terms of boosting sales from the five vistors a week who use non-IE browsers. Ergo, as much as we all hate it, their management has entirely the right mentality.
If you were going to do that, I'd suggest going back to the old-fashioned "Designed for..." logos at the bottom of the page, since at least a few people might remember them. Then again, those people are probably using non-IE browsers already anyway, and everyone else will probably go "What's Mozilla?" Sad as it is, you're never going to win this one by out-PRing Microsoft.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
My bank (CIBC) recently (in the last 8 months or so...) overhauled their site. and now says:
"Important: CIBC Online Banking supports the following browsers: Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.x or better, Netscape Navigator 6.x or better and Safari 1.0. If your browser doesn't meet the above-mentioned requirements, please select the "Browser security and cookie information" link below to find out the benefits of upgrading your browser."
Before it said something akin to "IE4.0 or Netscape 4.0 or better", but if you tried to use IE6, Netscape6, or Mozilla (any version) you were directed to the "you must upgrade to IE4.0 or Netscape 4.0 or better" page.
Most banks I've dealt with are bastards about browsers.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
I have been in a web dev for many years, and I recognize a couple of things contrary to your post:
You must conform to IE; it's > 90% of the browser market, to "give up on IE" is to admit you create shoddy sites or intranets.
Creating websites with "making them work with Mozilla" in mind, and ignore the other 90%?
IE doesn't conform to standards? Perhaps
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
That aside, SIGALARM was right. IE is, in essence, its own standard. What matter if 6.0 supports different features (or the same features differently) than 5.5? Guess you'd better upgrade your browser by purchasing a new computer and getting the latest MS OS.
I'm sorry, but MS really does dictate the market standards at this point. Trust me, I work for a fortune 100 company, and I can tell you that our websites are designed around IE. Our internal sites contain code to prevent viewing in any other browser in an attempt to minimize incompatibility. Nobody (at least, I think nobody) is arguing that IE is pretty horrible browser implementation; however, it's also the standard to which one must comply. Such is life.
(Yes, I run FireFox
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
You must conform to IE; it's > 90% of the browser market, to "give up on IE" is to admit you create shoddy sites or intranets.
Is a 100% W3C-compliant site shoddy if it doesn't render properly in IE, or is IE shoddy? I agree with you that for commercial websites, they have to render properly in IE because of its overwhelming market share, but IE, and least in the days when I was last a web developer, was well-known to break W3C compliance all over the place. I would be pretty surprised if anything has changed. To call a site shoddy because it won't render in IE even if it's clearly the browser's fault because the site is just wrong thinking.
Sadly, Netscape/Mozilla in those days wasn't fully W3C-compliant either, but it did a much better job than IE. To make a site really perfect for both required (and probably still requires) some Javascript magic to serve up a page that is broken in the right ways for the target browser. This can be necessary on a commercial site, for obvious reasons.
However, on a site that is your own personal page, it is perfectly justified (and I have done this) to just put up a notice that says "This site is 100% W3C-compliant; if it doesn't look right in your browser, get a better browser." That's telling it like it is, and you have no obligation to do anything else on your personal site.
IE doesn't conform to standards?
Well, since Microsoft has been a W3C member for years, then it's about time they get off their asses and fix their browser. That doesn't mean it can't also render MSHTML (that horrid, crufty mess), but as a starting point, it must render W3C-compliant sites correctly. To do less is to just admit they created (and continue to release) a shoddy browser.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
The sites average around 100,000 uniques a month all together, 4 of which are business sites and 3 of which are "fun" sites. I can tell you that IE has averaged between 90% and 96% per month for the last 12 months. Let me know if you want more detailed stats.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, but what are the sites? Windows Software sites?
We're a daily newspaper, we get way more than 100k unique visitors a month. We are seeing around 80% IE. Mozilla based browsers make up the second largest (15%), with safari at 2% or so. I think it's a pretty good estimate considering we don't even do tech news, so our visitors really are john q. public.
But you can't even say that all 80% of those users use IE6, it's really only around 30%, with the other 50% using IE5.5 5.0 and 4.0(!). So even just developing for IE is a pain in the ass because you're really developing for 4 different browsers.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many, many web pages that are authored in Front Page, run on IIS and look great on IE and like crap on everything else. Giving up and refusing to run alternate browsers in order to reduce headaches is in many ways a cop out. It makes the problem worse, since no one is slamming the webmasters for non-working pages. But it's easier, and when it comes to standing on principles or putting bread on the table, principles all too often take a back seat.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
I mostly agree with you - I've developed, or caused to be developed, lots of web pages. They work fine in Opera, IE and Firefox/mozilla.
PNG, however, supports 8-bit transparency on 8-bit images (technically resulting in a 16-bit image file, of course.) Not just for 24-bit images.
The advantage is huge - you can lay an image with all manner of nice features (shadows, antialiased edges, feathered cameos, just as a few for-instances) over any backdrop. As a result, there are lots of graphics instances where PNG is a much better choice (feature-wise) than GIF, likewise better than JPEG. For some things - like antialiased edges on typical objects - the nature of the transparency information results in very high compression, and there is almost no transfer overhead for the extra 8-bit plane. Transparency doesn't cost like byteplane data does, at least, not typically.
However, IE is the big dog. Until/unless PNG works correctly right out of the gate with IE, the typical business sites you see it on will be *nix business sites.
Case in point: I am a big Linux fan, and I also head a company that makes a product for Windows on the order of Photoshop. We've got a huge number of web pages; there are absolutely no PNGs on them (despite the fact that our software broadly supports PNG, and can even create MNG animations.) Why would I allow our web folk to put an image format on a page that will make the page look bad??? We're trying to sell a graphics product!
I won't allow the use of anything but JPG, GIF, HTML, CGI form elements, and server-side scripting (previously perl, now python) on a web page. Solves all manner of problems. No Flash, no PDF, no JAVA, no Director, no ACTIVEX, no CSS - no nothing but the basics. And you know what? It hasn't interfered in the least with our ability to get what we want on a web page. Almost every browser on the planet can read our pages, and no one ever has to go rooting around for a plug-in or otherwise have their browsing experience interrupted.
For PNG, I would extend the allowed image set to include it if IE supported it. Because there are advantages to be had there for us as page designers that cannot be easily achieved otherwise.
PNG's greatest misfeature is that it does not support animation. For that, we have the latecoming, and much more narrowly supported, MNG. That'd be awesome to have too, but if MS can't even support PNG in IE, I don't have much hope for MNG.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
I beg to differ. It is a royal pain in the ass, especially if you're trying to support different versions of IE.
Hardly! IE barely renders straight HTML fine, and heaven forbid if you want to do anything as advanced as -- GASP! -- DHTML.
The biggest consumer for IE -- the biggest, most inflexible consumer for IE -- is corporate ... and who the hell is developing web pages without CSS or Javascript anymore? Not corporations, that's for sure. They can barely get by without rendering each page entirely in Flash -- mostly, because IE is so broken and it is such a pain in the ass to write pages for that it is easier to use Flash.
Much of what CSS IE doesn't outright ignore, it renders incorrectly, and it can't handle much of the Javascript DOM API consistently. It'd be one thing if it was at least broken consistently, but it isn't. Javascript is enough of a pain in the ass to develop in without IE's quirks causing more confusion.
You're serious? Read what you just wrote. You're trying to tell me that me being forced to code around bugs in IE isn't a pain in the ass? How do you define "pain in the ass", in your world?
There is simply no excuse for how poorly IE complies to W3C standards, and it isn't even funny to try.
Re:Great browser, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
You must have something seriously weird on your systems. I've been using Mozilla and/or Firefox for over a year now on several machines on XP and 2000, and while I have an occasional problem with Firefox (fewer problems than with IE, though), I never had any installation go bad.
3. You're absolutely right here. The thing about IE though, is that it's got nowhere to go but down. MS has no plans to do anything more with IE beyond the fixes in XP SP 2, while the Mozilla projects just keep getting better and better. Of course, Microsoft just has to flex some of their monopoly power to put a hurtin' on any competitor, but in this case Mozilla has everything to gain and MS has everything to lose.
Nice? no (Score:4, Insightful)
Nicely put? Whatever. The writer seems so excited about his pun about Microsoft wetting itself that he ignored how awkward it sounds using the root word "shake" twice so quickly. He could have said "precarious position" instead of "shaky foundations," or even "trembling" instead of "shaking."
On topic: Microsoft has nothing to worry about from Firefox. Until Microsoft is forced to package Firefox along with Windows, as well as make it the default browser, the Mozilla crew will never catch up.
Re:Nice? no (Score:5, Informative)
check out this: http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html [google.com]
and more specifically this: http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/may04_brows
I love it to death, even have my family converted (unknowingly... changed the big blue E to point at firefox instead) but that graph doesn't paint a nice picture.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nice? no (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/mar04_bro
http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist/may
Re:Nice? no (Score:3, Funny)
That's what Opera's magnify feature is for. Zooming in is fun.
Superior Quality != Market Dominance (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Superior Quality != Market Dominance (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that superior quality and price does always win, but it may take a long time. Fortunately, there is no Mozilla corporation to go out of business in the meantime. There is nothing that can save the Microsoft empire in the long term, apart from moving out of open-source commoditized product areas, though it has had very little luck with that. Ten years from now, Mi
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Not there yet (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not there yet (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Not there yet (Score:3, Informative)
Is it just me.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Is it just me.. (Score:5, Informative)
0.9 has NOT been released. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:no installation tips: They' (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Is it just me.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Firefox 0.9 RC now available
A testing candidate for the newest and best preview release of Mozilla's next generation browser is available for download - featuring a new theme for Windows and Linux and much more!
What's next? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What's next? (Score:5, Funny)
Mozilla Blues (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft is NOT an innovator, so they need to get their ideas somewhere. I'd be willing to bet that they're biding their time, letting open source do free research and development for them. Then hand pick the best ideas for plugins, tabbed interfaces, etc and incorporate them into IE for Longhorn, which will then be shoved down the throats of the masses in 2006.
Re:Mozilla Blues (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mozilla Blues (Score:3, Interesting)
No, if non-IE browsers gain too much market share, more and more web sites will be standards compliant, but with lots of hacks to look fine on IE as well. IE will never (in the forseeable future) fall into such a marginal market share that it would be ignored by developers. Even if it were suddenly 50/50 overnight, or 75/25 in favor of FF, sites would still m
Re:Mozilla Blues (Score:3, Interesting)
Alternate browsers have a difficult battle ahead. IMO the browser developers really need to push major websites to take advantage of features that IE may not impliment currently and are part of of
Re:Mozilla Blues (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mozilla Blues (Score:3, Interesting)
just a thought
Text grab from server before it dies. (Score:5, Informative)
Last update: 06-14-2004
Submitted by Adam Doxtater
The last time we looked at Mozilla Firefox , it was still called Mozilla Firebird and then only in version 0.6. Times have changed. Oh how they've changed. Today, The browser with the identity crisis has a sleek new interface, modern features, and is blowing the doors off its competition... and this is putting it mildly.
Mozilla Firefox ( release notes | roadmap ) is a completely modular browser consisting of a basic, streamlined framework upon which users can add ' extensions ', which (just as the name implies) are essentially plugins for the browser. The idea of less is more has been taken to the next level with this browser. With the default browser, you have just enough browser to do pretty much anything you can on the Internet, while more advanced, custom functionality is reserved to the extensions. For instance, you can load extra functionality such as more precise ad blocking, mouse gestures, website registration bypassing, dictionary, user agent switching, complete page and listbox/textbox searching, text zooming, UI tweaks, and the list goes on. There are so many possibilities I can't go into them all here.
When compared to browsers such as Internet Explorer, Firefox is light years ahead. Microsoft will need to do some serious footwork to catch up to the usability and functionality of this browser. Seriously. The only browsers that come close are Mozilla (of course), Opera , and Konqueror . Safari is also coming along nicely on OS X . The beauty of this browser is not only its functionality... it also lies in its portability. Firefox is currently supported under Linux (GTK+-Xft), Mac OSX, Sun Solaris SPARC/x86, Sun JDS 2003, Microsoft Windows (all versions), and IBM OS/2 , so you can drop it onto almost anything with a modern CPU ( system requirements )
The Mozilla Firefox 0.9 browser
What's new in version 0.9?
This is the last preview release before Firefox comes of age at milestone version 1.0, so what new features have been implemented? Well, at first glance all you will notice is the interface has been redesigned with an updated theme. At first I didn't quite know how to take it, but now that I've used it for a while it's grown on me. The new look is very minimalistic, clinging tightly to the focus of the browser itself. Anyway, here's a more complete listing for those of you who are skimming:
* New default theme - Like I said, it sports a new sleek skin (seen in the screenshots of this review).
* Redesigned theme/extension managers & SmartUpdate - Newly redesigned interfaces make it even easier to manage your browser, as well as keeping it up to date with smart notifications
* Installer updates - Linux now has an installer for GTK2, and the Windows package has gotten smaller - to the tune of 4.6MB.
* Easier migration - Migrating your important information and settings from other browsers has never been easier. Firefox can now import settings from previous versions, Internet Explorer, Netscape, Mozilla, and Opera. This includes favorites, settings, cookies, history and saved passwords.
* Help - An updated online help system is now available. This is in addition to the wonderful Firefox Forums and existing help material
* Linux look and feel - Much work has gone into the UI, making it adhere better to GTK2 themes. Menus now look like they belong in the desktop scheme like they were meant to be.
Not only were new features added to this release, work continues to keep bugs squashed, past and present, so the browser feels far more stable than it has in the past. Don't get me wrong, this browser has always been ahead of its time in terms of vision and scope, but it has had its fair share of bugs, but so far as I can tell by running this release constantly for the past week or so it looks pretty solid. It hasn't crashed once, and let me tell you this is a definite improveme
Good lines :) (Score:5, Funny)
What about:
Internet Explorer, your pitiful life is soon to be ended by my completion. My mercy will allow you to die quickly and rot away. Your miserable "browser" functions is a thread against the race of the free, and you deserve the greatest and most horrible deseases known to man.
Anyway, Firefox cannot beat IE off the top rank. It's simply becaues IE comes with Windows, and no smallwited user would know that there's alternatives, at all.
Re:Good lines :) (Score:3, Insightful)
Sigh. I've noticed this. People don't even realise it's separate from Windows (come to think of it, a lot of them think Word and Windows are the same thing).
Even some of my friends who are aware that you can have another browser seem reluctant to change for bizarre, and really quite stupid reasons. It's difficult to convince them of the delights of tabbed browsing and gestures.
Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
However, I just don't see IE going anywhere, ever. Not while Windows is on 90+% of mainstream desktops. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but just because a product is better, does not mean it will be successful.
I am all for Mozilla/Firefox, but I just can't see it ever landing on my fathers Dell, or my aunt's HP.
unless, of course, I put it there, but they call me enough already with stupid user questions... I ain't giving them a new piece of software.
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Firefox might actually be a solution to your problems. Think of all the adware/spyware/popup issues that could be resolved by getting them to switch from IE.
Jesse's list of "what's new in FF 0.9" (Score:5, Informative)
...take a look at Jesse's more detailed and informative list [squarefree.com]
It's ok. (Score:4, Informative)
Firefox is great (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Firefox is great (Score:5, Interesting)
(this is in firefox
Tell me that's not "cute". Granted, it is based on google, but you could googlebomb some normal non-sites to really annoy people.
Also, i've never seen IE automatically install ANYTHING, when it's fully patched, without the user pressing "yes," and there's PLENTY of sites out there putting ad-ware XPI's out that prompt you every time you go to the site.
I'm a VERY happy firefox user (on both linux and XP), and convert all my friends and family, but FUD can come both both sides.
Here's whats REALLY NEEDED (Score:4, Interesting)
Install Firefox
Install User-Agent Switcher with some pretty buttons
(plus tutorial)
Remove IE Icon
Automatically set all email url links to go to firefox.
Import the bookmarks, in the main folder.
i.e. make it mother-in-law proof.
Steven Vallarian>
Why (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why (Score:5, Informative)
I'm glad you asked because not many peiople have addressed this issue. I recently switched from IE to Firefox and this is unusual for me for I am generally pretty skeptical of the OpenSource Communiy's ability to rival MS at thier own game. However, on this one - FireFox has hit a home run. Let's start with just a few things that make FireFox Better:
#1. An integrated Pop-Up blocker: this sucker runs smooth in the background and doesn't hang for a second. It's so smooth you don't even know it's working. Simply the best.
#2. Tabular Windows: New windows may be opened as Tabs within the primary wondow. It's fast and smooth and makes flipping between loaded web pages a snap. Hey...you can actually load 2 -ro- 3 pages while reading your primary page - all without context switching. Nice!
#3. Excellent Menus! Although I've used I.E. for years, I find the Mozilla Menu more intuitive after only 2 days!!!
#4. Does not Run MS VBScript and ActiveX: theses are nothing but security holes, and for that reason, Firefox doesn't support them. I'm glad.
#5. Every Plug-in Imaginable Available: and easy to find and download!
#6 Ability to Pipeline Page Element: Makes for a much faster Web Page Load!
#7 Ability to Render While Loading: ability to render a Web Page while it is still loading - no having to wait and wait and wait!
#8. Overall Speed!!!! This SOB Firefox is fast - Very Fast compared to IE
#9 Colorful Iconized Menu Bars: Menu Bar Icons are colorful and more Intuitive than any I've seen on any browser.
Visceral Emotion Plug (Score:5, Insightful)
but Firefox 1.0 will surely leave you shaking on your already shaky foundations and standing in a small warm puddle'
Firefox is an excellent browser; I've been using it happily since 0.6.
But while IE can claim that it "came with My Computer" Firefox cannot overcome it but very slowly and only among those who appreciate its superiority and have enough patience to download and install it.
AOL was the last distributor of millions of CDs who were in a position to bundle Mozilla and deliver it to the majority audience that will just take what they get.
Make Firefox Even Faster! (Score:5, Informative)
There is an interesting post on WebMasterWorld, on how to decrease the loading/rendering time of Firefox. I have tried the settings, and have noticed a mild improvement. Just wanted to share the information.
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum21/8007.htm [webmasterworld.com]
Edit: Updated Instructions:
open about_:config (without the underscore).
1.) network.http.pipelining = true
2.) network.http.pipelining.firstrequest = true
3.) network.http.pipelining.maxrequests = (the poster says 32, but suggest 8 is the limit)
4.) network.http.proxy.pipelining = true
Don't do number #5.
http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=
Re:Make Firefox Even Faster! (Score:4, Informative)
more stable (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't that the way things are usually done, to try to improve a product?
Re:more stable (Score:4, Insightful)
IE here to stay... for now. (Score:3)
We all have to click on the Microsoft Ads (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a simple way for us to get rid of or at least reduce the impact of thoughs stupid get the facts adds. CLIC ON THEM. This will cost microsoft money and if we feal like the extra effort we might as well ask for the free stuff that they are willing to send.
bottom up growth pattern of FireFox (Score:3, Interesting)
This sort of behaviour pattern is similar to what happened back in the early-mid 90's when MS Office started to errode the dominance of WordPerfect and Lotus (and also Netscape).
Already my aging father has gone forth and converted at least a dozen of his own friends from IE to FireFox... and thus the chain reaction starts
Security... (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess the best way to describe the difference between Firefox and IE is this:
- With IE, web pages control the browser. They can open windows, close windows, hide your menu and toolbars, hide your status bar, and do god only knows what else.
- With Firefox, the user in in control, including JavaScript security policies and popup controls that define EXACTLY what web pages can and can't do. And the cookie controls are second only to lynx (which had fine-grained control on cookies from the moment they added persistant cookie support
And don't get me started on IE's security record and how long IE bugs are public before M$ even admits they exist, much less fixes them...
Firefox and tabs (Score:3, Interesting)
So I now use the Mozilla browser most of the time because it works well with the tab extensions.
I wish I were in a position to toss some money at firefox to support mainstreaming the tab extensions.
Re:Firefox and tabs (Score:4, Interesting)
Firefox is a great browser and is constantly improving. Although the developers aren't implementing all of TBE's features due to fear of bloat, they are listening. We got the confirmation dialog for closing a window with multiple tabs and we may just see a single tabbed window option one day (first step = open external links in tabs, bug 172962 [mozilla.org] recently marked blocking1.0+ by Ben Goodger).
Sorry but the new theme sucks (Score:3)
The previous theme looked a lot better. I'm aware of the lisencing issues, but this one is just plain ugly and minimalistic to the point that when you start the browser you wonder if this is a high school level test application.
Re:Sorry but the new theme sucks (Score:3, Informative)
it is changing (Score:3, Informative)
FireFox Considered Harmfull (Score:5, Interesting)
Firefox Makes me have to do twice as much work. Let me explain.
Firefox is by far the best browser ever. It is fast, standards compliant, and runs on every platform i support.
The problem is when i develop in firefox. I do some web development, often on a dealine. If i make a stylesheet that looks awesome in firefox, 90% of the time it does not work in internet explorer, which, unfortunatly, is what 90% of my clients use.
So, after i think i'm done, and i test in ie, i know have to go back and fix it, which takes a while as IE is really borked. Therefore, i have to charge more, and my clients are not as happy.
I tell them to switch to firefox, but for some reason, they dont.It's to the point now that i've installed IE5.5 under wine, and i use that as my main development browser. sad but true. I use phoe^H^H^H^Hfirefox for my daily browsing, for sure, but IE to develop.
Strangely, if i make a site that works in IE, it'll usually work in ff and safari/khtml.
of course, this is all IE's fault.. my tongue is planted firmly in my cheek... but it is something that drives me nuts.
Remember, friends don't let friends use Internet Explorer.
Consider the source... (Score:5, Insightful)
Anybody who thinks Firefox should cause Microsoft to fear doesn't understand why Microsoft won the browser war. It's not because they were better, but rather because they were good enough and it came with the OS.
Browser innovation hasn't stopped. (Score:4, Insightful)
Since Microsoft successfully drove Netscape from our desktops by shoving IE down our throats they've stopped innovating (unless you consider tighter integration into the OS an innovation). In the long run this will seal their doom.
Windows will lose steam (the movement is underway) Their proprietary options may suit your average PC user but in the ever-changing world of computing cross-platform is the wave of the future. Linux will continue to gain market share as will Apple. This may not be apparent to the media but I can tell you that among power users, at least in my circle, we welcome innovation, interoperability, and most of all options. Anti-Microsoft sentiment has never been higher. Microsoft's focus on marketing (and intellectual theft) over innovation can only carry them so far.
The open source movement is simply not something that M$ can buy themselves out of.
With that said I'm a very happy Mozilla user.
Favorite Line (Score:5, Insightful)
This is my favorite line, because it demonstrates how little open source people know about what the average joe wants. The average joe is never going to use FireFox unless some "nerdy" friend comes along and shows it to him/her. First of all you know how many people call the browsers "The Internet", in addition do you know how many people are just happy using what they have, because they may not care or know any better to use another browser.
The days may be numbered for IE in that there is a perceived better browser out there, but the days are not numbered for IE being used as the number one browser. Because most of the people using computers/internet today don't know much more than how to turn on their computer and use some familure applications. Also I love the guys that are using Linux and talking about how the days are numbered for IE.
My question is "How did you get IE installed on Linux?", since you seem to feel the days are numbered and you are running FireBird/Linux. Note I am not talking to the Windows guys that love FireBird, just the *nix guys that claim IE is numbered. It really shows how biased they are.
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
I hate to be the bearer of bad news (Score:4, Insightful)
Mozilla/Firefox will not have "won" the war until the majority of programmers under MS Windows, upon needing to add an HTML render widget, or HTTP downloader, or FTP downloader to their app, do so by invoking the appropriate DLL from Mozilla rather than the IE/Windows DLL.
Until that day - until the day when one CAN remove IE and all of its component DLLs from Windows and replace them with Mozilla, MS will be the winners of the war.
Just wait a little bit... (Score:5, Informative)
The RC *is* major feature complete, but (as evident with the new theme and extension work) is still needing a fair bit of work before release. 0.9 final is expected in July, 1.0 final is expected in September (at which point I'm more than happy to shove it on everybody and anybody :) ) See the Roadmap [mozilla.org] for details.
In a build I downloaded today, I even noticed that the profile importer now finally gives you the option of which profile to import from (eg IE, Netscape 4, Mozilla 1.x, etc) before actually doing the dirty work. That wasn't present in 0.9rc IIRC.
In other words, I'd wait a little bit longer before pushing 0.9RC on your friends and family. This one's for the testing folks. Of course, anything pre-1.0 is really meant for testing, but this one more so :)
memory footprint (Score:5, Insightful)
Please, no more feature before a decent memory footprint!... then it will be THE browser
Just wrote this for you to urge FF developers to go that way.
1.0 Release Ideas (Score:4, Funny)
When is the next name update for the project?
Re:Forgive the ignorance... (Score:5, Informative)
Firefox is Mozilla without the email client, right? It can accept the same modules/plugins and everything, right? Or am I way off?
Firefox is based on mozilla code. They created a stand alone browser that was better, smaller, faster than the mozilla one. They also want to redo the concept of mozilla proper where all the components can either be stand alone application or extensions to FireFox. Chec out the roadmap [mozilla.org] for a better explanation.
Re:Forgive the ignorance... (Score:4, Informative)
7. Is Firefox just Mozilla with a couple UI tweaks?
Firefox is substantially different, featuring a number of exclusive features and countless refinements. Well over 120,000 lines of code have been added or changed in the browser and toolkit CVS directories since the project began.
Firefox is a web browser and does not do email. For email, use Thunderbird [mozilla.org]. Plugins for Mozilla generally work with Firefox but the extensions are usually not compatible with each other.
Re:Forgive the ignorance... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Forgive the ignorance... (Score:4, Informative)
Mozilla and Firefox share plugin (Java, Flash, etc...) structure.
Mozilla and Firefox are internally different when it comes to extensions (mouse gestures, etc...) and themes.
Re:Mozilla is Dying (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to use Netscape all of the time. Not because it was a good browser, it actually felt too big, but because it wasn't IE. When firefox came out, I rejoiced at a small browser that didn't have all the crap that Netscape had built in. Firefox is the answer that I think many of us had been waiting for. Once it becomes more stable, more and more people will be switching over to it.
So... no, Mozilla is not dead.
Re:It's not light-years ahead of IE (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, IE cannot render properly coded HTML/XHTML/CSS, and therefore webmasters make buggy pages to appear correct in IE.
This means the buggy pages appear buggy in FF, which is just how they should appear, causing many people to think FF cannot render and IE is therefore better.
Once (and if) IE is booted off the top spot, you will see a vast majority of webmasters changing their crappy code for something which actually works right.
IE is paticularly bad for CSS (e
Ah, you're one of those... (Score:4, Insightful)