Slashdot Mirror
PC Magazine Reviews Firefox, Opera
prostoalex writes "PC Magazine reviews Mozilla Firefox 0.9.1 and Opera 7.51, noting: 'Security concerns aren't the only reason to seek an alternative [to Internet Explorer]. IE's slow rendering engine and dearth of privacy features may plant the thought in some iconoclastic minds that it may not be the best browser for everyone.' 4 stars for Firefox and 3.5 for Opera, so looks like a Firefox win, although the editors do point out FF's troubles with DHTML as well as Opera issues with JavaScript."
...that I should stop running Internet Explorer using wine, and try Firefox?
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it dissolve.
Out of habit and ignorance, I have used IE for years. I think it is time to make the change to Firefox. Thanks for the article.
"IE's slow rendering engine " :(
Sad but true. The review page has been loading for almost a minute now
Mozilla, Opera and Firefox, from my unscientific perspective, seem to load web pages quicker than IE, but what really bothers me is how slow the mozilla opera and firefox load times are. I can either get to the web quickly with IE, or wait a while with firefox for a minute page load time diffrence.
IE 6.0 got a 4 out of 5 on their reviews site. Click on "more reviews" and it lists all their reviews.
Has anyone been tracking Firefox/Mozilla in the User-Agent stats for a large site to see if it is truly pulling browsershare from IE? The last mention we had from the Slashdot admins was that Slashdot was 90% Internet Explorer, is this on the decline? Are these stats publicly available?
If guns kill people, then CmdrTaco's keyboard misspells words.
CONS: Default installation doesn't include many functions; you have to download additional features via the Extensions Manager. Will not load ActiveX and VBScript; this prevents certain kinds of attacks, but also disables the normal functions of some sites.
Those are PROs if I ever saw one. Drive-by software installs and buggy Active-X is the reason I spend ten hours a month cleaning up computers of friends and family. WHo subseqently receive Mozilla and are forbidden to run IE except for Windows Update forevermore, on pain of no more free computer work.
Emphasis mine.
Now explain this? It's got boatloads more functionality (find as you type, tabbed browsing, popup blocker, livemarks [0.9+], etc etc.)... but it 'doesn't include many functions'.
Now how does IE rank? Please don't tell me feature rich. That's like calling is secure.
Considering I'd give IE a 0.5/5.0, there's no debate. The point is to use either of these before you use IE. The failure to patch IE after the Russian hacking debacle was the last straw. All users at my work are now on Firefox or Opera.
Also, I have a lot of "non-techie" friends. You should see the amount of adware/spyware littered on these computers. It makes me sick, and it's all IE's fault (pop-up > get scared > *click* > install > forget > go back to "pop-up"... go to site > install under users' radar > repeat... I'm sick of it). IE sucks.
-n-
I install Firefox for everyone I help with PC's, and no one has ever complained or needed additional help to use it. I had one person tell me they need their old bookmarks, but I showed them where you can see IE's imported bookmarks in the menu.
I'm sure some of you already do this, but for those that don't, next time you're running ad-aware for your non-techie friends, install Firefox, show them the desktop shortcut, and tell them to click on that one for their Internet. They'll thank you for it when they stop getting pop ups and strange home pages and toolbars.
isn't FUD usually just speculation and half-truths.
All the recent stories concerning IE's horrible security have been demonstrably true.
my pet machine
"Sorry, this browser does not support automated installation of trojans and other malicious applications, please upgrade to MSIE to further risk your computer security"
love slashdot. populate it. use it. abuse it. hate it. kill it. miss it. stop following links, they only kill servers.
But all the FUD was created by IE anyways.
I fear that I will have my personal information stolen.
I am uncertain that the IE Developers are competent programmers.
I doubt that I will switch back to IE in the near future.
In the days of 256+ MB RAM and 40+ GB HD space, having an extra 10 MB app doesn't hurt you. I have both Firefox (0.8 because I can't get TabBrowser Extensions to work on 0.9) and IE on my work computer, for the increasingly rare site that requires IE to work.
Now that the Mozilla Foundation is a 501(c)3 organization I think I may have to insist that the family/friends make a little donation.
I was not touched there by an angel.
I'm curious; Microsoft has really given up on IE development over the past few years. The last major release was version 6, and that was well over 3 years ago to the best of my recollection. Could it be that MS no longer sees web browsers as a viable resource for their future strategy? I really have no speculation on what they might have up their sleave, but MS hasn't been one to necessarily drop the ball like this. From a security standpoint, one could say they really screwed the pooch, but as far as releasing a snazzy new version or anything to gloss over the problems under the hood, they've kept their hands off.
--
Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
The browser isn't perfect, however. Firefox does not render nonstandard DHTML properly, nor does the Mozilla Organization have any intention of releasing a browser that does.
Well, good for them!
Durrrr!
Linux might not be ready for general public acceptance on their desktop, but using Open Source software such as Firefox, Open Office etc is the first step towards that acceptance. If you don't NEED Windows to run a program, it becomes alot easier to switch the underlying OS.
the only downside to firefox I've found are problems with web sites designed ONLY to work with IE. I've only had the problem with a few web sites and hopfully as firefox gets more well known and excepted people will stop that kind of stupidity.
Does this mean there are 3 bitches to every star? Are we talking Hollywood here?
DHTML is HTML with Javascript. Its just a buzz word, why do these PC magazines keep touting it as the latest and greatest thing???
The browser isn't perfect, however. Firefox does not render nonstandard DHTML properly, (emphasis mine).
Hello!! You said it yourselves! NONSTANDARD. Its websites that aren't perfect, not the browser. *head explodes*
The Anti-Blog
In my book gets 4.5 stars. But the java/javascript errors that come up constantly are a bitch and a half.
I give it 4.5 stars as well. I've been using Opera since version 3. My favorite features are the very simple things that let you browse painlessly even on poorly designed sites. For example, there is a button on the toolbar that lets you toggle images on and off without the need for changing your preferences. There is another button that lets you instantly override the color and font setting of a page with your own defaults. You can also turn off all plugins with a single checkbox. I tend to browse primarily for information, and nothing annoys me so much as poorly chosen backgrounds, graphics, and fonts that get in the way of reading the text. Opera lets me get straight to the content. It's a good browser, even though it is a bit flaky on javascript.
The BBC are running a similar story too:
Firefox doesn't have troubles with DHTML...
"Firefox does not render nonstandard DHTML properly, nor does the Mozilla Organization have any intention of releasing a browser that does."
Non-standard DHTML isn't really DHTML is it?
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Well, I've never read FUD in a context other than the speculation and half-truths that you mention, but taken literally, I've always been told that it means "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt". There may in fact be Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt surrounding Internet Explorer and a great many other Microsoft-related things, but they're based on a great deal more evidence than we usually think of when we say FUD. Maybe "legit-i-FUD" would be better? "Factual FUD"?
"Linux doesn't exist. Everyone knows Linux is an unlicensed version of Unix"- Kieren O'Shaughnessy
Before FireFox becomes the target off major exploits. Hopefully Firefox will stand up against it, and the Open source world will respond as fast as expected.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
The browser isn't perfect, however. Firefox does not render nonstandard DHTML properly...
So it is bad that the browser does not render bad source correctly?
Granted, the article does go on to mention that this is not Firefox's fault, but they way it is cast as a problem really rubs the wrong way.
Life is like a web application. Sometime you need cookies just to get by.
Isn't that the best way? consider a spider crawling up your leg, once you feel the spider crawling and ready to bite you, a knee jerk reaction occurs. Really you have to get used it it, cause every new version of (brand x) pants have the same damn spider embedded in them.
The only issue I had initially with FireFox and Mozilla is how slow they seem to load picture-heavy sites such as www.cnn.com
// This one makes a huge difference. Last value in milliseconds (default is 250)
// Change to normal Google search: q =");
// Instead of annoying error dialog messages, display pages:
To speed up the load times of all sites add the following to your user.js file (if it doesnt exist - for Windows users, go to the run menu and type: %AppData% and then browse through the Mozilla folder and any sub folders until you get to your profile folder - inside of this create a new text document and call it user.js):
user_pref("nglayout.initialpaint.delay", 0);
user_pref("keyword.URL", "http://www.google.com/search?btnG=Google+Search&
user_pref("browser.xul.error_pages.enabled", true);
The other two changes are ones i've found useful as well - the second one changes the browser to do a normal Google search from the location bar instead of doing an "I'm Lucky" Google search (this is more useful in Mozilla than FireFox since FireFox comes w/ the Google search bar built in).
The third change makes Mozilla and FireFox display error pages like IE instead of annoying dialog boxes when an error occurs (such as page not found). This helps a TON when doing tabbed browsing.
Hope those tips are helpful for everyone else as much as they were for me. For more of them go to http://texturizer.net/firefox/tips.html
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." - Tennyson
I'll bite, I can guarantee that some number of Mozilla developers are not competent programmers given the number of possible contributors to the project.
That said, I think MS realizes it has a problem now and is dealing with it, unfortunately it will take a year or two for it to really be dealt with. Mozilla knew (I hope and assume here) there was a problem right from the start and took steps to mitigate a lot of the problems that IE is plagued with (and netscape would probably have been plauged with before the complete rewrite of code). Its a new style vs old style mentality. Many applications (OSS as well as proprietary commercial) from the early to mid 90's are plauged with the type of problems that IE has. The problem is that MS rested on its laurels instead of continuing to push IE forward and improve it. They also were under the highly misguided impression that people didn't really care about security and weren't willing to pay for it. Hopefully the truth has come home to roost and we will see better products out of redmond.
"You can now flame me, I am full of love,"
Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. That pretty much sums up my parents experience of the Internet while using IE.
Anything that would keep them from calling me frantically wondering why their web browser now goes to some variation of cool web search sounds great.
Microsoft has dug IE this shithole by making the browser too much a part of the operating system, trying to get as much lock in as possible. Now they get to reap the fruits of their labors and lay face down in it.
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
I agree. I am an Opera user since way back. It is still my main browser but I use Firefox extensively. Mainly because of Operas poor javascript implementation.
I can't read my Gmail with Opera, My online banking doesnt' work with Opera. I use add suported because if I need a second browser I am not paying for the first.
Fix that (or ignore that) and it is by far the best browser IMO. This is from someone typing on Firefox right now.
Opera even with all features integrated is leaner and faster. None of the features collide, which is a problem I have with some firefox extensions (to try and get Opera functionality).
Opera addiction. Opera seems to be the only browser with true page caching. Hit back 4 times as fast as you can and instantly you will be back 4 pages. No load times and seemingly no render times. It is totally cached. This is like browsing on JOLT. Once you get hooked on the speed it is hard to go back.
To me going to the slower browsers is like going from DSL to dialup. I need my speed.
Here's a funny snippet of their Firefox review:
Con: Will not load ActiveX and VBScript
This should be under Pros, ActiveX is good for one purpose -- Windows Update. And I've never even heard of an real web site that used VBScript. Shall we detract points for not supporting every asinine scripting language ever invented?
Instead of using the default Windows software, as you have seen, other applications runs well under windows: Firefox and Opera are cool for browsing, but now that you are on the way to change your mind, give thunderfox a try, it is far better than outlook (or outlook express).
Then, forget your included windows media player, and try alternatives like BSplayer and others. When you want to edit a picture, use Gimp for windows or replace your illegal copy of Word by OpenOffice.
And if you enjoy what you are getting, and this new perspective of choices, jump in and join the GNU/Linux community.
For one, IE does rendering many times VERY BAD.
CSS is nearly non-existant.
PNG, whats that? Alpha colors, we dont do em!
And then there's just plain rendering inconsistencies. What you see is NOT what you get!!
Mozila hopes to implement the STANDARDS, not be super-fast. After all, computers will just get faster as time goes on. Why not do it correct and not as fast. Its the Unix Way.
...just want to point out that it's just a Google text ad in the toolbar. Completely unintrusive, and after two days unnoticeable unless you happen to be bored and want to look at what it's saying (which ranks up there with reloading /. on ways to waste time effortlessly).
Work is punishment for failing to procrastinate effectively.
isn't FUD usually just speculation and half-truths.
I don't know. Ask Michael Moore.
640YB ought to be enough for anybody.
1) Resources. I'm running Windows XP and from what I understand, there is no way I can remove Internet Explorer from my computer. Call me a space hog, but I don't like having un-used aps on my computer. I figure better to have an inferior browser on my computer, a little extra space, and less confusion then to load both of them. Can anyone solve that problem?
Yes, get your head out of your ass. Would you remove the seatbelts from your car to have "less confusion", or "a little extra space" ??
It's 2004, not 1994. A few megs isn't even worth thinking about on a desktop computer. IE trojans and exploits are real. Deal with it.
My favorite Opera feature is the page view zoom, especially for printing. Unlike Mozilla's zoom feature, which only scales the text, Opera scales the whole page including the images, so the layout and placement look very much the same, only bigger/smaller as requested. It wouldn't surprise me if Opera's zoom violates a few standards here and there, but I wish every browser did it like that. Very handy, indeed.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
And if that happens, where is the security update infrastructure to ensure everyone gets patched?
As of 0.9, firefox has an automatic update checker thing to let the user know when new versions are availible. It seill has a few kinks to be worked out, but they're going in the right direction.
I'm sure every single 3D artist out there uses a web browser, but how many web browser users are 3D artists? Your analogy is crap. It's more like driving a car and not knowing that there are a number of models out there to choose from. I admit my ignorance in the realm of 3D modeling, but I'm also not insulted by this in the slightest.
"I may not have morals, but I have standards."
In all fairness there is one other site that makes good use of ActiveX: housecall.antivirus.com.
It's great when you need to quickly scan a customer machine without installing anything or running updates on whatever happens to be there already.
I don't think 2 useful sites justify that travasty of a feature though.
I've always equated FUD with the use of disinformation to gain a competative advantage by invoking fear, uncertainty and doubt in the public about your competitor's product. In this case:
1) The information ("IE is insecure" etc) is verifyably true and reported by many different people and organizations.
2) The people behind Mozilla and Opera are not the one generating the reports about their competitor's (Microsoft's) products.
3) The people involved with 1 and 2 (The ones finding and reporting the security issues, and the ones championing Moz/Opera) have no (apparent) vested interest in seeing IE lose it's market share.
So I'm not convinced this article coutns as FUD in that respect.
=Smidge=
If you like CrazyBrowser, you really should be using Maxthon (formerly MyIE2):
;) And it's updated constantly.
http://www.maxthon.com
It's like SUPER CrazyBrowser
Use the extension MozEx, which allows you to select which apps launch when you click on a link.
You of course are forgetting to realize that many of us are FORCED to use Windows and IE in our work environments. And how could one let the day go by without catching up on the latest slashdot news at least several times during your 8 hours of hell? :)
:)
PS - I'm posting this from work
Joseph?
I always thought that in order to use Firefox you needed to be able to think in Russian. I'm surprised you don't see microsoft pointing this out as drawback.
Until about a week ago when i was introduced to Firefox. Here I'll give my opinions based on years of browsing and although I've used virtually every browser out there from lynx to safari I primarily use IE and have for the last several years so I will compare Firefox to it. As I've read other posts comparing speed, I find both of them render comparably fast, are compatible with roughly the same media and are basically equal at this level. People complain about the load times compared to IE but I really don't notice it that much, and there is none with tabs, they're very fast. I was skeptical at first and it still has a few annoying things I don't like but they're fewer than what I do so I'll list them first:
/. i'm looking at right now.
CONS
1.) you can't just press enter like in IE after entering information eg login/password, searches anything you have to press tab THEN enter.
2.) it doesn't pass off most wmv files to mplayer2 like it should and does with everything else fine
3.) why can't i run exes? must it not only second guess me but lock me into a forced download/install/delete cycle when IE lets me just execute after the download is complete trusting me to make the right choice?
PROS
1.) easily installed (ctrl-d, i like hte mimiced funcationality as it makes migrating easier for me and i'm lazy) highly functional bookmark toolbar buttons which even show the related website graphic with the associated website such as the green
2.) multiple browser tabs easily opened (ctrl-t), i had heard about these before but i grossly underestimated just how useful these really are until i started using them, never again will i go hunt and peck for the right IE window at the bottom my ever cramped taskbar.
3.) beautiful and extremely functional themes with details only someone who made it with love would think to include like red/yellow/green status lights for if a tabbed page is loading and separate forward and back list box histories (i'm using nautipolis from the site i found simply by clicking on "get themes")
4.) extension plug-ins available that flawlessly install, notable examples include a tiny java vm compared to the huge sun download and resource hog, easily done macromedia flash without any bullshit of registering or clicking through 400 pages to install associated with a similar typical IE 3rd party install, these are all seamlessly integrated and the installs are smooth. My personal favorite and most important extension is the adblock extension, which allows me to block source sites for ads with a simple right click and a wildcard.
5.) built in search and popup blocking, you take these things for granted if you have the google toolbar installed as i did but this takes up less realestate (almost none, a tiny google search thumb in the right corner) and is more functional and the google news button is easily emulated as per the buttons mentioned above.
Overall Firefox is extremely impressive and I'm rarely impressed and not only is it a lesson to microsoft not to sit on their laurels, in regards to adding actual functionality instead of endless security patches but its really a testament to how free software should be, polished, easy to use, portable and easily added on to by others. It's software products like these that will undermine monopolies and I'm sure htey're not unaware of the threat.
It's a pity there isn't a few billion dollars to market Firefox with or they would dominate. Even so word of mouth is powerful and it generates a momentum that is difficult to turn back.
To make Firefox render pages faster than IE, start by typing "about:config" in your FireFox address bar. Look for nglayout.initialpaint.delay and set it to 0 (zero).
The initialpaint.delay is the length of time (in milliseconds) after the server response before the browser begins to paint the page. By default it is 250 milliseconds, and even though by setting it to 0 (like Internet Explorer) makes it _seem_ to display pages faster, it ends up taking more overall time than with the default value.
You can also make Firefox faster by:
1.) Setting network.http.pipelining to true
2.) Setting network.http.proxy.pipelining to true
3.) Setting network.http.pipelining.maxrequests to a number between 1 and 8
Enabling the pipelining features allows the browser to make multiple requests to the server at the same time. The "maxrequests" is the maximum number of requests it will send at once. 8 is the maximum Firefox allows it to be, but it may bog down yours, or the server, connection, so it is best to leave these options on their default values.
More information about these and other tweaks are available at the MozillaZine's Firefox Tuning Thread.
"You should never doubt what nobody is sure about." -- Willy Wonka