Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firefox 2.0 RC2 Review

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the out-with-the-old-in-with-the-new dept.

segphault writes "Ars Technica has a comprehensive review of Firefox 2.0 RC2. It includes screenshot comparisons that illuminate the user interface changes that have transpired since the second beta, and it examines the similarities between the browser tab implementation from Internet Explorer 7 and the new tab management features in RC2. From the article: 'If RC2 is any indication, Firefox 2.0 is an incremental improvement of the 1.5.x series with performance improvements and a handful of relatively useful features. Based on my own experience, I consider it stable enough for regular use, but I endorse caution for users that rely on a lot of extensions, as most extensions aren't yet compatible with Firefox 2.0.'"

9 of 319 comments (clear)

  1. pun intended by User+956 · · Score: 3, Funny

    and it examines the similarities between the browser tab implementation from Internet Explorer 7 and the new tab management features in RC2.

    One could almost say that they've been "keeping tabs" on the competition.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:pun intended by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Funny

      One could almost say that they've been "keeping tabs" on the competition.

      That pun stunk so bad I had to open a new window.

  2. RC2 woes by TheDarkener · · Score: 4, Funny

    You know, I installed RC2 on my computer last night after I performed the recommended hardware upgrades, and my video drivers wouldn't work, my sound broke and it kept bugging me about activation. It wouldn't even let me download files from my favorite websites!!

    Oh wait.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  3. spellcheck by vivek7006 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I jst upgreaded to RC2 and I musht say that the neu spellchek feeture works lik a charm

  4. Spell Check Only? by maeglin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is the 2.0 designation deserved? I suppose that depends on your perspective. At the risk of veering into a largely irrelevant philosophical rumination on the ontological significance of version numbers, I feel inclined to point out that the implications of version numbers vary greatly between various open source projects. In some cases, there is a well-established nomenclature and version numbers can be used to infer all sorts of useful things about the nature and status of a build. In other cases, it may simply be an arbitrary value selected for the sole purpose of making it possible to distinguish between builds. For Firefox, it doesn't seem like there is a fully consistent version numbering model yet. Rather than expressing disappointment about the lack of new features in the upcoming 2.0 release, users should remember that Firefox release numbers aren't always going to be a helpful medium for establishing expectations.

    Sheesh... Judging by the above paragraph it also comes with a thesaurus.

  5. Re:Hard to make more than an incremental improveme by jazman_777 · · Score: 3, Funny
    As I said before, great ideas in the browsing experience may be hard to come by since the idea of the browser and its application are mature.


    They're waiting to see what the Opera developers come up with next.

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
  6. Re:What big fat memory leak? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Probably their myspace page.

  7. Re:Extensions by Firehed · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well some people might not want those fifteen tabs of porn to reopen after hurredly closing the browser, since the person next opening the browser might be the one for whom it was just hurredly closed. I hope there's an override key.

    --
    How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
  8. Re:Extensions by Disavian · · Score: 2, Funny

    ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!!