Slashdot Mirror


Minefield Shows the (Really) Fast Future of Firefox

zootropole writes "If you are using Firefox 3 (or even Chrome) you should consider taking a look at Mozilla's Minefield. This browser (alpha version yet, but stable) would give a new meaning to 'fast browsing experience.' Some Firefox extensions aren't supported, but riding the fastest javascript engine on the planet definitely worth a try. Minefield's install won't affect your Firefox, so there's no risk trying it. It's fast. Really. And I'm loving it." Reviews popping up around the web are overwhelmingly positive, calling the upcoming browser crazy fast, blisteringly fast, etc.

11 of 412 comments (clear)

  1. Suggesting nightlies to regular users?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are you crazy? If you want to be a little risky, try the 3.1 beta. Nightlies shouldn't be used by those that want to use extensions or avoid crashes.

    1. Re:Suggesting nightlies to regular users?! by ajs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's more, this is the same thing we hear every 2 years. "Browser X is really fast!" Then six months later you hear, "Browser X was lagging behind the pack because it didn't have support for A, B and C, but now it's getting them." After that you get, "Why is Browser X so slow these days?" And inevitably, "Browser Y is really fast!"

      When are we going to realize that browser maturity and performance are going to be on opposing curves and jumping ship to an immature browser just sets you up to lose functionality for a short period of time until the performance can be gobbled up by it.

      This is exactly why I'm not using Chrome. Chrome is very nice, but it doesn't have most of what I require of a browsing experience. Once it does, THEN I'll evaluate its competitiveness, not before.

    2. Re:Suggesting nightlies to regular users?! by JTorres176 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Speed seems to be determined by a lack of bloat... and by bloat, I mean features. Firefox, back in the days it was referred to as phoenix, was exceedingly fast. Since then, fancy bookmarking, spellchecking, rss feeds, etc, etc has been added to it, causing slow startup and loading times. With the addition of a few thousand lines of code, not surprisingly, anything will take a bit longer to start up and go.

      Chrome doesn't have many features, so it runs amazingly fast. Minefield doesn't have many features, so it runs amazingly fast. If either of them are weighted down with features (code bloat) then they will slowly grind to a halt much along the lines of IE or current FF.

      --
      Evil Walrus >83=
    3. Re:Suggesting nightlies to regular users?! by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except that, you know, Minefield is the Firefox trunk. The same thing FF 3.0 branched from, and what 3.1 will be taken from as well. The minefield in the article is simply the current nightly for FF 3.1. So it still has the features, AND is fast.

      --
      Not a sentence!
  2. Java v. Javascript by michaelhood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, it's time for us to start educating users and the media of when to properly use the monikers Java and JavaScript.

    The article linked to from the summary says "Handles Java Well" in the subtitle, but then never mentions it again - only JavaScript.

    These are NOT THE SAME.

    This is, of course, CBSNews.. but I have seen the same mistake in so-called "tech" media lately, too.

  3. Re:mozilla minefield? by Ant+P. · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That was their intention.

    It keeps idiots like you who look at the name only away from the nightly builds, and anyone with enough of a clue to not judge it by its name is also by extension usually intelligent enough to read the fucking warnings not to use it in the first place.

  4. Re:This is irresponsible by SkankinMonkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think anyone is encouraging the masses to use a nightly. However, slashdot is "News For Nerds" right? Nerds should be able to use a nightly without destroying their computers beyond recognition, if not they need to give their badges back.

  5. Re:This is a step up by Jaysyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems pretty quick to me, but that's probably cause it's not running my 15+ extensions.

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  6. No thanks by andy1307 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The biggest advantage of firefox is the ability to block out javascript via NoScript. Why would I want to give that up?

  7. Re:Competition and economics by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "DISCLAIMER: Use of this advanced computing technology does not imply an endorsement of Western industrial civilization."

    Actually, yes, it does. You're just too much of a hypocrite to recognize it.

    --
    -Styopa
  8. Re:Competition and economics by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How/why do you hate capitalism? That is about as specific as saying you hate socialism, when in reality most people hate poorly implemented socialist governments.

    As far as I can tell, the fact that you enjoy competition and therefore the fruits of competition is a direct endorsement for capitalism, at least at a basic level. Add another layer, that you agree to the negotiable exchange of value, and you have capitalism right there.

    How can you hate that? IE, Firefox, Safari, Chrome, and Opera all happen to give you a free web browser in exchange for different goods OTHER than money, which means they all play in the capitalist system.

    IE for control of the internet
    Safari to prevent Microsoft controlling the internet
    FireFox in exchange for investments from Google
    Chrome in exchange for more data mining
    Opera in exchange for license fees