Well, comparing features, FF2 stomps all over Safari 3 beta, so there's no comparison with FF3. For me, the lack of extensions like FF has is a deal-breaker nowadays. It's like having a microwave - you can definitely live without one, but you'd be an idiot to not use one if it was free. FF2 (and 3?) rendering isn't perfect, and not as good as Opera (and probably not as good as KHTML from what I hear), but it's good enough, and everything else it has is lightyears ahead of any other browser.
Fixing the problems with FF seems far easier to me than bringing everyone else up to the same overall level. It's rather like the joke "OS X: Because putting a good UI on UNIX was easier than fixing Windows.":)
What I meant was that many web developers feel they have more work now since htey have to test their pages with firefox, where as before they write for IE only or use some win32 app like frontpage to create most of the IE specific tags for them.
Same as before. Before Firefox was Netscape Navigator, and before that IE didn't even exist. There has *never* been a time when one should have only been coding for IE. So if any web devs out there are irritated by this, they haven't been paying attention since, oh, the invention of the web.:)
I'm glad to have a khtml-based browser running under Windows. I'd really like to know if it's got identicaly rendering to Safari on the Mac (and KHTML-based Linux browsers).
Many website developers both love and hate Firefox as it is because they have more work but the hope is firefox3 will be acid2 compliant and will force IE 7.5 in the future to be as well.
I don't know who tehse 'many' website developers are you speak of. Everyone where I work prefers Firefox.
FF3 being ACID2 compliant won't force MS to make IE better. If MS was actually concerned with the compliancy of competing browsers, IE would be a far different browswer than it is.
Interestingly, the Safari beta seems to be the second ACID2-compliant browser for Windows (after Opera). Nicely done, Apple!
It's a shame about the weird application chrome they decided to wrap around the app, though. *sigh* Apple.
I've definitely found unnoticed bugs before while working on other things (every week, it seems), but I think code reuse would tend to minimize that, in general.
And I certainly wouldn't advocate ignoring all minor bugs until big ones are fixed, but this bug in FF has been around since the beginning. That and the memory usage are really the only two things I experience that I would consider major bugs, and I can work around the memory usage now that I have a ridiculous amount of memory.
I was talking about information overload being a killer for fighter pilots. The situation is very different between that and a browser users. I agree - gimme all the freaking search results, etc. I hate paging through data. I have a scrollwheel on my mouse for a reason.
I think the idea of code reuse was to not have to reinvent the wheel every time. When you separate functioanlity into functions, you're actually LESS likely to improve older code until you have to hack in some new bit of data into the old. That's my opinion, anyway.
Well, a web browser and a fighter jet have two rather different users. A web browser is a much more stressful environment (at least judging by the internet as a whole).:)
That reminds me - FF doesn't have anywhere near enough weapons to suit me...trolls are terrorists, right?
Anyway, I disagree that addressing low-priority items makes severities of other problems go down, as a general rule. It *can* do that, certainly, depending on what the problems are. This may very well be an issue specific to the environment of a fighter jet. The fewer distractions a pilot has, the better he is able to deal with what's going on. Information overload is a very real and deadly problem in a fighter cockpit. When you can't even hear the "pull up! pull up!" alarm because you're dealing with too many other things, that's... not good.
But fixing a rarely encountered problem in FF doesn't change the fact that it occasionally locks up temporarily. The severity is still severe. If it was more than a temporary lockup, obviously it would be critical.
If that's the only thing they fix in FF3, I'll be very happy, as I have 2 gigs of RAM now, I can afford to let the memory use grow out of all reason. Lockups are always bad, though, no matter how perfectly the rest of the program works.
"But the program works PERFECTLY except for when it stops working for a bit!"
"Yeah, but it's THOSE times that we're complaining about."
Whatever the solution is, I don't much care, as long as it gets fixed. That's gotta be one of the oldest bugs in the code, and I would've thought it would be a very high-priority item. Apparently I'm wrong about that. A temporarily locked-up browser seems to be not a big deal to the devs.
Well, whether the solution to the "FF locks while loading some pages" problem (is there a Bugzilla entry for this that I can keep track of?) is a multithreaded UI, or some other nifty technology, is really a moot point for me. Mainly, I just want FF to stop locking up when some web pages load. I tend to run with lots of tabs open, etc, and I can be doing other things with the browser while a particular tab (or three) is loading. I don't know whether it's bad JS, bad Flash, or what. All I know is, it's the one major downfall of FF in my opinion. Not that it's anywhere near a big enough downfall to make me switch to another browser, and lose all that lovely functionality provided by extensions.
" hypervisor-level virtualization technology that allows multiple operating systems to be run with and without para-virtualization "
> I don't know about you but it still makes my eyes hurt!
Really, it's not that complex. The technology monitors all system calls, and makes a judgement call - if it's safe to let it through, it routes it through the EPS conduits. If it's not, it routes it through the GNDN tubes. As long as you don't overload the EPS taps, it's all good.
Some people think Regan, and prosperity and common sense come to mind.
Sadly, those two things don't go together at ALL where Reagan was concerned. Fake prosperity like we have now at the expensive of massive national debt is just an illusion. People with common sense realize that. That bill is gonna come due sooner or later, and with the real estate market crashing in large parts of the country, many people think it'll be sooner rather than later.
The near-diefication of Reagan by Republicans is one of the most ridiculous things about that party that I've ever seen (which is really saying something). The party of 'fiscal responsibility' has shown itself to be anything but for the majority of Americans. If you're rich, yeah, sure, it's a great party to belong to - but not for anyone else. Now, don't assume I'm a big fan of the Democrats, either. As Bill Maher once said, "The biggest difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is the Democrats are beholden to an only slightly less scary set of special interests." Plus there's the whole incompetence thing the Dems have going when it comes to selecting a Presidential candidate.
We *really* need a credible third party in this country. *sigh*
I want a LOT more attention paid to standards. I want it to be the number one priority over everything else (yes, even security). There will always be bugs and security holes in software - Firefox has been far from immune, but if you don't code for standards compliance from the get-go, you're certainly never going to achieve it by accident.
In an ideal world with a company with the resources that MS commands, one would hope that a parallel IE8 team would've been formed at the same time that IE7 was given the go-ahead, but to start a new browser from scratch. That would be marvelous. That would make sense. That would be so EASY for someone with the resources that MS has. That would also be a fantasy. *sigh*
If IE8 comes out and the *ONLY* thing it has over IE7 is standards compliance, I will consider it a rousing success.
If Firefox 3 comes out and the *ONLY* thing is has over FF2 is a multithreaded UI, I will consider *it* a rousing success.
I'm not holding my breath for either of these things to happen. And that's a real shame, because I look smashing in blue.
I'm not sure what part of my post you didn't get, but let me explain it another way: If you want to run OS X on a supported platform, you have to buy from a single vendor. The same isn't true of Windows or Linux.
If Vista wasn't pre-loaded with a zillion machines, there wouldn't be any question but that Vista was a massive failure. It's *only* because Vista is being preloaded on so many machines that there is any real sales for the thing at all. And if Vista was so great, there wouldn't be anywhere near this level of anticipation for the new releases of Mac OS X and Ubuntu.
The people want a change, and the first viable one to come along will win big. Ubuntu... isn't quite there yet, (though it's obviously better than Vista in many respects already). It *may* be where it needs to be with the October release if they can polish up the last bits, such as more reliable auto-configuration of video drivers and wifi cards (certainly Feisty got better in these two regards, but I'm still seeing several reports of problems on these fronts).
Sadly for OS X, it requires new hardware for most people (and from a single vendor, another bad thing), so that's right out, no matter how good it is.
"I asked if you could alter a device to make it easier to spy on."
Okay, see, that's the type of questions the NSA likes to see its potential employees ask. Any other type of person would ask if you could alter a device to make it *harder* to spy on.
TV show: Dark Angel. An old idea long before that, of course, but I'm all for a world with multiple Jessica Albas. Especially if they've got some cat DNA.
this means the hating of Vista is stronger then the hating of previos OSs.
Yes, Microsoft's eternal struggle to make each succeeding operating system 'suck just a little bit less' than the previous has now come to an end. A new era for all mankind!
Isn't that Xubuntu download done yet?!
Good, Maybe MS will take a hint....
It's not MS that needs to take a hint - it's the people who buy MS products that need to take a hint.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, comparing features, FF2 stomps all over Safari 3 beta, so there's no comparison with FF3. For me, the lack of extensions like FF has is a deal-breaker nowadays. It's like having a microwave - you can definitely live without one, but you'd be an idiot to not use one if it was free. FF2 (and 3?) rendering isn't perfect, and not as good as Opera (and probably not as good as KHTML from what I hear), but it's good enough, and everything else it has is lightyears ahead of any other browser.
:)
Fixing the problems with FF seems far easier to me than bringing everyone else up to the same overall level. It's rather like the joke "OS X: Because putting a good UI on UNIX was easier than fixing Windows."
What I meant was that many web developers feel they have more work now since htey have to test their pages with firefox, where as before they write for IE only or use some win32 app like frontpage to create most of the IE specific tags for them.
:)
Same as before. Before Firefox was Netscape Navigator, and before that IE didn't even exist. There has *never* been a time when one should have only been coding for IE. So if any web devs out there are irritated by this, they haven't been paying attention since, oh, the invention of the web.
I'm glad to have a khtml-based browser running under Windows. I'd really like to know if it's got identicaly rendering to Safari on the Mac (and KHTML-based Linux browsers).
Many website developers both love and hate Firefox as it is because they have more work but the hope is firefox3 will be acid2 compliant and will force IE 7.5 in the future to be as well.
I don't know who tehse 'many' website developers are you speak of. Everyone where I work prefers Firefox.
FF3 being ACID2 compliant won't force MS to make IE better. If MS was actually concerned with the compliancy of competing browsers, IE would be a far different browswer than it is.
Interestingly, the Safari beta seems to be the second ACID2-compliant browser for Windows (after Opera). Nicely done, Apple!
It's a shame about the weird application chrome they decided to wrap around the app, though. *sigh* Apple.
I've definitely found unnoticed bugs before while working on other things (every week, it seems), but I think code reuse would tend to minimize that, in general.
And I certainly wouldn't advocate ignoring all minor bugs until big ones are fixed, but this bug in FF has been around since the beginning. That and the memory usage are really the only two things I experience that I would consider major bugs, and I can work around the memory usage now that I have a ridiculous amount of memory.
I was talking about information overload being a killer for fighter pilots. The situation is very different between that and a browser users. I agree - gimme all the freaking search results, etc. I hate paging through data. I have a scrollwheel on my mouse for a reason.
I think the idea of code reuse was to not have to reinvent the wheel every time. When you separate functioanlity into functions, you're actually LESS likely to improve older code until you have to hack in some new bit of data into the old. That's my opinion, anyway.
Well, a web browser and a fighter jet have two rather different users. A web browser is a much more stressful environment (at least judging by the internet as a whole). :)
... not good.
That reminds me - FF doesn't have anywhere near enough weapons to suit me...trolls are terrorists, right?
Anyway, I disagree that addressing low-priority items makes severities of other problems go down, as a general rule. It *can* do that, certainly, depending on what the problems are. This may very well be an issue specific to the environment of a fighter jet. The fewer distractions a pilot has, the better he is able to deal with what's going on. Information overload is a very real and deadly problem in a fighter cockpit. When you can't even hear the "pull up! pull up!" alarm because you're dealing with too many other things, that's
But fixing a rarely encountered problem in FF doesn't change the fact that it occasionally locks up temporarily. The severity is still severe. If it was more than a temporary lockup, obviously it would be critical.
If that's the only thing they fix in FF3, I'll be very happy, as I have 2 gigs of RAM now, I can afford to let the memory use grow out of all reason. Lockups are always bad, though, no matter how perfectly the rest of the program works.
"But the program works PERFECTLY except for when it stops working for a bit!"
"Yeah, but it's THOSE times that we're complaining about."
Whatever the solution is, I don't much care, as long as it gets fixed. That's gotta be one of the oldest bugs in the code, and I would've thought it would be a very high-priority item. Apparently I'm wrong about that. A temporarily locked-up browser seems to be not a big deal to the devs.
Well, whether the solution to the "FF locks while loading some pages" problem (is there a Bugzilla entry for this that I can keep track of?) is a multithreaded UI, or some other nifty technology, is really a moot point for me. Mainly, I just want FF to stop locking up when some web pages load. I tend to run with lots of tabs open, etc, and I can be doing other things with the browser while a particular tab (or three) is loading. I don't know whether it's bad JS, bad Flash, or what. All I know is, it's the one major downfall of FF in my opinion. Not that it's anywhere near a big enough downfall to make me switch to another browser, and lose all that lovely functionality provided by extensions.
Multithreaded UI yet?
I call for a moratorium on Apple fluff pieces during finals week.
You think it's bad now, wait until you're in the workforce. EVERY week is finals week in the real world. *sigh*
That's a lot cheaper than flying the family back and forth to Japan all the time, though.
" hypervisor-level virtualization technology that allows multiple operating systems to be run with and without para-virtualization "
> I don't know about you but it still makes my eyes hurt!
Really, it's not that complex. The technology monitors all system calls, and makes a judgement call - if it's safe to let it through, it routes it through the EPS conduits. If it's not, it routes it through the GNDN tubes. As long as you don't overload the EPS taps, it's all good.
Microsoft is going to change their exchange listing to "MSCO".
Some people think Regan, and prosperity and common sense come to mind.
Sadly, those two things don't go together at ALL where Reagan was concerned. Fake prosperity like we have now at the expensive of massive national debt is just an illusion. People with common sense realize that. That bill is gonna come due sooner or later, and with the real estate market crashing in large parts of the country, many people think it'll be sooner rather than later.
The near-diefication of Reagan by Republicans is one of the most ridiculous things about that party that I've ever seen (which is really saying something). The party of 'fiscal responsibility' has shown itself to be anything but for the majority of Americans. If you're rich, yeah, sure, it's a great party to belong to - but not for anyone else. Now, don't assume I'm a big fan of the Democrats, either. As Bill Maher once said, "The biggest difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is the Democrats are beholden to an only slightly less scary set of special interests." Plus there's the whole incompetence thing the Dems have going when it comes to selecting a Presidential candidate.
We *really* need a credible third party in this country. *sigh*
I want a little more attention paid to standards.
I want a LOT more attention paid to standards. I want it to be the number one priority over everything else (yes, even security). There will always be bugs and security holes in software - Firefox has been far from immune, but if you don't code for standards compliance from the get-go, you're certainly never going to achieve it by accident.
In an ideal world with a company with the resources that MS commands, one would hope that a parallel IE8 team would've been formed at the same time that IE7 was given the go-ahead, but to start a new browser from scratch. That would be marvelous. That would make sense. That would be so EASY for someone with the resources that MS has. That would also be a fantasy. *sigh*
If IE8 comes out and the *ONLY* thing it has over IE7 is standards compliance, I will consider it a rousing success.
If Firefox 3 comes out and the *ONLY* thing is has over FF2 is a multithreaded UI, I will consider *it* a rousing success.
I'm not holding my breath for either of these things to happen. And that's a real shame, because I look smashing in blue.
"Wait for us, we're the leader!"
- Microsoft
I'm not sure what part of my post you didn't get, but let me explain it another way: If you want to run OS X on a supported platform, you have to buy from a single vendor. The same isn't true of Windows or Linux.
If Vista wasn't pre-loaded with a zillion machines, there wouldn't be any question but that Vista was a massive failure. It's *only* because Vista is being preloaded on so many machines that there is any real sales for the thing at all. And if Vista was so great, there wouldn't be anywhere near this level of anticipation for the new releases of Mac OS X and Ubuntu.
... isn't quite there yet, (though it's obviously better than Vista in many respects already). It *may* be where it needs to be with the October release if they can polish up the last bits, such as more reliable auto-configuration of video drivers and wifi cards (certainly Feisty got better in these two regards, but I'm still seeing several reports of problems on these fronts).
The people want a change, and the first viable one to come along will win big. Ubuntu
Sadly for OS X, it requires new hardware for most people (and from a single vendor, another bad thing), so that's right out, no matter how good it is.
Yeah that 16GB Truecrypt volume with only 5 MBs of word documents in it don't look the slightest bit suspicious.
:)
Hey, encryption uses a lot of overhead.
Good point, Agent 11846.
"I asked if you could alter a device to make it easier to spy on."
Okay, see, that's the type of questions the NSA likes to see its potential employees ask. Any other type of person would ask if you could alter a device to make it *harder* to spy on.
> Isn't this out of some SCI-Fi movie?
TV show: Dark Angel. An old idea long before that, of course, but I'm all for a world with multiple Jessica Albas. Especially if they've got some cat DNA.
That wouldn't be a problem if you were using a drive manufactured in the southern hemisphere. The discs spin the other way there.
Spinning discs? What century are you living in? You need to move to the solid state!
>And gluing a penny to the top of your PC lets you use imported software.
>It's true! Try it!
It works, but make sure Lincoln is facing UP.
Unless you're in the southern hemisphere, then you make him face DOWN. C'mon, people, not everyone lives in the USA! *sheesh*
this means the hating of Vista is stronger then the hating of previos OSs.
Yes, Microsoft's eternal struggle to make each succeeding operating system 'suck just a little bit less' than the previous has now come to an end. A new era for all mankind!
Isn't that Xubuntu download done yet?!
Good, Maybe MS will take a hint....
It's not MS that needs to take a hint - it's the people who buy MS products that need to take a hint.