Firefox, Opera, Safari don't need to worry about making old sites work because barely anybody uses them.
I suppose that's true if by "barely anybody" you mean less than 200 million users. Firefox alone has 125 million users. Why don't I see all those Firefox users complaining about the sites Firefox doesn't render properly with each new release of Firefox?
That's why creating a new profile is the most recommended fix for Firefox problems: "With a new profile the application will run without any extensions, themes, or customized settings that may be causing problems." Updating your plugins and drivers can help also. For more information, you can look at the MozillaZine Knowledge Base or the new official Firefox support site.
That reminds me of 2001 when it seems nearly everyone on Slashdot claimed that Mozilla 1.0 would never ship, and nothing I said would convince them it was just around the corner. In seven years I'll probably remember how everyone kept complaining about the memory leak so many of us could never see.
Why don't they use the from HTML5 (for HTML documents) and XHTML served with the proper MIME type (for XHTML documents) to signal improved standards compliance mode? That would mean documents properly written to the newest HTML and XHTML standards would render with the strictest adherence to standards in IE8 and later browsers. It would also mean that the vast majority of documents (over 99.99%) that exist today would continue to be rendered as they currently are.
That would cause older browsers to use quirks mode, but HTML 5 compliant browsers to use standards mode. causes both older and newer browsers to use standards mode, for an easy transition to HTML 5.
I don't have to do anything. I'm a fellow Firefox user and I'm trying to help you with your problem by getting a bug fixed in Firefox or figuring out what's wrong on your computer. If you're going to just be argumentative with me, I'll just stop trying to help.
How would one go about seeing this problem? What should I do so I can finally see it? If I can see it, I can get someone to look into it and fix it. If I can't see a problem, then there's nothing I can do.
All I can say is that any time I try doing the same thing in Firefox and another browser, Firefox really does use less memory than the other browser. I cannot prove to you that I personally do not see a problem, and you obviously don't believe me. On the other hand, I do believe you see a problem. My suggestion is to discuss the problem in the MozillaZine forums so you can get a resolution. Perhaps you can point out a specific problem in Firefox or fix a problem that is happening on your computer. Surely if there's an obvious problem, you'll find many people who can see the same problem you do, and it will be trivial to reproduce. Then, you can report the bug and get it fixed. It'll be as simple as that if Firefox really does use three times IE's memory opening any particular eight tabs. Why not go there and point out the problem already?
How in your right mind do you expect me to keep track of every click that I made over 5 days so that you can file a bug report?
I do not. But unless you can demonstrate how to reproduce a specific problem, all the complaining in the world will not fix the problem. You sit back tight and let someone else find the problem and report it. Until that time, do not add to the noise that is possibly drowning out an important signal. That is the way you can help. Thanks.
No, according to some sites, Firefox is the dominant browser for that site. You're pointing to W3School's server logs summary, which they admit are highly skewed toward alternative browsers compared to the overall market or most web sites.
Opera far more standards compliant than Firefox? i don't think so. According to Web Devout, Opera 9 and Firefox 2 have about equal support for HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and DOM standards. Let's just stop it with the Opera hype, already. It's too easy to see right through it.
Is this the new audiophile meme? Have you done side-by-side comparisons to make sure that you're not just looking back with rose-tinted glasses?
From all the completely vague comments above, it looks so. If anyone was able to demonstrate a new version of Firefox using more resources or having worse performance than a previous version (or any new problem that did not exist in an earlier version), that would be a termed a "regression." If anyone can demonstrate a regression in Firefox, they should give the specific set of steps to reproduce the problem, and we can file a bug report on the issue.
Well, I am not dismissing you. I am asking for more detailed information so that I can file a bug report so the problem can be fixed. Until you provide that information, I simply cannot do so. I'm not denying any problem or dismissing you in any way. I'm asking you politely for what the problem is. Could you tell me please? Specifically, I need a detailed set of instructions for how to reproduce the problem.
I have indeed pointed out a specific problem. The browser leaks memory like a sieve, and uses enormous quantities of processing power when doing apparently nothing. Not only is this a specific problem, it's very significant.
No, that is not one specific problem. That is two entire classes of bugs, memory leaks and CPU performance problems. If you are having problems like those, they are indeed significant. On the other hand, if you cannot give any set of steps to reproduce any problem, I cannot file a bug report and the problem cannot be fixed.
As I've said, I do not experience any "bloat" problem, and most others on the MozillaZine forums do not, either. Those that do have those problems report that following the suggestions in the Knowledge Base clears their problems up. Have you even tried the one suggestion of creating a new profile? If you continue to have problems, discuss them in the MozillaZine forums. There's no point in making vague complaints here, as they do not get us one step closer to making Firefox better or fixing a problem on your computer.
When I do that, Firefox uses about 100 MB of memory, about the same as any other browser. Besides, you give nearly exactly David Baron's example of a useless bug report. In order for problems to be fixed, we must come up with specific problems, along with a detailed set of instructions for how others can reproduce them. Then we can file a bug report on each specific issue. Can you point out any specific problems in Firefox?
As I've said before, the problem is that we can never seem to recreate the problems users complain about. When we ask for a detailed set of steps to reproduce the problem, we almost always either get none or we cannot reproduce the problem. You can't fault developers for not fixing problems, when hardly anyone can seem to point out any. You need to report the bugs first, and then the developers will fix them.
I do not seem to experience these problems you refer to. Others I talk to in the MozillaZine forums do not, either. When people come into the forums complaining about problems, we point them to the Knowledge Base, and when they follow the instructions there, they seem to quickly fix their problems.
If you are unwilling or unable to report or fix problems in Firefox, you should probably switch to another browser. There's no sense putting up with problems, as there are many good browsers out there. And it's even more pointless to keep complaining about vague problems such as "shoddy coding and bloat in general" when you cannot point out even one specific problem, no matter how trivial.
I just launched FireFox on the same machine. It has one tab open showing a blank page. This takes 47MB of RAM (not too excessive) and 3% of my CPU. Apparently it takes FireFox as much CPU to be inactive showing a blank page as it takes Safari to show 33 tabs and have me typing in one of them. Oh, and I have no plugins loaded in either browser.
If that problem is reproducible by others, then congratulations, you have discovered a bug in Firefox. Please discuss the problem in the Firefox Bugs forum and file a bug report if others agree that Firefox uses any more than 0% CPU displaying just a blank page. Some details you left out are which operating system you are using, and what version of Firefox you are testing. Remember to be as specific and detailed as you can when trying to report a bug. I cannot reproduce the problem, as I see 0% CPU usage even though I have this page open with the Flash ad running at the top of the page, and I have had Firefox open since yesterday. I'm using Firefox 3 beta 2 on Windows XP. (Actually, after previewing I get a different Flash ad that uses up to 8% CPU at certain points in the animation, but I don't see how that could be considered a problem with Firefox.)
Slashdot Mirror
I don't have a good feeling about this. Capitalism. Embrace... Extend... Extinguish.
It looks like IE8 will use improved standards mode for HTML5 as described above, and will also do so for newer XHTML doctypes also. Now MS should drop the meta tag idea entirely. It's not needed after all anyway.
That's why creating a new profile is the most recommended fix for Firefox problems: "With a new profile the application will run without any extensions, themes, or customized settings that may be causing problems." Updating your plugins and drivers can help also. For more information, you can look at the MozillaZine Knowledge Base or the new official Firefox support site.
That reminds me of 2001 when it seems nearly everyone on Slashdot claimed that Mozilla 1.0 would never ship, and nothing I said would convince them it was just around the corner. In seven years I'll probably remember how everyone kept complaining about the memory leak so many of us could never see.
That appears to be a bug in current Firefox builds. According to the documentation, a DOCTYPE declaration without a DTD should trigger full standards mode. Feel free to submit a bug report.
Yes, you understand the painting. You see, some of the paint has rubbed off. That's why you can't see what it would be. ;-)
You could still do versioning by using as I explain above.
If there ever is such a thing, perhaps ?
Why don't they use the from HTML5 (for HTML documents) and XHTML served with the proper MIME type (for XHTML documents) to signal improved standards compliance mode? That would mean documents properly written to the newest HTML and XHTML standards would render with the strictest adherence to standards in IE8 and later browsers. It would also mean that the vast majority of documents (over 99.99%) that exist today would continue to be rendered as they currently are.
That would cause older browsers to use quirks mode, but HTML 5 compliant browsers to use standards mode. causes both older and newer browsers to use standards mode, for an easy transition to HTML 5.
But good writers break rules knowingly and purposefully.
I don't have to do anything. I'm a fellow Firefox user and I'm trying to help you with your problem by getting a bug fixed in Firefox or figuring out what's wrong on your computer. If you're going to just be argumentative with me, I'll just stop trying to help.
How would one go about seeing this problem? What should I do so I can finally see it? If I can see it, I can get someone to look into it and fix it. If I can't see a problem, then there's nothing I can do.
All I can say is that any time I try doing the same thing in Firefox and another browser, Firefox really does use less memory than the other browser. I cannot prove to you that I personally do not see a problem, and you obviously don't believe me. On the other hand, I do believe you see a problem. My suggestion is to discuss the problem in the MozillaZine forums so you can get a resolution. Perhaps you can point out a specific problem in Firefox or fix a problem that is happening on your computer. Surely if there's an obvious problem, you'll find many people who can see the same problem you do, and it will be trivial to reproduce. Then, you can report the bug and get it fixed. It'll be as simple as that if Firefox really does use three times IE's memory opening any particular eight tabs. Why not go there and point out the problem already?
No, according to some sites, Firefox is the dominant browser for that site. You're pointing to W3School's server logs summary, which they admit are highly skewed toward alternative browsers compared to the overall market or most web sites.
Opera far more standards compliant than Firefox? i don't think so. According to Web Devout, Opera 9 and Firefox 2 have about equal support for HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and DOM standards. Let's just stop it with the Opera hype, already. It's too easy to see right through it.
Well, I am not dismissing you. I am asking for more detailed information so that I can file a bug report so the problem can be fixed. Until you provide that information, I simply cannot do so. I'm not denying any problem or dismissing you in any way. I'm asking you politely for what the problem is. Could you tell me please? Specifically, I need a detailed set of instructions for how to reproduce the problem.
No, that is not one specific problem. That is two entire classes of bugs, memory leaks and CPU performance problems. If you are having problems like those, they are indeed significant. On the other hand, if you cannot give any set of steps to reproduce any problem, I cannot file a bug report and the problem cannot be fixed.
As I've said, I do not experience any "bloat" problem, and most others on the MozillaZine forums do not, either. Those that do have those problems report that following the suggestions in the Knowledge Base clears their problems up. Have you even tried the one suggestion of creating a new profile? If you continue to have problems, discuss them in the MozillaZine forums. There's no point in making vague complaints here, as they do not get us one step closer to making Firefox better or fixing a problem on your computer.
When I do that, Firefox uses about 100 MB of memory, about the same as any other browser. Besides, you give nearly exactly David Baron's example of a useless bug report. In order for problems to be fixed, we must come up with specific problems, along with a detailed set of instructions for how others can reproduce them. Then we can file a bug report on each specific issue. Can you point out any specific problems in Firefox?
As I've said before, the problem is that we can never seem to recreate the problems users complain about. When we ask for a detailed set of steps to reproduce the problem, we almost always either get none or we cannot reproduce the problem. You can't fault developers for not fixing problems, when hardly anyone can seem to point out any. You need to report the bugs first, and then the developers will fix them.
I do not seem to experience these problems you refer to. Others I talk to in the MozillaZine forums do not, either. When people come into the forums complaining about problems, we point them to the Knowledge Base, and when they follow the instructions there, they seem to quickly fix their problems.
If you are unwilling or unable to report or fix problems in Firefox, you should probably switch to another browser. There's no sense putting up with problems, as there are many good browsers out there. And it's even more pointless to keep complaining about vague problems such as "shoddy coding and bloat in general" when you cannot point out even one specific problem, no matter how trivial.