Opera 8 manages to fit: * browser * mail * newsgroups * chat * bittorrent client * other smaller features (gestures, panels, SSR, slideshow...) * ad banner everyone is scared of
in 3.7mb.
SeaMonkey is much bigger package, and any major difference is having WYSIWYG editor (which I wouldn't use for anything other than occasional HTML mail).
It has been said before: Flash can be fast, because you can have many drives in parallel. Chips survive lots of rewrites, because they remap logical blocks when phisical wear out.
This may sound trollish, but is it fair to state on getfirefox.com that "Firefox empowers you to browse faster, more safely and more efficiently than with any other browser."
IMHO it should be "that other browser" or "any other Microsoft browser".
Big companies seem to do patent-cybersquatting. They just register whatever they could think of hoping that someone someday will fall under their vague patent.
First argument omits well-formedness requirement, but other are actually true.
There are common misconceptions about XHTML. Like pride in making XHTML Transistional (take slashdot, add more slashes!) and sending it as text/html (surely HTML parser works better with cooler name and extra syntax errors!).
Actually IE does render text nicely. It supports hyphenation (soft hyphen) and dynamic spacing of letters (text-justify:newspaper) that allows pretty rendering of justified text. Gecko hasn't improved in this area since old Netscape.
Yes, CSS is made to keep HTML simple. It takes layout/presentation complexity out of it.
So-called semantic code looks just like HTML2/3, and works great even in Lynx.
CSS allows users to override authors stylesheets. Take a look at user CSS in Opera 8 - you can increase contrast, add debug elements or even make every page look like displayed in Commodore 64 text mode.
CSS stores presentation information in quite efficient format - selectors and cascade allow elimination of most repetition while keeping it relatively simple (obviously you have to know and understand CSS for it to be simple).
There should be no dispute about Tables VS CSS - CSS has display:table-cell. Internet Explorer (including IE7) is the only major browser that doesn't support it, so it's CSS vs IE-stuck-with-tables.
AJAX is overhyped. This technology was available for years, and nothing revolutionary has happened. It recently just got a cool name...
1. Closing browser window (or navigating away from page in something else than Opera or DeerPark) kills state of application. 2. It still needs roundtrip to server 3. Still needs HTML+CSS gui, server backend...
Web apps are web apps. AJAX web apps are still web apps, but a little faster, duh.
Web designers will get full PNG and CSS1.0 support. So who loses in this scenario?
Developers, who won't get decent CSS. Features coming to IE7 are nice, but none of them are crucial for building CSS-based layouts. Those which are, remain unchanged (buggy, missing).
Microsoft wants IE7 to be XP SP2 only. About half of Windows users need to upgrade before WU can bless them with IE7.
Changes they're making look great compared to old IE, but even supercharged IE7 will be years behind competition.
Without support for CSS2 display properties, fixed floats model, fixed width/height pure CSS layouts are still going to be pain in the ass.
Don't count on IE7 pushing the web forward. Half of net population has to be ripped off by Microsoft to replace IE6 by IE7. I'd rather help people get free Firefox or give their money to Opera Software or Apple.
Box-model in IE was fixed around 2001. Fix YOUR code.
I'd like IE to support basics like width, height, display:inline and float. Currently under these names Microsoft has implemented min-width, min-height, display:inline-block and god-knows-what, respectively.
Slashdot Mirror
Opera 8 manages to fit:
* browser
* mail
* newsgroups
* chat
* bittorrent client
* other smaller features (gestures, panels, SSR, slideshow...)
* ad banner everyone is scared of
in 3.7mb.
SeaMonkey is much bigger package, and any major difference is having WYSIWYG editor (which I wouldn't use for anything other than occasional HTML mail).
I think SeaMonkey could do better.
Since when Firefox is more appropriate term for HTTP than HTTP?
This thing is dangerous. It's easy to promote mistyped name as #1 on Google and get users forwarded to fake site.
It has been said before: Flash can be fast, because you can have many drives in parallel. Chips survive lots of rewrites, because they remap logical blocks when phisical wear out.
1. Install clean system and all apps you will use ...
2. Scan drives to mark all software as safe
3.
4. Profit!
OMG!OGM!OMGOGM!!!111 My mom bought me Teh Windows Ultimate Ultra Edition!!!!11 My gamez R gonna B 10x c00ler than yors ROTLFOLOLOL!!!1111111
This may sound trollish, but is it fair to state on getfirefox.com that "Firefox empowers you to browse faster, more safely and more efficiently than with any other browser."
IMHO it should be "that other browser" or "any other Microsoft browser".
Big companies seem to do patent-cybersquatting. They just register whatever they could think of hoping that someone someday will fall under their vague patent.
IE5/mac supports more CSS2 than IE7 is going to. I'd say that there is no latest IE version for Windows.
Unlike these guys on /. who know everything...
First argument omits well-formedness requirement, but other are actually true.
There are common misconceptions about XHTML. Like pride in making XHTML Transistional (take slashdot, add more slashes!) and sending it as text/html (surely HTML parser works better with cooler name and extra syntax errors!).
Open Standards are useless when they are open standards of only single vendor. Good intentions, poor result.
No need to go anywhere, you can replace your car right here.
Does it improve CSS rendering? Does it support Firefox extensions?
Basic functionality and GUI aren't Firefox features worth copying.
With Fink and Darwin Ports, I can get most of "Linux" software on a Mac. I can't wait for WINE for OSX86. 3 major OSes on one desktop... yum!
Actually IE does render text nicely. It supports hyphenation (soft hyphen) and dynamic spacing of letters (text-justify:newspaper) that allows pretty rendering of justified text. Gecko hasn't improved in this area since old Netscape.
Yes, CSS is made to keep HTML simple. It takes layout/presentation complexity out of it. So-called semantic code looks just like HTML2/3, and works great even in Lynx.
CSS allows users to override authors stylesheets. Take a look at user CSS in Opera 8 - you can increase contrast, add debug elements or even make every page look like displayed in Commodore 64 text mode.
CSS stores presentation information in quite efficient format - selectors and cascade allow elimination of most repetition while keeping it relatively simple (obviously you have to know and understand CSS for it to be simple).
There should be no dispute about Tables VS CSS - CSS has display:table-cell. Internet Explorer (including IE7) is the only major browser that doesn't support it, so it's CSS vs IE-stuck-with-tables.
Table of CSS support in various browsers: http://www.quirksmode.org/css
I'll be missing "nah, that's just megahertz myth".
That's how AmigaOS gets new games these days.
AJAX is overhyped. This technology was available for years, and nothing revolutionary has happened. It recently just got a cool name...
1. Closing browser window (or navigating away from page in something else than Opera or DeerPark) kills state of application.
2. It still needs roundtrip to server
3. Still needs HTML+CSS gui, server backend...
Web apps are web apps. AJAX web apps are still web apps, but a little faster, duh.
Ewww... you're that kind of lazy consumer that helps Microsoft to monopolize market.
For video postprocessing I recommend VirtualDub - very fast, powerful, free, open-source.
Stealing? For important information websites should use HTTPS (certificates detect DNS spoofs).
Developers, who won't get decent CSS. Features coming to IE7 are nice, but none of them are crucial for building CSS-based layouts. Those which are, remain unchanged (buggy, missing).
Microsoft wants IE7 to be XP SP2 only. About half of Windows users need to upgrade before WU can bless them with IE7.
Changes they're making look great compared to old IE, but even supercharged IE7 will be years behind competition.
Without support for CSS2 display properties, fixed floats model, fixed width/height pure CSS layouts are still going to be pain in the ass.
Don't count on IE7 pushing the web forward. Half of net population has to be ripped off by Microsoft to replace IE6 by IE7.
I'd rather help people get free Firefox or give their money to Opera Software or Apple.
Box-model in IE was fixed around 2001. Fix YOUR code.
I'd like IE to support basics like width , height , display:inline and float . Currently under these names Microsoft has implemented min-width, min-height, display:inline-block and god-knows-what, respectively.