Firefox uses the Gecko engine which is inherited from the Mozilla suite, which again comes from Netscape. So Firefox, even though it is a standalone project, it does depend on code that was being developed long before the Firefox-project was even started.
If you can agree to this, you can also agree to that Firefox represents a evolutionary fork from Netscape. And that is what I meant by my post. Had Firefox started out on ground-zero it would have been nowhere near usable as a webbrowser today.
Your's sincerely a happy, but reasonable Firefox user.
As for "happy, but reasonable firefox user"--I am quickly tiring of the unceasing emotionalism of this article's comments regardless of what browser you use.
Thanks for clearing the Gecko issue up for me though.
My apologies, it was an AC coughing up some useless anecdotal "evidence" about Opera's stability.
Kind of like someone saying "Opening slashdot articles in a new tab crashes firefox." even though nobody else seems to have the same problem on a wide variety of platforms over the past year or so?
Except that before Firefox was Firefox it was Mozilla Firebird, and before that it was Mozilla Pheonix, and before that it was Mozilla and before that it was Netscape Navigator, which probably makes it a little bit more than 2 years. Argue as much as you like, but Firefox is basicly just the evolution of Netscape with the bloat added and removed midstream.
People didn't jump onto Firefox out of nowhere. Many were deep into the Mozilla/Netscape thing to begin with. The people who have jumped on to Firefox probably used Navigator until it bloated into oblivion and got back when the Mozilla foundation had a made a good product out of it again.
If you are going to show of the supiriority of Open Source please use somewhat factual facts, so you don't make the open-source community look like blatant liars.
I think, in the future, I will avoid posting to Opera related articles. The fanboyism and the emotion is too much to struggle against.
Blatant liars? Please.
And Firefox is a browser from scratch, it is my understanding. So the evolution is conceptual, not programmatic.
Interestingly, the Mozilla Suite which *is* a direct descendent of Netscape is not doing nearly as well as Firefox.
The two years I was noting are years where Firefox is a real player. Even if you count from Phoenix, I don't imagine we are looking at the same length of time as Opera--and ultimately, that was my point; Firefox (including version under its past names) is younger than Opera yet more successful.
And, I feel the need to point out: I used the word "strength", you are the one using the word "superiority".
In this particular discussion, your person is relevant, as you are proving to be very biased against Opera, and putting forward useless anecdotal evidence to try and find a way to bash Opera.
Where exactly did I bash Opera, kindly tell. You're using emotionally charged words again... and, it seems to me, for something that did not even happen.
Also, I must point out that even if I clash with you in one discussion, that doesn't mean that I will automatically label you a foe for all eternity and start bashing you elsewhere as well (unless you deserve it).
I labeled you a foe due to your use of what I perceived as underhanded childish insinuations. Seems a sensible use of the system. Not so?
I did not start to bash you elsewhere; unless you consider your replies to others in the same thread as being elsewhere.
And "all eternity" seems excessive.
I try to focus on people's message, not ncessarily on the person behind it
Fabulous.
such as when one is a Firefox fan and mindlessly bashes Opera.
Which I did when?? Not in a single post did I bash Opera. I ask again: who is the real fanboy?
Or Opera simply didn't have the perfect timing of being released as 1.0 exactly when everyone was warning everyone else, and telling them not to use IE. When that happened, Opera was at 7.54 or so - hardly a very interesting new browser.
True. Though marketing is where proprietary software should have the advantage normally.
Your posts says nothing useful about open vs. closed. All it does is to draw conclusions from dubious arguments.
...
Also, Opera actually has to sell a product to survive. It has to make money. Firefox was primarily created to grow quickly, and since Mozilla gets dontations from huge corporations like Nokia, IBM, Sun, and so on, they don't have to worry about sales. They get the money anyway.
Opera needs to focus on the bottom line, and maybe, just maybe, it's more important for Opera to have enough money to keep up development, rather than throwing it all out just to grow and make nothing.
I disagree that my arguments are dubious. You yourself state that Opera has to sell a product and make money to survive. Perhaps Firefox being less impacted by such considerations is a contributing reason for its success? Is that really such an outlandish proposition?
So, let's see... When Opera crashes it's Opera's fault, but when Firefox crashes it's the computer's fault? Hehe... Firefox fans... Gotta love'em:-D
You're an idiot, hkmwbz.
When a page that is claimed to crash the browser (and it is alleged to be the browser's fault) fails to crash it for other users on three different operating systems (with three different versions of the browser); perhaps the problem is not with the browser.
And who said anything about Opera? Who is the fanboy, buddy?
Re:Opera and Firefox [selective figures]
on
Opera 8 Released
·
· Score: 1
Did I mistakenly type "Opera Sucks" somewhere in my original post??
well, since firefox is actually a descendent of mosaic/netscape/mozilla, which *used* to have 90%+ market share, you could say that the power of the open source methodology has enabled it's leading browser to *lose* 85% market share...
Oddly, bringing up netscape supports what I was saying. Netscape the proprietary browser fell before Microsoft; Mozilla and Firefox are now retaking market-share as Free Software.
however, this would be interpreting the figures in a startlingly unrealistic and selective way, wouldn't it?
No... just making some fascinating conclusions that clearly do not follow from the stated facts.
i'm not including the mozilla suite, or other appearances of gecko, etc. kind of what you're doing with that ridiculous figure above that looks at one measure of success only -- apparent desktop penetration;)
WTF?? Mozilla Firefox **by itself** is considered as having over 5% marketshare. (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/19/05372 05) If I were to include all Gecko browsers, the number would be somewhere between 7% - 9%.
As for the ridiculous figure looking at Desktop Penetration only one measure of success: from a user perspective it is perhaps not insignificant? After all how much web browsing (both in terms of % of users and % of time) takes place *not* on the Desktop? I imagine we do not need concrete figures to know that the vast majority of users access the internet via desktop computers for the majority of time.
why do i say this? opera has an ever-increasing share in the mobile market, an area in which it is light-years ahead of the competition, and for which opera actually *makes money* -- yes, that's real money. firefox has 0% of this market. perhaps it will pick up some eventually, i understand there is a project heading in this direction. so what else... well, opera's rendering core now underpins the latest iteration of rendering for the newly revealed Adobe Creative Suite 2. hey, guess what - they got paid money for that too;)
Grand!
so, from what i'm seeing, opera isn't exactly struggling. they have over 200 employees, they have revenue, they have direction, and thus far every interesting new browser feature seems to have originated with them. the mouse gestures, the tabbed browsing, etc. opera did it first -- and i am quite happy to see them provoke yet more innovation in the browser market. heck, even something as seemingly simple as page-zoom has yet to be implemented as effectively on anything else (not counting font scaling -- seriously, the way opera does it is far, far better than anyone else's efforts)
I was assuming that a company whose flagship product is a desktop web browser would probably want increased marketshare. And, after a number of years, Opera has far less marketshare than the recent newcomer Firefox.
You seem to suggest that their interest may lie elsewhere. You might be right. If Opera did not want to gain greater marketshare in the desktop web browser arena, than indeed they did not fail at the task.
nevertheless, my preferred browser is opera, i paid for it and enjoy it's superior responsiveness, but i also support and use firefox. indeed, i have encouraged many friends and colleagues to install firefox instead, depending on their requirements.
Grand. To be clear, at no point did I make any comment on Opera's quality or on Firefox's quality.
Let me quote my own post:
What that suggests to me is that the Browser market was in fact quite open to a better solution, and Opera despite years of trying failed to fully take advantage of the opportu
"In a way, Opera really shows the strength of Free Software versus Proprietary Software."
You didn't really prove that. Another unproven argument that is just as plausible is that "free" software is replacing higher quality proprietary software among those users that are more interested in religion than technology.
No I didn't "prove" that. Did I promise I would "prove" anything? In fact I specifically worded my post to avoid doing so.
I'm stating my views and opinions.
Though unlike your babbling about religion (try saying what you mean next time, instead of employing childish name-calling), I at least stated why I think as I do.
No it doesn't.
Not on three different computers using three different operating systems:
Windows 98, Windows XP Pro, Gentoo Linux
Maybe you need to get your computer fixed?
In a way, Opera really shows the strength of Free Software versus Proprietary Software.
Opera has been around for how many years now? Version 8. It has about (based on thecounter.com) 1% marketshare.
Firefox has been around (as a Browser "on the map") for surely no more than 2 years. And it is at 5%+ marketshare already.
What that suggests to me is that the Browser market was in fact quite open to a better solution, and Opera despite years of trying failed to fully take advantage of the opportunity.
Then Firefox came along, and, of course, the rest is history.
I wonder how different all this would be if Opera had turned Free some years ago and the company behind it had become "The Opera Foundation", focusing worldwide development and making their buck via consultations and pay-per-feature contracts from the Corporate world.
If nerds could really manipulate TV listings, we'd have new episodes of "Star Trek" every night (including those "T'Pol's Bath" shows aired only after midnight).
But your strong statement of a conclusion turns out to be backed up only by Tridgell's claim.
Correct me if I am wrong--but Larry's oh-so public hissy fit is all anyone arguing the opposite side of the argument has.
And while I understand your point regarding the **AT ALL* part; Tridge's statement literally included the phrase "did not use BitKeeper at all". So while perhaps misleading as to its worth, it was not a hyperbole I dished out to bolster my argument. (Or, at the very least, not *my* hyperbole.)
Having said that... yeah, I'll seek to better qualify my rantings/informings in the future.
I expect that in the future I will be able to give a more detailed response, but for now I can only tell you the following:
- In late February I wrote a tool that is interoperable with BitKeeper. The aim was to provide export to other source code management tools and provide a useful tool to the community.
- I did not use BitKeeperat all in writing this tool and thus was never subject to the BitKeeper license. I developed the tool in a completely ethical and legal manner.
That, and the fact that Larry not only offered no proof of anything but also has been conveniently vague, is what I know.
Slashdot Mirror
As for "happy, but reasonable firefox user"--I am quickly tiring of the unceasing emotionalism of this article's comments regardless of what browser you use.
Thanks for clearing the Gecko issue up for me though.
Apology accepted.
Blatant liars? Please.
And Firefox is a browser from scratch, it is my understanding. So the evolution is conceptual, not programmatic.
Interestingly, the Mozilla Suite which *is* a direct descendent of Netscape is not doing nearly as well as Firefox.
The two years I was noting are years where Firefox is a real player. Even if you count from Phoenix, I don't imagine we are looking at the same length of time as Opera--and ultimately, that was my point; Firefox (including version under its past names) is younger than Opera yet more successful.
And, I feel the need to point out: I used the word "strength", you are the one using the word "superiority".
I said what I meant, no more, no less.
hkmwbz, I just looked at some of your journal entries.
Really now... you are the epitome of fanboyism.
I did not start to bash you elsewhere; unless you consider your replies to others in the same thread as being elsewhere.
And "all eternity" seems excessive. Fabulous. Which I did when?? Not in a single post did I bash Opera. I ask again: who is the real fanboy?
No, you are the one who is insinuating the insults; I'm the one making them directly.
In my book the former is underhanded.
Such an odd thing to say, since you can't seem to further the discussion by a single post that doesn't use emotional or ad hominem attacks.
Perplexing.
You do understand that my replies are written to you. Do you not?
And I don't think, of the two of us, I'm the one with the crusade.
Guilt by association is fashionable again?
"All X people are Y." and so on and so forth.
My post spoke of Free Software versus Proprietary Software and did not address browser quality.
So I'm not sure how you came to your conclusion.
You're an idiot, hkmwbz.
;-)
Since your post did not have anything even borderline meaningful to say; there's nothing else for me to write either.
Ta ta.
When a page that is claimed to crash the browser (and it is alleged to be the browser's fault) fails to crash it for other users on three different operating systems (with three different versions of the browser); perhaps the problem is not with the browser.
And who said anything about Opera? Who is the fanboy, buddy?
Oddly, bringing up netscape supports what I was saying. Netscape the proprietary browser fell before Microsoft; Mozilla and Firefox are now retaking market-share as Free Software.
No... just making some fascinating conclusions that clearly do not follow from the stated facts.
WTF?? Mozilla Firefox **by itself** is considered as having over 5% marketshare. (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/19/05372 05) If I were to include all Gecko browsers, the number would be somewhere between 7% - 9%.
As for the ridiculous figure looking at Desktop Penetration only one measure of success: from a user perspective it is perhaps not insignificant? After all how much web browsing (both in terms of % of users and % of time) takes place *not* on the Desktop? I imagine we do not need concrete figures to know that the vast majority of users access the internet via desktop computers for the majority of time.
Grand!
I was assuming that a company whose flagship product is a desktop web browser would probably want increased marketshare. And, after a number of years, Opera has far less marketshare than the recent newcomer Firefox.
You seem to suggest that their interest may lie elsewhere. You might be right. If Opera did not want to gain greater marketshare in the desktop web browser arena, than indeed they did not fail at the task.
Grand. To be clear, at no point did I make any comment on Opera's quality or on Firefox's quality.
Let me quote my own post:
No I didn't "prove" that. Did I promise I would "prove" anything? In fact I specifically worded my post to avoid doing so.
I'm stating my views and opinions.
Though unlike your babbling about religion (try saying what you mean next time, instead of employing childish name-calling), I at least stated why I think as I do.
No it doesn't. Not on three different computers using three different operating systems: Windows 98, Windows XP Pro, Gentoo Linux Maybe you need to get your computer fixed?
In a way, Opera really shows the strength of Free Software versus Proprietary Software.
Opera has been around for how many years now? Version 8. It has about (based on thecounter.com) 1% marketshare.
Firefox has been around (as a Browser "on the map") for surely no more than 2 years. And it is at 5%+ marketshare already.
What that suggests to me is that the Browser market was in fact quite open to a better solution, and Opera despite years of trying failed to fully take advantage of the opportunity.
Then Firefox came along, and, of course, the rest is history.
I wonder how different all this would be if Opera had turned Free some years ago and the company behind it had become "The Opera Foundation", focusing worldwide development and making their buck via consultations and pay-per-feature contracts from the Corporate world.
I think you misspelled around the clock.
I was going for subtlety and mysteriousness--but, ultimately, trying to make the same point.
Though, to my shame, I have never been there. :-(
It is not. I am thus perplexed. ;)
And while I understand your point regarding the **AT ALL* part; Tridge's statement literally included the phrase "did not use BitKeeper at all". So while perhaps misleading as to its worth, it was not a hyperbole I dished out to bolster my argument. (Or, at the very least, not *my* hyperbole.)
Having said that... yeah, I'll seek to better qualify my rantings/informings in the future.
Cheers.
One would hope that you yourself believe your own opinions... in fact one might argue that the very definition implies it.
Yeah, yeah; I'm nitpicking words. I'm aware of it. Andrew "Tridge" Tridgell stated (bolding by me): That, and the fact that Larry not only offered no proof of anything but also has been conveniently vague, is what I know.