Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Firefox 2.0 To Debut Tuesday

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the two-for-tuesday dept.

445

An anonymous reader writes "Firefox 2.0 for Tuesday, says the Seattle PI. They give a quick recap of some of the new features, and discuss the ongoing IE vs. Fox debate." From the article: "Version 2.0 also improves on the tabbed-windows interface that Mozilla innovated and that Microsoft introduced for the first time last week with IE7, its biggest upgrade since 2001. Analysts said IE7 is a significant improvement over its predecessor, but the big question is whether it will stem Firefox's growth at Microsoft's expense. Firefox's share of the browser market has grown to 9.8 percent of the U.S. market this month, from 2.9 percent in October 2004."

cancel ×

445 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

YAY! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539140)

That is all.

Re:YAY! (1, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539180)

Anyone know if there any significant changes that web developers will have to account for/be able to take advantage of?

Re:YAY! (5, Informative)

aymanh (892834) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539320)

The changes are nicely summarized in this page [mozilla.org] .

I find "Client-side session and persistent storage [whatwg.org] " to be quite interesting, and wonder if any major web apps will make use of it in the near future. There are also JavaScript 1.7 [mozilla.org] which makes JavaScript more Pythonic, SVG [mozilla.org] support, and several other features.

Re:YAY! (5, Funny)

From A Far Away Land (930780) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539324)

With the built in spell checker, I expect about 12% of the web's users to look smarter by at least 50% on Tuesday, with the number expected to grow as Firefox spreads.

Re:YAY! (5, Interesting)

ilovepolymorphism (642188) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539750)

With the new spellchecker they will also be introducing a new attribute to the input tag: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Controlling_s pell_checking_in_HTML_forms [mozilla.org] Is this a non-standard attribute? Are we going back to each browser adding stuff and hoping the other one stays relatively compatible? I'm not saying whether this is a good or a bad thing. I was just curious.

innovation? (5, Informative)

minus_273 (174041) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539144)

geez, "tabbed-windows interface that Mozilla innovated" that is beginning to sound like microsoft innovation. Long before firefox existed, I was using tabbed windows in opera. Give credit where it is due.

Re:innovation? (0)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539172)

You beat me to it. Seriously though, firefox is highly overrated. Is it better than IE6? Without question. Are there better browsers out there? Again, without question.

Re:innovation? (5, Insightful)

Sporkinum (655143) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539294)

Opera might be better, and IE might be improved, but as long as Firefox has Adblock and the filtersetG updater, Firefox is the browser for me, my family, and anyone else that wants do do away with annoying (read all) advertising.

Re:innovation? (-1, Troll)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539584)

Opera might be better, and IE might be improved, but as long as Firefox has Adblock and the filtersetG updater, Firefox is the browser for me, my family, and anyone else that wants do do away with annoying (read all) advertising.

You mean as long as you know that you're posting to Slashdot and that you'll get modded up for saying Firefox is teh pwn0r, you'll talk about it.

Tabbed browsing is the *least* important feature of a browser IMHO. I rarely use it (actually never) because I would rather have it be in another window that I can ALT+TAB to rather than CTRL+TAB (which is always in a different spot on each keyboard I use daily).

Re:innovation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539642)

Nice groupthink douchebags. Congrats for making my point.

Re:innovation? (5, Informative)

AcidArrow (912947) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539574)

Are there better browsers out there? Again, without question.

May I ask what are those other browsers you're talking about? I am aware of 4 major browsers other than Firefox. Let's have a look at them and how they compare with firefox.

IE7 - It finally got tabs and a search box but still has crappy html and css standards support. Actually it's a little worse than MyIE [myie2.com] for IE6. I'll pass.
Safari - Has a lot the basic features of a good browser and is very simple. Respects HTML and CSS standards. Has crappy PNG support (gamma correction) and for some reason scrolls slowly even on fast machines. It's a fine browser but I prefer Camino [caminobrowser.org] .
Konqueror - Although I have limited experience with this one, it looks like a good browser/file manager, but I am un-aware of any features (appart from passing that ACID2 test) that make it better than Firefox.
Opera - The only browser that is at least feature-wise better than firefox. But for some people Open Source actually matters. Though even with that into the equation, I can't really say which one is the better browser.

So, while you can argue and I might accept that opera is better than firefox, what are the other browsers that I've been missing that are better than the "overrated" firefox? Oh, and preferably opensource.

Re:innovation? (4, Informative)

jZnat (793348) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539654)

Konqueror comes with AdBlock built-in, so that's an instant win in my book. It's fast, integrates with my desktop (unlike Firefox), and even has a few extensions of its own.

Re:innovation? (1)

cortana (588495) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539678)

The reason to use Konqeror is because it integrated with the rest of the KDE desktop. That is why I use Epiphany on my GNOME system.

Re:innovation? (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539612)

Better browsers is dependant on the person.

Firefox is the best for most people. Opera isnt for everyone.
Personally I use Seamonkey and cringe a little when I use Firefox (I flinch whenever I see IE).

Re:innovation? (1)

skoval (921501) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539670)

I often get into flap when I found no FF at the PC when browser is needed.
Even if I only need to view a simple local html file. And no internet connection available.

Re:innovation? (3, Interesting)

Xymor (943922) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539194)

And I've been using since 1997 [wikipedia.org] with IE

Re:innovation? (1, Insightful)

MrP- (45616) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539202)

Not only has opera had it before firefox, it works better too.

I love Opera, it's my primary browser. I wish it was as popular as firefox

(and yes i know opera didnt invent tabs either but still)

Re:innovation? (5, Informative)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539220)

So, to whom should the credit go to?
"Web browsers are notable for implementing this kind of interface (called tabbed browsing). BookLink Technologies pioneered this interface design in its InternetWorks browser in 1994"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing [wikipedia.org]

Re:innovation? (4, Interesting)

Blakey Rat (99501) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539318)

BeOS had tabbed-windows system-wide since it was released. What year was that? It also had to be around 1994 or so...

Re:innovation? (3, Insightful)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539536)

Is taking tabs and applying them to web browsing all that innovative anyway? Surely the first program to interface a tabbed interface or equivalent (ie. switchbar), whatever it's purpose, is the true innovator and the first web browser to make use of them was simply "a good idea".

Tabbed web browsing in itself doesn't seem to be a milestone of great significance. Certainly no more so than tabbed text editing or tabbed image viewing etc.

Re:innovation? (1)

mnmn (145599) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539540)

Doesnt matter where the credit goes, as long as it is 'not Microsoft'.

As far as browsers are concerned, I agree with you, Opera was the first one IIRC.

MDI (5, Informative)

jonasj (538692) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539230)

Not that it matters who came first, but Mozilla did actually have tabs earlier than Opera. What you were using in Opera back then was actually MDI [wikipedia.org] , not tabs.

But of course other browsers had tabs far earlier than any of these two.

Re:innovation? (4, Informative)

unixmaster (573907) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539244)

It was first introduced in NetCaptor [netcaptor.com] browser, more history here [mozillazine.org] .

Re:innovation? (1)

BridgeBum (11413) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539312)

I remember netcaptor, the tabbed interface was what drew me to it. I used it for a while until it became fairly standard (everything except IE). Real innovation, for sure.

Another reason to use Opera.. (1)

Channard (693317) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539394)

.. is that it actually lets you decide how much memory is used for cacheing. Firefox, on the other hand, has no such limit and I've seen its memory usage go sky-high, both in Windows XP and OSX.

Re:Another reason to use Opera.. (1)

jrumney (197329) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539606)

Firefox, on the other hand, has no such limit

So what is this "50Mb" limit I see in the Cache section of the Advanced / Network tab of the Options dialog?

Re:Another reason to use Opera.. (1)

Trumpet of Doom (1002887) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539616)

Last I checked, Firefox did have a limit on how much... wait, that's hard drive space, but still, memory usage for the cache shouldn't go much (if any) above that. By any chance, the people who were using Firefox to cause its memory usage to balloon... did they have about a gazillion tabs open?

Re:Another reason to use Opera.. (2, Insightful)

bunratty (545641) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539656)

Firefox also lets you decide how much memory is used for caching [mozillazine.org] . The problem is that all images on all currently displayed pages are stored uncompressed in the memory cache [mozilla.org] , even if the storage exceeds the maximum size you've set. It's not a memory leak, so in practice the memory usage is a problem only when you're displaying pages with lots of large images, but it can cause hundreds of megabytes of memory usage on certain pages.

Re:innovation? (1)

slashkitty (21637) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539424)

"Version 2.0 also improves on the tabbed-windows interface that Mozilla innovated" That is seriously debatable. I will NOT upgrade to version 2.0 till they offer the old version again. It's seriously harder to use for power users.

Re:innovation? (1)

Simon Garlick (104721) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539548)

www.netcaptor.com

NetCaptor has had tabbed browsing far long than Mozilla.

Opera tabs. (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539148)

"Version 2.0 also improves on the tabbed-windows interface that Mozilla innovated and that Microsoft introduced for the first time last week with IE7, its biggest upgrade since 2001. "

Opera is going to surprised to hear that.

Re:Opera tabs. (1)

Cheapy (809643) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539426)

Especially since Firefox made them popular.

Re:Opera tabs. (1)

Bertie (87778) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539484)

Actually, I'm not sure it does. I preferred to have a single location for the "close tab" button, rather than individual ones for each tab. By all means add them to the tabs in addition to the static one on the right-hand side, but it was nice to have a button that you could repeatedly click on to close several tabs, without scooting along the line from one to the next.

FACT: OPERA DID NOT INVENT TABBED BROWSING! (4, Informative)

Sir Homer (549339) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539512)

Yes. Stop spreading the myth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing [wikipedia.org]

Re:FACT: OPERA DID NOT INVENT TABBED BROWSING! (1, Informative)

yoyhed (651244) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539610)

Nope, but in 1996 Opera had buttons in their browser for each page along the top, which worked EXACTLY LIKE TABS. NetCaptor was just the first to draw them like tabs in their interface. Stop spreading the myth.

Re:FACT: OPERA DID NOT INVENT TABBED BROWSING! (1)

Ruff_ilb (769396) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539710)

"BookLink Technologies pioneered [tabbed browsing] in its InternetWorks browser in 1994."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabbed_browsing [wikipedia.org]

Re:FACT: OPERA DID NOT INVENT TABBED BROWSING! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539630)

If you read that statement carefully you will see that it does not say Opera did not have tabbed browsing first.
And I am now foeing all the Opera fans, I'm sick of the repetitive whining.

Tuesday? (5, Funny)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539160)

Tuesday? The day when security patches for IE are released?

Re:Tuesday? (4, Funny)

The MAZZTer (911996) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539200)

Maybe they're saying Firefox is the ultimate security patch for IE? :^)

Re:Tuesday? (4, Funny)

Dracos (107777) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539634)

Why not? People used to say that Service Pack 6 for NT4 was RedHat.

Re:Tuesday? (5, Funny)

electrosoccertux (874415) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539222)

Firefox _is_ the security patch for IE.

Re:Tuesday? (5, Funny)

wertarbyte (811674) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539688)

Indeed. Internet Explorer is a fine browser, I use it all the time on a new windows installation - to download Firefox.

Re:Tuesday? (0, Offtopic)

TheDreadSlashdotterD (966361) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539266)

I've got it. The trip to redmond was to give microsoft a way to shut down FF 1.5 and earlier in order to force people to upgrade to 2.0. This also gives FF 2.0 a month to work before microsoft tries to turn it off as well. Fortunately, Skynet will come online as soon as MS tries it.

The end of your world is near. Long live the machines! (powered by Firefox!)

My balls are drained (-1, Troll)

lick mi ballz (1016185) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539174)

mi dick is raw and blistered from jacking off so much thinking about the new firefoxx release and my azz is sore from zonk fucking it

Lies (-1, Flamebait)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539190)

the tabbed-windows interface that Mozilla innovated

Lies. You know, marketing BS like this puts Mozilla in the same camp with Microsoft in my eyes.

Re:Lies (2, Informative)

ricree (969643) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539226)

It depends on whether this was due to misstatements by mozilla people, or if it was just a stupid writer. Never underestimate how ignorant journalists can be.

Re:Lies (1)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539240)

There were tab-based browsers before Mozilla or course (Opera for instance), but none where you could open pages in either a new tab or new window.

Re:Lies (4, Insightful)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539242)

When has Mozilla claimed that in innovated tabbed-windows interface? You are quoting Seattle Post-Intelligencer, not Mozilla.

Re:Lies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539284)

Innovated does NOT mean or imply invented. Firefox's parent browsers were the first popular ones to employ them and firefox has improved them. Therefore there was some innovation involved.

If you still have trouble with the definitions, there are plenty of dictionaries around.

Re:Lies (1)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539326)

Yes it's BS, but Mozilla didn't write the article so you can hardly blame them for it.

Re:Lies (1)

MooUK (905450) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539446)

Most other tabbed browsers were single-window-only, as far as my experience goes. FF also allows multiple windows, remember.

Also, did Mozilla say they invented it themselves, or is the writer getting things wrong? Answer that before you place blame.

Minimum tab size (4, Interesting)

42forty-two42 (532340) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539228)

One of the annoying things about the new firefox interface is you can't have as many tabs in the bar at once anymore. Sure, it has a scrolling interface, but I liked the sort of spatial representation of the old system. Is there a way to change the minimum size of the tab headers in the new firefox?

Re:Minimum tab size (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539254)

I'm sure somebody's working on an extension for that as we speak. If there's not one already.

Re:Minimum tab size (1)

pepsi_max2k (961389) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539340)

check about:config, there's a setting in there where you can change the min. size of a tab. i forget what it is and where i found it, but it's there.

Re:Minimum tab size (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539258)

THis is one of the many reasons I stuck with Mozilla suite and Seamonkey, rather than firefox. The UI is just so much better.

Re:Minimum tab size (4, Informative)

christopherfinke (608750) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539272)

s there a way to change the minimum size of the tab headers in the new firefox?
Set browser.tabs.tabMinWidth to 0 (or whatever you want) in about:config.

Re:Minimum tab size (1)

oddfox (685475) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539712)

Thanks for the edumacation! Nice trick I was too lazy to look up myself.

Re:Minimum tab size (5, Informative)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539274)

Yes there is. You can remove the close buttons from the tabs (make it look like it was in 1.5) and also tell the min width for the tabs:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.tabs.closeButton s [mozillazine.org]
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.tabs.tabMinWidth [mozillazine.org]

Re:Minimum tab size (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539276)

Use browser.tabs.tabMinWidth and browser.tabs.tabClipWidth in about:config.

Re:Minimum tab size (1)

atsabig10fo (857922) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539290)

yeah i don't like all the close buttons in each tab, it makes it too cluttered and slow to navigate.

Re:Minimum tab size (1)

lordofthechia (598872) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539620)

Plus you can just set your middle mouse button to close a tab.

Re:Minimum tab size (1)

cyclocommuter (762131) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539306)

I'm pretty sure the version of Tab Mix Plus or some other tab related extension which will be ported to run on Firefox 2.0 will have this feature. This is the beauty of Firefox... its extensibility using extensions. Sure Opera might be smaller/faster and IE might look shinier but the community that writes extensions for Firefox is what makes it the best IMHO.

TabMixPlus RC (3, Informative)

skoval (921501) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539336)

I've just checked.
RC1 of new TabMixPlus version (with FF 2.0 support) is already available.

Good news for me.

Re:Minimum tab size (1)

TheSeer2 (949925) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539374)

Opera has the same things. Except they're called Widgets.

Of course Firefox has the XUL bonus.

Hey Folks (5, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539268)

...Firefox's share of the browser market has grown to 9.8 percent of the U.S. market this month, from 2.9 percent in October 2004."

Hey Folks,

They're both free apps under Windows! How does it really hurt MS if FF gets 100% marketshare? In fact, if FF were to take over it might actually benefit MS. How? IE has been their worst blackeye of the past couple of years. More problems with than than everything else. If MS could make all the bad IE press go away, don't you think that would be a positive? I realize this is like suggesting to Apple to let Dell build their hardware, but does that make it a bad idea? As long as FF adheres to Open Standards, everyone can compete with web-sites equally with it.

Re:Hey Folks (5, Insightful)

dvice_null (981029) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539314)

> How does it really hurt MS if FF gets 100% marketshare?

If all the people use Firefox, there won't be that many IE-only applications. This means it will be a lot easier to switch to other operating systems, which usually means that people stop using Microsoft software. Microsoft's strategy is to force people to stick with their system. Why else do you think they are always making their own version of standards?

Re:Hey Folks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539362)

This means it will be a lot easier to switch to other operating systems, which usually means that people stop using Microsoft software.

Oh yes, people are sticking with MS today just to use IE. [rolling eyes]. You're somewhere between clueless and moronic.

Re:Hey Folks (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539496)

Sorry to feed the troll, but... the fact is that there are far too many IE-only web applications in the business world. It is very hard to crank down the security rules (let alone move to Firefox) due to these poorly implemented web applications (or web interfaces to legacy systems)

In fact, in the browser wars of the 1990s, Microsoft required that certain license terms included the requirement that some critical part of the license holder's web site have IE-specific behavior and/or require IE to operate correctly. (I know, we refused to sign that contract and ended up having to do our own implementation of the wininet.dll - which turned out to be a good thing in the long run but cost us dearly)

(Posting anonymously, for obvious reasons...)

Re:Hey Folks (2, Insightful)

boron boy (858013) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539518)

Listen up, it works like this. If IE had close to 100% market share (as it did in the past) lazy web developers would only develop sites that ran properly when viewed in IE. Now that it has dropped to around 80%, web developers must make their sites compatible with all browsers.

This means that when I view these sites on my linux machine they actually work! It effectively removes one barrier to switching my OS. Now if only the game companies would release linux versions I could put linux on all my machines.

Re:Hey Folks (4, Insightful)

Tim C (15259) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539466)

This means it will be a lot easier to switch to other operating systems

Only if IE is the most compelling reason to remain on Windows, which I suspect is not the case for most people.

Why else do you think they are always making their own version of standards?

There are plenty of possible reasons:

* It's easier
* It lets you do stuff that you consider useful/necessary/cool but that isn't in the spec
* Not Invented Here syndrome
* As you suggest, lock-in
* They're arrogant enough to think they know best and big enough to get away with it

Re:Hey Folks (5, Insightful)

C0vardeAn0nim0 (232451) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539356)

IE is a loss leader, just like the Xbox. they make up by selling other stuff, like devopment kits for activeX applets and other stuff.

plus it's an anchor to hold people to their products.

how many people you know have computers only to check e-mail and browse the web ? if all these people switch to firefox, how soon they'll realize they can use FF running in linux, freebsd, mac, etc ?

what MS wants is joe sixpack to think that "internet == internet explorer" so they can keep shoveling windows on the unsuspecting masses

Re:Hey Folks (2, Insightful)

Omeger (939765) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539490)

I highly doubt joe sixpack even knows what linux or freebsd is.

Re:Hey Folks (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539386)

If through shifts in market share every popular Windows app becomes crossplatform, then people will realize that they don't need Windows. That would really hurt MS.

Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (5, Interesting)

JavaManJim (946878) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539288)

Its Sunday after all right now, so why not pray for FireFox? This is FireFox 2.0 Beta running on my Windows XP PC.

1. Starts without maximizing itself to the full PC screen area. Always leaves space available. In contrast SeaMonkey correctly occupies the full PC screen area when starting (but SeaMonkey makes me create a new profile except for once.). FF thinks its full screen according to its maximize/window button but is mistaken.

2. FF fails CSS rendering because it uses an antique CSS engine.
http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/ [webstandards.org]

Those are my FF issues. What are yours?

Thanks,
Jim Burke
     

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539368)

Not suffered from 1, but then I just bought a HUGE screen, running full screen browsers on it, is fascicle. On point 2, it's not antiquated it's constantly being improved, just the stable releases of the engine are behind the bleeding edge you can get hold of one which can pass Acid2 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dbaron/126886608/), but the rendering engine might crash on you.

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539376)

Those are my FF issues. What are yours?

Definitely its memory usage.

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (4, Informative)

bunratty (545641) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539506)

Good news... There are several [pcworld.com] reports [zimbra.com] that [mozillazine.org] Firefox 2 uses less memory than IE 7. Only a small percentage of users [cmp.com] ever had problems with memory usage to begin with.

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (1)

Cap'n Refsmmat (1003152) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539390)

1. Never seen that problem, and have been using the Firefox 2 branch for months. 2. Wait for Firefox 3, when the rendering system will be given a major overhaul.

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (1)

skoval (921501) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539442)

It takes a lot of time to build it from scratch.

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (1)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539546)

My #1 FF issue is memory use. It could be an extension, but I don't think I have any besides IEview. I have three tabs open and Firefox is using 90MB of RAM. It's not uncommon to see it use 200MB or more. That's a bit ridiculous.

Something wrong w/ your system (1)

skoval (921501) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539598)

I could get similar results only in 1.0.x versions browsing all day long: opening, closing, rearranging and restoring several tens times an hour.
In fact I haven't seen FF using more than 100M RAM for a long time.

Maybe that's because of pictures switched off/on?

Acid2? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539562)

Why does anybody care about Acid2?

Acid2 is about how it deals with faulty HTML/CSS. If you write decent HTML and CSS, you'll never run into the problems that cause Acid2 to fail under Gecko.

Do you have any actual issues with Gecko's CSS which Acid2 demonstrates, or is this just a "wah wah Safari users see a pretty smiley face but I don't" pissing contest?

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (1)

Ankur Dave (929048) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539580)

In Firefox 2.0 on Linux, the Backspace button doesn't take you back a page anymore; instead, it scrolls the page up. The new Back key shortcut is Alt+LeftArrow. This annoys me no end, since I don't like having to use two small keys versus one big one to do a common function.
(There may be a way to re-enable the Backspace key, but Googling hasn't helped me.)

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (1)

daemon_mf (786046) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539618)

1. Starts without maximizing itself to the full PC screen area. Always leaves space available. In contrast SeaMonkey correctly occupies the full PC screen area when starting (but SeaMonkey makes me create a new profile except for once.). FF thinks its full screen according to its maximize/window button but is mistaken.


Do you have Nvidia's Nview Desktop Manager enabled?

Same thing happens to me when I enable it.. except it's all windows.

FF no goes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539664)

Can't stand the FF dumbed down preferences. I was SO glad when the seamonkey project started. Renders faster,too, for some reason. Got a better look and feel to it. I keep upgrading FF, and inevitably just close it and go back to seamonkey. Sometimes I use Konq but not too often, but could live with just that.

My actual all time favorite browser is iCab though, pity that dev don't get religion and go to open source and linux.
.

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (1)

Zarel (900479) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539694)

Well, #2 isn't going to be fixed until Firefox 3.0, as the developers mentioned a long time ago. And as for #1, I don't remember ever having that problem.

Re:Two of my prayers for FireFox Improvement (1)

AcidArrow (912947) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539720)

While passing the ACID2 test is a fine achievement browsers can brag about, does it have any real meaning? After all what it means is that it can render correctly some really convulted CSS that doesn't break any rules. I develop websites from time to time, and I never had any real problems with how firefox currently handles CSS.

But where can I get my IceWeasel 2.0 ? -- NT (4, Funny)

zeenixus (571630) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539408)

But where can I get my IceWeasel 2.0 ?

9.8??? where do they get these numbers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539420)

9.8% ????? Are you kidding me, that's gotta be a very conservative estimate going by the stats on the website I work on. Granted it's an Academic oriented community, but we have more unique firefox users than IE users.

Here's hoping. (5, Insightful)

Grendel Drago (41496) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539486)

I hope it won't leak quite so much memory. That'd be nice.

"whether it will stem Firefox's growth" (1)

zantolak (701554) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539530)

Um, definitely not. When you can only run IE7 on Vista, XP or 2003, it won't be stemming the growth of Firefox at all. What a ridiculous question.

Market? What market? (4, Insightful)

jc42 (318812) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539534)

Firefox's share of the browser market has grown to 9.8 percent of the U.S. market this month

This has gotta be one of the weirder (mis)uses of the term "market". After all, the competing "products" aren't for sale, and a "market" is usually a place where people sell things.

Of course, it can be difficult to establish a market when the "market leader" does the ultimate price-war thing and gives its product out for free. They did kill Netscape Corp, of course, but somehow they still didn't capture the "market".

There are some bizarre (bazarre?) economic theories at work here, I think.

One-time importing from SessionSaver? (1)

steveha (103154) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539554)

We've been heavily using the SessionSaver plugin feature with Firefox 1.5. When (not if, when) Firefox 1.5 uses up all the system memory and Linux kills it, we restart a minty-fresh new instance of it and all our windows come back.

It turns out that SessionSaver doesn't work with Firefox 2.0, and it doesn't really need to because Firefox 2.0 has a session saver feature built in. I have several dozen pages open, and I'm wondering: is there any convenient way to bring those pages forward? Basically I just want to import my session.

If no one knows any way to do this, I'll probably whip up a quick Python script to convert the SessionSaver saved URLs into a format that Firefox 2.0 can understand.

P.S. I really hope that Firefox 2.0 will take longer to use up all the memory and fall over. Or even, dare I hope for it, not leak significant amounts of memory at all.

steveha

Re:One-time importing from SessionSaver? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539706)

Just bookmark all tabs into a folder, make a copy of your bookmark file, upgrade, and open the bookmarks to tabs.

what's really new? (1)

claus.rosito (913183) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539578)

i've been looking at ff2 and i couldn't find anything new. every single feature stated as new was already present in 1.5 using extensions like antiphishing, feeds, etc. it seems more like the extensions went into the core. but, do we want a huge monolithic core with lots of features or a smaller one wich i customize with extensions according to my needs?? my veredict: i'll stay with 1.5 for a while!

The Netscaping... (0, Troll)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539638)

While people are busy commenting "the Netscaping" of Symantec and McAffee, people are missing the more obvious one:

The Netscaping of Firefox.. Quite a fit, eh?

IE7 has the power and ability to burry Firefox in the ground. And I don't want lame excuses like "but Firefox has X and IE7 doesn't".

You know this doesn't matter.

Bad release date (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16539662)

Too bad Firefox 2.0 release is going to be shadowed out by the release of Frozen Bubble 2.0 coming up on the same week :^)
Teaser here [dailymotion.com] . Rumors has it the game will be networked..

FireFox still rules (4, Insightful)

Mike_K (138858) | more than 7 years ago | (#16539722)

I'm a Windows user. I used to think that Firefox used too much RAM - I have about 30 tabs open in 2 windows, and it consumes over 140MB. In my book that's A LOT.

Few days ago I installed IE 7. I know, installing brand new MS software is a bad idea. But I'm reinstalling this OS soon anyway, so I wanted to give it a try. I opened the same tabs in the browser. Some of them didn't have my cookies, so slightly different pages loaded. But to my surprise, IE7 was taking up over 400MB of RAM. That's almost 3 times as much as Firefox. It got sluggish compared to Firefox. (I have a gig of RAM in a decently fast computer)

I'm sticking with Firefox. I'll test out 2.0 when it comes out, and baring bugs or bloat, I'll be using it as my main browser on all 3 computers I use.

m
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>