allynfolksjr wrote:
I think the real subject should be:
Firefox 4 released: Who cares?
And what browser do you use, may I ask? Firefox 4 released: Who cares?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I've noticed it does start a bit faster on my commodity hardware than the previous version, but there's nothing to get excited about.
Hm, I like FF 4. The menu designs is nicer than that of FF 3.6 and the browser is a bit snappier, although I can't really say I see much difference in memory usage. Personally, I can't see anything blurry about the font, but the smaller toolbars are kind of annoying and I don't see any obvious ways to change the size. I also kind of miss the foot-bar at the bottom of the screen, since I can't see any way to use easily access Noscript.
EDIT: Played around with the settings a bit and it came back, but all of the pretty icons have been replaced with text
EDIT: Played around with the settings a bit and it came back, but all of the pretty icons have been replaced with text
Qwerty.55 wrote:
Hm, I like FF 4. The menu designs is nicer than that of FF 3.6 and the browser is a bit snappier, although I can't really say I see much difference in memory usage. Personally, I can't see anything blurry about the font, but the smaller toolbars are kind of annoying and I don't see any obvious ways to change the size. I also kind of miss the foot-bar at the bottom of the screen, since I can't see any way to use easily access Noscript.
EDIT: Played around with the settings a bit and it came back, but all of the pretty icons have been replaced with text
You can make Fx4 look and behave exactly like 3.6 when it comes to the menus and UI, I don't know what you mean whey you say all the icon's have been replaced with text. EDIT: Played around with the settings a bit and it came back, but all of the pretty icons have been replaced with text
"Always code as if the person who will maintain your code is a maniac serial killer that knows where you live" -Unknown
"If you've done something right no one will know that you've done anything at all" -Futurama
"Have a nice day, or not, the choice is yours." Tom Steiner
<Michael_V> or create a Borg collective and call it The 83+
<Michael_V> Lower your slide cases and prepare to be silent linked. Memory clears are futile.
Fun keyboard shortcut I just found for those who like add-ins like ForecastFox but also like tons of screen real estate: Ctrl-/ toggles the add-in bar at the bottom of the screen on and off.
The real thing for me is the fact that you can drag tabs around into different groups it looks cool.
Svenne wrote:
allynfolksjr wrote:
I think the real subject should be:
Firefox 4 released: Who cares?
And what browser do you use, may I ask?Firefox 4 released: Who cares?
Chromium, of course. What else?
. 
Firefox's fundamental flaw is that bloated XUL that's always going to hurt its performance and memory-usage. Firefox isn't a bad browser, but having to load this gigantic XUL framework into memory every time one wants to browse the web is superfluous. I don't go near programs that require large libraries. I don't like having to load all these dependencies into my computer's memory when the program could have been written in a more efficient / less dependent language. FF would have been just fine to take advantage of the OS' native API. In fact, Camino (a FF Mac port) doesn't even use the XUL framework - just the native Cocoa API.
I've tried Firefox 4. Didn't think much about the new features. It's an okay browser, aside from the aforementioned complaint, which is something that will likely never change.
I've tried Firefox 4. Didn't think much about the new features. It's an okay browser, aside from the aforementioned complaint, which is something that will likely never change.
Zera wrote:
Firefox's fundamental flaw is that bloated XUL that's always going to hurt its performance and memory-usage. Firefox isn't a bad browser, but having to load this gigantic XUL framework into memory every time one wants to browse the web is superfluous. I don't go near programs that require large libraries. I don't like having to load all these dependencies into my computer's memory when the program could have been written in a more efficient / less dependent language. FF would have been just fine to take advantage of the OS' native API. In fact, Camino (a FF Mac port) doesn't even use the XUL framework - just the native Cocoa API.
I've tried Firefox 4. Didn't think much about the new features. It's an okay browser, aside from the aforementioned complaint, which is something that will likely never change.
I've tried Firefox 4. Didn't think much about the new features. It's an okay browser, aside from the aforementioned complaint, which is something that will likely never change.
Bwahahahaha. Wow, you are a moron. Praytell, what makes you think XUL is bloated, has bad memory usage, or is a large library? See, I'm curious because Firefox is less than *half* the install size of Chrome - so XUL obviously isn't a large library. Ditto for memory usage, since Firefox uses less than all the other browsers (Chrome is actually by far the worst in this - it om noms memory like it's going out of style). XUL is the reason Firefox has extensions that other browsers can't hope to compete with - it is one of it's biggest strengths. XUL also isn't bloated by any means - it uses XML, CSS, and JavaScript - things every browser already supports. XUL is essentially free, it adds very little to code size. If you are against large libraries, you should *love* Firefox's usage of XUL since it drastically cuts down on library bloat by re-using the website rendering engine to render it's own UI. It is quite a clever little trick, that.
As for Camino, it uses Gecko, which means it includes complete XUL support. It is no smaller or less bloated than Firefox when it comes to XUL. If anything, it's additional support for things like AppleScript would make it more bloated.
So to summarize, quit talking out your ass, go learn a thing or two, and stop being retarded.
heh, I do beleive that this is not going to be my 2nd favorite browser now, as long as it's directory does not get corrupted after a boot into ubuntu >.> (ikd how chrome did that, but it is quirks like that make me sometimes use FireFox)
qazz42 wrote:
heh, I do beleive that this is not going to be my 2nd favorite browser now, as long as it's directory does not get corrupted after a boot into ubuntu >.> (ikd how chrome did that, but it is quirks like that make me sometimes use FireFox)
That's very strange, did you try to use your Windows Chrome from Ubuntu or something? But discussions of Chrome bugs are for another topic, I think. 
ScoutDavid wrote:
w0000t 35 million downloads, getting it right away!
Awesome! I like how in one day Firefox 4 got way more downloads than IE9 had gotten in several days. Register to Join the Conversation
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Advertisement