Firefox VS Safari

[edmonton]

Which is better, and why?

[KTamas]

Firefox, cause of gecko.

[smm5786]

Firefox, cause of gecko.

584745517[/snapback]

yes gecko does a much better job rendering pages than KHTML (or webcore as apple likes to call it)

[thekore]

Firefox seems to run slower for me...

[krmathis]

I prefer Mozilla Firefox, because imo its a more complete browser than Safari.

Pros:

* Standard compliant.

* Runs fast and stable.

* Extensions support.

* Lots of great features.

* Frequently updated.

* Great community.

But it also have some cons:

* Using XML (No native menus and widgets). :(

* Development is dropping behind the Windows and GNU/Linux versions (more bugs etc...).

[KitCh]

Firefox, as it is just plain easy to use and user friendly! :)

[Righty]

i use firefox on windows but for mac i would have to say that safari is better. firefox seems slugish and seems to have more bugs and dosnt quite fit in with os x.

[mac15]

I prefer Mozilla Firefox, because imo its a more complete browser than Safari.

Pros:

* Standard compliant.

* Runs fast and stable.

* Extensions support.

* Lots of great features.

* Frequently updated.

* Great community.

But it also have some cons:

* Using XML (No native menus and widgets).  :(

* Development is dropping behind the Windows and GNU/Linux versions (more bugs etc...).

584745758[/snapback]

- Safari's Rendering Engine is Standards Compliant, it's based off KHTML and Apple's Team (David Hyatt) is doing wonder's with it.

- Safari Runs Fast and Stable too.

- Extentions is something safari is lacking, but there a hand full of great third party plugins that make Safari even better.

- Safari is too feature packed

- Safari see's an update close to everything 4-6 weeks, if not a security update it's a major rendering engine update in Apple's small System updates.

- Well you now how Safari's a community is, were mac heads :)

But Firefox for Mac OS X is lacking, XUL means no native widgets, but there is always Camino which works so much better than firefox and is picking up in development rapidly.

[Spacedog]

I was just wondering why nobody brought up Camino, that's a native - and great - OS X version of Mozilla... thanks, Mac15

[firebud]

I like Firefox for Mac just because of "Copy Image Location".

I mean, come on Apple, add it in! :pinch:

[Elliott]

yes gecko does a much better job rendering pages than KHTML (or webcore as apple likes to call it)

584745525[/snapback]

I wouldn't say that at all. Dave Hyatt has really improved KHTML and, in my opinion, made it more standards compliant than Gecko. That definitely shows in Safari's CSS compliancy.

[Wickedkitten Veteran]

I like Firefox for Mac just because of "Copy Image Location".

I mean, come on Apple, add it in!  :pinch:

584748615[/snapback]

High Five, that is the one thing that stops me from using Safari. You don't realise how important that it is until you need to use it a lot.

And to make firefox more "mac osx like" check out Hicksdesign, I think I remember reading somewhere that they will be making the mac version more "mac'y" soon.

[Steve]

FireFox just feels like a Windows app on Mac OS. Horrible IMO. Unless things changed recently?

[oik]

i prefer safari. there's no reason to change, so i don't use firefox. same goes for omniweb and camino and the rest.

[oik]

I like Firefox for Mac just because of "Copy Image Location".

I mean, come on Apple, add it in!  :pinch:

584748615[/snapback]

is it really so hard to open the image in a new tab and copy the address? :huh:

[MovieFanatic07]

Firefox, its very easy for anyone to use.

[JorgeIvan]

Firefox :D

[fuzzy_logic]

I use Firefox because Safari doesn't render some page right for me. But Firefox is such a memory hog. (It's using 101.4MB read memory and 458.72MB virtual memory now). :no:

[firebud]

is it really so hard to open the image in a new tab and copy the address?  :huh:

584750865[/snapback]

Well, not really, I'm just lazy. :p

[mac15]

Really? 100mb normal memory is nuts but nearly 500mb virtual memory? That's not good at all

[cmove]

Safari, is simple and more quicker

[Chad]

I wouldn't say that at all. Dave Hyatt has really improved KHTML and, in my opinion, made it more standards compliant than Gecko. That definitely shows in Safari's CSS compliancy.

584748637[/snapback]

Hah! He's improved it, but Safari still doesn't hold a candle to Firefox as far as being complient. Gecko is ages ahead of khtml

is it really so hard to open the image in a new tab and copy the address?  :huh:

584750888[/snapback]

Well if you'd actually try it the other way, you'd realize it's quite a bit faster. Once you start downloading quite a few images, there's no contest.

Seriously...Safari isn't even close in the browser race anymore. Apple crammed as much in there as they could, so now it's a bloated piece of a browser. WELL behind firefox and Omniweb. And seriously...why even bother with Camino? Who cares if it uses the native OS X gui and Firefox doesn't? Since when does your browser looking good come before functionality? :rolleyes:

[Elliott]

Okay, so you say Safari is bloated, and then you say you want more functionality. I really don't get you Chad, I really don't. Safari is light, fast and really much better than Firefox on OS X. Firefox on Windows is nice. It's the best Windows has, but in the Mac scene, we have better. I'm sorry, but "Copy Image Location" doesn't make Firefox better than Safari.

[XP_01]

Safari

[oik]

Okay, so you say Safari is bloated, and then you say you want more functionality. I really don't get you Chad, I really don't. Safari is light, fast and really much better than Firefox on OS X. Firefox on Windows is nice. It's the best Windows has, but in the Mac scene, we have better. I'm sorry, but "Copy Image Location" doesn't make Firefox better than Safari.

584753269[/snapback]

i think the only person that understands chad is... chad.

chad: it's interesting you say apple has crammed "everything" into safari, and that it's behind omniweb and firefox, compared to all the features i'd call "bloat" in omniweb and firefox. and no, as a keyboard junkie (one finger on the cmd key, four fingers hovering the keyboard, one hand on the mouse), it would save me perhaps a half a second to choose "Copy Image Location" over "open in new window" > cmd-l > cmd-c > cmd-w.