Recommended Posts

Is it only me that when some images have some time of error, they simple don't show up?

That is a bit anoying since when we are seing some websites there is nothing that can tell us that should be there one image that is not working fine :s

Cheers

I had a problem like that, my router was causing it. Does it happen on every browser or just firefox ?

Scrolling really sucks in Firefox on Mac OS X. Instead of being smooth it jerks around when using a Magic Mouse or Magic Trackpad. In general Firefox' animations are awkward and nowhere near as smooth as throughout the rest of the OS and its applications, or completely missing. Yet another reason why using customs interface APIs instead of the native ones is a really bad idea.

Scrolling really sucks in Firefox on Mac OS X. Instead of being smooth it jerks around when using a Magic Mouse or Magic Trackpad. In general Firefox' animations are awkward and nowhere near as smooth as throughout the rest of the OS and its applications, or completely missing. Yet another reason why using customs interface APIs instead of the native ones is a really bad idea.

Not my experience. My Alu MacBook has perfect scrolling on nearly all sites I visit.

Not my experience. My Alu MacBook has perfect scrolling on nearly all sites I visit.

Compared to Safari, Finder, Mail, iCal etc. Firefox' scrolling is really jerky with inertia enabled. Firefox only scrolls smoothly when holding down my fingers without letting go when I move around. But when I give a flick with two fingers to scroll and inertia kicks in scrolling starts to stutter.

They really changed the about:config strings to make it almost unrecognizable for some settings compared to FF3.

I was trying to change the default search for the address bar to Bing by searching for the keyword.url as I used to, but now it is browser.search.defaultsearchengine.

Compared to Safari, Finder, Mail, iCal etc. Firefox' scrolling is really jerky with inertia enabled. Firefox only scrolls smoothly when holding down my fingers without letting go when I move around. But when I give a flick with two fingers to scroll and inertia kicks in scrolling starts to stutter.

I don't have any of that.

Needs a new option: "Are We Relevant Yet?"

Mozilla really needs to step up their game if they don't want to be left in the dust. FF4 is a joke at this point.

How exactly is it a joke?... Sure it's slow on development process... but it's still better then Chrome IMO. Firefox for me was lacking a bit in speed with Firefox 3. With Firefox 4 the speed has picked up a lot and is now the clear winner for me. Chrome is missing quite a few features I just cannot live without.

And what exacyly is the joke?Can you be more specific???

I don't know about you,but the only joke i see is your post Educated Idiot.Firefox is faster,has betterUI and a lot more options and addons than chrome(this is my personal opinion).For me on sunspider or kraken benchmark or in real life browsing FF 4 is better than chrome in any way.As Kaoxt said development is not as fast as we would like, but after FF4 they are going in a faster release cycle so this will not be a problem anymore.

Needs a new option: "Are We Relevant Yet?"

Mozilla really needs to step up their game if they don't want to be left in the dust. FF4 is a joke at this point.

To be honest I think 4.0 is a GREAT update. I considered using Chrome but ended up going back to FF4 :/ I might give Safari 5.1 another shot in Lion but we'll see... I'm not holding my breath

How exactly is it a joke?... Sure it's slow on development process... but it's still better then Chrome IMO. Firefox for me was lacking a bit in speed with Firefox 3. With Firefox 4 the speed has picked up a lot and is now the clear winner for me. Chrome is missing quite a few features I just cannot live without.

The current dev build in chrome is bit laggy for me, which is why I decided to finally go ahead and test out FF4b12 (originally was planning to wait until rtm since I had not need). Having used FF3 in the past, it certainly is a great improvement in performance, features, and customization (perhaps biggest key point here) and I am impressed despite their slow development. But overall, speed and performance is the most important for me, which is where Chrome excels (at least for the time being). FF4 feels very bloated at times and gets a bit laggy, partly because of the large initial memory load despite having 6GB of ram. It still lacks some of the innovative features that makes chrome so great, like the ability to manually add search engines, which is something I find essential for fast/convenient browsing. I will be back to using chrome by next week following this little experiment, but I still have faith that the mozilla team can make FF more competitive by the end of the year.

To be honest I think 4.0 is a GREAT update. I considered using Chrome but ended up going back to FF4 :/ I might give Safari 5.1 another shot in Lion but we'll see... I'm not holding my breath

I am one of the few people that actually likes Safari on Windows (the browser itself, not the crap it comes with). It has always been fast (as fast as earlier builds of Chrome, even) and looks decent enough to use full-time. In fact, I can't remember a single crash. I have, however, managed to crash Chrome a couple times, but that's another story.

Anyway, what I meant to say is the development of FF4 is a joke: one delay after another, 12 billion betas, engineers leapfrogging one-another, and so on. Mozilla itself isn't like it use to be, and I'm not even referring to Google's financial support. I don't know what happened to them, but I'm guessing the world passed them by while they were screwing around. That's the thing about the tech world (especially on the software side): you miss one month and it'll take years to catch up.

The browser itself is pretty reliable--It doesn't crash (much), websites render cleanly and I can't live without some extensions (i.e. Adblock+). However, it takes forever and a day for it to start up, and it takes even longer to get it working right. I think I spend more time tweaking and customizing the damn thing than I do using it, and that's a problem. I can't live with a slow, ugly browser.

I rag on Mozilla a lot because I am extremely dissapointed in them. I use to consider them one of the greatest companies on the web at one point, but now it seems like each department has its own agenda. It's just sad that they've lost focus and they're pulling in different directions.

Since people keep claiming Firefox 4 is taking so long, I decided to actually go and look up the time between versions.

1.0 to 1.5: 1 year, 20 days

1.5 to 2.0: 10 months, 25 days

2.0 to 3.0: 1 year, 7 months, 24 days

3.0 to 3.5: 1 year, 13 days

3.5 to 3.6: 6 months, 22 days

3.6 to 4.0 (now): 1 year, 1 month, 9 days

So yeah, the time between 3.6 and 4.0 isn't that bad, and isn't even as long as the time between 2.0 to 3.0.

People said the same things about 3.0 as they're saying about 4.0 (Taking too long, too many beats, irrelevant, etc.). And funnily enough 3.0 was also the release that set the world record for downloads :laugh:

How exactly is it a joke?... Sure it's slow on development process... but it's still better then Chrome IMO.

How FF development process is better than Chrome's? Google at least doesn't tease users with features they can't add in time and doesn't move release date forever ...

Needs a new option: "Are We Relevant Yet?"

Mozilla really needs to step up their game if they don't want to be left in the dust. FF4 is a joke at this point.

Its not joke , Mozilla had been very "open" with their public and that's how it has been , yeah i accept the development was very slow , but i can bear that if they deliver a very stable product (considering even nightlies are very very stable)

I remember when the first beta came , their wiki page said "w00t!" , that's mozilla and i love them this way :D

Since people keep claiming Firefox 4 is taking so long, I decided to actually go and look up the time between versions.

1.0 to 1.5: 1 year, 20 days

1.5 to 2.0: 10 months, 25 days

2.0 to 3.0: 1 year, 7 months, 24 days

3.0 to 3.5: 1 year, 13 days

3.5 to 3.6: 6 months, 22 days

3.6 to 4.0 (now): 1 year, 1 month, 9 days

So yeah, the time between 3.6 and 4.0 isn't that bad, and isn't even as long as the time between 2.0 to 3.0.

People said the same things about 3.0 as they're saying about 4.0 (Taking too long, too many beats, irrelevant, etc.). And funnily enough 3.0 was also the release that set the world record for downloads :laugh:

Several reasons why we claim it is too slow and is still a relevant argument:

-Chrome has been blazing along for the past year gaining a huge lead on performance while FF was lagging behind. This put extra pressure on Mozilla to push out a new release to at least maintain the gap, which they have taken too long relative to the pace of Chrome. The function of "long" is purely to the present rather than the past.

-At the time when FF3.0 launched, Chrome was still under development and was still a couple months away from launch. FF was considered the best browser available at the time until Chrome came along and changed the philosophy of web browsing. It forced people to decide which was more important to them: faster page load times and less system resource use for a basic browsing, yet highly responsive experience, or a decently fast and tons of addons for a more robust browsing experiences. This led to the major divide we see in the thread. Diehard FF fans said they could not live without their addons, while others like myself were willing to sacrifice addons to have the fastest web performance.

Also, it is one thing to download a browser, another to actually use it as default browser. I would not be surprised if FF manages to set another record with the FF4 launch, but the number of people who will actually use it every day is certain to be far below the number of downloads and installs.

Since people keep claiming Firefox 4 is taking so long, I decided to actually go and look up the time between versions.

1.0 to 1.5: 1 year, 20 days

1.5 to 2.0: 10 months, 25 days

2.0 to 3.0: 1 year, 7 months, 24 days

3.0 to 3.5: 1 year, 13 days

3.5 to 3.6: 6 months, 22 days

3.6 to 4.0 (now): 1 year, 1 month, 9 days

So yeah, the time between 3.6 and 4.0 isn't that bad, and isn't even as long as the time between 2.0 to 3.0.

People said the same things about 3.0 as they're saying about 4.0 (Taking too long, too many beats, irrelevant, etc.). And funnily enough 3.0 was also the release that set the world record for downloads :laugh:

Awesome find , also one must consider that Firefox 4 compared to Firefox 3.6 is AGGEESSS AHEEADD and the time taken seems less to me sometimes , its just that they failed to deliver products at the time they promised (or rather targeted in wiki notes and we took it as promise) , that's what made us feel they are slow , if they had said Firefox 4 would come next year Q1 , no one would have said development is slow

The current dev build in chrome is bit laggy for me, which is why I decided to finally go ahead and test out FF4b12 (originally was planning to wait until rtm since I had not need). Having used FF3 in the past, it certainly is a great improvement in performance, features, and customization (perhaps biggest key point here) and I am impressed despite their slow development. But overall, speed and performance is the most important for me, which is where Chrome excels (at least for the time being). FF4 feels very bloated at times and gets a bit laggy, partly because of the large initial memory load despite having 6GB of ram. It still lacks some of the innovative features that makes chrome so great, like the ability to manually add search engines, which is something I find essential for fast/convenient browsing. I will be back to using chrome by next week following this little experiment, but I still have faith that the mozilla team can make FF more competitive by the end of the year.

Firefox 4 (since preb13 builds) uses much much less memory than chrome , what innovation did chrome do? They went to the market , picked up fastest browser engine , added some features from each browser and tada! We have chrome ready to be served ! Even now with the latest version (11 i guess) they used tracermonkey like method , which again is an "innovation" by mozilla "used" by Chrome. Its just the omnibar , tabs on top and slight other changes which i accept , are innovative.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • SpaceX has secured a significant cloud-services deal with Google, agreeing to a monthly payment of $920 million for computing power.  This agreement, covers approximately 110,000 NVIDIA GPUs and other components.... https://cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/investments/google-to-buy-computing-from-spacex-at-920-million-per-month/131543026    
    • no thanks is overpriced and its not the fastest ram neither.
    • It is, but it also has a bad performance reputation even on high-end gaming PCs. Some people say it's the engine's fault, others say it's the games developers' fault, who knows... At the end of the day, for the average gamer, the take is this: PC game with Unreal Engine 5? Be affraid and cross your fingers, it's a 50/50 chance.
    • 25th anniversary Xbox Series X unveiled with classic translucent green design by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe The Xbox Games Showcase had a new Xbox console reveal from Microsoft celebrating the gaming brand turning 25 years old. This is to be a new limited edition Xbox Series X and controller collection that draws on the design of the rare green version of the original Xbox console. The "XBOX Series X25 Limited Edition" is coming out later this year with its matching controller. "Inspired by the look and feel of the original XBOX console, both the console and controller feature a translucent OG Green design, with subtle tributes to the journey we’ve been on together," said Microsoft in the announcement. The Xbox Series X|S line has received several new variants over the years, but this will be the first edition with a translucent design. The Xbox Series X25 will have one terabyte of internal storage and a green light on the X to signify the console lines' history. There is a 25th anniversary logo printed on the front plate. Microsoft is also teasing that the community will be able to find "a few hidden surprises throughout" the machine as well. As for the new X25 Special Edition Xbox controller, this is also coming with the classic translucent green design for its front and back plates. "From the original ABXY colors, to the timeless green, every detail calls back to the beginning, including the bumpers honoring the original black and white buttons on the original “Duke” controller," says the company about this release. "The back case and battery door are fully transparent, revealing the classic XBOX logo." The XBOX 25th anniversary collection, containing both the translucent console and controller, will be available for purchase in November 2026 as a limited-edition release. Microsoft will be offering the new XBOX Wireless Controller X25 Special Edition separately as well. Pricing details and pre-order information will be coming later.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      243
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      66
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!