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

    • I have updated my Series 9 Watch so I assume there is either a mistake in what was said, or as suggested - the new AI feature set isn’t supported on anything other than those listed above.
    • WhatsApp slams Isreali firm, NSO Group, for trying to spy on its users by David Uzondu WhatsApp has come out accusing Israeli cyber-intelligence firm, NSO Group, of deploying a fresh wave of highly targeted "spear phishing" attacks against users, which its security teams successfully thwarted. The Israeli firm, according to WhatsApp, ran this operation like its usual one-click phishing campaigns, trying to get people to click malicious links that lead them to external sites. To coordinate the campaign, the spyware vendor created fake test accounts and groups on the messaging app. WhatsApp said it is sharing the specific malicious domains, ikhwancast[.]com, ghazacast[.]com, and fr24cast[.]com, because potential victims need this data to check if they were targeted across other messaging systems or email platforms. The NSO Group is infamous for creating and selling Pegasus, a military-grade commercial spyware capable of silently compromising smartphones simply by sending a message or placing a missed call via apps like WhatsApp or iMessage. Users do not even have to interact with the incoming notification before the infection takes hold. Once Pegasus manages to break in, the spyware harvests private data, letting operators read private messages, emails, photos, and documents. It also tracks precise GPS locations, records keystrokes, activates the device's camera, and monitors live microphone audio. Independent investigations by cybersecurity watchdogs like The Citizen Lab and human rights organizations like Amnesty International have proven that governments use this software to track humanitarian workers, journalists, diplomats, and political dissidents. These findings directly contradict NSO Group claims that clients use the technology to spy on criminals and terrorists only. In late 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce added the firm to its Entity List, effectively banning the vendor from buying hardware and software from American tech companies. WhatsApp said in its blog post that the spyware vendor violated a permanent court injunction with this new spear-phishing campaign. This injunction, which took effect in 2025, strictly prohibited NSO Group from targeting WhatsApp and its users. The platform is now asking a federal court to hold the firm in contempt.
    • It would be surprising if even 3 year old Apple Watches (and not SE models at that) cannot run watchOS 27. Granted, it doesn't mean it would work as well. We'll see.
    • Apple launches new website for parents and a revamped Screen Time experience by Aditya Tiwari At WWDC 2026, Apple announced new parental control features for iOS 27, iPadOS 27, and macOS 27 to keep kids' device usage in check and keep them safe online. As a parent, you'll get access to a simpler setup experience, Ask to Browse, Time Allowances, and a redesigned Screen Time. You'll be able to pick exactly which apps your child can access on their device, choosing from just a few essential apps, a curated set, or the apps you feel are appropriate. There will be an option to gradually add more apps. Ask to Browse is a new feature that requires kids to request permission before visiting a new website in Safari on iPhone, iPad, or Mac. You can also turn on a setting that requires your kid to ask for approval before connecting with an unknown contact via Messages, FaceTime, or the Phone app. You can manage your child's screen time more effectively with Time Allowances that work across categories, including Games, Entertainment, and Social Media. You can set time limits based on your kid's age and get suggestions informed by expert research. Speaking of expert guidance, Apple added that it's working with the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) to adapt its Family Media Plan to create a guide parents can refer to when using Apple products. Moreover, the company has also set up a new dedicated website, where you can find tools, resources, and answers to common questions around parental controls and child safety. Apple also allows parents to set daily schedules to manage screen time, configuring access to different apps at different times of the day and across the week. Overall, the Screen Time section has been revamped and provides a bird's-eye view of your kid's average device usage and most-used apps. "For example, to help protect important family moments, parents can quickly limit access during meals, outdoor play, and other times that deserve full attention. If kids need a little extra time to finish something in an app, parents can also easily extend access," Apple said. Apart from these, Communication Safety has been updated to block gore or violent content when detected in shared images or videos. The feature already blurs nudity in Messages and FaceTime calls, and is enabled by default for users under 18.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Very Popular
      Captain_Eric earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • One Month Later
      amusc earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      231
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      87
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      80
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!