Mozilla Firefox Browser
- Thread starter barutiwa
- Start date
InfiniteJest
Paragon
It's got a hell of a lot of add ons. It's the most customizable browser in the world. Problem for me is, I find it to be too heavy. I personally use chrome as it loads with crazy speeds and doesn't overfill your CPU.
fantanoice
Madly Diligent
Firefox has a bunch of add-ons, plus is updated quite frequently, meaning that bugs are often fixed and it is often becoming more compliant with changing web standards (something that IE could only dream of). It's also a fiery fox, which is pretty cool as well.
I've been using it for 5+ years and it's also been reliable.
I've been using it for 5+ years and it's also been reliable.
fantanoice said:
NB: I'll voice for Opera
Haven't you just shown why not to use FF?
1. Add-ons: Why would you want add-ons? They make browsers slower, hence why they are inbuilt into Opera, making performance much, much faster and better.
2. Bugs/Often Fixed: Bugs are "often fixed". Doesn't seem like FF caters for all users. With very limited bugs on Opera, where they are so minimal, they are fixed easily (hence the need for not updating constantly which is a hassle and affects user aestheticism), FF seems to be bug abundant, which then requires constant updating.
3. "Becoming": Browsers shouldn't be catching up with web standards; they should update automatically when there is a new web standard, let alone has a representative at W3C conferences.
3 reasons why not to use FF over Opera. Then again, it's much better than IE 😛
Interesting. IE has my attention because it was one of the first browsers I used in 1996 and 1997. Netscape was the first actually, then Internet Explorer. I use Firefox every once in awhile. Opera, I've never tried it. Maybe I should.
fantanoice
Madly Diligent
1) I'm not going to install each and every add-on there is. The ones are do have are to make my general browsing experience much nicer. It may slow down the browser as a whole (but I personally have not seen a problem with it), but it makes general activities much quicker.DavidL said:
2) Lolwut? Opera has just as many bugs as any other browser, just Firefox can detect and patch them quicker because they have more people working on it. Just because the bugs may not effect you doesn't mean they don't exist. Also, some of the updates aren't necessarily for fixing bugs, they're for making the browser more web compliant. There are a number of CSS2 (the current standard) and CCS3 (the future standard) codes that Opera is not compliant with and won't be because it isn't updated as quickly as Firefox is.
3) Which is what Firefox does. It's not going to be 100% compliant overnight, but there's enough people working on it to get it happening as quickly as possible.
Really, Opera is a fine browser, I just prefer Firefox. It's not perfect, but neither is Opera and it's really just determining the best browser for your own experience.
fantanoice said:
1. Opera is independently the fastest, full-running browser (therefore excludes Chrome; still in beta), with more inbuilt modifications and addons which FF does not have. Performance wise, I can tell from experience that Opera is much faster; I only have 2 FF addons and it's relatively slow compared to Opera.
2. You have no proof that FF patches bugs quicker, let alone have proof that they are troubleshooting the exact same bug. Also, you're statement of "more people working on it" is flawed statistically. I can only infer, but Opera has over 750 employees, whereas FF has a mere 250 in comparison. I can't confirm that Opera has more people on debugging, but from the statistics, Opera can balance out their staff in each section of their company. Note that FF also has Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, and a whole lot more here so clearly they don't have as many staff on debugging then Opera, hence showing that Opera has more employees to perfecting the browser, which is their only intangible asset.
Opera is a performance browser, therefore does not require the need to attain to all CSS2/3 coding. Anyway, any genuine web developer can easily edit the Opera files to attain to this. FF is way behind on performance, noted by their recent update, just recently fixing their browser appearance issue, when Opera looked into this 2 years ago when it was a booming issue for all web browsers, and fixed it early 2009.
3. If a browser is just coming to 2008 standards for Opera, then they are clearer slow in maintenance, especially when they need to maintain reputation. When Chrome came along, FF seriously lacked in design, performance and aestheticism, and still are, but not to a major degree anymore. There clearly isn't enough people working on it, statistically, hence the slowness of genuine updates on performance. Even Chrome after 2 years is far ahead of FF who seems to have just came out of the Netscape Navigator era, and just passing IE.
True, but have you tried out Opera for at least 1 month? If not, I genuinely suggest you at least test it out. 🙂
fantanoice
Madly Diligent
I know, but I don't find Firefox's speed a problem. Also, I probably wouldn't use a lot of Opera's in-built stuff (Opera Mail and whatnot) because I have other ways of getting that stuff.
Yes, I used Opera 9 for a fair few weeks (never bothered to get Opera 10 because I was happy with FireFox). It was reasonable, but I really missed my add-ons and it crashed a fair bit as well (from what I can remember).
Yes, but Firefox is an open-source project, so even if the Firefox employees aren't working on it, it's not impossible to say that somebody else isn't looking at the source code and fixing it themselves.
That's what I meant, not that there are more employees. :/
Even if there is someone looking at it, it doesn't necessarily mean it will be formally addressed and formally released. This issue can be raised, but the issue doesn't have to be addressed, hence the solidarity of Opera's coding so people can raise issues, but all coding is done internally so the final release can be certain of all issues. Opera doesn't have to deal with 20 different debugging options, which "may" lead to issues in another part, which web developers may not know about.
Anyway, I reckon FF is a decent web development browser that needs to catch up to modern web performance, but it's definitely not a terrible browser.
NBK*Twitch
Seasoned Veteran
Just putting this out there,opera does pass the acid 3 standards test.
Firefox still does not.(Even with the latest beta)
@OP I would suggest google chrome or Opera,both are very fast web browsers.
However if you are a plugin guy Chrome would be best.
Firefox still does not.(Even with the latest beta)
@OP I would suggest google chrome or Opera,both are very fast web browsers.
However if you are a plugin guy Chrome would be best.
Affiliates
