A while ago there was an article Mozilla’s web site mentioning that they are switching their browser component to a new one (at the time called Phoenix). It was a simple and fast browser so I started using it instead of Mozilla. Mozilla Firefox uses the same engine as Mozilla. The difference is in the user interface as well as some features. Firefox is meant to be a small and simple browser with only the most basic features. More features can be added as extensions. The basic features (not so basic comparing to IE and some other browsers) are tabbed browsing, pop-up blocker, download manager, a mini search-bar (Google by default) and all the usual suspects (bookmark and theme manager, etc). Firefox comes with a simple theme but more can be added. Every new Firefox release so far has come with a different theme. I love seeing new themes. Aren’t you tired of seeing Mozilla’s old theme ironically named “Modern”? Firefox installer is less than 5MB, which means with a fast Internet connection it can be downloaded in seconds. It’s great if you want to install it on other people’s computers ;-).
My favourite extensions so far are Bookmark Synchroniser (the name says it all) and single window (opens new tabs instead of new windows). Of course you always open pages in a new tab if you use the middle button but I
use this to avoid those annoying links that open in a new window. Other people seem to like Googlebar (in case you need more than just the basic search-bar… I don’t). There’s also a more advanced pop-up blocker I’m more than OK with the default pop-up blocker. You can also download or add more search engines to the search-bar. These use the same format as the original Mozilla browser and I’ve found every engine I use regularly (Dict.org, Wikipedia, eBay, IMDB, etc).
Firefox has a simple user interface and as far as the options go the user only sees what needs to be changed. More advanced options are accessed in a hierarchy so everything is very clear for the user. (If needed, more options can be changed by adding an extension or editing the configuration files directly if you are comfortable doing that and don’t want to bother installing an extra plug-in.
After installing Firefox (only a few clicks and no confusing options), the user will see a very simple and clear interface with what you would expect to see in a web browser and (almost) nothing more: Those five browser buttons, an address bar and a tiny search bar with Google’s logo clearly showing what it does. Default options are great for most users if not all and the menus are very clear and easy to understand too. There is no help (except for tool tips) and it is not needed for basic use anyway as a good user interface should not require a written manual.
Firefox 0.9 (the Linux version only) was a real disappointment for me. In the new version “Tools->Options” menu is now “Edit->Preferences” and OK/Cancel buttons are reversed (I think they’ve been that way since 0.8). This is because Firefox for Linux is going to be integrated with GNOME desktop environment so the developers have decided to “Gnomify” it. Apparently the menus can be edited back to where they belong (without having to recompile) and
we might end up seeing some Linux distributions do it. But average users can not do that and they don’t expect to see the buttons move either! I think there should been special edition for GNOME. I think it would be much better to keep
the same program consistent on all systems rather than changing it to make it consistent with other programs in one system. GNOME is not even an operating system but one of many desktop environments for Linux. Even not all GNOME
programs follow that standard. Gaim (an instant messenger for GNOME that is ported to other operating systems) is one example. I particularly hate the position of buttons. I use server authentication for my fax server (the
username/password dialog with OK/Cancel buttons) and even though it’s been a while since they switch the buttons I still hit the Cancel button after typing my password and have to do it again. Fortunately (in a way) I see
more Windows users switch to Firefox due to problems with IE than Linux users so this issue doesn’t apply to most new users.
The problem with bad user interfaces is the fact that they are designed by, and thus for, technical people. I do not believe simply following design guidelines is enough. For example in my experience people generally are not comfortable switching from a hard-to-use user interface they have got used to, to a very easy-to-use interface that is new to them and they call what they’ve got used to more user-friendly. So I always run my own little practical experiment with average users.
My experiment with Firefox had interesting results and I’ve been observing new Firefox users for over 6 months now. I initially performed an experiment in Windows by installing Firefox on the shared computers at work. After a short while I realized most colleagues of mine are now using Firefox as their default browser. In fact some of them got their family members to use it. I also asked my family and friends who were having problems with IE – mostly due to pop-ups, worms and spy-ware – to switch to Firefox. After a short while they too started recommending Firefox to their friends and they all mentioned the ease of use and useful features. With the small download size I see my new Firefox users install Firefox on every computer they touch. I also discovered people who use Firefox as their default browser are more comfortable using Linux too because they can use Firefox and it’s safe to say no program is used more often than your web browser.
About the author:
Hooman Baradaran is currently a senior at York University in Toronto, Canada. He’s currently working on a his paper on use of haptics devices in a 3D design system.
If you would like to see your thoughts or experiences with technology published, please consider writing an article for OSNews.
Good stuff
I wonder if all these stories covering firefox will help to reach the 1,000,000 downloads in 10 days goal:
http://spreadfirefox.com
It needs to support displaying ALT Text tags, but that is my only complaint. :>
It needs to support displaying ALT Text tags, but that is my only complaint. :>
See
http://texturizer.net/firefox/faq.html#tooltips
about alt text and images
“It needs to support displaying ALT Text tags, but that is my only complaint. :>”
No it doesn’t.
If you read the current standards at W3C you will realize that ALT tags are not intended for being displayed but are actually intended for use by other tools such as screen readers.
What most people mistakenly use ALT tags for is actually supposed to be handled through a “tooltip.”
The browser that has this wrong is IE. Not any of the Mozillas…that includes Firefox.
Not that I’m a fan of ESR, but the metaphor does apply.
This is my main complaint against Firefox. The main browser itself is an enormous download, yet completely bereft of features. Users are forced to pick and choose the functionality they want, and the time it takes to install all of the extensions you use must be repeated for each system you use.
To me this ultimately amounts in frustration, and a failure of the collaborative development process to make a cohesive and well integrated product. For this reason I prefer browsers that take the cathedral approach and provide a large, powerful, and integrated feature set per default, and weigh in at a fraction of the size of Firefox.
I agree regarding the time and effort of re-creating an installation of Firefox plus, say, seven extensions. Not to mention the vague fear that you are forgetting one of them.
However, look at how many extension there are. Incorporating them all, if even an option, would be a terrible one. While it’s arguable that a few things should become standard (mouse gestures, for example), I can’t argue in general with the extensions approach even though it has a negative side-effect.
The best solution I can think of would be the ability to have a “Mozilla account”, which you could maintain at Mozilla.org and direct a newly-installed version of firefox to for the purpose of customizing itself to your saved specifications. Not a perfect solution, but one that solves the particular problems you raise without threatening to turn Firefox into bloatware.
“Users are forced to pick and choose the functionality they want, and the time it takes to install all of the extensions you use must be repeated for each system you use.”
Er, I’m not sure what you’re talking about. I’d consider myself a fairly advanced user, and I have yet to install an extension. If I’m satisfied with the functionality, I imagine lots of users with simpler needs will be as well.
It’s not like Firefox is broken out of the box, it works excellently with its default functionality.
Watch http://www.polinux.upv.es/mozilla/ for a new version of Plastikfox compatible to the preview release (including Cancel/Ok button order swapping).
What exactly are these features Firefox is allegedly bereft of? It views web pages, in tabs no less, has bookmarks…. what exactly does, say, IE offer that Firefox doesn’t be default?
What Firefox really does is replicate the operating system model. The browser is a platform for a sea of subprograms. Sure, it’s a hassle to reinstall all your programs/extensions whenever you upgrade. But the benefits of de-coupling the feature set from the main platform development are many. Linux, OS X or especially Windows… who isn’t going to want to install something extra on top of the defualt set?
The idea of a Mozilla Account is a pretty good one, though.
An application should be consistent with the host platform. Making the application look the same across platforms means that it will be inconsistent with other applications on some of those platforms.
You may think that this imposes a burden on those who use more than one platform, but that is not what I found when I was asked to survey customers of a cross platform tool. It turns out to be easier to switch conventions when you sit down at a different system than it is to switch conventions back and forth between applications on the same system.
Most users use a single platform, and the application should be consistent with it. Others switch between systems in different locations, separated by time, and the surroundings help kick in the right habits. It’s more of a toss-up when dealing with remote acces to multiple systems from the same desktop, but platform interface features can keep you sorted out as to which remote system you are using – usually a good thing. In the case of Firefox, I see little reason not to run it on the local system, with an interface consistent with that system.
The author feels otherwise, and I can’t argue with personal preference. But I can report that every single customer that I surveyed rejected identical appearance on all platforms in favor of consistency with the host platform.
One of the main problems with converting to Firefox for IE users? Compatability with web sites.
I say to a friend “Use firefox, its good” and he replies “I heard a friend who tried it say that it wouldn’t work on his banking website”
It doesn’t work 100% on my banking website either (but most features work, so it’s acceptible). In fact, if there were an Australian bank that said they support all non-IE browsers, I would use them as my bank.
There are no excuses from the web developers – It’s 100% their fault there is this incompatability. W3C has set up standards that all browsers use, the only excuse on the web developers part is laziness and lack of understanding.
We had a banking problem too, when we switched from ie to firefox (Camino on Mac). We spoke about it with the bank and they gave us the finger. In the end we switched banks. Same thing with our insurance company and the broker handling our investments… not willing to support a safe browser? Then we are off…
I installed Firefox 0.9.3 for my father, and his online banking works great. The fun part is that we use a local bank in a small town in Norway.
Hi,
just would like to ask, how is going automatic update to work? Will it push me to download whole new firefox executable or will there be any incremental updates like with Windows Update? I think that without proper functionality, this is going to be main show-stopper of mass adoption of Firefox/Mozilla family.
Thanks,
-pekr-
I regularly uses Firefox on both Linux and Windows, and I am very happy for Firefox to have consistent button order in my GNOME desktop.
It makes button order inconsistent between Linux and Windows, but it didn’t bother me at all. I don’t know why, but that is the way I feel. Actually I didn’t notice this change for a long time.
The problem of cross plaform software is that for it to be descent on the nativepllatform it has to change for that platform.
First, Firefox dosn’t really have a linux platform. It also runs on FreeBSD etc…, they just call it linux, because that is the fashionable thing to do. The underlying platform which they call Linux is really *nix+Gnome.
Sorry to say this, but yes, firefox is aiming to integrate with gnome on the linux platform.
A KDE one might be in the works (after what happened in Akademy) but I don’t know.
So expect Firefox for ‘Linux’ to become more Gnomish over time. That means even possibly changing to an instant apply dialog (rather then OK/Cancel), integrating with fontrendering, open file dialog, gtk themeing, gnome-vfs locations (like smb:), and even possibly printing frameworks or atleast the dialogs.
“The main browser itself is an enormous download”
How the HELL do you describe 4.5mb as enormous? A single security patch for MSIE6 can weigh in larger than that. The only possible explanation for this ridiculous comment is that you’re adding on the size of a Sun JVM – something most users already have.
Mozilla Firefox’s download is smaller than IE, smaller than Opera, even smaller than some browsers than use the IE rendering engine !
yah…i wonder what you were referring to as a browser with more features than firefox but has smaller size…
besides my preference is not to install the sun JVM — it just slows things down
and java applets are giving way to flash for the most part already (save for some niche applications)
use title=”xyz” instead of alt=
This also works for other tags than <img>, i.e. <a>
very useful.
I was just wondering what a review for newbies is doing on a site like OSNews. I mean none of my “newbie” friends know this site exists and I think the majority of the regular OSNews readers can be described as fairly competent.
Just wondering.
because you might have newbies in your workplace or family who you might want to recommend firefox to.
that’s why.
The options applette is a tool, not an editing function. If the Gnome Foundation wants to put things in the wrong place, that’s fine with me, but Firefox shouldn’t make that the default for Linux. The Mozilla Foundation aims to make their software platform independent, and Gnome isn’t even the only (nor the best, for many people) DE/WM for n*x, so why single it out?
If Gnome wants something special in their web browser, they should do what they, and KDE, have always done; build their own interface. If the Mozilla Foundation continue to integrate into Gnome’s (imo) design flaws, then I certainly hope Dillo is ready to step up. I’m a Fluxbox, PekWM, and Enlightenment user, and a Gnome like interface would NOT blend with the platform.
I would rather die before letting my browser pull a handful of Gnome libs, like was suggested above. You have Epiphany and Galeon, it’s not our fault if the Gnome Foundation developers screwed them up. Just let me have my Firefox, damnit!
Desktop environments will be the downfall of UNIX/clones yet.
—
Michael Salivar
PS. I know putting options in the edit menu isn’t the end of the world, it’s what might happen next that worries me.
Lazy to check, but last time I’ve downloaded Opera, the Windows installer without Java was about 3.4 mb. Kind of the same for Mac OS X.
To add my 0.02 cents, I must admit that on the Mac I use Safari most of the time, and then Opera. Under Windows I’ve got both Firefox and Opera. I keep constantly trying to use Firefox and I do it. I’ve taken the decision to forget about trying to make it “behave” like Opera, so I didn’t install any extension at all. But I keep going back to Opera for two reasons:
The empty browser (i.e.: no windows created) takes more time (noticeable, 2-4 secs) more to load in Firefox. I know 4 seconds is “nothing”, but when you’re on the phone, on a large distance call or writting down a webpage you ought to see in the next 2 seconds, it makes a difference. This stupid example is what happened me a few times in the last weeks; I know, it’s not something normal, but.. let’s say that I just takes more time to load.
Annoying Update Message: Everytime I open Firefox 0.9.3, it keeps saying that there are updates. Not only there are none, but if I reinstall it, it will keep happening. This is kind of annoying because I can’t tell for sure when there are REAL updates. There may be a simple and stupid fix, I haven’t researched nor I will (enlighten me) .
I’d add another one which is constantly pulling me back to my “tweaked” Opera (but believe me I have Firefox as my default browser, just to make sure I won’t forget it); the thing is, memory usage it seems to be higher when firefox is bloated with tabs. I have 512 Mb RAM, and I use Visual Studio 95% of the time I spend in Windows (the other 5% goes straight to Total Commander, Notepad, and games). VS.NET is BLOATED. It uses ram, loves ram, burns ram. If you’re Debugging it won’t use ram, it will use ram + hdd + your desktop + part of your chair + if you have a flash bios, it will lend some memory address spaces there too.. you get my point; when I open a link this is what happens:
If I have Firefox opened (or cached) it’s ok, I don’t even think of it.
If I Don’t have firefox opened, I just say Oh my…
If I have Opera opened and the link goes there, I don’t even think of it.
If I don’t have Anything opened and I’m in a hurry, I kick opera in and paste/go (ctrl-d). *in THIS system* opera is faster in matters of response speed of the UI. Page loading? It looks faster under mozilla (but i guess it’s just a matter of rendering techniques, here the difference is possible .5 or less seconds, that is not noticeable as far as the page starts loading as soon as data gets in -something that both browsers do-.
This is not a comparison nor a flame, just my two 0.02.
In any case, I try to install or recommend Firefox to some users and Opera to others, I do the filtering; I make the decision for ” my users “, because I know their habits. A joe average++ user (that is a joe average on steroids) apparently seems to prefer Opera over Firefox. That’s what I’ve seen in about 15 users out of 20. The rest (another 20/25 users, really really average, preferred either Firefox or I.E.).
Now I’m gone, gone for good.
well, first of all firefox a big download? enormous? WTF? 4.5MB is smaller then some of DLINK’s drivers. Extensions needed? the only thing i needed to install was flash player on my firefox. Java applets on websites i generally dont trus and dont want. the rest works like a charm, i AM a poweruser and i yet have to install an extension.. grnated firefox for OS Xis 8MB (or 9) but thats still smaller then some of the security patches for IE 6 and you get more functionality.
The banking. I guess i am lucky living in scandinavia (Finland) since all banks here support Firefox. Hell my bank told me if i find a bug with any browser to let them know immediately, and this is a HUGE bank. If your bank says that they only support a safe browser like IE (dont laught i have seen this on some banking sites) then you shouldnt use them anymore anyway. if enuff user defect from them maybe they will learn.
I do recommend Firefox to my friends. I recommend it to them at every opportunity.
I don’t think posting reviews for newbies is a bad thing, I just think it should be posted on sites that newbies actually read.
Martin, I’m in an OS without a GUI right now, so I can’t double check to be positive, but check under the ‘advanced’ section of the options applette. I know there’s an option in there somewhere to toggle checking for Firefox updates, and a separate one for extension updates.
my banking website lists compatiblity with IE6 & Netscape7 but works correctly with Firefox 0.9.3 & with Firefox 1.0PR
You’re sick of installing the very same thing on several computers and loosing time through searching extensions, changing options on all of them?
Big problem, easy solution:
Create your own standard-installation.
Where is a folder called “default” in the installation file. Simply modify it’s context, create a zip or your own installation program (not so hard at all). You can even make a new standard “home” where you explain every new feature to the user.
So one install and you will have all wanted extensions, all options and even a nice explanation standard “Home Page”.
All those KDE die-hard-zealots, who don’t like Firefox conforming to Gnome HIG, can reverse the direction of OK/Cancel buttons by adding these lines to their userChrome.css file (create one if you don’t have it, there’s a userChrome-example.css file, too) in the profile directory:
.dialog-button-box {
-moz-box-direction: reverse;
-moz-box-pack: center;
}
.dialog-button-box spacer {
display: none ! important;
}
Do this, and then you have your beloved [OK] [Cancel] order.
Actually the GNOME and MacOS X button order makes more sense for right-handed people, after getting used to it.
Firefox is becoming more Gnomish – e.g. it can now set itself to be the default web browser and HTML viewer in Gnome (this can be done from the Preferences), and 1.0 will use the native GTK 2.4 fileselector (the new one).
> Firefox is becoming more Gnomish – e.g. it can now set itself to be the default web browser and HTML viewer in Gnome.
How is it becoming Gnomish while Firefox could set itself to be the default web browser in Windows for ages?
How is 4-8MB a big download? Even on dialup this is only an hour or so. Besides, some projects with 50KB of code get to 3MB just because of the auto-generated makefiles and such…
Moz has done a great job of making the firefox download small.
“This is my main complaint against Firefox. The main browser itself is an enormous download”
Are you on crack? FF is a tiny download. It takes less than 30 seconds to download.
“Too large a download” ….”No, a tiny download” …”No, too big” …”no, you smell” …”no, my dads in the army” … please, people, calm down. some ppl think an hour download is large, others don’t mind waiting a day or so. Its hardly something to be fighting over. If you would like to se a slimline download, say so, and say it to the Mozilla crew. Ask why the download is the size it is. Don’t flame people for having a different perception of what consitutes “large”.
yah…i wonder what you were referring to as a browser with more features than firefox but has smaller size…
Opera has more features than the Mozilla suite + a dozen of its best extensions (barring the worthless Calendar and Composer), but with a smaller download size than FireFox. It’s also a lot quicker and more stable. Sure, it’s not free, but if you’re willing to spend hundreds or thousands on hardware, why not twenty to forty on software?
Both Mozilla and Firefox are excellent browsers. Just waiting for the latest versions to hit the debian servers so I can do the upgrade. Keep up the good work!
I was trying to use Opera because there are millions of articles saying that Opera is such a nice little browser and you can download it for free, so I tried. Oops…over 70% of the web sites were not rendering correctly, I was talking about few years ago. Now, I tried, Oops, still, over 30% of the sites were not rendering correctly.
Plus Opera’s user interface is too difficult somehow, or I can say, it has just too many features that I don’t really need, sometimes, I don’t even need back and forward buttons because I have Logitech MX700, which has built-in buttons, or i can say I can hide the entire toolbar or whatsoever, these are all not important, the only thing that I want is to have a site rendering correctly but it doesn’t.
Somehow Firefox renders 99% of the sites that I go; yes! it consumes more memory than Opera; yes! it has 4.3MB download size; yes! it has less features than Opera; and yes! it loads 2 seconds slower! But for me, I don’t care. Internet becomes a very dangerous place to go to. If you use IE(I don’t know about Opera’s security since everytime I use it for less than 10 mins and then I just uninstall it), most of the time you are hacked unless the only place you go is the bank sites.
When I(emphasizing here, I, not you, so it’s just my 2 cents!) choose a web browser, I would choose something that is not TOO slow(2 seconds for me is not really that long even I am rushing to a site to checkout something), small in size, small memory consumption, and most important thing is security and stable. Comparing Opera, IE, and Firefox, only Firefox can meet my requirement, so I stick with Firefox up until now.
Happy browsing!
I haven’t seen anyone mentioning the memory issues with Firefox. It’s my default browser, I love it but the memory issues do tend to make it unstable after being open all day. I close it down and restart it every now and then to free up the memory it won’t release. If you don’t belive me, just open up your resource meter and watch the memory useage climbe with every new page you visit. Fix this and it will be the best browser ever.
On which platform is does this happen? And with which Firefox version?
By Andy (IP: —.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com) – Posted on 2004-09-15 15:08:16
“I was trying to use Opera because there are millions of articles saying that Opera is such a nice little browser and you can download it for free, so I tried. Oops…over 70% of the web sites were not rendering correctly, I was talking about few years ago. Now, I tried, Oops, still, over 30% of the sites were not rendering correctly.”
—————–
30% not rendering correctly? Can you please mention some sites you visit that don’t render correctly? That percentage is unusually high.
I’d say that since Opera includes much of the functionality of the Firefox extensions and still clocks in at a smaller download size than Ii>barebones[/i] Firefox, then I’d say you could consider the Firefox download size bigger by comparison. IMHO, the extensions thing is a terrible model. Sure, it works great if you’re not a power user and don’t use any of them, but for those of who install 15+ of them, having to install Firefox quickly becomes a royal pain in the ass.
Firefox is the best and I also like Safari. I tell everyone I know about Firefox, much better than ie.
http://secunia.com/advisories/12526/
Nice to see that the “patch” is to download the alpha version, so it’s your choice, bugs or security vulnerabilities.
You’re sick of installing the very same thing on several computers and loosing time through searching extensions, changing options on all of them?
Big problem, easy solution:
Create your own standard-installation
Okay, that’s fine except…
* I need to do that for all five platforms I regularly use (Windows, OS X, Solaris, FreeBSD, Linux)
* I need to do that each time a new version comes out
* I need to get all new extensions each time a new version comes out, and they aren’t always immediately available
And guess what, everyone needs to update to 1.0PR because of the recent security vulnerabilities.
Fortunately I use Opera, which I can tweak to my liking from a default install in less than a minute.
To hell with Firefox
I was trying to use Opera because there are millions of articles saying that Opera is such a nice little browser and you can download it for free, so I tried. Oops…over 70% of the web sites were not rendering correctly, I was talking about few years ago. Now, I tried, Oops, still, over 30% of the sites were not rendering correctly.
I find Opera renders pages much more like IE than Firefox does. The margins on tables and divs are often off compared to IE, and I run into several pages where JavaScript doesn’t work on Firefox but works on Opera. As an example, try to register for IGS in Firefox, enter your e-mail address and click the link in the confirmation mail, then fill out the form and try to submit it… the submit button doesn’t work due to their JavaScript, but works fine in IE, Opera, and Safari:
http://www.pandanet.co.jp/English/register/index.htm
Opera and Firefox both have compatibility issues, and in my experience I have had more problems with Firefox than Opera, but YMMV…
0.9 was, technically, an unstable release in the run-up to 1.0.
1.0 PR is, technically, an early release candidate for 1.0.
1.0 PR is thus, at least in intent, a more stable release than 0.9. It’s therefore acceptable to suggest it as a security for for 0.9.
Anyway, what *are* all these extensions you install? I use adblock (which is fine, as such advanced functionality has no place being in a web browser by default), tabbrowser preferences (this could maybe be in by default), and that’s it. What else do you need in a browser that’s not a waste of space for others?
Yes marcoos, because EVERYONE who doesn’t use Gnome is a KDE zealot. Honestly, what does that attitude say about you? That you’re a Gnome fanatic? There are always going to be choices out there, and people are free to make whichever ones they want. To support your choice is one thing, in fact an admirable one, but to do so militantly is a completely different beast.
There are too many window managers out there to count. To arrogantly suggest that anyone who doesn’t like your beloved Gnome is a KDE zealot is a disrespect to a large portion of the OSS community. A community who’s focus is on that freedom of choice which I mentioned, and which you seem all too willing to give up.
—
Michael Salivar
Sorry for going off topic, but that attitude really gets at me.
Anyway, what *are* all these extensions you install?
* All in One Gestures (of course a part of Opera)
* Page Bar (Fast Forward/Rewind in Opera, doesn’t integrate with AiO Gestures, integrates in Opera)
* Undo Close Tab (^Z in Opera)
* Web Developer Extension (disable referrer logging, a checkbox in the Opera preferences)
* Reload Every extension (another basic Opera feature)
* Image Zoom extension (closest I can get to Opera’s zoom)
I use adblock (which is fine, as such advanced functionality has no place being in a web browser by default)
I’d rather the functionality be there, be well integrated and cohesive with the rest of the application, and disabled per default but available to users who desire it. That’s the approach Opera has been taking, and I certainly don’t see computer novices I’ve set up with Opera tripping over “advanced functionality”.
tabbrowser preferences (this could maybe be in by default), and that’s it. What else do you need in a browser that’s not a waste of space for others?
Waste of space how? Opera includes mail and IRC support, in addition to all of these advanced features, and is still a 3.5MB download. Firefox is completely barren of anything but basic web browsing functionality and weighs in at 4.6MB.
More functionality, less bloat. What a concept.
does sound nice. last time i used opera it wasn’t particularly impressive, and i’m not gonna try again as i’m not interested in non-free software, but 3.5MB is a nice feat of engineering for sure. firefox does everything for me, though…
oh, and btw, does opera do regexp-based ad blocking like adblock does? it’s my number one favourite thing to use in firefox, closely followed by the search tool…
– AdBlock
– Add bookmark here
– All-in-One Gestures
– Allow right click
– Amazon Sidebar
– Basics 1.0
– Bugmenot
– Close tab on doubleclick (they should be shot for not including this one with the browser)
– Dictionary Search
– etc, etc, etc …
And the worst part is, they like to break shit in between releases, so it’s pretty much a given that if I try to upgrade one version over the other, at least half the extensions are going to stop working.
As for Opera, I like it, but some of the features from the Firefox extensions (esp. Adblock) are either missing altogether or are harder to use (filter.ini)
“they like to break shit in between releases”
well, yes. where did you miss the part about the software not being 1.0 yet? you want api stability, use something that describes itself as stable.
well, yes. where did you miss the part about the software not being 1.0 yet? you want api stability, use something that describes itself as stable.
Point well taken, however .. if they’re not stable, why do they have this whole marketing campaign going on?
http://www.spreadfirefox.com/community
They expect me to ‘spread the world, but they haven’t even released 1.0 yet. I can put up with the breakage simply because I’m a power user, but it isn’t something I’d recommend a newbie install just yet.
By Darius (IP: —.dsl.austtx.swbell.net) – Posted on 2004-09-15 22:58:35
As for Opera, I like it, but some of the features from the Firefox extensions (esp. Adblock) are either missing altogether or are harder to use (filter.ini)
—————
Tools > Quick Preferences
(Or F12)
Uncheck:
“Enable plug-ins”
Instant flash (and other plugin-based) ad killer (the most intrusive form of advertising, IMO). The on-the-fly toggling of images takes care of most of the rest.
Does the job for me.
Oh, my word! You use 5 OSes regularly? I thought I was bad with Win2k and two Linux distros.
You also do seem to use far more extensions than most as well. Fair enough. I can see why those two factors, taken together, would tend to make Opera a better choice for you.
However, to suggest that Firefox is therefore “…an enormous download…” is definitely overstating things a bit, don’t you think? Especially when you take into account the unholy mess that is IE on Windows. Have you seen just how large the IE 6 download is? Especially after applying all the so-called security patches?
Granted, Firefox is larger than Opera. It’s not that much larger, though.
Like many in this thread, I prefer Mozilla.org’s dedication to open source software over Opera’s closed source free download approach. That, for me, tips the scales to Firefox. However, I have no issue with others making a different choice. Variety is the spice of life, eh?
I’m not most people and also can still see the world we live round about, so I don’t have a screen reader.
It’s just that seeing alt text displayed as a toop tip along with the title infomation would be nice, because often times images may have a more useful description, sardonic comment, or in the case of doomworld.com silly quoted text from IRC conversations.
There should be no cause to disable graphics just to read title & alt text.
Firefox is great software and it’s been my default browser for three months and with the bugs being squished out for the upcoming 1.0 release there is even more reason to recommend Firefox to friends.
After over twenty years of using mostly all Microsoft products, I am happy to use another more competent competing browser. :>
but the problem with that is it’s just wrong; the alt_text is *not intended for that use*. using it in that way actually makes the experience worse for those who rely on the alt_text to be a description of the image, and it’s irresponsible for browsers to encourage the abuse of the alt_text feature.
but the problem with that is it’s just wrong; the alt_text is *not intended for that use*. using it in that way actually makes the experience worse for those who rely on the alt_text to be a description of the image, and it’s irresponsible for browsers to encourage the abuse of the alt_text feature.
yeah, I know the standard. I’ve been told by four different people.
How the hell does displaying alt text in that way abuse Blind Folks using a screen reader? How does that make it worse?; Usually there is enough text in html page to describe content.
It isn’t my fault if site owners use alt_text to be funny :>
Maybe I need to use a screen reader to understand what the sam hell you are writing about.
That extension reinstall thingie on every new installation is s’thing I don’t like in Firefox. Though I like te extension model…. Is there a possibility to bundle all the extensions in one package, download and you select which one to install?
Hans -intermediate nembie, but regulary reading OSnews. gee I don’t belong here?