Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by sock

quote:

---

Originally posted by blade


it's faster

---

Actually, that's the main reason for me *not* using Firefox: it starts up way too slow on my machine.

---

Yes it does take more time to load up than IE does that's because as a lot of people know IE is loaded up with Windows for quick access to it.

Firefox does actually load pages up faster that's what blade ment.

It would be ideal though if IE followed some strict standards. Since W3C already has some standards I do not understand why it is so hard for Microsoft to follow them.

Sometimes I will write some stuff in CSS and in firefox it will work fine but then I will view the site in IE and it will do nothing or do something completely unexpected. Then I will have to spend ages using google to search for a work around so it looks right in IE. It requires so much more work to just make IE do something which would otherwise be simple.

I don't agree that browser wars are over yet. Obviously Firefox is probably IE's closest competitor at the moment. But what firefox is missing is marketing (and the fact it is not included in Windows) they don't have enough money for this. So most people wouldn't even know Firefox existed. This is probably why netscape was more successful than plain mozilla. They could afford to make deals so their browser would be bundled with other software. I still think this is room for a new browser to take IE's place but it probably won't happen while IE is so integrated with Windows.


Edit: Oh and firefox gets glitches because IE does not follow standards! If Microsoft actually listed their own standards I would say yeah firefox should follow IE's standards because it is the main browser. But you can't say because IE is the most popular browser that it goes by the standards. The way IE renders pages sometimes makes no sense.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carltos Cool
Yes it does take more time to load up than IE does that's because as a lot of people know IE is loaded up with Windows for quick access to it.

---

I don't care what's the reason, it loads up faster. I know Microsoft is dodgy, but they already rule the OS/browser world, they have forced their ways on the world.
You know, following this logic, Firefox users actually waste their resources since they have both Firefox and IE loaded.

quote:

---

Firefox does actually load pages up faster that's what blade ment.

---

I suppose... but any browser renders a page in less than a second, the differences in startup time are much more significant. Mind you, I am not even satisfied with IE's load time... I think XP is to blame for my computer being so slow.

quote:

---

Originally posted by heatus
Since W3C already has some standards I do not understand why it is so hard for Microsoft to follow them.

---

Because that would make much of the Web render on the new IE differently than intended. That's the last think MS wants - lots of (non-geek) Webmasters and users mad at them.

As for the rest of your post: Indeed, it's very bad that Microsoft doesn't publish any organized specifications for their rendering engine. I know they are dodgy and make things difficult, and as I said it would be ideal if everyone were W3C-compliant. But IE's current status gives us no choice.

I used to use ie but once i used ffox i was hooked on like the most of u. Total custumization, awesome extensions and themes and much much faster than ie (in start up time) imo.
Ffox is light years ahead. Once i got a taste of ffox there is no going back to ie

Firstly - while I was browsing, I found the roadmap to Firefox 2.0:
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/roadmap.html

Secondly, you can look at the roadmap to Firefox 1.0. It can be viewed HERE. It clearly states the first release was in 2002, so about 2 years to fully develop a web browser :

0.1     Pescadero     2002-09-23     Bugs     Initial release introducing customizable toolbars, simple new interface, performance and size improvements, and lots of destruction.

0.2     Santa Cruz     2002-10-01     Bugs     Improvements to toolbar customization, inline web form autocomplete, sidebar, extensions management, making preferences work (somewhat), more size improvements and bug fixing.

0.3     Lucia     2002-10-14     Bugs     A few more features, global Go menu, improvements to pop-up blocking, tabbed browsing improvements, redesign of bookmark groups, more speed and size improvements and lots of bug fixing.

0.4     Oceano     2002-10-21     Bugs     Shifting from features to bug fixing and polish. Plans to leverage the Mozilla 1.2 stability push to make Phoenix rock solid.

0.5     Naples     2002-12-07     Bugs     Polish and cleanup. Lots of bug fixing.

0.6     Glendale     2003-05-16     Bugs     Redesigned Options window, new default theme, smooth scrolling, automatic image resizing, and much more.

0.6.1     Glendale     2003-07-28     Bugs     Security and other critical fixes, middle mouse button pan scrolling, a few other fixes picked up off the trunk.

0.7     Indio     2003-10-14     Bugs     Updated helper applications management, automatic downloading, plugin control, bookmark panels, theme updates and numerous bug fixes.

0.7.1     Three Kings     2003-10-25     Bugs     Maintenance update for Mac OS X - focusing on a small number of critical bugs that were present in 0.7 (see link) including external URL handling (when used as default browser) and page Save-As.

0.8     Royal Oak     2004-02-09     Bugs + - ?     Download System Upgrade (ongoing Helper Applications and Download Manager updates), Part II (ben), XPInstall UI Upgrade (ben), Windows Installer (ben), Add Bookmark Dialog UI (pch)

0.9     One Tree Hill     2004-06-15     Bugs + -
?     "Feature Complete" - Linux Installer (bryner), Mail Integration UI (mail button option for toolbar to launch default mailer) (ben), Extension API Changes [chrome registry changes, extension update UI] (ben+et.al.) SmartUpdate (ben) Migration Engine (ben), Help System Documentation Integration (rlk)

1.0PR     Greenlane     2004-09-14     Bugs + - ?     Bugs with higher complexity/risk, localization impact. See queries.
Release Candidates: RC1 (Mission Bay - 2004-10-27) and RC2 (Whangamata - 2004-11-03)

1.0     Phoenix     2004-11-9     Bugs + - ?     Ultra Critical Bugs, PR Feedback

1.1     Deer Park     March 2005     Bugs     Re-sync with trunk. Ongoing HIG compliance work for Aqua, GNOME etc.

1.5      "The Ocho"      ??? 2005      Bugs      First major half of 2.0 development.

2.0         ??? 2005     Bugs     Second major half of 2.0 development.

Firefox is much better the only bad things is that he suses a lot of ram when u have lots of tabs but it desotn install things of some kidns of sites u odnt ask it to..

ok, and now stop this browser-war and go back to the topic... thank you...

There are far too many threads about which browser is best, what browser is based upon what etc... and besides many things I read here are twisted facts anyway:

eg: blade, Firefox (the name/brand) itself is 2 years old, but the engine/codebase itself, the thing on which Firefox is based upon, is much older (1998 if you consider the public release of the opensource, 1994/95 even you go even further back). Thus it goes back to almost the begining days of the web; you could well say that Firefox (and the whole mozilla family) is as old as MSIE)

If you want to dicuss this, then go to some of the thousands of tech forums specially dedicated to this and where you can "discuss" your browser 24/7, year in, year out...


I'm tired of seeing a new thread about this every 20 days...

Ok sorry then cookie.

Don't be, your question is legit though:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Carltos Cool
Sorry if this is really old . Do you think IE is under threat from FFox?

---

...but it is somewhat dangerous, because as you could see this easly evolved into yet another browser war...

thus, to others:

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
ok, and now stop this browser-war and go back to the topic...

---

I think a browser war thread is immature I mean they all do the same job (load internet pages). It was ment to be a question not to be made into an argument.