Username or EmailPassword
According to Apple, we're supposed to eschew Flash entirely. Unfortunartely, some websites still use it. The 64-bit build of Minefield (Firefox beta) doesn't support Flash on some platforms because there is no 64-bit flash. This isn't a problem for Safari, which runs Flash in its own 32-bit helper process. So why can't Firefox do this? Edited 2010-07-07 20:50 UTC
It can do it through a 3rd party plugin called NSPluginwrapper
That's fine for Linux, but what about MacOS? Of course, Mozilla has always put Mac support on the back burner. Still can't use Firefox without running down my battery -- it prevents the computer from going to sleep after a period of inactivity. This bug has been in the database for a LONG time with no attention.
Mozilla should just drop the Mac version entirely.
I can't believe how many bugs I came across that were FF/Mac specific. You'd think the rendering engine would be consistent across platforms but...not really. I came across other bug reports from people who assumed that testing in FF/Windows meant it would work fine in FF/OSX. Mozilla really treats the OSX version as second rate.
Oh and with the same ajax project Chrome had zero cross-platform issues. Chrome was just a pleasure to work with. IE8 wasn't a big deal either.
Sorry to say but i think this is because Apple users are mostly users (leechers). VLC has the same problem with there Mac version, to few people who contribute to the platform in result that the Mac version is not as far as the other platforms.
No flame, just a my couple of euro cents left in my wallet.
VLC & Firefox are two very different products.
Mozilla makes money when people use Firefox (and use the search box). More users, means more money.
With Chrome becoming more popular, and Safari adding plugin support, Mozilla has got to up their game if they don't want to lose users.
I'd rather see Gecko based browsers fall out of favor.
Mozilla should just bite the bullet and switch to Webkit.
Hit the 2 GB limit? Flash? Yes.
Not that it would help giving it access to more. The 64 bit version would consume all available RAM (and then some) when I tried to access sony-ericsson.com.
No. I switched to the 32-bit version. I'm just saying that this is an oversight on their part.
This is an oversight on who's part? Seems like an oversight on Adobe's part for not having 64 bit flash for the Mac. You are asking Mozilla to place some 32 bit hack into the browser because Adobe is slackin?
Yeah, I'm basically suggesting that. Adobe does very poor work, leaving it up to the rest of us to work around their problems. People just need to accept that until we can replace Flash with something else.
Remember the "bad ol' days" when IE6 was considered the "fast" browser, and Netscape 4 was just too clunky to use, when the upstart Firefox browser was released? Remember the "wow" factor from using a web browser so many times faster than IE?
Use FF4 for a bit, and you'll experience that feeling again.
I used to think FF 3.0/3.5/3.6 was a fast, light browser. Then I used Chrome and I realised just how slow and clunky FF had become.
Using FF4 is like using FF2 after years of using IE6. It really makes you realise just how slow FF3 is for JS-heavy sites.
Haven't used it too much, can't really comment on the UI (although it's nice to have a default UI that doesn't waste 3" of vertical screen space). But, many, is the JS engine ever speedy ... even on Linux and lowly ol' XP.
the list of improvements for developers is quite impressive
but what i've specially appreciated, and I'm sure more people will do, is greater UI responsiveness.
adblock plus is yet updated to work with this beta so I encourage all non-critical installations to backup their profiles and start to use it on a daily basis.
Yeah, I used Opera 3.x back in the day, running it off a floppy in the university Windows 3.11/95 labs. It was nice! Things went downhill starting with Opera 4.x, though, and that's when I gave up on it (altough I do run each major version for a few days to see what's new/improved/worse/etc).
However, that has absolutely nothing to do with a discussion about Firefox.
By the time of IE6, Opera still had that horrendous ad in their shareware version.
So it was not Firefox who overtake Opera through hype, but Opera himself who killed their own chance to became the second most used browser today in one of most crucial moments of the browser wars, and as a side effect, made Firefox the only usable non-annoying free alternative to IE6. =)
If that is actually true, I may actually switch back. Haven't used firefox since the day chrome came out.
FF has become clunky, I'm not at all surprised that it is no longer gaining marketshare.
Using it right now on all my Windows machines, and anxiously waiting for the Linux version to be released so I can use it on my all my Ubuntu machines.
it is already avaliable for linux
you have to extract the folder, put it where you want (eg: /usr/local/firefox4) and edit your typical shortcut to point to the executable file (eg: /usr/local/firefox4/firefox). I much more prefer to install things through Ubuntu Software Center or apt-get, but for Firefox 4 betas I am doing an exception.
If you just want to test the beta without affecting your normal FF profile, you can install the FoxTester extension. Point that at a directory, then copy the .tar.bz2 file for whatever version you want to test into that directory, and then you can access them via the FoxTester menu.
Run multiple versions at once, without installing any of them.
that's kind of funny cause ff4 doesnt feel any faster than ff3.6 here.
Now ff3.6 didn't feel slow at all. But ff4 has a new interface.. and i'm 99% sure its what gives the "wow" feeling to ppl.
Same reason they use Chrome. Nothing to do with clunkyness. Now, the new interface isn't bad anyway, I got used to it rather quick and I find it more comfortable for me than Chrome which has no title bar (and it annoys me lol)
I hate that new confusing web icon used in the address bar in the new Chrome builds.
Yes, there is "tabs on top", but it actually doesn't help me with anything. There is still a menu bar and a title bar above the tab bar.
Until I can change tabs with my mouse at the top of the screen, I will continue to use Chrome, which is unfortunate, because I prefer Firefox in nearly every other way.
There are several different extensions that hide the menu bar. I use HideMenu and Personal Menu to put all that crap behind a single icon in the addressbar.
Once those are updated for FF4, it'll be very difficult to tell Opera, FF, and Chrome apart.
I'll double-check when at work tomorrow, but I'm almost certain that feature is there and can be toggled.
Is there a version of noscript that will work with it?
yes, or I wouldn't be here posting this
Seriously though, NoScript does a great job keeping up with Mozilla APIs and has working version for trunk nightly builds and the beta, in my recent experience, on Win,Mac,Lin (32bit all).
Is there any way to get it with the old interface on Windows? I don't use Chrome because I don't like the tabs on top and am just used to the old menu format.
Right click on the toolbar to toggle tabs on top, and press Alt to show the menu and choose View > Toolbars > Menu to keep it on.
Thanks. Off to upgrade then...
One tip for Mac users. If you want Firefox to look like a native app go here: http://takebacktheweb.org/
and install the theme GrApple Yummy. There is a a version available for beta1 at the bottom of that page. There is an option to have the tabs at the top if you like it that way.
we hit the point of diminishing returns a while back.
Just because a browser gets a 10% gain in a synthetic benchmarks does not mean that anyone can tell the difference in daily browsing.
GPU acceleration will be the next big improvement in browser technology. IE9 is going to provide Mozilla with some serious competition.
That is if every browser hasn’t already released a version with HW acceleration by the time IE9 actually comes out. Besides the time frame, yes, I think IE9 is going to raise the bar because of tight integration with Windows’ capabilities.
IE9 isn't even in beta yet. Geez.