"When Firefox launched in beta release five years ago, it burst on the open-source browser scene like a young Elvis Presley - slim, sexy and dangerous. Since then it has attracted millions of users, generally set the agenda for browser development and unseated Microsoft's IE as the de facto monopoly in the field. But, with Firefox 3.0 poised for release later this year, the 'IE killer' is in danger of morphing into an early Fat Elvis, if increasing numbers of die-hard fans turned reluctant critics are any guide."
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-24
"""
Anybody using the nightlies will already be aware of the noticeable improvement in speed,
"""
Not to disagree, but I have been watching Mozilla development from the day that Netscape released their code. And I swear that for 3 years whenever anyone criticized Mozilla in any way, the response from the community was "Use the latest nightlies! They're great!".
Something horrible must happen to the "wonderful" nightly code when it is released in a stable version.
It's weird.
Edited 2007-05-18 20:04
Member since:2006-01-09
Not only that, but Firefox became freakin´ slow as time passed by. Mozilla Seamonkey, having been kept up to date by only a handful of developers - not sponsored by Mozilla Corporation, it seems - in order to "backport" some of Firefox niceties such as AdBlock+ and often accused in the past as being sluggish, is WAY faster than most of the recent FF iterations.
The only reason that I still use Firefox instead of Opera is that I prefer the way how FF rendering engine tries to work around broken websites compared to Opera´s and the fact that the Opera Adblocker is not nearly as good as Adblock+ but anyone comparing FF and Opera speedwise and claiming that FF has an edge must have his or her head examinated. Not to mention that Opera´s cache management knows no rivals.
Opera lacks the mindshare, yes. It could also benefit of an extensible API so that its users can build the nice things that the community around Mozilla built on top of Firefox... True. But Opera definitely surpassed Firefox some time ago.
In my sister´s slower machine, the choice is a no brainer. Firefox definitely needs to go back to its roots if it wants to keep the lead over the competition since even MS seems to be waking up and getting their stuff up to the snuff!
Edited 2007-05-18 20:40
Member since:2005-07-24
Actually, that is the case, IIRC.
Nightly builds are usually taken from an active-development tree (where devs can 'freely' make changes to the code (once meeting certain criteria), as patches).
Stable builds are taken from a fine-picked assortment of the code submitted in between releases, and resides in its own tree, making it possible to have vast differences between the two trees.
That and the difference in compiler options in stable builds, extra code (feature) patches applied, etc...
It can get fun finding the best nightly to run, though, so I'd stick to the stables if your unsure :-)
--The loon
Member since:2005-07-07
I for one have gone back to using Safari as my browser of choice. There have been content rich pages (like the World of Warcraft Armory pages) which have caused Firefox to choke and consume 100% of my CPU speed for 5 - 10 seconds before successfully loading the pages.
Just taking this article as an example. Safari uses about 10% CPU power to display the page and the adverts. Once the animations complete, CPU usage drops to 0 - 3%. In contrast, Firefox 20 - 30% CPU usage to display that page and when the animations are done, CPU usage drops to about 5 - 10%.
This is really sad, as I much prefer Firefox since more pages render correctly.
Member since:2005-07-06
It's not just the webpages though. I still have an old version of Phoenix installed (0.8) and it runs circles around Firefox. Sure Firefox does a lot more now, but it comes at the expense of speed, let's not pretend it doesn't.
Member since:2005-08-17
Firefox has always been a 'Fat Elvis'.
I find it amazing that people believe it's a 'light browser'. But I do agree that web pages are getting way too bloated in general.
There are so many web pages that have javascript and I can never work out what it's being used for.
For some reason people forgot that a webpage is just a document with hyperlinks. I blame graphic designers and programmers those that never learnt real programming.
Member since:
2005-11-10
Anybody using the nightlies will already be aware of the noticeable improvement in speed, what with the new graphics backend. If anything, the webpages we use are getting more bloated. More sites are using reams and reams of javascript, lots more flash & ajax, this all adds to massively increased RAM requirements.
Whilst Mozilla have standards for patched accepted, they could go one up, and do as Webkit - no patch may regress speed—at all.