Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Jun 2008 23:18 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones I've seen superlative after superlative concerning the release of Firefox 3.0, and in all honesty, it is making my stomach ache. Yes, Firefox 3.0 is a great release. It has a slicker interface (the UI on Vista looks quite pretty) and the use of native widgets in Linux is a very, very welcome addition. On top of that, it actually delivers what I was craving for the most from my favourite Windows web browser: much improved performance. But does Firefox 3.0 change the web, or alter the way we use the intertubes?
Thread beginning with comment 319519
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by deathshadow
by deathshadow on Sun 22nd Jun 2008 18:39 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

EVERY release of Firefox has been overhyped as the second coming - nothing new here.

... and as usual it's just not that warranted. Missed 2/3rds of the milestones originally set on bugzilla? Check. Even missing bugs in the standards rendering that date back to gecko's infancy as open source back in 1998? Check. (can't fix or implement the full HTML4/CSS2 and they've had a decade... WOW.) - though at least now we have inline-block that almost works right, now if they could just finish off colgroup support.

Though I can say one good thing about this release - it's the first time (including the 3.0 betas) that there's a firefox release that doesn't chew memory like a pig and hog the cpu to the point you end up having to kill it. Dunno what they did different between the last public beta and the release, but it TOOK LONG ENOUGH for them to get the damned thing stable - Since it's been unusably unstable for me since 0.89 to the point I wouldn't even have had it installed if I wasn't a web developer. (and that's regardless of OS or hardware, I could crash ANY gecko based browser in 20 minutes of 'normal use', even on machines where most people say it's fine)

Edited 2008-06-22 18:40 UTC

Reply Score: 3