Mozilla Releases Firefox 3 Web Browser

[vladyslav]

Inquisitor

Hi, i've read a lot of posts here about inability to customize Safari. But if you try Inquisitor, which i found for myself couple of weeks ago, you'll be amazed how useful it is. Well, at least using Safari + Inquisitor, i can't see any particular reason to switch to another browser

 

[dejo]

For the pic you quoted. I guess the original author has trouble understand "CREATED TO PROMOTE" web standard. was safari created to promote web standard? I think not.

But it doesn't say "created to promote web standards", does it? It says "created to promote openess, innovation and opportunity on the Web", something much more vague.

 

[clevin]

Zzzzzzzzz, Mac has Safari, iPhone has Safari, iPod has Safari, PC has Safari, I do not need another browser and different ways to do the same. One browser to rule them all even if it may not be as good as some others. Safari does the job very well.

For those highlighting the security features ..... The only way to make a browser secured is to remove it from the system. By its very nature, it is a vulnerability waiting to happen regardless of who wrote it.

The problem with partial security is that it gives people a false sense of security and is likely to cause users to let their guard down. Attacks that a user would have avoided, may now be triggered because the user lowered its guard.

no safari on linux. and safari for windows ......

the security logic u are arguing, let me repeat, its the most classic sample of abusing of statistics, exaggerate 1% of problem and use that to negate 99% of the positive. Its dishonest, and ignore the reality, for the sake of attacking rather than really caring about the end users.

I can't believe it comes from u, lol

But it doesn't say "created to promote web standards", does it? It say "created to promote openess, innovation and opportunity on the Web", something much more vague.

well, i think thats even better, did apple create safari to promote open-ness? by initially refusing to cooperate with KHTML? or by using undocumented OSX API? or by partial implementation of web standards to pass acid 3 and confusing developers? not really....

opportunity on the web, you bet! w/o firefox's rise, more ie only web will still be here, and that, my friend, will leave OSX and safari less chance to succeed. Apple really should be sending a thanking letter to mozilla HQ by now.

Apple ppl shouldn't be upsetting about firefox's success, it may or may nor hurt safari, but it definitely eliminate ie only website and thus for sure helps OSX. after all, its OSX, not safari, are the main attraction of a mac.

 

[Tortellino]

Here you go, Safari left, Firefox right. I don't know about you but I can see the difference clearly, even with this JPG compression

Looks like simply font size is different by 1 point (larger in FF). Have you tried to change the default sizes?

 

[clevin]

7.8 million download as of now. 8 minutes to go for the record. already 4% market share! (wonder how many from ie)

 

[MrCrowbar]

Hi, i've read a lot of posts here about inability to customize Safari. But if you try Inquisitor, which i found for myself couple of weeks ago, you'll be amazed how useful it is. Well, at least using Safari + Inquisitor, i can't see any particular reason to switch to another browser

AGREED 100%. Inquisitor is my number 1 reason to stick with Safari.

 

[dejo]

well, i think thats even better, did apple create safari to promote open-ness? by initially refusing to cooperate with KHTML? or by using undocumented OSX API? or by partial implementation of web standards to pass acid 3 and confusing developers? not really....

opportunity on the web, you bet! w/o firefox's rise, more ie only web will still be here, and that, my friend, will leave OSX and safari less chance to succeed. Apple really should be sending a thanking letter to mozilla HQ by now.

See. By being vague they leave the interpretation of those items (openess, innovation, opportunity) up to the reader. And your interpretation possibly differs from others and can be spun to support your opinion.

...8 minutes to go for the record...

What record are they trying to beat? As far as I know, they are trying to establish a new Guinness Book of World Record, for which there is no previous holder. Shouldn't be too hard to beat a record that was previously 0.

 

[clevin]

See. By being vague they leave the interpretation of those items (openess, innovation, opportunity) up to the reader. And your interpretation possibly differs from others and can be spun to support your opinion.

hehe, possibly, Im too happy right now to argue..

 

[twoodcc]

i mainly use safari, but i might give this a try, just for the heck of it

 

[PlaceofDis]

i've never been a huge fan of FF, using mainly Camino and bouncing back to Safari every now and then.

i have issues with safari that Camino addresses, but there are somethings lacking in Camino that i can find in FF. i'll have to play around with FF and see if i can get it to behave similar to Camino first, and if thats possible then i might start using it more often.

 

[Macmanus]

See. By being vague they leave the interpretation of those items (openess, innovation, opportunity) up to the reader. And your interpretation possibly differs from others and can be spun to support your opinion.


What record are they trying to beat? As far as I know, they are trying to establish a new Guinness Book of World Record, for which there is no previous holder. Shouldn't be too hard to beat a record that was previously 0.

Hehe, like i said before : the choice is now ONLY ideological.

The "open source" culture is just another leftist propaganda tool to convince us that "a better world" (= free one, another communist reincarnation) is possible. Am i going too far on this one ?

 

[clevin]

What record are they trying to beat? As far as I know, they are trying to establish a new Guinness Book of World Record, for which there is no previous holder. Shouldn't be too hard to beat a record that was previously 0.

well, the higher record, the more difficult to beat by others

update, since yesterday mozilla's server was down for 1hr 16min, the finish line is now 18:16 UTC

 

[Challeman]

So far it's lightyears ahead of Firefox 2 and works better than the FF3 betas, but it still opens new tabs when I command-click links when I have "New pages should be opened in a new window" and not "...tab" checked >.< One good thing is that pages finally open at the same position and not in a "cascading" manner. Not sure if I'll switch from Safari permanently yet.

Tried shift + click? Or just click?

 

[ATG]

first you can't ignore the numerous change to "fit it"

second you need to realize there is much more to a browser than UI, consider the developing schedule and the thing they already done. You want a pretty kit that doesn't do much? fine. nobody ask you to switch, just try to be fair.

why bother? please say it loud to safari for windows. thats absolutely 100% no effort to "fit it"

I don't want a pretty kit that doesn't do much. I want an acceptable kit that does what I think it's going to do.

I don't use or recommend safari for windows. I actually use firefox on windows. But I'm not talking about windows, I'm talking about OS X.

 

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

It is great to hear all the positive feedback about the new Firefox. I can't wait to download it tonight when I get home.

 

[clevin]

I don't want a pretty kit that doesn't do much. I want an acceptable kit that does what I think it's going to do.

I don't use or recommend safari for windows. I actually use firefox on windows. But I'm not talking about windows, I'm talking about OS X.

i have no problem with your legalistic criticism, after all, im not saying firefox is 100% OSX integrated, but you need to also realize system integration is a double swords, granted firefox still need to do more, but there will also be many functionality at stake.

Mozilla didn't make any decision lightly, and I understand that, do you? There are 160million users out there with different ideas, you and me only count two.

For the part of your correct criticism, i hear you, but it take time, cairo+cocoa+all the coding, isn't easy, is that so not reasonable to give credit when its due?

There are millions of people out there who are happy with these, after all, there is no perfect product in this world. we can always wish for more, but we also need to know what we already have. and understand Rome wasn't built in one day.

 

[aranhamo]

Don't like it

So far, I don't like it. I'm using it on Windows XP. It still freezes up all the time like Firefox 2, apparently to think about doing what I just told it to do. And the main thing I can't stand is that address bar. I used to be able to click on the little arrow, and the menu would drop down with all the websites I go to all the time. Now, it seems to just pick the ones it thinks I should go to. I end up having to type all the addresses in, instead of just selecting one from the drop-down.

I downloaded the Safari 4 preview last week. I've always used Firefox as my default on Windows, but Firefox 3 may make me switch to Safari 4.

 

[dejo]

I am a little disappointed in Mozilla from the fact that they have not done as much as they could've to promote this new version. My wife was not even aware a new version had been released. And firing up my FF2 doesn't tell you there's a FF3, even if you "Check for Updates..."

 

[KingYaba]

Mac requirements

Operating Systems
Mac OS X 10.4 and later
Minimum Hardware
Macintosh computer with an Intel x86 or PowerPC G3, G4, or G5 processor
128 MB RAM (Recommended: 256 MB RAM or greater)
200 MB hard drive space

I have Panther (10.3.9) on my Powerbook. Any chance it will run?

 

[GNice]

I never warmed up to Safari since becoming a Mac user about a year. Love FF3!

 

[jettredmont]

The look & feel isn't THAT native:

http://www.sanneblad.se/johan/?p=180

(Which is a shame since one great thing about a Mac is how most apps share certain predictable behaviors--including visual ones.)

Nonetheless, sounds like a great update over FF2.

The problem I have with Firefox has never been how it looks (well, that has often triggered the gag reflex, and I'm glad it's been fixed, but that's not the main problem).

The main problem is how it functions.

For instance, in Safari I can open this little edit box in TextMate (to give me full BBCode syntax highlighting and completions) with control-command-E. Every other Cocoa app on my machine (ex, Scrivener) likewise work just the same. Doesn't do a damned thing in Firefox. Related, the entire Services menu is disabled, so I can't do quick text fixes and completions like title capitalization, etc.

Why is it this way? Because FireFox refuses to use native controls and thus does not integrate well with the system. No amount of pixel-perfect current-look duplication will fix this.

I'm glad FireFox has a healthy ecosystem of plug-ins, because I'll need to delve deep into them just to replicate the functionality I already have system-wide thanks to the Services menu and similar.

Oh, btw, FireFox: thanks for bringing the "innovation" of spell check in your text window finally! Problem, though: the highlights are not obvious enough. I'm sure someone on your team decided that the highlights provided by the OS-supported equivalents got in the way too much when typing code into a text box, but the faint one-pixel dotted line in pink just doesn't allow for scanning across a post and seeing the spelling problems.

I'd absolutely love a (supported) FireFox branch which used 100% native controls. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to exist. Safari, for all its faults, at least works like the rest of my machine when it comes to text entry.

 

[elppa]

Yeah, that sense of moral superiority they try to project has always been one of the things that bugged me about FireFox and Mozilla. That and the typical open-source "uglies" problem are the two main detractions, and it seems like they have both survived to this version.

I also am really kind of ticked at this stupid "worlds record" stunt, and am purposely waiting until it's over before downloading the thing. There's nothing particularly wrong with it, but personally I just find it childish and gimicky.

I prefer Safari because it's a simpler, cleaner design. the standard answer to any FireFox problem encountered is always the great configurability of the thing and the add-ons that will "do almost anything." In practice however, the only add-ons that I have ever found useful are the ad-blocking and the themes that make it look less ugly. Also, I don't particularly *want* to "maintain" my browser by downloading and constantly updating a bunch of add-ons that really bring little to the table overall.

Ever since Safari got ad-blocking, I just don't see any reason to switch.

Firefox extensions remind me (yes I know they are not the same thing!) of extensions in Mac OS Classic. In theory they added lots of great functionality, in practice they were a pain in the ar*e to manage and inevitably lead to problems and incompatibility.

Mozilla spit the dummy out a few too many times for my liking as well. If it is not over the ACID tests then it is over Apple including Safari in the Apple Software Downloader! Funny how they are quite happy for Firefox to be included in the Google Application Bundle at the expense of other browsers. Double standards?

its better to reserve big statement until you try it thoroughly and fairly with an open mind.

For the pic you quoted. I guess the original author has trouble understand "CREATED TO PROMOTE" web standard. was safari created to promote web standard? I think not.

I think so. That is one of the goals of webkit for sure. Safari, as you know, uses Webkit. Webkit is a project which Apple has a huge amount of involvement in (they even coined the name webkit). So by extension Safari advocates Webkit and carries forwards the goals of Webkit.

well, i think thats even better, did apple create safari to promote open-ness? by initially refusing to cooperate with KHTML? or by using undocumented OSX API? or by partial implementation of web standards to pass acid 3 and confusing developers? not really....

Webkit's "partial" (as you call it) support of web standards is less partial than any other rendering engine out there. The “refused” co-operation with KHTML developers doesn't tell the whole story either.

You talk about the need for people fair and opened minded. On this occasion I think it may be wise to swallow some of your own medicine. I'm pleased as punch that Firefox has got to version 3, I have use it fairly regularly and am delighted that the strong branding of Firefox has seen it crack some of IEs dominance of the desktop browser market. I'm not anti Firefox.

 

[clevin]

blah blah blah

haha, get your facts straight, safari doesn't use native cocoa control button neither!.

I think so. That is one of the goals of webkit for sure. Safari, as you know, uses Webkit. Webkit is a project which Apple has a huge amount of involvement in (they even coined the name webkit). So by extension Safari advocates Webkit and carries forwards the goals of Webkit.

Webkit's "partial" (as you call it) support of web standards is less partial than any other rendering engine out there. The “refused” co-operation with KHTML developers doesn't tell the whole story either.

You talk about the need for people fair and opened minded. On this occasion I think it may be wise to swallow some of your own medicine. I'm pleased as punch that Firefox has got to version 3, I have use it fairly regularly and am delighted that the strong branding of Firefox has seen it crack some of IEs dominance of the desktop browser market. I'm not anti Firefox.

its easy to make big statement when it is small, isn't it "by extension" is an interesting word, i think it should be used with cautious. extension is assumption, and you dont know it, it has no support.

why is that you think webkit is created by apple then? because apple named it?

whats the whole story behind apple bought codes from KHTML and then refuse to cooperate? tell me.

less partial? safari is the only one being singled out by the standard drafter, or did you read something else?

I will swallow any mis-statement I made. sorry, not this one.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Mac requirements

Operating Systems
Mac OS X 10.4 and later
Minimum Hardware
Macintosh computer with an Intel x86 or PowerPC G3, G4, or G5 processor
128 MB RAM (Recommended: 256 MB RAM or greater)
200 MB hard drive space

I have Panther (10.3.9) on my Powerbook. Any chance it will run?

No. It will install but NOT run.

I use Foxmarks on FF3 perfectly well on both OSX and Windows XP. If you want to perform cross platform bookmark syncing I would suggest you use Foxmarks.

Personally, I like the new Firefox and I have preferred it over Safari because of the Add-on functionality and ability to sync (via add-ons) bookmarks and functionality between the Windows and OSX worlds.

Thank you for the suggestion! I will look into it.

 

[TwinCities Dan]

i <3 Safari
snip...FireFox for Hotmail access. Since Hotmail is shittay on Safari.

I kinda like FF3, I only use FF because I CAN'T USE HOTMAIL WITH SAFARI at all, are you saying you CAN access hotmail?

(I know Hotmail=MS=the Devil but my account is like 10 years old so I keep the same address, I would gladly support Safari if I could just check my email with it )