• Firefox 4.0
    511 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Disarray;23224205]User Javascript is pretty much the Opera version of extensions. Although admittedly it could be setup to be slightly easier to find good ones and make them easier to manage and install.[/QUOTE] So hang on. Chrome is the fast one, and it's not even less extensible than Opera? All Opera has to offer over Chrome so far is bloat.
You'd have to be an idiot to think Opera is "bloated".
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;23224619]You'd have to be an idiot to think Opera is "bloated".[/QUOTE] I don't like red. :colbert:
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;23224619]You'd have to be an idiot to think Opera is "bloated".[/QUOTE] Except that opera turbo and unite bullshit they include with it, unless they don't do that anymore. I don't need a web accelerator since they're all crap and I don't want to share my photos using your service, Opera.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;23224687]Except that opera turbo and unite bullshit they include with it, unless they don't do that anymore. I don't need a web accelerator since they're all crap and I don't want to share my photos using your service, Opera.[/QUOTE] Doesn't make it bloated. Everything is opt-in, and even if you enabled the features there's absolutely no slowdown. I've been using Firefox as my main browser for a month or two now, but out of all the browsers I've used, Opera's interface has always been the snappiest. [editline]05:50PM[/editline] If you want to talk about bloated, look at Safari. The download itself is 30-40 MB. Opera, on the other hand is extremely light, and even with all its features (built in mail client, RSS reader, IRC chat, Turbo, Speed Dial, Unite, Widgets, notes, Link, etc.) it's still only an 8 MB download. If you've actually tried the program, you'd know that it definitely is light. There's nothing "bloated" about it.
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;23224619]You'd have to be an idiot to think Opera is "bloated".[/QUOTE] It has a torrent downloader, it has an RSS reader, it has a mail client, et cetera. That's all stuff I don't need in a browser, since I already have them either on the web or on my computer. [QUOTE=MisterMooth;23224945]Opera, on the other hand is extremely light, and even with all its features (built in mail client, RSS reader, IRC chat, Turbo, Speed Dial, Unite, Widgets, notes, Link, etc.) it's still only an 8 MB download.[/quote] Ooh, thanks. It has an IRC client. It has a file sharing application. All this stuff is unnecessary.
[QUOTE=arienh4;23224987]It has a torrent downloader, it has an RSS reader, it has a mail client, et cetera. That's all stuff I don't need in a browser, since I already have them either on the web or on my computer.[/QUOTE] Do they bog down the browser or get in the way? No. That's not bloat.
It has all this "bloat" and it still manages to be just as fast as Chrome.
[QUOTE=arienh4;23224987]It has a torrent downloader, it has an RSS reader, it has a mail client, et cetera. That's all stuff I don't need in a browser, since I already have them either on the web or on my computer. Ooh, thanks. It has an IRC client. It has a file sharing application. All this stuff is unnecessary.[/QUOTE] Wow, it does stuff you don't need. So what? Your argument is retarded. It's there if you do want it, and many people use the additional features. Just because you don't use them doesn't mean they're unnecessary. There are absolutely no negative consequences of having these extra features in the browser. [editline]05:57PM[/editline] I don't use Firefox's Live Bookmarks feature, but do I complain about it? "Stupid Firefox has this extra feature I don't use; damn thing's bloated!"
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;23225038]Wow, it does stuff you don't need. So what? Your argument is retarded. It's there if you do want it, and many people use the additional features. Just because you don't use them doesn't mean they're unnecessary. There are absolutely no negative consequences of having these extra features in the browser. [editline]05:57PM[/editline] I don't use Firefox's Live Bookmarks feature, but do I complain about it? "Stupid Firefox has this extra feature I don't use; damn thing's bloated!"[/QUOTE] If the entire browser is centred around that bloat like Opera is, I can imagine it'd be a lot faster without it.
[QUOTE=arienh4;23225072]If the entire browser is centred around that bloat like Opera is, I can imagine it'd be a lot faster without it.[/QUOTE] And it still manages to be one of the fastest, with one of the quickest and snappiest interfaces I've used. Sorry, your argument isn't getting anywhere. Opera is faster than Firefox in almost every aspect, yet you complain it has "bloat". [editline]06:27PM[/editline] Features =/= "Bloat" [quote]Software bloat is a term used to describe the tendency of newer computer programs to have a larger installation footprint, or have many unnecessary features that are not used by end users, or just generally use more system resources than necessary, while offering little or no benefit to its users[/quote] Larger installation footprint? Nope. The download is only ~8 MB and its installation folder is only ~13 MB. Uses more system resources than necessary? No, Opera has always been very light. In terms of computer resources, all the main browsers are very similar. No benefit to the users? I, like many users, do make use of Opera's built-in features. It's its feature-richness that appeals to most users.
[QUOTE=arienh4;23224987]Ooh, thanks. It has an IRC client. It has a file sharing application. All this stuff is unnecessary.[/QUOTE] [I]Omg it's unnecessary to me, must mean nobody needs them![/I]
I don't like that every tab is on the taskbar. And there is no X in the corner here. :frown:
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;23224945] If you've actually tried the program, you'd know that it definitely is light. There's nothing "bloated" about it.[/QUOTE] I have tried Opera, right after that last big release. There was nothing wrong with it but I still prefer FF.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;23226928]I have tried Opera, right after that last big release. There was nothing wrong with it but I still prefer FF.[/QUOTE] All I'm saying is that its extra features don't bog down the program and make it "bloated". It's all very tightly integrated.
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;23226946]All I'm saying is that its extra features don't bog down the program and make it "bloated". It's all very tightly integrated.[/QUOTE] But they're still there, and I feel icky when a program has a bunch of features I don't want.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;23226986]But they're still there, and I feel icky when a program has a bunch of features I don't want.[/QUOTE] It's not like they get in the way.
[QUOTE=DarkendSky;23205765]Am I the only person who doesn't give a flying fuck about HTML render speeds? I use Firefox on all of my systems out of preference, not speed.[/QUOTE] I use it because of Adblock +
[QUOTE=Killuah;23227240]I use it because of Adblock +[/QUOTE] Similar tools are available for other browsers too.
[QUOTE=knutmora;23225836]I don't like that every tab is on the taskbar. And there is no X in the corner here. :frown:[/QUOTE] Hover over the one that you want to close. [editline]03:03PM[/editline] Everybody, just stop arguing about what browser is bloated and which is best. We all have our opinions and that's fine, but this thread is for discussing Firefox 4.0!
Last night I uninstalled firefox and installed chromium so I can get a decent opinion on it. The interface is nice and everything, but there are things that firefox just does better. Sure this has a better Javascript engine, but firefox actually renders HTML and CSS faster. The scrolling is wonky. middle clicking certain links seems to make it open in two tabs instead of just a new tab. And, of course, Chrome's interface doesn't fit my theme at all.
[QUOTE=LarparNar;23225505][I]Omg it's unnecessary to me, must mean nobody needs them![/I][/QUOTE] A browser doesn't need an IRC client, or a mail client, or an RSS reader. For those there are [b]better[/b] web-based alternatives. That is [b]un[/b]necessary bloat.
The only positive point I can find is that it supports youtube's implementation of HTML5.
[QUOTE=LarparNar;23228227]Similar tools are available for other browsers too.[/QUOTE] Except for Chrome. (Yes, I realise I made AdSweep. It's just not the same.)
[QUOTE=arienh4;23237580]A browser doesn't need an IRC client, or a mail client, or an RSS reader. For those there are [b]better[/b] web-based alternatives. That is [b]un[/b]necessary bloat.[/QUOTE] not gonna lie, I'd rather use Opera's IRC client than a web based one, but I prefer my Xchat over anything else.
I like my browser to be able to handle RSS feeds on it's own.
[QUOTE=arienh4;23237580]A browser doesn't need an IRC client, or a mail client, or an RSS reader. For those there are [b]better[/b] web-based alternatives. That is [b]un[/b]necessary bloat.[/QUOTE] I know people who use all of those things, because it just works, and works well enough for them. I've used the IRC client myself, and while I'd rather prefer mirc, it works just fine, and for people who don't care about the extra ten features of mirc they don't need, it's good to have it in Opera. And besides, if you don't use it, you don't notice it. It doesn't slow the browser down, and it doesn't make the download huge. Where is the problem? In fact I find Firefox' interface much less snappy than Opera's.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;23237566]Last night I uninstalled firefox and installed chromium so I can get a decent opinion on it. The interface is nice and everything, but there are things that firefox just does better. Sure this has a better Javascript engine, but firefox actually renders HTML and CSS faster. The scrolling is wonky. middle clicking certain links seems to make it open in two tabs instead of just a new tab. And, of course, Chrome's interface doesn't fit my theme at all.[/QUOTE] Now using Opera, it's better than chrome, and certainly feels faster than chrome does, but there are things that I still don't like, the thumbnails in tabs "feature" being one, I've accidentally enabled it twice already, just by clicking the tabs like normal. If using something other than Firefox, I'll take Opera.
[QUOTE=Justice;23166079]Artificial benchmarks :allears: Chrome's speed is a placebo effect on any modern machine during normal browsing. The only speed gain I saw when I compared it to Firefox was the startup time on a cold boot. Afterwards, they were pretty much exactly the same with nothing noticeable to me. Chrome's a good browser in its own right (and is very good for low-end PCs, but that's where Opera comes into play as well), but comparing browser speeds on any modern machine is pissing in the wind.[/QUOTE] Alright now I don't have the newest parts in my machine but it takes Fire fox around 4-6 seconds longer to open a tab compared to chrome which does it in a second or less.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;23241014]Now using Opera, it's better than chrome, and certainly feels faster than chrome does, but there are things that I still don't like, the thumbnails in tabs "feature" being one, I've accidentally enabled it twice already, just by clicking the tabs like normal. If using something other than Firefox, I'll take Opera.[/QUOTE] Tab thumbnails can be disabled in preferences.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.