What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
50 Comments
- Duncan, on 10/12/2007, -6/+25Of course you digg it, you submitted it!
- ddrirc, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17@masterspy7: Google does have a background color. I understand that it's trivial, but I find it interesting that web developers forget something like that.
- anotherjesse, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Ricklionheart,
18 seconds is bad! I spent a lot of time between 0.5 (February) and our current release working on performance issues. Firefox will probably always start up quicker than us. We add things like a lucene search engine, and other components which take time to load.
I would like to figure out why it is so slow for you. If you want, you can email me (my email is jesse at flock dot com) and we can try to figure out what we are doing wrong!
I've been doing open source coding for a long time, and it rocks to be payed to work within the codebase every day.
Jesse - masterspy7, on 10/12/2007, -8/+17Your criticizing it because it doesn't have a background color? Um, hello take a look at Google. Sometimes white is the best when you want to keep a site clean and simple.
- Kiel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10i think he means set, as in with the css. and hes right i cant see it either. though.... im not sure its that big a deal
- anotherjesse, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8xr56n44, we still don't do folders :( I think this will be fixed in the next release. sorry it is a show stopper for you
- Jarda, on 10/12/2007, -11/+15SPAM anyone? I'm looking at the people who are digging all this flock stories as well as commenting on them and I'm observing a very strange pattern.
Just take a look at those guys praising flock; they digg almost all flock stories, even those not on the front page.
Very strange indeed! - tomvendetta, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12Awww, you'll live.
- themacman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3like the website, like the browser, except i cant seem to figure out how to add bookmark folders on top of the browser window, like in other browsers?
- mrwiggly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Quite. Also 'When you use Flock to do something cool, you're a Flockstar' ? Middle-aged marketing muppets in desperate attempt to tap the youth market.. Can you digg it?
- macewan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3they made improvements in speed - I'm not seeing the lag problems reported earlier in this conversation
very refined browsing - Llan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm sorry. Next time, I will contact you before I take interest in something, because you, oh wise master, know better of which ways I should take, and when and why.
- xr56n44, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6have they fixed the moronic way that they handled bookmarks? that was an absolute show stopper for me
- Mulos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Reading all the hype about Flock, I was expecting something pretty special... but instead all I see is Firefox with a pretty skin, and a couple of fairly pointless bits of added functionality, most of which can already be achieved in Firefox with extensions.
Is this the best a team of 25 people can come up with? - mfearby, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I'm, I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but the site is hardly anything over which one could lose one's... ah, custard, shall we say? It's an improvement over the infantile site they had previously, but hardly newsworthy, even to the most hard-core style sheet writer. It's just another ordinary home page. Get over it.
P.S., why does the digg spell checker not like the apostrophe? What does digg have against good grammar? - tomvendetta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How is this for a Digg-Army, Jake?
- johnnyspade, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think it looks good but it looks like hundreds of others so not sure it warrants a digg. Plus, it's pretty web 2.0 trendy. Large type - got it, supermarket sticker - got it, slightly skewed photo - got it. Swap the Trebuchet with Lucinda in the font string and it's a sweep. A nice looking site just nothing overly special. I'll check under the hood.
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7I can see his point. If it's not set then the designer assumes everyone has a white background as there browser default.
Seems kinda lazy to me. - allenu, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8Agreed. When web 2.0 is over, flock will be remembered as just another me-too product.
- spyres, on 10/12/2007, -8/+9Nice Drupal based site.
- Rousterfar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I actually love Flock. It's a great little mod of Firefox and has a tone of cool stuff built right in that generally work better then the extentions do for Firefox.
- hundrednorth, on 10/12/2007, -11/+12So people can't digg stories about things they like now?
- pigsbladder, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2damn, somebody has sand in their vagina. I think it looks great. Simple and it gets the point across. I'm going to try flock and see how it works.
- latour, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Flock has no use to me... i don't see anything special about it. Most of the things you can do with flock you can do by downloading firefox extentions.
- samdu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If it fills a niche without as much fiddling as the standard FF configuration, then it's useful to a certain segment of users. That's a good thing.
- Ricklionheart, on 10/12/2007, -11/+11Flock is a totally crap web browser. So what if its beta still, any web browser that takes 18 seconds to boot (Firefox 0.8, Safari 0.9 sec) is just crap and flock-ing-useless.
- Llan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1311 people (and counting) say: Yes.
- wouaren, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Do we need a firefox clone ?
Do we want "normal" people to be affraid of choosing a browser from a list of 40 and asking us for that ?
Flock is just a Firefox with some extensions and a web2.0 design, it seems that the only things that flock developpers wants is to be mentionned on websites and magazines ? If you wanted so you should have made firefox extensions for flickr etc... Then they would have been used by tons of people but making a browser who's 98% the same of another is just a bad idea.
Flock will die, sorry but that's for sure unless they implements REAL novative function for all users (not just for the ones that uses flickr or delicious ...)
If it continues like that, in two years we'll receive calls of users that can't show the uncle webpage because they use flëckbrowzer 5.32 and they should have used Flaück2.21 ... Same thing for video codecs/audio codecs ... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5sdbillin, whatever dude, worse stories have been on the frontpage before.
and flock is a good browser, the design is neat.. dont see why its not worth your stupid vote. - keane, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4When the Firefox browser got a new website design (the whole mozilla.com/.org thing) it was big news
http://digg.com/software/Firefox_1.5_Officially_Launched_with_New_Site_Design_ (196 days ago)
Flock is not as big news but still, same type of thing - samdu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2White is actually the best option for the background a LOT of the time. The only browser (graphical, of course) that I can think of that defaults to another color for non-specified background colors, is Mosaic (grey). I think it's fine to not specify it. Maybe not "best practice," but fine. And the site looks great. Only complaint - there's no "about Flock" page that explains the technology behind the browser. I first thought it might be based on IE, which was an immediate turn-off. Then I looked at the extensions and determined that it's based on FF.
- sdbillin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5It's not worth my "stupid" vote because it's non-news. It's nothing.
A Web 2 site got a new "clean" design, just like all the other Web 2 sites.
Why should I help promote this? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Amen.
- Eddible, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4It's sad how you judge Flock purely on the basis that it takes longer to boot than Firefox. There is so much under the hood that a slower load time is completely acceptable in my eyes.
- Elevate, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Actually it wasn't just him or the people at flock who designed the entire site. A company called Zurb (www.zurb.com) helped them out as well. I believe they even designed all of the icons for the browser. The flash presentation on the home page was done by them as well.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I apologize for being a complete ignoramus but how is this newsworthy?
- cwncool, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2digg didn't set a background color either! so leave!
check and mate! - jaxshores, on 10/12/2007, -11/+8I've been reading Bryan's blog for ages. He's and astute man and talented web designer.
- KissTheRing, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4#FFFFFF
- Eddible, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5This has to be the perfect example of how ridiculously pedantic certain members of the Digg community are.
- computerdude33, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3LINK. NOW!
- Visceral, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6Nice website. Dugg. However, horrible web 2.0 bubble browser/product.
- sdbillin, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3Some site got a new design. Wow.
No digg. - Scatropolis, on 10/12/2007, -15/+7In recent news...I changed a page on my website....added some photos.
DIGG!!! - rudinz, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4Gr8 job Bryan......
- gajendra, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2dddsfsdfds
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -21/+6people digg! this is good
- ddrirc, on 10/12/2007, -31/+15They didn't even set a background color. :/
http://flock.com/ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -30/+4Suuuuure bud....
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -32/+6I agree with josue, digg!!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is