What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history - the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
116 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+126This is one of the many reasons that made me switch from Internet Explorer to Firefox. Windows has that annoying tendency to shuffle the lists you sorted to your liking the previous time. You better leave my goddamn bookmarks alone, Firefox!
- andyrobo60, on 10/12/2007, -24/+104next week microsoft will announce that IE8 with the same new features. But with IE8 you get the special microsoft touch aka half assed implementations of them.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+34I can see Google Docs and Spreadsheets integrating with this...
- starsky51, on 10/12/2007, -2/+29berwiki, 'Web App' doesn't necessarily mean 'ActiveX'. GMail is a web app. No activex or exploits there (i hope).
- towca, on 10/12/2007, -5/+32If by very soon you mean approximately half decade, then yes indeed.
- 1KrazyKorean, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32Firefox>IE
- calacak, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28How about working on reducing the memory footprint? Having two tabs (gmail and digg) open should not require 151megs of memory.
- NinjaBoy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28I don't use bookmarks because in a week I could add 100+ bookmarks. Each dealing with a specific project I'm working on. And its just not worth the trouble the save and organize them if i can do a google search and find it just as fast. But if i could just search it, i would start using bookmarks much more.
- mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Digg/Firefox is the worst combination because of all the crap Javascript in Digg and the Javascript related memory leaks in Firefox. I've gotten in the habit of shutting Firefox down entirely after a Digg session just to free up memory.
- cronot, on 10/12/2007, -10/+27@Retrospekt:
Sorry, but he's right. While more robust, Firefox is still the most bloated of all browsers in the market. I think they should focus on making it leaner and faster, cutting off the memory leaks and memory footprint, and from I what've read, they actually ARE doing it - but maybe not to the extent that is needed, if they are looking to add more useless (for me) features.
Mind you, I'm not against adding new features, like the "smart-sorted" bookmark and others - but I think maybe they are adding it at the wrong place. Case in point - the Spellchecker in FF2.0. I have no use for it, but I see many others do. I think that this kind of feature (and many others) would be better off as extensions, so I can remove it if I don't want/need it. That's what really neat about FF anyway, right? It's modular. I'd have no problem with them embedding the spellchecker on the default installation, if it came as an extension. But no, it is embedded on the browser itself, there's no way to remove it. Well, It's not like it gets in the way, it can be disabled, but it still adds to memory footprint of the core browser - that's the problem, and that's just one case.
So, I think they should take the "trimming down" approach more seriously. Now, go on, digg me down. - Wyzard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18@3mpire:
"The thought of my "cache" being in an embedded database makes me nervous. What if that db is compromised and cached information from my online banking sessions is copied to a remote host?"
Your browser's "cache" is currently stored in ordinary files on your hard drive. What if those files are compromised and cached information from your online banking sessions is copied to a remote host?
Storing data in SQLite doesn't expose it to any additional risk. It's just a more versatile way of putting structured data in a file. - lucianolev, on 10/12/2007, -7/+23Any browser > IE
- listrophy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17Have you tried the del.icio.us firefox addon? It basically replaces the normal bookmark bar with a seamless interface with your del.icio.us account. Then you could create a tag for each of your projects and automatically filter by tag.
I use the add-on, but not nearly to its full potential. There's some pretty cool stuff built-in. - T3rry, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17The one thing that annoys the hell out of me (but I will tolerate it, given the alternatives) is that when you right click a live bookmark, and go to "reload live bookmark? It’s right above "sort by name" with no divider between them, so I accidentally hit the sort button when trying to reload my live bookmarks, then I have to intentionally kill my firefox process to crash the browser and restore my bookmarks to the previous order.
But honestly, the whole point of a bookmark is so it's a 1 click, no hassle passage way to your most visited sites, and generally you get to know the ordering so well that you dont even have to look at the label of the bookmark you're clicking, you just know what it is. - williumbillium, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14@Jabobber: It's called a laptop.
- catalysis, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13There definately have been exploits of gmail, including stealing cookies to give full access to a user's account. I don't know why berwiki is being dugg down. Opening your browser to web applications will almost certainly introduce new avenues for viruses. The only question is, how well will the developers address the exploits?
- listrophy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10The last bit of the article mentioned JavaScript 2. Could we be looking at a jQuery-like or Prototype-like syntax BUILT-IN to the browser? That's hawt.
- FyberOptic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Wow, this guy makes a perfect point here about fixing what they've already got instead of slapping out yet more clunky code, and everyone diggs him down. Zealots abound today!
- bobcrotch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I agree.
There should at least be different versions, a light weight and a bloat ware with all the other stuff.
Just like with word or any text editor these days, sometimes all you need is a simple application. Firefox has been that way for a long time and I hope they stay true to it in one way or another. - Tanglefuzz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8offline support is pretty sweet for web-apps... it could make stuff like Google Docs / Spreadsheets a lot better. At the moment you can't use them when you're working offline, so Word can't be exchanged completely by G. Docs. With offline support, it just might :)
- Jabobber, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9My question:
Is putting offline support for web apps into a browser really worth the effort? In an age where having an always-on broadband connection is quickly becoming the norm, especially among those using web apps, it would seem that offline web apps will appeal to a fairly small audience. - dragazis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8If you or anyone else is really interested, I would definitely take a look at Alex Faaborg's blog. He's works on user experience design at Mozilla, more specifically for Firefox 3. http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/
- Retrospekt, on 10/12/2007, -11/+17I love firefox, and its features are great, but it will never get to be as popular as Internet Explorer. Most people buy pc's from the store where unfortunately Internet Explorer is on the desktop and thats the only browser they've ever used.. I've asked many less computer savvy people about web browsers, and the only ones they seem to know are Internet Explorer and some know Safari because they're apple users. It's a shame though, because firefox is a great browser.
- superpixel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Remember when Firefox was the "lean and mean" version of Mozilla? And a snappy alternative to IE? Man, those were the days. Ah Firebird, we hardly knew ye.
- Burmask, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5How will they get this release out when Firefox is getting hacked everyday? http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/02/24/1320227.shtml
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Again?
- dustysquareback, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Hey, it isn't a leak, it's a FEATURE.
- FyberOptic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Short answer: They'll strip out all the new features and give it a new skin. I mean, it worked for FF2.0!
- starsky51, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5It's a three-pronged trolling attack. Subliminal, liminal, and superliminal.
- Rammsteined, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That is pretty *****, I wonder why I'm only using 54MB with digg and GMail open, perhaps the Linux builds are a bit better in that respect?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6You mean if IE was Acid 2 compliant and rendered 99% of markup and css formatting correctly? I think the ***** world would come to an end, sir.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Firefox plugins > Opera
- op12, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5You'll like how high they put this on their priorities then:
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox3/Goals - EXreaction, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well, as much as I hate giving people the idea that MORE javascript is better, it would be nice to be able to render the sites bloated with javascript faster...
I for one both love and hate javascript. Hate it because it confuses me half the time(I never got very far into javascript), love it because when it does do what I want it is beautiful. - Mcaruso, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Do yourself a favor and read the article again.
- berwiki, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5The funny part is this is the whole reason they branched off from their original Mozilla implementation.
It had integrated pop3 support, along with other goofy stuff. They created firefox to be quick and lean.
But what else are all those developers supposed to do?! - joe332, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yup it does, i use my gmail with opera
- GoatMonkey2112, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm hoping they add support for uploading multiple files at once through a single file input element. All of my users bitch about that.
The other features sound nice, but they can't really be used unless other web browsers do the exact same thing. This is going to turn into another branch of code that has to be written slightly different for IE and FF. - tybris, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Ah, so that's what the Google sponsorship of Firefox was all about.
Anyway, Opera is what Firefox should have been. - jm1234567890, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Isn't this going aways from standards compliance...? Web apps will soon be "designed for firefox" and users of other browsers will suffer.
- icyisamu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Was SQL Lite supposed to be a Firefox 2 feature, but was later pushed back for Firefox 3? My memory is getting bad.
- bsmedberg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2SQLite is included in Firefox2 and powers the DOM storage feature. The fulltext indexing features for web history/cache are what may be included in Firefox 3.
- thewebguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3lame
in addition, has anyone noticed this bug in firefox 2.0.0.2 ? unchecking the 'remember forms' setting doesn't work. - ray901, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Hyperthreading technology is and should be hidden from anything running above the kernel. You do not seem to understand what you are talking about - yet you get dugg up......
- cvarma, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5definitely.
- chicagodj, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Why is he being dugg down? As much as I like alternative browsers and feel lost without my firefox setup, he is correct. None of the alternative browsers will EVER be as popular or widely used as Internet Explorer. Reason being that every windows computer has it installed by default. It's the default browser immediately after installation. Plus many many many corporations do not allow the use of any alternative browsers and only allow the use of I.E. There are several reasons for this: corporate intranet sites don't work correctly in any other browser (yes I know this is the coders fault but if their code works on the default browser and that's what the corporation uses why code it for anything else), no need if there's already a browser installed (i.e. decreased image footprint), user familiarity, amongst many others.
Sorry Firefox lovers but unfortunately this is true. It's not anything bad or anything to fight because all you'll do is frustrate yourselves and your target audience and alienate them away from you further. Just enjoy the differences and teach people about it and let them decide for themselves which they like better (i.e. teach but dont be overzealous) - TimDigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I am very optimistic that the firefox team will bring continue to enrich our experience on the web, that being said, I'm still lost as it relates to concept of "data brokerage".
My guess is it gives you buttons about various various generic categoric and then can collect data based in those categories, based on you where want to get data from, similar to how an RSS feed works, but with better features related to organizing the data.
My hope is that XML will bring about the revolution that was promised. - gioma1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You already have something even "cooler" than prototype regarding iterators and other "rubyish" language stuff: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/New_in_JavaScript_1.7
If you mean DOM shortcuts or CSS based selectors (AKA $ operators), I don't think you'll get them built-in.
But you may want to take a look at the standard XPath support via document.evaluate().
JS 2 (AKA JavaScript with classes) is more an evolution towards an (optionally) strongly typed Java-like language with class based OOP.
We've already seen something like that in ActionScript, and it's not casual that the "next generation" JavaScript VM in Mozilla will be Tamarin ( http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/ ), courtesy of Adobe/Macromedia. - Wyzard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@3mpire:
It's data stored locally on your computer. It's no more or less secure than any of the other data that's stored locally on your computer -- such as your browser cache, your cookies (which can contain saved logins to websites such as Digg) and all your personal files. -
Show 51 - 100 of 117 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is