What is Digg?299 Comments
- atdigg, on 10/29/2007, -58/+217Can Mozilla explain why Firefox is bigger than Opera yet it has less features?
- scallon, on 10/22/2007, -6/+142Because that is how Mrs.Firefox likes it.
- EnderMB, on 10/18/2007, -8/+98As much as I hate IE that article has to be one of the most bias things I've read in the past few months. From the word go he bitched about Vista and IE and steamed forward into a senseless fanboyish rant, whilst the IE architect kept calm and answered the questions given. Vista doesn't take 10 minutes to boot up, IE7 rarely crashes for the average user, and no one cares about a few measly megabytes what with the world of broadband. He also makes a poor argument for an online platform. In theory it's great, but with the power we have now it'll never take over from locally stored files or installations. Some applications will benefit (Google Maps) from being online, but many come off as sub-par products.
All in all, a very poor interview and article. Buried. - inactive, on 10/18/2007, -18/+83Your mothers so fat shes makes internet explorer look anorexic...
- atdigg, on 10/28/2007, -19/+77How would that make Firefox more bloated? Even without any extension installed Firefox is still bigger, that's the point.
- Kazbaeden, on 10/28/2007, -3/+45So you're saying browser + extention API takes up more space than browser + full feature mail client + torrent support + widgets + ad blocker + gestures + speed dial etc. etc. etc...
There's probably another reason. - notthemama, on 10/18/2007, -6/+47"The interesting part for us is we get to rely on the Windows system to provide capabilities for us."
"The big challenge for us is we don't run on just one version of Windows. We can't rely on things that are just in Windows Vista." Relying on anything in Vista might be dangerous, I want to suggest, but that might just induce my PC to crash again out of spite."
Dear gods. Is what I'm reading correct? Does this mean they are coding IE to use system services of EVERY version of windows? Code it to work with 95, then code it to work with 97, then XP, etc. What a mess of spaghetti code that would be!
If you have to go through hoops to use a system service rather than just including the code in your own product, no wonder IE sucks so badly. They can't make an improvement to IE or an OS without passing those changes along to everything and testing them all. - zed260, on 10/18/2007, -15/+55extension apis cost size
- Buelldozer, on 10/28/2007, -5/+42May I suggest that if the APIs required to create the functionality are larger than the functionality itself then something is wrong?
Also, Opera does have widgets which are very similar to extensions and it's STILL smaller and faster! - mikeylopez, on 10/22/2007, -9/+46IE is less of a memory hog. But Firefox still cleans IE's clock, and Opera Whips some ass.
- frieddonuts, on 10/29/2007, -14/+50I agree with you, but you're going to get buried faster than a dead hooker. Digg= Firefox country.
- chilekillr, on 10/22/2007, -1/+32Sorry, you used the aforementioned three letter acronym.
- nights0223, on 10/28/2007, -45/+75Extensions
- gorgalor, on 10/18/2007, -4/+31Lame, one sided article full of blah. I'm fine with ripping on Microsoft for being incompetent as long as there's substance which is well delivered, but c'mon. Crying about vista crashing is only a distraction from the article at hand. Did this article have any real merit whatsoever? A cherry picked quote followed by 2 paragraphs of bellyaching? Sounds like a pretentious hothead article with a blogger that is more concerned about bloating out his chest than adding anything new to the blogosphere. Burried for wasting my time.
For the record, I use Safari. And Firefox, and Opera. And Camino... - MikeWanDo, on 10/29/2007, -5/+30That's not very fast. I mean you could leave a hooker out for a day or two before burying them. After that though they start to smell.
- ryodoan, on 10/22/2007, -2/+26You must not have used IE7 tabs.... It seems to open the equivalent of an entire new IE process for each tab, I have seen IE7 get up to 250 MB.
Also, it takes IE7 forever to open the tabs. - greatblackowl, on 10/18/2007, -0/+22Yeah? Well your mother's got more open ports than Windows ME.
- shakin, on 10/28/2007, -4/+25You can't trust IE's process. IE uses several Windows processes as well so its size is spread around where it's hard to find.
- mr_bako2, on 10/28/2007, -6/+27Agreed, Opera is actually much smaller and has alot more features, and is alot faster as well. However, it does have one annoying bug where sometimes (maybe 1-2 times a month) it will jump to 100%cpu usage but i think they all suffer from the same problem. Diggers will never admit opera has more features beucase they can waste time downloading plugins to match it. But i don't mind firefox at all, but opera is free, fast, designed well, feature packed, and free... i personally would choose it over the competition any day.
- JasonCox, on 10/18/2007, -9/+29"I have seen IE7 get up to 250 MB."
And I've seen Firefox hit 1.4GB. The best part- Mozilla says it's a feature.
:-) - SMF2, on 10/29/2007, -9/+26i don't give a toss about its install size. the problem is that a *web browser* is the only app that needs 2GB RAM on my machine (and regular restarts). Firefox is *still* horrendously RAM inefficient.
- hello2usir, on 10/18/2007, -1/+18Because a large majority of that executable also gets loaded into memory. Let me know when you've got hundreds of gigabytes of RAM.
- Jabjabs, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17So far this is how it's been with me on browsers.
IE, fast and slightly buggy, I only use it if a site is not working on any of the others.
Firefox, reliable and feature packed but a memory hog and a little sluggish. Extensions can make it turn into gold but there are still a few issues with performance that hold it back that said it's my choice on PC.
Opera, fast and efficient but unreliable if they fix the stability on some sites then this one can potentially be the king of the browsers.
Safari, sucks on PC wouldn't touch that at all, brilliant on Mac and is my No 1 but it falls into a mix of the three above, large memory, great features, bad stability (on PC). None of them are winners but all have their pros and cons, that's about it.
Just find one that works for you and go with that. - joe90210, on 10/18/2007, -4/+20wow I don't think that writer knows anything about profesional journalism, terribly biased and terribly written
- shortarabguy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+18You're right. There's a tracking program logging everything you do in the program. It gets bigger as you use it more, and it's GETTING INTO YOUR HEAD!!! PUT ON THE TIN FOIL HELMET, NOW!!!!!
Seriously, it's all about scripting. I can make a script do something in 5 lines and it could take 200 lines for another person being more thorough or just less economical about the script's language. - goodnewsevery1, on 10/18/2007, -3/+19Remember, MS biggest backward compatibility issue is not joe website. Its the billions of lines of custom code written for corporate America that relies on IE for rendering. Sorry, but MS isn't going to change to please web dorks and tell corporate America that all that custom software has to be rewritten. When ever crap articles like this appear they always seem to forget what Windows and IE were designed for.
- Rikkochet, on 10/18/2007, -4/+19"And yet, despite relying on Windows to provide many capabilities, a standard download for IE7 weighs in at 15MB, compared to Firefox's comparatively slimline 6MB. What's that about?"
This is stupid rubbish and the author obviously has no knowledge of software development.
Want a real metric? Grab the same virtual machine. Install Firefox on one instance and IE7 on the other. Compare the space free between the two AFTER install. THAT is the definition of how big the app is, not the installer.
Our main app at work includes megs and megs of InstallShield ***** that's never installed - most PCs already have it (check Program FilesCommon Files). Just because you are covering your ass by bundling dependencies doesn't mean a modern OS will be bloated by that byte count.
CPU utilization, memory usage, and load times are how browsers should be benchmarked. Sadly, Opera is the only browser I've used that isn't a dog, but it lacks so many features that makes Firefox great. - Bamborzled, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14You can do anything with ActiveX.
And that, my friend, is the problem. - DarkDx, on 10/18/2007, -6/+20So you think firerfox supports more standars than opera? Keep researching
- chowmeined, on 10/22/2007, -1/+13They are different because as cross-platform browsers they specifically avoid those system services and instead try to use the generic APIs. The more system specific stuff you use, the more difficult it is to make cross-platform. Actually, the technique used in firefox abstracts the low-level APIs (even the GUI) and bases everything off a single mozilla platform. That way, to make it run on another platform, they only need to provide a few things underneath to support everything above it.
- yingjai, on 10/28/2007, -4/+16maybe because we want to reserve ram for other uses?
- Matri, on 10/18/2007, -3/+15Okay, dugg for the rather original "Yo mama" crack.
- MioTheGreat, on 10/18/2007, -4/+16"I'm guessing you're a vista user"
Only because anyone who has actually _used Vista_, rather than gone by Info they've seen on digg knows that 99% of the Vista bashing that goes on here is completely baseless. - HonoredMule, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12My browser's bigger than yours.
- comptergeek, on 10/22/2007, -16/+28Honestly, who cares about the size? Hard drives are measured in the hundreds of gigabytes currently, why does it matter that IE is 9 MB larger than firefox? Nowadays, 9 MB is a drop in the bucket compared to a DVD backup or a CD rip.
That being said, the article was very interesting, especially his explanation of PNG images only "sometimes" not working in IE6. - Kazbaeden, on 10/28/2007, -2/+14"Diggers will never admit opera has more features beucase they can waste time downloading plugins to match it."
I've actually tried switching to firefox quite ernestly a couple times because of a plugin available. As hard as I tried I could not find enough plugins which elegantly mirrored the functionality of Opera. In the end I went back to opera and wrote the plugin myself (Yes, little known fact Opera has plugin support). - WhereAmI, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13But they probably didn't delete the old references.
- Yazilliclick, on 10/19/2007, -1/+13How exactly does opera, which has been completely free now for quite some time, bug you about buying their product? May I say, perhaps it's time you removed your head from your ass and returned to reality?
- damonic, on 10/28/2007, -3/+15I have ZERO extensions installed and Firefox was using 177mb of RAM today. DOH!
- joebeastie, on 10/18/2007, -1/+12From the latest Opera build @ http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/
"(UNIX) When running Gnome, Opera will now use the native GTK file chooser when opening and saving files"
Still isn't OpenSource tough. Shame for you. - xxdesmus, on 10/10/2007, -4/+15I have no issues. I always have 7-8 tabs open most of the time...keep it open for hours on end, no problems. It's using 100MB right now. I have 2GB of RAM so who cares? Why do I have 2GB of RAM if I don't want it to be used?
- palta38, on 10/19/2007, -1/+11lol opera even runs on cellphones
- DimensionalPunk, on 10/18/2007, -1/+10Wow, it's just a browser preference, not everyone has to have same one as you.
- FLarsen, on 10/19/2007, -0/+9Talking about operas appearance is kind of useless, as you can skin it. I would guess skinning is not only for windows.
- dwhitbeck, on 10/19/2007, -2/+11I am reading your comment just ow in my Opera browser on Linux.
- Tippis, on 10/19/2007, -1/+10F12 -> Enable Referer Logging -> on/off
- Rikkochet, on 10/19/2007, -2/+11I've had to jump ship from Firefox to Opera due to the annoying (and never fixed) bug where Firefox quickly jumps to near-100% memory usage after a day. I think it's shoddy and a cop out to blame extension authors for a browser that allows over 700MB RAM to be used for a couple of tabs being open.
- gfunk84, on 10/28/2007, -7/+16Why is everyone so afraid of using RAM? You bought it, why not use it?
- HonoredMule, on 10/18/2007, -5/+14I strongly dislike Vista, IE, etc. but this author's thinly veiled bitterness and hostility toward MS and their products really hurts his credibility and has no place in professional journalism.
- cypherz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Wow dude! Way to get blocked! Woohoo!
-
Show 51 - 100 of 294 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is