digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at lifehacker.com

Firefox 3 On Track To Be Speediest Browser

lifehacker.com — Now that Mozilla's locked down Firefox 3's final feature set with Friday's push of release candidate 1, it's official: while Firefox 3 boasts some great new features like a smart address bar and better bookmarks manager

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • warrior007, on 05/20/2008, -11/+197"Mozilla VP of engineering Mike Schroepfer claims that Firefox 3 is 9.3x faster than Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 and 2.7x faster than Firefox 2 in terms of JavaScript performance. In terms of Gmail message load time, he claims Firefox 3 is 6.8x faster than IE7 and 3.8x faster than Firefox 2. And he says Firefox 3 beats Apple's Safari, which is also faster than Firefox 2."


    looking great firefox3
    • uptown, on 05/20/2008, -13/+44Probably all true, however it's still slower than Opera in JavaScript performance. While I realize this doesn't mean much for most users since Opera's market share is so small ... Opera still sets the bar for what I hope all browsers eventually achieve in terms of speed.
      • actionscripted, on 05/20/2008, -5/+15Opera is damn fast with well-written JS, I'll give you that, but the Opera nerds need to work to make Dragonfly suck less so that developers (those responsible for pushing changes to a public that is ~70% IE and 30% FF [depending on your audience]) will start using it more regularly.

        If there were something like Firebug or better in Operaland they could easily see their marketshare rise. Dragonfly is a great step, but it's still got a little ways to go.
        • nephilimx, on 05/20/2008, -2/+4Current Dragonfly is the first open beta version and has only been released a month, I dont think it really compares to Firebug which has been around for 18months.
        • uptown, on 05/20/2008, -1/+8Agreed. The Web Developer extension for Firefox is great as well.
        • lamiaconfitor, on 05/20/2008, -6/+10The extensions for firefox make the browser solid gold. I cant imagine anyone ever making a browser that is comparable in quality, and now with the only bottleneck left, speed, eliminated... no one is going to catch up anytime soon unless they release source code for open source developers and catch up in popularity. probably the only possible competitor is, as you suggest, opera.
        • KibibyteBrain, on 05/20/2008, -0/+9@lamiaconfitor Webkit and KHTML are both open source. Firefox has more problems than just speed, namely meeting web standards and such, and overall stability and codebase management issues. Considering Webkit is a younger project and Mozilla is already trying to catch up to it this time around, I wouldn't count Webkit out just yet. Especially as it has been more popular with other FOSS projects like Android.
        • sholde4, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Yeah, Dragonfly still can't beat the knockout punch of Firebug + Webdev toolbar.
        • TenebrousX, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1give the Opera web dev toolbars a shot:
          http://operawiki.info/WebDevToolbar
        • nmnnotmyname, on 05/23/2008, -0/+1@KibibyteBrain: Opera still has some layout bugs. (Yes, really. Try 100% width on a table cell and you must use min-width and max-width on the other cells to make it so it does not occupy the whole page width) Firefox is cool in the way it handles rendering - I mean, It's usually in between everything, working more often than other browsers do. It tends to work how you want it to. Plus, the speed of Firefox 3 is undoubtedly very high - JS speed is not a linear measure that stays true for every usage of it. I agree on web standards and codebase management though.

          And webkit, extremely cool ;)
      • grimward, on 05/20/2008, -0/+11Yes, it's funny to note that they didn't include opera in their speed comparisons. Now me.. I'm a die hard fan of FF since ages ago, but even I have to concede and admit that opera is way faster... but it doesn't offer the same flexibility as FF does, so therefore.. FF wins for me.
      • sholde4, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5Not true. I'm writing an application that does lots of heavy lifting in javascript, and wanted to run some benchmarks to see how browsers handled JS. I ran SunSpider (http://webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider.htm ... on safari, FF3, opera beta, and IE 6/7, and FF3 came out on top. Safari and Opera were less than a hundred milliseconds behind, but FF3 still took first place. IE6/7 were horribly slow, particularly on string manipulation (some things were almost 100x slower than FF3). In all IE6/7 had little difference between each other and were about 10x slower than FF3.
      • jer2eydevil88, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Opera is a good browser but its lack of open source goodness keeps me far away from it. Firefox isn't that far behind it in terms of performance and its excellent collection of plugins makes it the defacto choice for me.
      • yuanzhoulu, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3opera is damn fast, but i don't use it because it completely disregards my user interface theme settings such as colours, fonts, and so on. my ***** gosh the menus are in Arial font, every other app on my system follows my GTK setting of Bitstream Vera Sans, until they change that to obey my system settings i can't stand staring at the app.
        • BlackOp, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Have you tried clicking tools/appearance or tools/preferences?
        • yuanzhoulu, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1yes. but there still is no way in those dialogs to change the user interface font or ask it to use system *widgets* like GTK2 or whatever it is for the system you're on. all you have is the option to download and install themes, which incidentally also don't ever change the font, nor is it easy to create themes just because you want it to match your system. matching your system should be the "no theme" default.
        • Zounas, on 05/21/2008, -0/+0Preferences -> Advanced -> Fonts?
    • fluoro, on 05/20/2008, -19/+11But to be clear, when they're comparing to Safari they're comparing to the currently released version of Safari. The nightly WebKit builds seem to blow away the Firefox 3 betas.
      • Tyr7BE, on 05/20/2008, -4/+17And how do they fare against nightly builds of Firefox head? Let's compare apples to apples.
        • persept, on 05/20/2008, -1/+7The nightly builds of Firefox are pretty damn close to the RC 1 version... which is what these benchmarks were testing. So if it were between the nightly of each, webkit would win hands down. Not to bash the firefox browser, but in my opinion the Webkit engine is much better than the Gecko engine, but Firefox is a much better browser in general, extensions, options etc.
      • asskey, on 05/20/2008, -2/+13Trust me, the nightly WebKit builds are gods among a bunch of blind demented mouse turds when it comes to speed. Too bad they don't have the extensibility of Firefox or we'd have the perfect browser already.
        • zongamin, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2Safari + Safariblock + Inquisitor is fine for me.
        • jimmah, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2well it's extensible to a point if you use OS X. Safari is blisteringly fast, and javascript performance is excellent. But under windows, its just a shame you can't add functionality in the way Firefox does so well.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 05/20/2008, -3/+35I like how suddenly when they have a new version out, they admit the older version was slower than Safari.

      Using FF3 RC1, yeah it's a lot faster than FF2. Best browser.
      • comrade693, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3I don't recall them every saying Firefox 2 was faster than Safari...
      • brundlefly76, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1I like the way Firefox original selling point was "the lean and mean browser to fight IE browser bloat" - but after those roles reversed and Firefox became the biggest memory hog in the history of web browsers, you didn't ever hear them referring to themselves as 'bloatware'.

        (I love Firefox and never use IE, but I think Open Source community is just as, if not more guilty, of hyperbole and hypocrisy as any corporation)
    • GOVATENT, on 05/20/2008, -4/+4To bad google won't update GBS support for firefox 3. That's the one plug in that kept me on firefox. I will switch back to ubuntu if thats the case. I have not tried ad block with the RC yet. Does it work? And could people digg http://digg.com/software/Google_Sync_and_Firefox3 and add a comment in the google group. Its a bunch of people trying to get google to update GBS for firefox3.
      • weizilla, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2exactly why i haven't switched yet. however, i'm losing hope and patiences and i'm about to take the plunge and use foxmarks or a del.icio.us contraption instead
      • GOVATENT, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3wow. i just read what i wrote. ubuntu. I think its time to take step outside. I ment firefox. I use ubuntu so having firefox 3, it would be nice to use gbs. thats why i made the mistake.
    • pdbailey, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5For some odd reason RC1 is much slower than the beta. Now when I comment, it lags behind my typing. I figured this was a real problem when my wife said, "since this weekend" when I installed FF3 "this computer has been much slower." She had no idea that I installed FF3 and is not asking me to roll it back because the computer is almost unusable.
      Yes, the computer is a 2001 laptop (400 MHz G3, 512MB ram) but again, it ran FF3 beta fine.
    • MiddleOfNowhere, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2This may be true with regards to rendering speed etc., but the bookmark manager of FF3 (RC1) on the Mac has a bug that makes it crawl like a turtle on dope.
      Try importing bookmarks from a large HTML file (say, 2,000 bookmarks).
      Now try moving all of these imported bookmarks around in the Bookmark Manager, e.g. to a subfolder.
      Even with dragging (or deleting) just a few hundred bookmarks, expect to wait a minute or longer. This took the fraction of a second in FF2, and it's fast in Opera.
      It's hard to imagine that the shiny new DB running in the background takes *that* much time for updating entries when bookmarks have been moved or deleted - so I reported this for Beta 5, it was acknowledged as a known bug, and it hasn't been fixed.
      I'm no FF basher - it's my main browser -, but this is annoying as hell. I sill hope it gets fixed in the final version ... :/
    • littlebear, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1does anyone else still have memory leak issues with Firefox? I am using v3.0 with adblock and 5 tabs 2 windows and its using 150mb of ram! I have seen it go as high as 350MB of ram! Of course this only seems to happen because i leave it running all the time. But still, it should not leak that bad.
      • barf314, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3I blame Digg - watch your energy consumption drop when you close those tabs.
      • hypersniper, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2How are you inferring that your version of Firefox has memory leaks by the amount of memory it is using?
      • thebrownell, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3It's probably just *using* most of the RAM -- Imagine that.
        Do you have any idea how much RAM IE uses?
        • FKnight, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Make suer that when you compare the memory footprint between Firefox and IE, you do it like this:

          1) In Firefox, Open 5 Tabs of Google.Com
          2) In Internet Explorer, Open 5 Tabs of a Digg comment page that has 700 comments all loaded up into RAM so that AJAX can handle all the nifty animations when expanding and collapsing.

          That's the only fair comparison that would fly here on Digg.

          I don't care what browser you're using, whether it's IE, Firefox, or Opera; If there's a concern about memory usage, someone should take a look at all of this ***** Javascript all over the web.

  • Rajaie, on 05/20/2008, -22/+233It always been #1, and this is just another reason
    • VoxteX, on 05/20/2008, -21/+15Opera used to be number 1. Only recently has Firefox managed to catch up and surpass it.
      • Gathalimay, on 05/20/2008, -3/+9Not sure why everyone is digging you down. I used to use Opera 'cause it was faster and less of a resource hog than FF 2.x. Now I don't even use it 'cause the FF 3.x series completely destroys even the Beta 2 of Opera, which was significantly faster than the current stable. Also, I don't have to manually add things to the adblocker :). I actually uninstalled Opera like a week ago, no competition as of now.

        And another thing: it integrates with the GTK stuff a lot more (at least from what I remember. It was abysmal in appearance for the menus, but the Qt integration was nice. However, I picked up Xfce so back to GTK)
    • thepxc, on 05/20/2008, -14/+24Actually, Opera's pretty much always been faster.
      (Posted from Swiftfox 3.0pre)
      • yuanzhoulu, on 05/20/2008, -2/+0i dunno about y'all but my copy of elinks is ridiculously fast compared to opera and firefox.

        lynx on the other hand sucks balls because every time you get a cookie to accept you are forced by the app to wait a full second before it continues.
    • skyshock1, on 05/20/2008, -2/+26Always? Really?

      I'm pretty sure Mosaic was #1 back in '93.

      A little history lesson for you youngsters.... http://www.xtimeline.com/timeline/Web-browser-hist ...
      • spammishking, on 05/20/2008, -0/+18Actually, I think Pro Comm Plus (a DOS based program) was faster than Mosaic. It popped up the characters as fast as my 14.4 could download them. I could even download pictures in less than 1 hour.
        • phenom2k7, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Dude, you just pwned him, big time.
      • vuke69, on 05/20/2008, -4/+8Isn't it past your bedtime Grandpa?
    • ajamer, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3IE has always opened up and run faster for me

      Maybe it's all of these bloated extensions I have....
      • betterth, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2Uhh most likely.

        Firefox opens almost instantaneously for me.
        • lcmatt, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3IE is built into the operating system so it's bound to open faster on first run than Firefox or any other 3rd party browser.
        • betterth, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1*On first run*.

          Sure, on a cold boot with nothing open IE probably beats Firefox.

          But let's face it, 99% of browser openings aren't from a fresh system after a restart. It's after we've opened, closed, (and repeated) the browser numerous times.

          And once Firefox has been loaded once, it beats IE every time for me. By at least a second, actually.
    • netneutrality, on 05/20/2008, -0/+4There always seems to be a lot of conflicting information out there about browser speeds. But here's one thing everybody can agree on: Mozilla Firefox > Internet Explorer.
  • nepttako, on 05/20/2008, -6/+158I sincerely want a faster Firefox...
    • tomwhughes, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3Don't we all...
    • Twenty, on 05/20/2008, -4/+16I wish I could digg you up twice, sir.
      • WallnutBoy, on 05/20/2008, -1/+22You could always digg him, undigg him, and then digg him again? =P

        new comment system ftw?
    • Ascendancy5, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Second
    • wentwj, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5I've been using Firefox 3 RC1 on OS X and have been very pleasantly surprised by it's performance
  • pafboy, on 05/20/2008, -54/+4RC1 is better then anything out there

    http://www.reliablesource.org/
  • SEGA4life, on 05/20/2008, -52/+4Great, with these speeds now maybe I can go back to 56K... pun*
  • 11up, on 05/20/2008, -35/+8I think most modern browsers are fast enough that this really isn't very significant to most people. It really comes down to what you want in a browser. I'm sticking with Safari 3, as it just *works* for what I need it for. I found whenever I tried Firefox I just ended up trying to make it more like Safari.

    I can definitely see the draw for people who like to tinker with Plugins and stuff, I'm just not one of them.
    • vault, on 05/20/2008, -6/+29Safari eats RAM like there's no tomorrow. I like the look and feel of Safari better but FF3 conserves RAM so much better and there really isn't a very noticeable difference in speed between the two.
    • whataboutdave, on 05/20/2008, -3/+15I've been using FF3 through the late betas and it flies on the legacy hardware I had lying around.

      Prepare to be amazed.
    • Tyr7BE, on 05/20/2008, -0/+14The location bar alone is reason enough to try it out. I don't even use bookmarks anymore. I just start typing out a vague semblance of what's on the page I'm looking for.
      • Protoss, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6This! I love the location bar, I just type in "Scrubs" and BAM! List Of Scrubs Episodes wiki article! It really comes in handy and is so useful...
    • duckyinc, on 05/20/2008, -4/+12Apparently everything by apple just *works*
    • Elranzer, on 05/20/2008, -0/+9I hope you mean Safari for Mac. Safari for Windows is unusable garbage.
  • infectthefrets, on 05/20/2008, -12/+40Although The latest release (RC1) is awesome, it still has a bunch of bugs to be fixed. It's great to hear that it's becoming the fastest browser, but it's not out quite yet.
    • fadetoone, on 05/20/2008, -1/+10I'm still getting a couple crashes a day with the RC1 like I was getting with the beta. It's probably a problem with an extension I use, but you'd think they could make the browser a little more fault tolerant with respect to the extensions you run. Crash the extension, not the whole browser.
      • Smiff2, on 05/20/2008, -2/+4the way XUI (firefox GUI) is written extensions become part of the browser.. this is why extensions can do so much and not slow it down, but it has this downside.. the extensions have to be written and tested properly. ask the extension authors to fix them. extension incompatibility is a more difficult issue to lay blame on.
    • jer2eydevil88, on 05/20/2008, -0/+6I have been using FF 3 since beta 3 and I haven't had a single crash. There were some rendering issues which have been fixed though.

      There are two computers I use everyday running Windows Vista x64 SP1,and OS X 10.5.2 respectively. Both of these computers have FF 3 RC1 (upgraded in succession from FF 3 b3) and neither has experienced a crash.
      • ericdrum, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1On my XP rig, FF RC1 crashes 2 to 3 times a day and has since the beta, but my Vista rig with FF RC1 is much more stable and has never crashed even with the beta.
    • i88gerbils, on 05/20/2008, -2/+1Upgraded from Beta5 -> rc1 yesterday. Lots of disk access and cpu access on each page load. Firefox 3 RC1 is *not* faster for everyone.
  • parkamark, on 05/20/2008, -4/+100I just upgraded from 2 to 3 RC1 today and can confirm the speed increase is very noticeable - a vast vast improvement. I recommend everyone upgrade to 3 once you get a chance, you will NOT be disappointed. *

    * except many of the add-ons don't work with 3 yet, but I'm sure they will be updated in due course. If this bothers you, don't upgrade just yet.
    • str1fe, on 05/20/2008, -5/+16Or just set extensions.checkCompatability to false.
      • Onyxblaze, on 05/20/2008, -0/+33(Can cause problems)
      • init100, on 05/20/2008, -1/+14Some extensions actually don't work in Firefox 3, even if you turn off compatibility checking. The compatibility check is there for a reason.
      • wentwj, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5if you turn off compatability checking, do not come here, or anywhere, and complain about it crashing.
    • madwh, on 05/20/2008, -0/+4The add-ons, that's what stops me. I can't live without mouse gestures for example.
      • Gathalimay, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3FireGestures works with Beta 5 and RC1, I used to use another gesture extension but it didn't work with this version. However, I stumbled upon FireGestures so it worked out well. There are usually repeat plugins but some work with the new versions of FF while others still don't. Just gotta look around.
    • skyshock1, on 05/20/2008, -4/+7Yup. RC1 is DEFINITELY faster than Beta5 in script rendering at least. And seems to start up much faster.

      SunSpider Javascript FireFox3 benchmarks:
      Total: 3020.0ms +/- 1.2%

      HOWEVER. Webkit is still faster...
      Total: 2815.8ms +/- 0.7%

      And notice Firefox3 still fails Acid3 miserably. Oh well, RC1 is definiteliy an improvement and at least they're starting to steadily catch up to the Webkit and Opera guys.
    • keyo, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3It better be fast because I used opera for the first time in a while yesterday and it kicked FF2s ass. All the tests seem to back opera up as being the fastest. I'm not saying it's the best all round browser tho, just that it's faster.
      If firefox3 runs faster than opera that'd be great, but I doubt it will.
    • Farrel, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1So when will the final version come out? Do you predict that Google will update their Firefox toolbar to coincide with the release of the final version? And how about Roboform. I am heavily dependent on those two add-ons and am finding it quite a bit of pain to do with out them. Notwithstanding those issues, the browser is absolutely amazing and using ctrl-L and just freetexting finds all that I want.
    • krz9000, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1no google browser sync -> no update :P
    • monoa, on 05/20/2008, -0/+4All of my 28 extensions work in FF3 - it just requires checkCompatability to be set to false.
  • TheWindBlows, on 05/20/2008, -8/+2One feature i would like to see though is a native like firefox preloader of course it being disabled by default.
  • Neticule, on 05/20/2008, -3/+52Can I use firefox 3 and keep my firefox 2 installed? I would love to try it out before I actually switch.
    • MAGZine, on 05/20/2008, -7/+41Yes.
    • str1fe, on 05/20/2008, -5/+15Yes, just install it to a different folder.

      e.g. if FF2 is installed to Program FilesFirefox you can install FF3 to, say, Program FilesFirefox 3 RC 1
      • iofthestorm, on 05/20/2008, -0/+22Important Note! Before you do this, make sure to set up two profiles for Firefox 2 and 3, and have the shortcuts for the non-default one set to use a specific profile instead of the default one. Otherwise, your profile could get borked if both Firefox 2 and 3 use it because Firefox 3 upgrades/changes the profile structure which could mess it up if you run 2 after running 3. I would suggeest using PortableFirefox instead as this will not mess with your profile folders: http://portableapps.com/news/2008-05-19_-_firefox_ ...
        • pault107, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1I wish I knew this three days ago

          I was really holding off of installing the FF3 beta, but eventually couldn't hold back. I discovered most of my FF2 extensions don't work in FF3 so I thought 'no problem', I'll open up FF2. Nope, those extensions no longer work in FF2 either. Grrrr.
      • kfilip, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Just some additional information to the very good point made by iofthestorm. To poke around with Firefox's profiles, run it like that: "firefox -ProfileManager".

        Then, create a new profile, say "ff3" and always start your new FF3 like that: "firefox -p ff3" (it's best to create a shortcut with that command). Your FF2 profile won't get borked that way.
    • Neticule, on 05/20/2008, -0/+11Wonderful, thanks guys :) Off to install!
    • Fergy, on 05/20/2008, -1/+10If you use Firefox Portable it uses its own profile:
      http://portableapps.com/news/2008-05-19_-_firefox_ ...
    • smackjack, on 05/20/2008, -1/+10you can have both installed. you just can't run both at the exact same time
  • canthraxp, on 05/20/2008, -2/+13Now I'll have to install the FF3RC just to know what about:robots does. (Not that is a bad thing, but I was holding for the official one on the ubuntu repository)
    • Spetz, on 05/20/2008, -0/+7It's awesome geek humour. :)
    • Wakuko, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Gort! Klaatu barada nikto!
    • Wakuko, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Btw, the Awesome bar should show all about:* stuff when I type about:
  • coheedcollapse, on 05/20/2008, -10/+66I wonder if Opera freaks are still going to be yelling about how superior it is if Firefox beats it in speed tests.

    I can say right now, as a user of both Opera and Firefox, that Firefox 3.0 RC1 feels faster (although it's always felt faster to me, so I could be completely wrong).
    • JasonMaloney101, on 05/20/2008, -19/+23Try comparing it to Opera 9.5 beta 2. Opera is still speedier.

      *waits to get dugg down because of the Digg Crashes Opera article*
      • coheedcollapse, on 05/20/2008, -4/+30Eh, I wouldn't digg you down for your browser choice, I just hated the elite stance that a lot of the more talkative Opera users would take when it comes to Firefox. They act like the only reason anyone uses the browser is because they're uneducated and trendy.
        • JasonMaloney101, on 05/20/2008, -5/+11The reverse applies also. And for the record I'm posting this from IE7 until that crashing issue is resolved. It's already installed, it works, why not use it?
        • coheedcollapse, on 05/20/2008, -3/+16I agree. Use what works. IE 7 is a vast improvement on Internet Explorers in the past. If you were using IE 6 I might poke fun at you a bit, but the newer version really holds its own.
        • jenshik, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2Yes. Elitism sucks, guys. Don't do it.
        • novemberdobby, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2Well there's more than plenty of FFanboys out there too, who seem to think there's IE and there's Firefox...
      • iofthestorm, on 05/20/2008, -3/+7Actually, there was an article on reddit which incorrectly claimed that the latest build of Opera beat the latest Firefox 3 nightly, except they were using a month-old nightly, and I don't even know if the results were from the same computer. I ran the latest Opera and Minefield builds at the time through that test and Firefox 3 was substantially faster (in Javascript anyway). http://dromaeo.com/?id=9311,9310 I actually do feel Firefox 3 to be faster than Opera now, although Firefox 2 was a whole other story.
      • salvadorwii, on 05/20/2008, -7/+6*duggs down because digg hates opera*
      • shawn1122, on 05/20/2008, -6/+1It is still speedier in general, that's for sure. But its slower with javascript I think, Gmail and Yahoo mail are much slower and laggier on Opera.
        • Ramble, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Do a couple of benchmarks yourself, I have - Opera is faster, not by a massive amount like with Firefox 2 but it is still faster.
    • MadOgre, on 05/20/2008, -3/+16I agree. It not only seems faster, but more stable thank to fixed memory leaks. I think I can say this now... this is the best browser I've ever used.
    • Weejay, on 05/20/2008, -15/+7No one uses Opera anyway.
    • HigherLogic, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Tools -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Browsing. Try messing with the Loading setting and you'll get that same "feeling" of a page loading faster (even though it's not).
    • HigherLogic, on 05/20/2008, -4/+20By the way, someone posted a speed test in the comments (nikon38). Yeah, it's on track, but still a lap behind.

      [mootools.net]

      Opera
      Dojo 1.0.2----------------52ms
      JQuery 1.2.3------------140ms
      MooTools 1.2beta2------92ms
      Prototype 1.6.0.2-------176ms

      Firefox
      Dojo 1.0.2---------------138ms
      JQuery 1.2.3-------------226ms
      MooTools 1.2beta2------195ms
      Prototype 1.6.0.2--------359ms

      [nontroppo.org]
      Basic Render
      Opera-------------------3562ms
      Firefox----------------18075ms

      [nontroppo.org]
      Opera-------------------422ms
      Firefox------------------626ms

      opera build 9981
      firefox 3Rc1
      • Gathalimay, on 05/20/2008, -3/+2I take it that build 9981 is the Beta 2? I don't see the build number anywhere and I don't feel like installing it again just to find out, heh.

        if you compare FF 3 RC1 on the digg comments to Opera, Opera tanks that test :(
      • HigherLogic, on 05/20/2008, -3/+1Yes, Opera 9.5 build 9981 is the latest release, beta 2. And yes, Captain Obvious, of course Opera "tanks the test" on Digg comments.
  • ctrlfreak13, on 05/20/2008, -0/+22I've been using FF3 since it came out in beta and the first thing I noticed was more speed and significantly less memory consumption, and it's only gotten better through the betas and now the RC.
    • Firehed, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Memory consumption always seems to be about the same for me - somewhere around the 300MB range. But that's on a system with 4GB, and it really doesn't bother me if a program that gets 50%+ of my time takes less than 10% of my RAM.
      • mrspize, on 05/20/2008, -1/+0as a developer I can say that FF2 used to run up to 1.5gig memory used with gmail and multiple windows open. FF3 seems to live around 300. I would use it 100% if more plugins were compatible. Google toolbar and multiple gmail fileupload plugins missed most. Could find alternatives I'm sure, but I can live with restarting FF2 every day after first cursing at it...
      • renegadeafk, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1I can have upwards of 30 tabs open on my 4 gig system and never have it go above 200.
    • tektalk, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2 You can really feel the responsiveness and the speed of the FF3 RC in Vista. I had a ***** time with firefox two on vista, so I had to boot into Ubuntu every time I wanted to use the internet without fear of sudden crashes. Now I don't have to since FF3 RC is stable enough to run and not consume so much memory (which is a big help in vista), so I can now conduct research and type up essays in safety.
    • alothrop, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Everyone knows FF3(American numbering) was the best of the FF series. Some say its FF7 which was very solid IMO. There are also many arguments for any of the other ones pretty much, but IMO Kefka was the best of the villains, and I tended to care about these characters more, if only slightly, than the others in the FF series'.
  • NotOptium, on 05/20/2008, -3/+26As someone who's reading this story in Firefox 3 rc1 (on a piece of ***** computer) I can honestly say:
    Yes. Sweet Jesus it is fast.
    • WallnutBoy, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5I second that. (College PCs suck)
    • Wakuko, on 05/20/2008, -3/+2It is not a piece of ***** computer, it just has Vista installed ;-)
  • toenail, on 05/20/2008, -12/+5i love firefox and all but have really been considering switching back to internet explurblah.... nah i wont go that far, but damn can they fix that flash problem.. when i watch flash videos sometimes they work, sometimes they dont.. 3secs of video, no sound.. gotta do the ietab thang then switch back.. so not kool
    • Onyxblaze, on 05/20/2008, -1/+6That isn't a problem I've ever heard of. Maybe it is your computer having soundcard issues or something.
      • toenail, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4yeah i would have liked to believe that.. cause when i do a search in google most other ppl that are having this issue are using ubuntu.. i have xp on my desktop (got that problem) i have two laptops, both using vista (also have the problem) it mainly happens when i go to totallycrap.com, plus around 50% of youtube videos do the same thing... what a bummer, but then again.. everything works fine when i open up internet explorer.. but i dont want to bore everyone with my issues, i guess thats what the tech forums are for... i better shutup now before this comments gets buried pretty bad.. haha
        • willy1234x1, on 05/20/2008, -2/+5I never ran into it, try reinstalling flash. If you happen to be on Ubuntu it could be using the "free" flash plugin that does it instead of using the Adobe Flash plugin. Also correct your grammar it's pretty hard to read and the unnecessary ellipses and usage of 'ppl' make it all the easier to bury your comment.
        • toenail, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3lol, i know.. its too hard for me to get rid of the ellipses... its just a bad habit, ive been doing that as long as ive been typing... i dont know why, just one of those things... ive gone back to certain forums that i was involved in back in 98 and noticed that i was doing the ellipses even back then.. im sorry but its just too much of a bad habit to break.. just like ppl compared to people.. the "P" and the "L" are so close together and not having to move my finger the the left to hit that "E" just seems like a waste of time... seriously though, thanks for your input.. much appreciated!
        • WallnutBoy, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Try reinstalling firefox completely... Just google 'uninstall firefox completely' and you'll find this guide for both XP and Vista to completely do a fresh install.. I've never had that problem, but I had an issue with history not being saved etc. Clean install fixed that.

          You can use FEBE to backup all your addons, but it might be an addon which is causing the issue so be careful.

          Edit: I got bored. http://kb.mozillazine.org/Uninstalling_Firefox#On_ ...

          The part you wanna focus on is the Removing User Profile stuff..

          If that fails, or if you don't want to uninstall firefox, you could try a portable install (portableapps.com) and see if the problem is still there.

          Hope I helped =/

          EditEdit: I really should read the whole thread before posting, seems someone else has the right idea.. Wow what a waste of time -_-
    • JoeRW, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5I get that problem too. On XP. Something to do with memory limits since with ff flash videos work only when not low in memory. IE just allocates all the memory regardless, but then crashes more often because of it.
      Yes I get 3 seconds of video without audio then freeze.
      • toenail, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1dont know what the deal is with that.. the only extensions that i have are the google toolbar, greasemonkey and adblock.. thats it.. hmmm?
        • twiztidsinz, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1How much total system memory do you have?
          Do you have onboard video or a card?
          How much VirtualMemory do you have set up under Windows?
          What other programs are you running in the background (iTunes, WMP11, Photoshop, etc)?
          Right click the Task Bar and choose Task Manager, Click Mem Usage twice to sort it descending. Is anything (other than explorer.exe and firefox.exe) using more than 30,000K memory?
  • przemeklach, on 05/20/2008, -2/+18This is good news. Hopefully this will put even more pressure on M$ to make IE8 better/faster. This is evidence that competition gives good products. Hope it continues.
    • tomwhughes, on 05/20/2008, -1/+7Very true. Firefox is still an underdog in the browser wars, and I fear that if that ever changes, Firefox will stagnate.

      But then another competitor will come forth and take the reigns. Thank god for our free market economy.
      • init100, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3"I fear that if that ever changes, Firefox will stagnate."

        You mean like IE did, after Microsoft erased the competition by bundling it with Windows?
        • DarkShroud, on 05/20/2008, -2/+1I think you mean, giving it away for free. Netscape was winning until MS gave IE away for free. Then MS bundled both IE & Netscape in with Windows for some time afterwards.
        • Burn, on 05/20/2008, -0/+7Really? I've never installed a version of Windows with Netscape pre-installed. Out of genuine interest, which OEM builds of Windows came with a browser other than IE pre-installed?
        • DarkShroud, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2The 9x series did, I'm not sure about me. I've seen it installed with some Win2k discs, but they were hard to keep track of because of the service packs. I've also had it install with XP Pro pre SP1 disc, that might have been due to a slip stream.

          I have to different 98SE discs that both install Netscape 4.0 with the OS.
      • known, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4Open Source Software promotes Competition.
        Closed Source Software promotes Collusion.
  • aserer511, on 05/20/2008, -1/+9RC1 on my PC is hickuping a LITTLE in terms of speed, but with nightly test tools all add-ons work, and not a crash yet! its still a bit memory heavy but not ridiculous.
  • wildmXranat, on 05/20/2008, -2/+12I've been using Firefox 3 for about a month now. The smart bookmarks, improved address bar typing prediction and anti-phishing features make it a WIN for me. I use older Firefox and IE browsers while at work as it deals with web programming and usability testing , but my home use is strictly Firefox 3.

    Job well done.
  • Tyr7BE, on 05/20/2008, -0/+24It's even good on Apple. FF2 was more or less unusable on my iBook G4. FF3 is my default browser.
    • tomwhughes, on 05/20/2008, -0/+7It's especially good on apple. On my MBP 2.2ghz, Firefox 3 runs like a beast - and now with the RC it even has the same launch speed as Safari 3.1, with faster browsing and rendering.

      Also the mac theme looks great. Fits in much better with the general OSX theme.
      • ridercologne, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3The default theme looks even better when you set "icon size" to small by right-clicking the buttonbar and choosing "customize..."

        i love the one-click-bookmark feature!!
  • devaney16, on 05/20/2008, -10/+9I still prefer SeaMonkey.
    • courtjester555, on 05/20/2008, -6/+2Don't be a bitch Brian
      • devaney16, on 05/20/2008, -1/+8That response was far too prompt, not to mention creepy.
      • courtjester555, on 05/22/2008, -0/+1I guess that would be weird if I didn't know you, but I do
    • lonewalker, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Everyone to his own beer/booze
  • tHr333, on 05/20/2008, -5/+6Been testing it since it was known as a codename. (Gran Paradiso)
    Great, looking forward to it's release so skins and mods work!

    Let's see what Microsoft has to say to this. While FireFox gets faster and faster, IE chugs down to a stop.
    • estvir, on 05/20/2008, -1/+9No it doesn't, IE7 is faster than IE6 and from my limited use of the IE8 Beta I'd say it's a little faster than IE7.

      RC1 is good and all but there's no need to bring in MS and to lie IE.
      • aserer511, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3There is need; they're stagnating. OK so lets say IE8 is as quick as FF3. it's missing intelligent bookmarking and near stellar standards support. and IE renders some pages funkily. to IEs credit, FF2 didnt handle all embedded video well, but IEtab solved that in ff2 and FF3 does it all well (doesn't hurt i have ietab in FF3 as well)
        • DarkShroud, on 05/20/2008, -1/+2IE stopped stagnating with IE6 SP2. IE7 holds it's own as a browser and IE8 has a lot of new features. And their are entire add-on suits for IE like IE7 Pro that add most of the functions that FF users brag about in one package.

          And having to use IE API function in Firefox (IE tab) is nothing to brag about. You should have just left IE out of it.
        • aserer511, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1The fact of the matter is, FF3 passes the acid test.
          end.
          game.
  • Psythik, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3I'm running RC1 on an 800MHz PIII with 128MB RAM (because my other PC is fried and I can't afford to repair it) -- aside from completely freezing up for 30-seconds every hour or so, when loading websites that heavily rely on scripts, it's faster than a cheetah on amphetamines.
    • Troy64, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3I have FC1 running on my daughter laptop,a PIII 600MHz with 256MB RAM. She taxes the hell out that system and doesn't have any crashing problems.
  • dagamer34, on 05/20/2008, -15/+6So the article pretty much ignores the existence of Safari. Bravo.
    • MasterJediDan, on 05/20/2008, -3/+5And WebKit (http://webkit.org - the open source browser, not the core of Safari), for that matter. WebKit is significantly faster than any other browser out there, yet sadly it's often ignored.
    • Cglass, on 05/20/2008, -0/+13"And he says Firefox 3 beats Apple's Safari, which is also faster than Firefox 2."

      Clearly it ignores safari.
    • novemberdobby, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1Safari doesn't exist.
  • sillykalcifer, on 05/20/2008, -13/+4FF3 doesn't work well with facebook chat
    • gooberguy, on 05/20/2008, -1/+7so?
    • MattBD, on 05/24/2008, -0/+1Get a copy of Digsby for that, best IM client ever and supports Facebook Chat
  • LostinService, on 05/20/2008, -1/+6The browser is great and I'm getting accustomed to the new URL bar but facebook chat doesn't work which is a shame. Even that drawback is made up for by its incredible speed.
    • ThEDeMoNKiNg, on 05/20/2008, -2/+13Huh, chat in Facebook works for me.. maybe your friends don't want to talk to you?
    • Stonekeeper, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1A real boon for the business market!
    • zongamin, on 05/20/2008, -1/+3I've grown accustomed to your face
    • persept, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2LostinService is right, facebook chat doesn't work. To tell the whole story, it works for about 15 seconds and then loses connection with the facebook servers. This never happened with the last beta or FF2. Since it works on Safari, Internet Explorer and FF2 fine I'm going to guess it's some minor problem with FF3 that can be fixed, if they can figure out the problem
  • truspect0r, on 05/20/2008, -23/+9LOL OPERA
  • Condemned, on 05/20/2008, -3/+5I downloaded FF3 RC1 yesterday, it's great!
  • j.carcinogen, on 05/20/2008, -21/+5After using Safari for awhile, Firefox looks like *****.
  • qbthemc, on 05/20/2008, -13/+3I hope they tested this on porn sites. :)
  • DarkPrincess74, on 05/20/2008, -3/+6I've been using FF3 through the different beta versions and it is definitely much faster than other browsers out there. It's painfully obvious that IE7 is tremendously slower especially at tabbed browsing. Woohoo FF3!
    • Troy64, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2IE7 locks up almost every time I use it. That was why I originally switched to Firefox.
  • xdevit, on 05/20/2008, -3/+2Only issues/annoyances im having/noticed is, seems it doesn't always use the right character set, address bar drop down is abit hard to read sometimes, and why the hell did they remove the memory leak.. that was the best feature. On the up side, I now can watch web videos with out being locked to the tab till I hit pause/stop and all my extensions work just fine with the help of the nightly tester tools. (Adblock Plus, Anonymouser, Download Statusbar, Greasemonkey, Image Zoom, Tiny Menu, User Agent Switcher). Only one that didnt work was the google toolbar which would crash on startup.
  • Retrospekt, on 05/20/2008, -10/+2It wasn't the fastest already?
  • eminiguy, on 05/20/2008, -12/+6I think Safari is still faster than FF. Get Safari and you will see for yourself. IE is a joke no matter what version you want to talk about. MS has again stopped innovating.
    • Vipersfate, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4I am still a Safari fan, but at times it's seen some slowdown on my MacBook.

      I'm currently testing out FF3RC1, and I will eventually decide what I like better.
    • init100, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4Speed is important, but it isn't everything. I have Safari on my Mac, but I don't use it. I want to use the same browser on all three operating systems that I use (Linux, Mac OS X and Windows XP), and Firefox is there for all of them.
      • BabyWookie, on 05/20/2008, -2/+3Except that Opera is there too and is a faster, better browser.
    • novemberdobby, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Did they ever start?
  • kozicka, on 05/20/2008, -2/+1Been using it for a few days now and can definitely (and thankfully) say that gMail is a lot quicker. RC1 does have a few odd quirks I cant quite pinpoint the issue of but its better than the Betas I was trying before.
    Saying that, typing this comment is a bit laggy, Digg pages load up quite slowly. May just be me though. Generally websites do noticeably load up quicker which is great :)
    • haobaba1, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2They just upgraded gmail, has nothing to do with firecrash.
  • smrdka, on 05/20/2008, -16/+5Opera 9.50 beta is faster than Firefox 3 and IE 8 put together.
    • truspect0r, on 05/20/2008, -3/+7It's so good it crashes on Digg and Acid3 LOL
      • basotl, on 05/20/2008, -3/+5Wow I have Opera as a testing browser and never noticed that it crashes on Digg until you said that and I tested it.
  • FyberOptic, on 05/20/2008, -12/+6Nice how they conveniently leave out Opera. That's usually what people do when they don't want it to appear better over Firefox. It happens a lot. Opera 9.5 beta is already tested to blow all the builds of Firefox 3 out of the water.

    In a nutshell, Firefox has never been the fastest browser. Not even faster than IE. Whether it beats IE7 with this version, who cares. It's still not the fastest browser, and will never be, due to its design. Anyone who knows anything about the underpinning of the browser would recognize its shortcomings in terms of speed.
    • truspect0r, on 05/20/2008, -6/+10It's so good it crashes on Digg and Acid3 LOL
      • basotl, on 05/20/2008, -3/+4Wow I have Opera as a testing browser and never noticed that it crashes on Digg until you said that and I tested it.
      • BabyWookie, on 05/20/2008, -5/+6I just did the Acid3 test in Opera. It didn't crash. It's not Opera's fault that Digg is developed by retarded monkeys.
  • Kwipper, on 05/20/2008, -9/+4It's like Windows Vista, but without the suck.
  • mike648, on 05/20/2008, -3/+16I wish I could actually use Opera to write this message. The browser is very fast but speed is useless if certain sites don't work properly.
    • Niten, on 05/20/2008, -5/+8Of course, there's a difference between "certain sites don't work properly" and "the browser is unstable". A web browser shouldn't segfault under any circumstances, no matter what kind of HTML it's fed.
      • BabyWookie, on 05/20/2008, -4/+5LOL. It's not the HTML that's making Opera crash on Digg comment threads. Its the lame javascript coding. I can't believe these buffoons didn't actually bother to test the new comment system on the best web browser before rolling it out.
        • BRODEL, on 05/20/2008, -1/+6Well if the browser crashes based on code it's fed, regardless if it's HTML or Javascript, something is wrong there and it needs to be fixed.
        • BabyWookie, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1They should have ***** tested it, discovered the issue, contacted Opera and got it resolved. It's just mind-blowing to me that the devs fora major "tech" site didn't bother to test their latest version in Opera. . Even if only 1% of the Internet users browse with Opera, it's still what... millions of people? Plus, on a site like Digg, the Opera usage is gotta be more like 5%. I mean, I could understand not testing with the latest nightly build or something, but to have every version of Opera (even the Wii browser) crash like this? I would also understand if the Digg comment system has been known for its excellence, but it's not. It's been notoriously slow and buggy. Opera, on the other hand, IS known for its excellence. So, forgive me if I assume that it's just sloppy coding on Digg's part.
    • thegreatanti, on 05/20/2008, -8/+2I think it's quite logical of Digg not to test Opera. Almost no one uses that browser, so why care? No, Opera's days are numbered.
    • GrantTLC, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5Opera has released a new build today that claims to have the Digg issue fixed. Haven't tested it myself yet....
      • TheSeeker11, on 05/20/2008, -0/+3Using 9.50 Beta 2 Build 1971 (Debian) right now and thankfully Digg no longer crashes. Unfortunately, I cannot digg up/down individual comments.
  • nonks, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4glad to hear... nice work Mozilla devs
  • stockjones, on 05/20/2008, -4/+4Its definitely faster. But I wouldnt say its fastest yet. It seems to start up as fast as IE, Opera or Safari but not faster. Just about the same which is good. It renders pages a lot faster which is nice but its more on par with Opera and Safari rendering wise. But its a vast improvement on speed. At least its not the sluggish FF of old. But lets not claim the fastest title yet.

    Safari doesn't render as many pages very well across the board like FF, but safari's speed over other browsers is very noticeable.
  • seanwuzhere, on 05/20/2008, -10/+5I have a question,.. is the new release EVER going to get -- I dunno,.. actually released??? I can just see it now,.. 5 years later,.. people are still Digging articles about Firefox 3.0. "Introducing Firefox 3.0 alpha 18 of beta 37, release candidate 488, version 3.031.0001.2876 rev U is the greatest version of Firefox 3.0 to date!! Speediest browser ever!" Oh wow, I can hardly contain my excitement. :rolleyes:
    • Jerky1312, on 05/20/2008, -0/+5If you are following the alpha and beta releases, you should easily know that Fx 3.0 is being released in June.
      • Farrel, on 05/20/2008, -1/+1What date in June? In other words, what date do you believe there is a 75% chance that it will be released on or before?
  • dood, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1I might try it again on Linux, now that it's RC. Last I used it on Debian Etch, it or the required updated gtk library caused the X server to crash essentially randomly. It was pretty irritating, so I went back to Firefox 2 (Iceweasel), which is just glacial. Anyone on digg see that problem, and know if the RC fixes it?

    I didn't submit a bug report, given that the open bugs I'm already tracking for Mozilla are several years old. No sense in just piling on more, heh.
  • frotastic, on 05/20/2008, -2/+1So www.google.com/maps doesnt work for me... its just keeps loading. anyone else have this problem?
    • beermad, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2Working OK for me. And as I make extensive use of Google Maps for a project I'm working on, I'd've been raising lots of bugs if it wasn't.
    • Farrel, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1No. Sorry. Your on your own.
    • Malcosa, on 05/25/2008, -0/+0I'm having the same problem..it work fine with previous versions, but since installation of RC it´s gone it never load the map!
  • gaurav4u99, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2RC1 is kewl..
    Somehow the back button for me is not what I see on the forums. It is similar in shape as the forward button.

    anyone seeing this?
    • zongamin, on 05/20/2008, -1/+4View, Toolbars, customize - you have 'small icons' ticked - untick if you want to see the BIG back button
  • arcooke, on 05/20/2008, -10/+20How could they possibly leave out Opera? I'm a firefox fan, but Opera is well-known to be the fastest browser on the market.. and here comes Lifehacker saying Firefox 3 RC1 is the fastest on the market and never even bother to mention Opera. As far as I'm concerned (and I usually like Lifehacker), that article is garbage. I want to see a thorough test.. with at least the top five included.. betas too, seeing as how they're relying on a release candidate version for their results.

    Shame on you Lifehacker.
    • Pfkninenines, on 05/20/2008, -3/+6RC isn't the same as Beta. We're past it, so maybe he'll do a test once Opera gets itself out of the beta stage as well.

    • HigherLogic, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Agreed. And LH does talk about Opera actually (obviously not in this article, but he still should have compared it to Opera 9.27), I know I've seen 4-5 articles on here from the site. We'll just have to wait until Firefox 3 and Opera 9.5 come out to really see who's faster.
    • BabyWookie, on 05/20/2008, -5/+11Because when you include Opera, it makes Firefox look bad and makes all the open-source fangirls mad.
      • twiztidsinz, on 05/20/2008, -4/+2Yeah.. I just love Opera's AddOn's... oh wait.. that's right...
        • johnnysaucepn, on 05/20/2008, -1/+5Yeah, that's right. We've still got all those features, while you have to wait a few weeks until the extensions writers get around to making them compatible with RC1.
        • twiztidsinz, on 05/20/2008, -2/+1Actually.. I've been using Firefox 3 since Beta2 and aside from Foxmarks which needed to be reworked from the ground up by the Foxmarks Dev's all my AddOn's have been updated within 24 hours or have worked simply by disabling the compatibility check.
          Except for AddOn's that deal with things that have been significantly changed (like Bookmarks), the majority of stuff works and doesn't need to be 'fixed', just updated to have the new version number changed.
    • thegreatanti, on 05/20/2008, -8/+5Because no one cares about Opera, that's why.
  • zohaibusman, on 05/20/2008, -9/+3i am always very concern about the firefox speed. its a good news.
    Firefox on Fire
  • ThenWang, on 05/20/2008, -8/+1This "good news" is actually misleading
    the real FF fans knows that we love FF not for the speed,and even it cost more ram,we still stick to it,those reasons could take you a very long time to be discovered,that's why those lazy idiots remain the same
  • smackjack, on 05/20/2008, -3/+9Kind of off topic but I'm using RC1 now. Is anyone having a problem with facebook chat? It keeps "disconnecting."
  • oliviacond, on 05/20/2008, -2/+2but not for long.....
    (i'm firefox user)
    • lonewalker, on 05/20/2008, -0/+1Well nothing ever stays for long in the technology world, won't they?
  • pascalosti, on 05/20/2008, -9/+2people people lets keep it real IE 7 blows firefox away
    • joshualamgroup, on 05/20/2008, -0/+2your face blows ie7 away..
      have you ever tried firefox anyways?
    • Chris4, on 05/21/2008, -0/+1Hahahaha
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.