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.
94 Comments
- mithrasinvictus, on 09/08/2008, -2/+68ask adobe, they made it
- Lordrust, on 09/08/2008, -9/+63WHERES THE FLASH FIX!!!
*crashes* - baldgye, on 09/08/2008, -0/+52I hope Google and Mozilla go at it big time, so by the start of next year we have some silly fast browser
- BulletsforRingo, on 09/08/2008, -2/+40seriously, someone needs to fix this *****.
- jggube, on 09/08/2008, -0/+36The JavaScript boost is compelling enough to try it (just roll back if you experience difficulties).
- thecheatah, on 09/08/2008, -2/+35Yup its a good idea to mix beta and alpha products together in order to reduce the amount of crashes.
- ElBeh, on 09/08/2008, -0/+25I would like to try it - but is it really stable enough to use? I've used the Firefox 3 betas all the time and had little difficulty, but I've never used an Alpha.
- virtualonliner, on 09/08/2008, -4/+28Man, its faaaast. I don't have numbers to prove. But it seems faster than Chrome.
- kronaslor, on 09/08/2008, -2/+23Firefox 3.1 has been well underway long before any hints of chrome went public.
- jayjay80, on 09/08/2008, -0/+19I second many of your thoughts, but the lack of plugins, as in firegestures and such, keep me away from chrome for the time being. When the plugins start to surface I will reconsider my browser of choice.
- mgrest, on 09/08/2008, -0/+19I have far too many problems with Flash in Chrome. After using Chrome for a few days I've now gone back to Firefox. The whole thing hangs and becomes unresponsive once you have been using Flash media in Chrome for a while (on 2 different PCs).
I also miss the type-ahead search functionality of Firefox. - zplot, on 09/08/2008, -6/+21Can't wait for the Javascript update. Chrome might keep Firefox on its feet for the Javascript optimization, but it's still Mozilla all the way. The Firefox eats Chrome browsers for breakfast. Yum yum.
- iofthestorm, on 09/08/2008, -0/+14It's not bad, I've used nightlies from the alpha stage onward and there is hardly ever anything data-destroying. But the best practice is to wait until later in the day each day for others to post stuff in the daily build threads so if there's a major bug you will know and not update to the day's build. Usually if there's something really major they'll put out a respin with something backed out to fix the major issue, although that has to be a big problem for that to happen.
- caracter2, on 09/08/2008, -3/+16Unicorns?! Have they added Unicorns!? Please! Please! Please!
- inactive, on 09/08/2008, -0/+12Browser competition is a good thing for the users of the browsers but bad for developers as it forces them to innovate and improve on what they have already done. If all browsers get a kick in the pants to improve then those that use them win, regardless of which browser you use. Even though firefox has been planning these javascript updates for years, and it took adobe to overhaul spidermonkey (3 mozilla contributors vanished unexpectedly after starting to work to make spidermonkey faster - 3 separate people doing independant work oddly enough). The more browsers that are faster, provide more features, etc will force the rest to either die off or compete for the same userbase. I only see good things as a result of this.
- init100, on 09/08/2008, -0/+11Did you try with TraceMonkey enabled, or did you just compare with contemporary releases of Firefox?
- Protoss, on 09/08/2008, -0/+10That's really weird. I can log into my Tomato-flashed router just fine with Firefox 3.
- SniperGX1, on 09/08/2008, -0/+9From those benchmarks (the link currently escapes me) it was faster than Chrome in Javascript rendering. It was a little slower in CSS though. I'm not sure overall how CSS speed affects the performance vs Javascript.
- AnthonyFTMFW, on 09/08/2008, -0/+8I presume redtube and it's variants? I dropped Chrome and went back to Firefox for the same reason.
- Sabretou, on 09/08/2008, -0/+7Yeah, because since it is a browser, it will obviously be competing with another browser.
- talonstriker, on 09/08/2008, -0/+7As a person who knows nothing about routers, the above comment is hilarious.
- foomojive, on 09/08/2008, -0/+7dugg for "silly fast browser"
- inactive, on 09/11/2008, -2/+9Wish they'd come out with Firefox 4 already...
- redxxx, on 09/08/2008, -1/+8Yeah, flash is pretty much broken. As I tend to listen to flash based streaming radio... well all the damn time, it is a deal breaker. Pandora 2% CPU usage in FF. 58%(which is kinda amazing because it's that means it is running multi-threaded across both of my cores) in Chrome.
Flash will get fixed. The plug-in situation will surely get better and will eventually have something like parity with Firefox. It's beta. Now, it's google, so it will probably always be a 'beta', but right now it actually means something and there is actually going to be more development.
At the moment, it's got a pretty slick UI and pages load fast because DOM is rendered amazingly fast. Non-flash resource use and speed is all pretty close, and tends to depend on the particular pages being tested. - jtinz, on 09/08/2008, -0/+6The 3.1 alpha does not have TraceMonkey, the new JavaScript engine, integrated. If you want to see a real speedup, you need to download a nightly build and enable the JIT option for JavaScript manually.
- KillTheRhythm, on 09/08/2008, -0/+6I think he's being sarcastic.
- RaulMuadDib, on 09/08/2008, -2/+8Have you tried swiftfox? It's really...swift.
- Robzzz, on 09/08/2008, -0/+6Minefield is the nightly build so that will be ahead feature wise, but might have stability issues as it is in constant development.
- inactive, on 09/08/2008, -1/+7if they do its likely that opera, IE, safari and others will join the fray, not just improving speed but also functionality. Take gears (available for firefox and default with chrome), it lets you use webapps offline. There are greasemonkey scritps to add the functionality to wikipedia for example that lets you use wikipedia offline and all that. Googledocs can also be used offline in this way (by design).
Its not just about speed, there is functionality and security that will attract users. And the more functional, the more secure web browsers are, the more likely that more sites will have extended apps that go beyond what has been the standard for the last 15 years. - brett1337, on 09/08/2008, -0/+5obviously you needed a sarcasm tag there
- n0odles, on 09/08/2008, -2/+7Not Mozilla's fault if Adobe makes a ***** piece of ***** product.
- Pfkninenines, on 09/08/2008, -0/+4http://i34.tinypic.com/25z76zs.png
85/100 on the Acid3 test. Highest I've seen yet!
Beats Chrome by 7-8 points too. - megadupek, on 09/08/2008, -8/+12FF is even now with 3.0 far better than Google Chrome...
- leerayIG88, on 09/08/2008, -0/+4Forget get about fancy browsers, people should stick to command line.
- LocalDocal, on 09/08/2008, -2/+6Er, there's a lot of extensions/themes not supported in FF3. You want to know what they are? Simply go to the FF extension database and proceed to go through. You'll see plenty.
The problem is that you're probably thinking of the more popular extensions, which of course has all been updated to work with FF3 already. On the other hand, I myself use a few extensions (well, 'had used' is more appropriate) which still have not been updated for FF3. And just now, I went to the Add-on database, did a few random searches for themes/extensions, and easily came upon a few that still only support up to FF2. - Dunhamzzz, on 09/08/2008, -2/+6install the flash player 10 beta...
- HonoredMule, on 09/08/2008, -1/+5Yeah, now I can't use all my ancient, obsolete, and no-longer-supported extensions.
If it's useful enough that if anyone actually cares and it is still relevant in FF 3.0, any dead extension would have "branched" to an actively-maintained child/related extension. I'm sure there are some exceptions, but I haven't found any yet. Since it was specifically mentioned, I'll point out that while FasterFox is pretty useless, especially in 3.0, you can still check out: http://morerandomcommentsplz.blogspot.com/2008/06/ ... - gritta, on 09/08/2008, -2/+6I have bad more problems with the supposed Chrome "beta" than with Firefox alpha versions. The pretty much only issue I had with FF3 alphas was not having many important addons like Firebug, IETab and Foxmarks!
Respect to Google for a very good browser architecture but their software is not even close to release quality. - doshindude, on 09/08/2008, -3/+7no, you're retarded, stfu.
- kinggimped, on 09/08/2008, -1/+4I'm loving all the Chrome fanboys dissing the hell out of Firefox for being 'rubbish' and 'bloated' and 'outmoded', yet 2 weeks ago before Chrome was available to download they were Firefox fanboys bashing the hell out of IE for the same reasons.
LET'S... GET... FICKLE! - inactive, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3Even if the page doesnt validate, it should render. That is the difference between lab tests and real world experience. I had a news bot way back when (before google news, which is what killed its need) that would parse html pages, and many had validation problems, even from some of the top sites on the net. Bad html exists everywhere, and if you only work with validated pages then you will not be able to render a large quantity of pages.
Further the standard way routers do a user/pass dialog is via a 403 response saying authentication is required, if its not sending the data back from that it would be a FF problem. - BrianOl, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3@thecheatah
It is if the beta and alpha releases fix the bugs from previous releases. - Robzzz, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3If you are willing to install this Alpha 2 I would recommend going the whole way and install the Nightly Build(Minefield), I have been using it for the last week, and it has only crashed on the sunspider benchmark site after I enabled TraceMonkey in about:config. Only one of my addons didn't work, TagSifter. It is also seems a lot faster and more responsive than Aplha2.
- dtfinch, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3Yes, but they're invisible.
- level1computer, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3Please don't confuse java and javascript
- silfiriel, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3It really is faster. Faster then Fx3, Chrome or Safari.
Some add ons don't work, (actually most of them), so I can't wait for the final release. - nomadbea, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3I mean, it works fine on my other *other* browser --- i still hear audio on flash sites, long after I've closed the tab.
- thelizardreborn, on 09/08/2008, -1/+4Even if if took twice as long as IE8, I would still use any other browser instead. Microsoft showed us with IE6 what happens when they have all the market share.
- sandiegodude, on 09/08/2008, -0/+3I have IE Tab just for pesky pages that don't operate correctly with FF... like Southpark Studio's video viewer which won't go fullscreen in FF. yargh, hate seeing advertisements!
- level1computer, on 09/08/2008, -1/+4I've been using chrome and I don't experience anything I would call a bug. Missing features yes, and addons are desperately needed (I can't stand flash advertising) but no real bugs that I can think of
-
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 