Firefox 7

Firefox 7 is available http://www.getfirefox.com

Wow! Another major release. Any powerful new features?

In reply to a post by micksharpe:

Wow! Another major release. Any powerful new features?

They've taken away the http:// from the url bar

It's 7/6ths as good as Firefox 6.

but introduced a feature where if you copy the URL it always adds http:// on paste when it never used to.

Matt

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by micksharpe:

Wow! Another major release. Any powerful new features?

They've taken away the http:// from the url bar

In other words, they've run out of ideas.

In reply to a post by uno:

but introduced a feature where if you copy the URL it always adds http:// on paste when it never used to.

Matt

Well that's a good idea
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/windows/t/4048402-r...
It works well on this forum

In reply to a post by uno:

but introduced a feature where if you copy the URL it always adds http:// on paste when it never used to.

Matt

I don't know who's in charge of Firefox these days but whoever it is, they're killing it.

Could it... could it be Google?

Depends what you do. I'm constantly pasting things in terminal windows and now have to edit out the http://

Considering the switch to Safari or Chrome now

Matt

In reply to a post by micksharpe:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by micksharpe:

Wow! Another major release. Any powerful new features?

They've taken away the http:// from the url bar

In other words, they've run out of ideas.

No, it's faster and uses less memory.

In reply to a post by uno:

Depends what you do. I'm constantly pasting things in terminal windows and now have to edit out the http://

Why, what's the terminal window for?

I'm still using 3.6 , works for me, with all the plugin's that i find useful, but as for continually updating something just because it's there,forget it 3.6 works why break it,

Edited by tommy45 (Thu 29-Sep-11 21:17:21)

I'm thinking of going back to 3.6.x. I think they're still issuing security fixes for it.

Yep, there was an upgrade to 3.6.23 the other day.

Google have done for Firefox for me - the Google toolbar is not being updated (it only worked in v5/6 with the compatibility add-on) and now it is impossible to sign in.

Ironically Chrome doen't have the same features (at least not all together in the same easy to use toolbar) so I've gone back to Internet Explorer .

There seems to be some twisted logic somewhere when Google take away a feature in Firefox that they don't (or not obviously) provide in Chrome but are happily continuing to support in IE.

And in under 6 weeks it will be Firefox 8

And no doubt FF 9 by end of year.

I'm staying put on 3.6 for the foreseeable future.

The Google toolbar has features?

Firefox 7.0.1 is out now.

In reply to a post by uno:

Depends what you do. I'm constantly pasting things in terminal windows and now have to edit out the http://

Considering the switch to Safari or Chrome now

Matt

Chrome does the same thing, i have no idea about Safari as i never used it

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by micksharpe:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

... nested quotes trimmed ...

They've taken away the http:// from the url bar

In other words, they've run out of ideas.

No, it's faster and uses less memory.

It could not be any slower and use any more memory, that memory leak have been with Firefox for years, about time they fixed it.

i used to love firefox, but they spoilt it after version3.5

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by micksharpe:

Wow! Another major release. Any powerful new features?

They've taken away the http:// from the url bar

and whats the reason for that?

the url bar is massive given the removal of other stuff as well. Do they think we need an extra 4 characters or something?

funny I click on check for updates and its downloading an update.

I told it to check not download. If I was doing this on my 3G dongle I would be furious.

It does seem tho on every FF update they either copying chrome or making changes for the sake of it.

Now its done its download it just says apply update and not what version it is, very devious behaviour of the app now.

In reply to a post by Banger:

Firefox 7.0.1 is out now.

Got it. Thanks

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Banger:

Firefox 7.0.1 is out now.

Got it. Thanks

Colorful Tabs is incompatible

True

ColorfulTabs 6.0.1 for Firefox 4, 5 & 6 {released Aug 21, 2011}

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

the url bar is massive given the removal of other stuff as well. Do they think we need an extra 4 characters or something?

Have firefox still got the separate search box? I love the way chrome uses the URL box for searching as well entering addresses.

I was surprised that I did like it so much to be honest, but I could not go back to a separate search box

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

the url bar is massive given the removal of other stuff as well. Do they think we need an extra 4 characters or something?

Have firefox still got the separate search box? I love the way chrome uses the URL box for searching as well entering addresses.

I was surprised that I did like it so much to be honest, but I could not go back to a separate search box

You can remove it.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

You can remove it.

i know you can remove it, you could do that even in version 2, but the URL bar did not work like the one on Chrome.

You can use Firefox address bar to do search.

http://techreviews.in/use-firefox-address-bar-for-go...

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

the url bar is massive given the removal of other stuff as well. Do they think we need an extra 4 characters or something?

Have firefox still got the separate search box? I love the way chrome uses the URL box for searching as well entering addresses.

I was surprised that I did like it so much to be honest, but I could not go back to a separate search box

It does and I want it to stay. But if chrome dont have it I guess firefox will copy and remove it soon.

Think what the average resolution is now days on a desktop, even on a laptop its fairly high.

Then ask yourself what is the point of trying to save the space taken up by the search bar. The address bar would get bigger and its already easily big enough.

It seems browsers (and OS's windows 8 onwards) are now been primarily designed for mobile devices. Which have severe space issues on their tiny screens.

I reported tesco.com and other visa verification sites broken, mozilla closed bug as web site broken funny. So it works in FF3.6 IE, opera. Visa and tesco major companies used by millions and firefox wont fix.

I use Tesco all the time, no probs.

In reply to a post by 12eason:

I use Tesco all the time, no probs.

your the only one then as I have read other reports backing what I said, one was even on this site I think.

Firefox is about to lose its second place in the browser standings to Chrome. I can't help but think it must be doing something wrong.

In reply to a post by AEP:

Firefox is about to lose its second place in the browser standings to Chrome. I can't help but think it must be doing something wrong.

Can you change the path/folder Chrome installs into?

Silent updates are being implemented in FF10.

In reply to a post by 12eason:

Silent updates are being implemented in FF10.

Good to see you can opt out and you still will be able to chose the folder location.

In reply to a post by DavidFinbarr:

In reply to a post by AEP:

Firefox is about to lose its second place in the browser standings to Chrome. I can't help but think it must be doing something wrong.

Can you change the path/folder Chrome installs into?

After research it's a "No" so no Chrome for me.

Useful addon I just found: http://priv3.icsi.berkeley.edu/

In reply to a post by 12eason:

Useful addon I just found: http://priv3.icsi.berkeley.edu/

You COULD divulge some USEFUL information before sending us all the way to Berkeley....

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

You COULD divulge some USEFUL information before sending us all the way to Berkeley....

About what?

In reply to a post by AEP:

Firefox is about to lose its second place in the browser standings to Chrome. I can't help but think it must be doing something wrong.

yeah its trying to be chrome but chrome does chrome better than firefox.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

You COULD divulge some USEFUL information before sending us all the way to Berkeley....

About what?

What is it for ? What does it add ? What does it do ? Need I say more ???

Colorful Tabs is incompatible

Works ok on my FF7!!

I reported tesco.com and other visa verification sites broken, mozilla closed bug as web site broken funny. So it works in FF3.6 IE, opera. Visa and tesco major companies used by millions and firefox wont fix.

Tesco and visa verification (and Colourful tabs) works ok with my FF7!!

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

You COULD divulge some USEFUL information before sending us all the way to Berkeley....

About what?

What is it for ? What does it add ? What does it do ? Need I say more ???

It's explained on the site. You don't have to actually travel to Berkeley - just click the link

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

... nested quotes trimmed ...

About what?

What is it for ? What does it add ? What does it do ? Need I say more ???

It's explained on the site. You don't have to actually travel to Berkeley - just click the link

There is 'apparently useful' information EVERYWHERE on the internet.
So if I say clik HERE, THERE and SOMEWHEREELSE you just will ???

Most of us don't have the time to blunder about.....

Firefox 6 was unreliable, just opening a new tab caused it to crash. I gave up in the end and switched to Google Chrome.

Not going to try Firefox 7.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

It does and I want it to stay. But if chrome dont have it I guess firefox will copy and remove it soon.

Think what the average resolution is now days on a desktop, even on a laptop its fairly high.

Then ask yourself what is the point of trying to save the space taken up by the search bar. The address bar would get bigger and its already easily big enough.

It is not about space, it is about ease of use. If I type something into the address bar on Iron it will go to the search engine I want and search for it, so if I muck up it will search, if I put the right address in it will go to the site.


With Firefox, if I enter something into the address bar, it will not search it will add .com on the end so I get something I don't want and it also seem to search with Google even if I change the order of the search engines.

I must admit I not that fond of the address bar being below the tabs, that is one thing about Firefox you change that and now doubt even if they get rid of the search bar you will be able to get it back.

It seems browsers (and OS's windows 8 onwards) are now been primarily designed for mobile devices. Which have severe space issues on their tiny screens.

Because we are told that is the way things are going, which I suppose it is to a certain degree.

But I still prefer my desktop and got no intention of buying a tablet or another laptop either.

I reported tesco.com and other visa verification sites broken, mozilla closed bug as web site broken funny. So it works in FF3.6 IE, opera. Visa and tesco major companies used by millions and firefox wont fix.

I don't know as I stopped using Firefox for my main browser after version 3.6

In reply to a post by DavidFinbarr:

In reply to a post by 12eason:

Silent updates are being implemented in FF10.

Good to see you can opt out and you still will be able to chose the folder location.

But for how long?

In reply to a post by 5km:

Firefox 6 was unreliable, just opening a new tab caused it to crash. I gave up in the end and switched to Google Chrome.

Not going to try Firefox 7.

i found that with version 3.6, it was slow and crashed a lot, I stuck with it for a while, but got fed up so looked about for other browsers, I did not want Chrome, but fond Iron which is a chrome clone and it don't auto update, which is a good thing

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

With Firefox, if I enter something into the address bar, it will not search it will add .com on the end so I get something I don't want

That's old internet explorer behaviour. FF does not and has never done that. You may trip it up if you add a '.' or a ':' because then it treats it as a url.

Edited by deleted (Sat 08-Oct-11 12:01:52)

I have to agree with you zyborg47 .
Unfortunately its only a shadow of the earlier versions, the incredibly excessive memory usage requires fixing but it is a hard defect to rectify that is exacerbated by supercilious add ins that FF alows to be infused into its browser. FF does perform better without any add ins but it requires a lot of work to get it back in competition with Chrome or IE9.

That doesn't even make sense. It doesn't require work to remove addons, they're not installed in the first place.

Honestly, there are a lot of things FF is bad at compared to others, but some of the reasoning in this thread is just ignorant.

In reply to a post by HarrysPlusnet:

Colorful Tabs is incompatible

Works ok on my FF7!!


I uninstalled it and re-installed and it's OK now

yeah it seems fixed in 7.0.1 now. Only took them 3 versions, what were 4,5,6? all betas masqueruading as stable versions?

incidently since IE and firefox both love leaking memory I have 16 gig ram arriving tommorow, it may sound crazy but its simply to allow me to use browsers without restarting them every couple of days to flush memory.

Probably be able to run a VM machine or 2 also hopefully.

Edited by Chrysalis (Mon 10-Oct-11 17:06:55)

yes thats the fault for you thinking the address bar is for searching.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

yes thats the fault for you thinking the address bar is for searching.

It proves that chrome have gone forward and got rid of the search box, which is not needed. i thought firefox bar was suppose to be awesome.

Chrome is not perfect, but I think it got Mozilla on the run other wise they would not be putting out all the versions that they are putting out.

I'd rather have the two separate on my PC.

But on my netbook I could see the benefit of only having one

All this "Firefox crashes....uses tons of memory.....can't do this or that".

TBH - I don't agree. I've been using FF since 3.5 and allowed all the upgrades. It doesn't crash. The only times it will crash is if your installation of Windows in borked. I know this having worked in IT Support for over 5 years and seen FF installed on unstable Windows and stable Windows.

I'm running it on Win7 64 Bit and I get no memory leaks or crashes. I was previously running it on a 4 yr old PC with Win7 32 bit. Again, no issues.

It is still a cleverer browser than IE. IE, quite frankly annoys the hell out of me. Chrome isn't compatible with enough things I do. (It doesn't work with Citrix gateways very well - if you know what that is). It is more configuarable - and allows you more things that you want to do. Not what Microshaft wants you to do.

I like having a removable separate search bar. I hate sharing it in Chrome. Horses for courses though. As for a quick release schedule. Rapid Application Development - allows issues to be dealt with much faster, than IE, which moves like a slow-dinosaur.

It's the choice browser for Linux users. Or rather, the most commonly installed browser there. I don't think this browser is being 'killed' at all.

Edited by deleted (Tue 11-Oct-11 13:21:00)

I'm running 3.6 and happy with it.

All the add on I want work with it and can't remember the last time it crashed.

I find it quick enough, I'm not going to worry about an extra millisecond.

Start up time isn't an issue as I use "Sleep" so FF come on in an instant.


Not happy that they have removed the status bar in 4+ (even though there is an add on to mimic it)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

yes thats the fault for you thinking the address bar is for searching.

Maybe, but I think it makes sense to have one text box that does both. I thought that what Mozilla wanted, but it never happened
also firefox still searches using Google even if changed.

In reply to a post by DavidFinbarr:

I'd rather have the two separate on my PC.

But on my netbook I could see the benefit of only having one

Maybe i been using Iron for too long and got used to it.

In reply to a post by white43:

All this "Firefox crashes....uses tons of memory.....can't do this or that".

TBH - I don't agree. I've been using FF since 3.5 and allowed all the upgrades. It doesn't crash. The only times it will crash is if your installation of Windows in borked. I know this having worked in IT Support for over 5 years and seen FF installed on unstable Windows and stable Windows.

I'm running it on Win7 64 Bit and I get no memory leaks or crashes. I was previously running it on a 4 yr old PC with Win7 32 bit. Again, no issues.

It is still a cleverer browser than IE. IE, quite frankly annoys the hell out of me. Chrome isn't compatible with enough things I do. (It doesn't work with Citrix gateways very well - if you know what that is). It is more configuarable - and allows you more things that you want to do. Not what Microshaft wants you to do.

I like having a removable separate search bar. I hate sharing it in Chrome. Horses for courses though. As for a quick release schedule. Rapid Application Development - allows issues to be dealt with much faster, than IE, which moves like a slow-dinosaur.

It's the choice browser for Linux users. Or rather, the most commonly installed browser there. I don't think this browser is being 'killed' at all.

I was using firefox since it was called Phoenix, so that is a while back, before then i use Netscape. I have seen how Firefox have gone downhill, more so since after version 2 which was fine. Version was okish, but after 3.5 it really went downhill and got worse in 4 not better.


I think Mozilla have lost me as a user to be honest unless they speed it up, stop having compatibility problems with the extensions every time they update the browser and stop it using so much memory,

In reply to a post by DavidFinbarr:

I'd rather have the two separate on my PC.

But on my netbook I could see the benefit of only having one

indeed, I often have something typed in the search box, ready for a search and it stays there but would be lost if it was also the adress bar.

The only times it will crash is if your installation of Windows in borked.

stupid comment, that lost you credibility and I didnt read rest of your post.

there is no way you can 100% say ff has no bugs that could cause a crash.

FF9 before Christmas. What's the point!

Streuth!

Must be trying to catch up with IE numerically?

FF 226.0 is out.

What's in a name? It's actually 6.5-ish, stop worrying about the numbering system.

The only practical importance, except for corporate use, is whether or not your own set of plug-ins remains compatible, and by that measure FF 7 and 8 have been the most trouble-free browser updates ever for me.

In reply to a post by Banger:

FF 226.0 is out.

But that was yesterday. What version is out today?

In reply to a post by JPL:

What's in a name? It's actually 6.5-ish, stop worrying about the numbering system.

The only practical importance, except for corporate use, is whether or not your own set of plug-ins remains compatible, and by that measure FF 7 and 8 have been the most trouble-free browser updates ever for me.

It don't matter what number system they use, they don't improve it. i used to love Firefox,but it just got slower and slower with more and more bugs, they seem to be more bothered about what it looks like than how it works.

And so now you use ... ?

In reply to a post by JPL:

And so now you use ... ?

chrome, well Iron to be exact.

Faster and more reliable than firefox.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by JPL:

And so now you use ... ?

chrome, well Iron to be exact.

What's that got to do with Firefox?

FF6 was fine and for the past few weeks every day I have had the upgrade to FF7 nag screen appearing. Earlier today, I decided to upgrade to FF7 - I always prefer to wait for any bugs to be sorted. What do I find - I have got FF8 !

Is this the same browser that a few years ago was being proclaimed by many as being far superior to Microsofts' Internet Explorer?

How the mighty a fallen!!!

OK, that's what I would have guessed. I have Chrome on my testing PC, but it doesn't work well on my main PC because it does not handle a 120 dpi monitor properly: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=679
IE and FF (with layout.css.devPixelsPerPx set appropriately) are fine in this respect.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by JPL:

And so now you use ... ?

chrome, well Iron to be exact.

Faster and more reliable than firefox.

http://internet-browser-review.toptenreviews.com/
http://lifehacker.com/browser-speed-tests/

Just from those 2 quickly, it looks like chrome sucks.

Personally i wouldn't want Google's spyware on my system, i don't even use it's spy bar, as for ie 8 that's not a good browser how ever ie9 is, pitty they will not release a version for xp

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by JPL:

And so now you use ... ?

chrome, well Iron to be exact.

Faster and more reliable than firefox.

http://internet-browser-review.toptenreviews.com/
http://lifehacker.com/browser-speed-tests/

Just from those 2 quickly, it looks like chrome sucks.

Chrome should really be discussed in the Apple forum, seeing as Apple wrote it.

Chrome should really be discussed in the Apple forum, seeing as Apple wrote it.

??? I know Apple wrote Safari, after all it is their browser, but as Chrome is Google's browser I assumed that Google wrote it.

Are you saying that Apple wrote it for Google???
In the world of competing browsers and the associated advertising revenues, I find that difficult to believe.
I would genuinely be obliged if you could point me towards the relevant evidence.

In reply to a post by Gypsydog:

Chrome should really be discussed in the Apple forum, seeing as Apple wrote it.

??? I know Apple wrote Safari, after all it is their browser, but as Chrome is Google's browser I assumed that Google wrote it.

Are you saying that Apple wrote it for Google???
In the world of competing browsers and the associated advertising revenues, I find that difficult to believe.
I would genuinely be obliged if you could point me towards the relevant evidence.

That's right, Apple wrote it. Ask in the Apple forum.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Gypsydog:

Chrome should really be discussed in the Apple forum, seeing as Apple wrote it.

??? I know Apple wrote Safari, after all it is their browser, but as Chrome is Google's browser I assumed that Google wrote it.

Are you saying that Apple wrote it for Google???
In the world of competing browsers and the associated advertising revenues, I find that difficult to believe.
I would genuinely be obliged if you could point me towards the relevant evidence.

That's right, Apple wrote it. Ask in the Apple forum.

Ta, will look.

Edited by deleted (Sat 12-Nov-11 11:15:35)

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Gypsydog:

Chrome should really be discussed in the Apple forum, seeing as Apple wrote it.

??? I know Apple wrote Safari, after all it is their browser, but as Chrome is Google's browser I assumed that Google wrote it.

Are you saying that Apple wrote it for Google???
In the world of competing browsers and the associated advertising revenues, I find that difficult to believe.
I would genuinely be obliged if you could point me towards the relevant evidence.

That's right, Apple wrote it. Ask in the Apple forum.

According to this from Wikipedia

Chrome was assembled from 25 different code libraries from Google and third parties such as Mozilla's Netscape Portable Runtime, Network Security Services, NPAPI, as well as SQLite and a number of other open-source projects

Reference from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome

In reference to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebKit:

WebKit was originally derived by Apple Inc. from the Konqueror browser's KHTML software library for use as the engine of Safari web browser

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by JPL:

And so now you use ... ?

chrome, well Iron to be exact.

What's that got to do with Firefox?

I was asked what I use now.

In reply to a post by Gypsydog:

Is this the same browser that a few years ago was being proclaimed by many as being far superior to Microsofts' Internet Explorer?

How the mighty a fallen!!!

but it still is, which proves that IE must be awful, which it is.
I would still use firefox over IE any day.

But another browser is out that is better than Firefox,

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by Gypsydog:

Is this the same browser that a few years ago was being proclaimed by many as being far superior to Microsofts' Internet Explorer?

How the mighty a fallen!!!

but it still is, which proves that IE must be awful, which it is.
I would still use firefox over IE any day.

But another browser is out that is better than Firefox,

So discuss it in another thread, preferably in the Apple forum.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

http://internet-browser-review.toptenreviews.com/
http://lifehacker.com/browser-speed-tests/

Just from those 2 quickly, it looks like chrome sucks.

It is the start up speed of Firefox that annoyed me, It takes ages before it starts up. Iron is pretty quick.


Webpage loading on both Firefox and iron is pretty quick, but Iron don't crash as much as firefox does, also the sandbox system Iron uses is a nice idea. One tab crash, it don't affect the others.


Speed tests are to be honest a waste of time, with different speeds of computers and internet.

I also like the way the address bar works on Iron, firefox is still stuck with the extra search box.

You look at both of those results that you linked to and they don't match up

In reply to a post by tommy45:

Personally i wouldn't want Google's spyware on my system, i don't even use it's spy bar, as for ie 8 that's not a good browser how ever ie9 is, pitty they will not release a version for xp

which is why I use4 Iron and not chrome.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Gypsydog:

Chrome should really be discussed in the Apple forum, seeing as Apple wrote it.

??? I know Apple wrote Safari, after all it is their browser, but as Chrome is Google's browser I assumed that Google wrote it.

Are you saying that Apple wrote it for Google???
In the world of competing browsers and the associated advertising revenues, I find that difficult to believe.
I would genuinely be obliged if you could point me towards the relevant evidence.

That's right, Apple wrote it. Ask in the Apple forum.

I think they use something applely to produce it as if you look you can see some things that are the same as safari in the GUI.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reference to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebKit:

WebKit was originally derived by Apple Inc. from the Konqueror browser's KHTML software library for use as the engine of Safari web browser

That what I was thinking of Apple Webkit

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by tommy45:

Personally i wouldn't want Google's spyware on my system, i don't even use it's spy bar, as for ie 8 that's not a good browser how ever ie9 is, pitty they will not release a version for xp

which is why I use4 Iron and not chrome.

So it's just another Webkit wrapper, written by apple.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

which is why I use4 Iron and not chrome.

So it's just another Webkit wrapper, written by apple.


I don't care who wrote it as long as it is safe and works and that it does.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

So discuss it in another thread, preferably in the Apple forum.



You the mod now are you? I got a windows machine not a Apple machine. i would love a Apple machine but after paying out nearly a grand for a new PC build i don't think a Apple Mac will be on my list for a while.


Mozilla need to see where they are going wrong with Firefox and then fix it. I been using Firefox for years, since it was Phoenix and before that I used Netscape. so I have used it long enough to know that it is not as good as it once was.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

That's right, Apple wrote it. Ask in the Apple forum.

Huh? They've contributed heavily to it for sure, but webkit is an open source project (previously KHTML). To say its purely Apple is fairly insulting to the many other companies and individuals who have contributed their time to it.

Edited by SamsonUK (Sat 12-Nov-11 19:29:23)

Much as what I thought

In reply to a post by SamsonUK:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

That's right, Apple wrote it. Ask in the Apple forum.

Huh? They've contributed heavily to it for sure, but webkit is an open source project (previously KHTML). To say its purely Apple is fairly insulting to the many other companies and individuals who have contributed their time to it.

That may be your opinion, but my point is the discussion of Chrome is out of place in a Windows forum in a Firefox thread.

Just downloaded firefox 9 beta, not that impressed to be honest, I know it is a beta, but I don't think much will change. A couple of my add ons will not work, no surprise there.

Mozilla once again have lost the plot, shame really.

Back to Iron/chrome,

Why did you download the beta? Surely you want to run 'release' software?

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Why did you download the beta? Surely you want to run 'release' software?

I doubt firefox 9 is much different to FF8 to be honest. Still take a age to start up and add ons I like to use once again fail.

No wonder more and more people are going to chrome.
Mozilla you have certainly lost the plot.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Why did you download the beta? Surely you want to run 'release' software?

I doubt firefox 9 is much different to FF8 to be honest. Still take a age to start up and add ons I like to use once again fail.

You can't seriously expect release-level add-ons to work in a beta release.