backtop


Print 73 comment(s) - last by johnsonx.. on Apr 3 at 3:51 PM

With the release of Firefox 3 imminent, the rest of the Firefox team is cooking up some crazy ideas for Firefox 4

While Firefox 3 pushes the boundaries of a browser, delivering a cleaner graphical interface, numerous security upgrades, and a variety of new features, it still is far from the "perfect browser".  Of course no browser on the market could earn such a distinction, be it Opera's "Kestrel" 9.5 browser, which is shaping up to be very nicely, Microsoft's Internet Explorer 8, which is sure to deliver top end performance, or Apple's Safari v3.1 browser, which although plagued with bugs of late is still one of the fastest, most compatible, browsers around.

However, perfection is exactly what Mozilla wants for its Firefox 4 browser and it intends to get it through outside the box thinking.  With the release of Firefox 3 imminent, Chris Beard, VP of Labs for Mozilla, has started to talk Firefox 4.  Beard is working on many features which, while their underlying components might start to pop up in Firefox 3, won't truly see the light of day until Firefox 4.

Beard's basic push is to un-isolate the browser.  He says that after 10 years the browser still remains isolated from your browser on other machines and from your computer environment. This leads to the focal point of Mozilla's efforts for Firefox 4.  Mozilla is pushing strongly for two very different new lines of research:  Prism and Weave.

Prism is the main path of Mozilla's efforts to make the browser into almost a virtual OS, with applications, workspaces, and more advanced resource management and graphical abilities.  Mozilla says the HTML 5 and Prism will make Google Gears obsolete.  Google Gears is a beta service from the search giant which offers a way of accessing its online tools and applications, offline via clever caching and scripting.  Mozilla also claims Prism will similarly be a death knell for Microsoft Silverlight and Adobe Air, two programs similar to Google Gears, attempting to meld online and offline applications together.

Mozilla's goal is to be able to take any website or application and turn it into an application that can run directly from the desktop.  While part of the emphasis is removing the classic need to go into a browser to access these applications, another focus is to make the applications available when you are offline.  HTML 5, the upcoming next standard of the classic internet language will be updated to provide explicit support for offline/local resources, which should significantly aid Firefox 4 towards accomplishing these ends. 

While little of Prism will appear in Firefox 3, Weave will see some of its underpinnings crop up in Firefox 3.  Weave moves to expand Firefox in the opposite direction as Prism -- instead of expanding towards the desktop, this one looks to expand the internet boundaries of what Firefox can accomplish.  The key emphasis of this drive is to provide a way of syncing a user's online preference whenever they use a browser anywhere.  Among the elements of this are syncing bookmarks, home pages, favorites, and passwords.  With the increased mobility from improved internet on mobile phones, consoles, and other devices, this becomes a particularly useful goal.

Firefox 3 implements the skeleton of this, with a new transactional database for store bookmarks and favorites.  In Firefox 3 this simply allows more efficient and unique management of these items, but does not offer inter-browser syncing.  Beard hopes to have the extensions necessary to provide syncing ready to roll out for Firefox 4.  Firefox 3 will implement some information being fed into the browser when online, which should pave the way for this.  In Firefox 3, streaming updates to malware signatures will help shore up security by offering protection against new phishing and drive-by download scams.

Aside from Weave or Prism specific efforts, Beard is trying to focus on making the browser take effort off the users shoulders by helping them figure out web addresses.  Firefox 3 implements a basic version of this called the "awesome bar", the new smart web-address bar.  Most users of Firefox 3's betas should already have noticed this feature.  Beard wants to go beyond this and allow for a basic "linguistic user interface" in Firefox 4 which will allow users to type basic commands in plain English.  He cites Enso and Quicksilver as to utilities that implement functionality similar to what he hopes to offer.

Aside from these core improvements, Beard warns that there may be some other "crazy ideas" in store for Firefox 4.  With such ambitious goals, it should be interesting to see what Beard and his team can put together for 2009-2010.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

For Firefox 9
By aebiv on 3/28/2008 11:39:00 AM , Rating: 5
"...and for FF9 we are planning on having no user input as the browser will read your mind on where you want to go, and what you want to do!"




RE: For Firefox 9
By Joz on 3/28/2008 11:42:53 AM , Rating: 2
Mind reading is already a reality in computer technology.

I think it was OCZ that was realeasing a mind-controled mouse.

--------------

Windows 8, now with Firefox (couse we bought out mozzila after they kicked IE's butt with their mind-reading FF9)


RE: For Firefox 9
By zshift on 3/28/2008 2:12:20 PM , Rating: 2
ocz's devices doesnt read your mind. it mostly works by detecting faint muscle movements throughout your face, and detects alpha and beta waves (i think) to determine a customized action, though detecting of alpha and beta waves is still bery primitive which is why it depends so heavily on muscle detection.


RE: For Firefox 9
By JasonMick (blog) on 3/28/2008 11:50:02 AM , Rating: 5
You totally missed the important part--

Firefox 9 will read your mind and grant your every wish, including making the Firefox girl appear to enhance your "browsing experience". ;)


RE: For Firefox 9
By Omega215D on 3/28/2008 2:14:57 PM , Rating: 1
Ooh... interactive hologram.


RE: For Firefox 9
By Bonesdad on 3/29/2008 12:10:42 AM , Rating: 5
"Please state the nature of the sexual emergency..."


RE: For Firefox 9
By Tsuwamono on 3/29/2008 2:07:49 AM , Rating: 2
lmao i was just about to post that. Nice job.


RE: For Firefox 9
By idconstruct on 3/30/2008 6:57:28 PM , Rating: 2
+1


RE: For Firefox 9
By DeepBlue1975 on 3/28/2008 2:17:51 PM , Rating: 5
And I thought, by just looking at the picture, that the girl is already an "enhanced version" of herself.

Her face suggests that she only needs some of her "expansion slots" filled in with "important extensions".


RE: For Firefox 9
By bodar on 3/28/2008 3:02:35 PM , Rating: 5
Well, if you plan on uploading your data into her SCSI drive, make sure you are using a malware solution.


RE: For Firefox 9
By RyuDeshi on 3/28/2008 11:11:30 PM , Rating: 2
I lol'd =]


RE: For Firefox 9
By DeltaZero on 4/3/2008 4:29:56 AM , Rating: 2
On one hand the Firefox girl already made reading this article worthwhile. On the other, she's making reading the article very very difficult :(

Screw you Microsoft, we'll build our own browser... with hooters , and browsing experience!
In fact, forget about the browsing experience... :)


RE: For Firefox 9
By daftrok on 3/28/2008 11:59:18 AM , Rating: 2
All I want is for the memory usage to go down and stop the leaks. Firefox 3 Beta 4 is definitely in the right direction (it takes 30% less memory than Firefox 2 for me) but its still up there (around 70MB usage when on 2 or three sites). Maybe the final release will be even less. Here's hoping!


RE: For Firefox 9
By Christopher1 on 3/28/2008 12:37:15 PM , Rating: 2
There aren't any leaks in Firefox 3 as far as I can see.... what you need to do is look at the webpages you are opening to see "Okay, how many pictures is it opening? How much memory do those take to keep in memory?"

Once you do that, you will see that there are no memory leaks.... it's a question that pages are getting more and more 'graphics heavy'.


RE: For Firefox 9
By tastyratz on 3/28/2008 12:56:15 PM , Rating: 1
open those same pages in I.E. and see how much memory it takes up.
Should be similar or more.
Firefox did a good job plugging the holes in v3b4 and it shows.
My firefox sessions could be 400 megs at times so I'm seeing a 30-40% reduction in memory usage at times.... and no huge creep in ram over long sessions.
In ff2 I used to kill my session and open ff again to "restore session" to find Its 200mb shy of what it was.


RE: For Firefox 9
By daftrok on 3/28/2008 1:10:52 PM , Rating: 2
On average my sessions on Mozilla are around 70mb (comparing to excess of 100 mb) whereas my Internet Explorer 6 takes around 40 mb, which is sad because Firefox is blocking all those flash animation adds and whatnot. I noticed that fluctuations have ceased but memory usage is still high.


RE: For Firefox 9
By Zurtex on 3/28/2008 1:51:13 PM , Rating: 2
IE6 cheats a little by using other windows services. IE7 is a better comparison because it's truly just using its own process as the memory is uses.


RE: For Firefox 9
By Zurtex on 3/28/2008 1:54:08 PM , Rating: 3
This is a point, images in their raw format take up a fair bit of memory.

There are memory leaks:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40233...
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42247...

But there is no massive leaks anywhere, this is how Fx3 has really improved its memory usage:

http://blog.pavlov.net/2008/03/11/firefox-3-memory...


RE: For Firefox 9
By MAIA on 3/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: For Firefox 9
By Oroka on 3/28/2008 2:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
"...and for FF10, Firefox will tell YOU where you want to go, and what YOU want to do!"


RE: For Firefox 9
By Darkskypoet on 3/28/2008 9:10:39 PM , Rating: 2
In Russia Browser Controls YOU!


RE: For Firefox 9
By Kermit on 4/1/2008 5:20:25 AM , Rating: 2
In Russia, you give browser cookies!


How did you get past the first picture?
By drew494949 on 3/28/08, Rating: 0
RE: How did you get past the first picture?
By baseball43v3r on 3/28/2008 12:54:52 PM , Rating: 5
now if only your girlfriend were real...


RE: How did you get past the first picture?
By MAIA on 3/28/2008 1:01:17 PM , Rating: 3
Now, don't tell me you've been "cheesing" ...


By therealnickdanger on 3/28/2008 2:01:43 PM , Rating: 4
I'm cheesing my effing balls off.


RE: How did you get past the first picture?
By MattCoz on 3/28/2008 1:50:56 PM , Rating: 1
Because it's at the top of every Firefox article, we're used to it, and we know it's fake(as they surely are as well).


RE: How did you get past the first picture?
By AmishElvis on 3/28/2008 3:04:31 PM , Rating: 4
Firefox Girl is named Francesca Lee. Her website is: www.francescasportfolio.com/portfolio.html

It is NOT to be viewed by the under 18s, and is NOT SAFE for work.


By DeltaZero on 4/3/2008 4:43:58 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks dude! Are you sure?


By johnsonx on 4/3/2008 3:51:59 PM , Rating: 2
really doesn't look like the same chick. VERY nice to look at, but I don't think that's the firefox girl.


MS's worst Fear
By akugami on 3/28/2008 12:32:10 PM , Rating: 1
This is what Microsoft feared from Google. This is why MS bought out a tiny web browser maker and turned it into Internet Explorer. This is why Microsoft is always making its own "standards" in direct defiance to the status quo.

So much of our computer experience is now through a web browser and with the so called "web 2.0" and I presume what some will be calling "web 3.0" where web browsers get more and more sophisticated and handle more and more of the duties of a traditional OS that Microsoft fears the browser will completely bypass Windows OS and thus kill of MS's main cash cow. I don't see any web browser or any web services being anywhere near mature enough to even attempt this but I do see the seeds being planted to displace Windows, Vista and whatever OS is next in line in MS's roadmap.




RE: MS's worst Fear
By MAIA on 3/28/2008 1:08:41 PM , Rating: 2
You're probably right about some stuff but, any browser still and will need an OS to run. Perferably free ... probably it starts with a "L" and ends with a "X" and it's not Lindox ...


RE: MS's worst Fear
By mcturkey on 3/28/2008 2:21:44 PM , Rating: 2
Ah, when the browser reaches the point where it becomes your only interaction point with the computer, and all apps/functions are run through it, you don't need an OS anymore. At that point, the basic OS functionality that is needed by Firefox XXVII will come built into the 300GB download.


RE: MS's worst Fear
By Darkskypoet on 3/28/2008 9:21:43 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Ah, when the browser reaches the point where it becomes your only interaction point with the computer, and all apps/functions are run through it, you don't need an OS anymore.


Actually.. You then have whats called a shell... You do realize Windows has been doing so for quite some time (for better or worse). On an IE6 machine, run explorer.exe, and type a web address in.. Boom. Shell that renders HTML (etc)...

It's not Basic OS functionality at all. It's surface shell functionality. Shell != OS. Much like xwindows != linux kernel, Quartz (might be wrong here) != Mac OS X. Get it?

I must say, aside from the nasty underlashings that made IE6 a craptacular security issue, I did appreciate the ability to pop between local, WAN, and LAN resources within a single shell.. did I like just how tied into everything that exposed shell was? No. But did I like that it didn't matter what, or where I was browsing, I could do it all rather well with one app? Yes.

Did I HATE and CURSE, and want to Kill Bill every time explorer would tie up and hold the rest of the system at its mercy when it took 5 minutes to time out while browsing an injured network share? YES.

So room to grow, and fix things... But Fire Fox as a Windows Shell... That's where they are going... further, Fire Fox as a multi-platform shell... That's where they want to be. A common interface regardless of the innards... That has legs.


RE: MS's worst Fear
By mikefarinha on 3/28/2008 3:12:30 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
This is what Microsoft feared from Google. This is why MS bought out a tiny web browser maker and turned it into Internet Explorer. This is why Microsoft is always making its own "standards" in direct defiance to the status quo.


First off, Google was founded in 1998. IE was first included with Win95 in 1995. Thus MS didn't buy IE to compete with Google.

Secondly, MS was making it's own standards to compete with Netscape's own standards... because there were not official standards until the newly formed W3C proposed them in 1997. By that time the web had exploded and everyone had their own "This site best viewed with..." graphic.

Yes, shame on MS for not getting with the program and making IE7 sooner, however their failings doesn't make it ok to distort reality.

OTOH if MS hadn't dropped the ball me might not have seen Firefox emerge as strong as it has. Which is what I use daily. :-)


RE: MS's worst Fear
By akugami on 3/31/2008 10:16:27 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry but I kinda threw the post up there without thinking things through. I'm not writing a research paper after all. Yes, you are correct in that MS was competing with Netscape but even then I think MS saw a glimmer of what is happening now, at least as far as what Google is doing with the "Web 2.0" stuff.

For better or for worse, MS has some pretty darned smart people and I think they envisioned some of this to come. They did not want to lose control of what they had so they released a web browser.

And I'm not a rabid anti MS guy, maybe that's why I got voted down. I do use Firefox for most of my browsing but I use Vista on my main computer (paid the $400 Vista Ultimate tax, it's legit).

I still stand by my view that MS foresaw some of this years ago regardless of who they were competing with at the time on the browser wars and that some of the stuff is coming true now.


uh?
By fic2 on 3/28/2008 11:56:26 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
the browser still remains isolated from your browser


I don't see how the browser could remain isolated from the browser.




RE: uh?
By SlipDizzy on 3/28/2008 12:15:08 PM , Rating: 2
You, the human behind the keyboard, are a browser. You are browsing the internet, so you are a browser. To browse the web, you use a program labeled as a browser.

I'm guessing they are stating that the person and the program are isolated from each other. Perhaps they want to make us merge with each other for a super browsing experience.

Thats what I got out of it...


RE: uh?
By MAIA on 3/28/2008 12:58:44 PM , Rating: 2
Yeap your right about this one. But this begs a question: Who's the real browser ? The browser or the ... browser ?


RE: uh?
By MattCoz on 3/28/2008 1:48:18 PM , Rating: 2
Try reading the rest of the sentence.

quote:
the browser still remains isolated from your browser on other machines


RE: uh?
By Alexstarfire on 3/28/2008 3:05:35 PM , Rating: 2
Personally, I don't care as I don't bookmark most pages on my computer. I'm not too lazy to type in 3 words or less to go to a site. In fact, I'd venture I type the URL faster than I could go click it with my mouse.

Anyways, I was more worried about the " and from your computer environment. " part. IE6 and previous versions were/are all integrated into the OS, and we know how much trouble they caused. I prefer Firefox to remain its own separate process and stay away from integrating with the OS. Might have some benefits, but if it turns out like IE did then it's just going to be a big mess of a problem.


RE: uh?
By HeelyJoe on 3/28/2008 4:50:37 PM , Rating: 3
You do know that bookmarks were not created to speed up browsing, right?

Have you ever used a bookmark in a real book? Did you notice that its function is to save your place, not to make reading the book go faster?


RE: uh?
By Alexstarfire on 3/28/2008 5:05:44 PM , Rating: 1
Huh? Wouldn't being able to find out where you were make you finish the book quicker? Also, it can't be about saving your place if you can already look at your "history" on the internet. And then we have the "Restore Previous Settings" if the program crashes or your computer cuts off. What would be the point if it's not to speed up browsing?

I guess you could say it's a way to selectively "save your place" without saving EVERY place.


Tiling
By Martimus on 3/28/2008 11:59:30 AM , Rating: 3
I just hope they add a tiling feature for the tabs soon. Otherwise I don't see a point for tabbed browsing versus using seperate windows. I've been wanting to use tiled tabs for a long time and neither IE or Firefox seems to have that capability.




RE: Tiling
By MAIA on 3/28/2008 1:18:37 PM , Rating: 2
How would you call it .... hmmmmm ..... stabbed browsing ?


RE: Tiling
By Zurtex on 3/28/2008 1:59:31 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Tiling
By neon on 3/29/2008 12:01:08 PM , Rating: 2
Try Tab Mix Plus:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/112...

After install, go to Tools -> Tab Mix Plus Options -> Display -> Tab Bar

Then in the "When tabs don't fit width:" select box, choose "Multi-row"


RE: Tiling
By Martimus on 3/29/2008 8:17:35 PM , Rating: 2
No, I am looking for the ability to tile the windows of the tabs, either horizontally of vertically. Similar to if you right click on the task bar and click "tile windows horizontally" or "tile windows vertically". Thanks for trying to help though.


RE: Tiling
By neon on 3/30/2008 1:40:36 AM , Rating: 2
Oops, sorry. Zurtex's links to Showcase and Taboo look more suitable.


Competition!
By stirfry213 on 3/28/2008 11:44:44 AM , Rating: 4
I couldn't be happier that there is a product that can compete with Internet Explorer. I hope they continue to push the envelope of what browsers are capable of, making them all better.




RE: Competition!
By wordsworm on 3/28/2008 11:53:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I couldn't be happier that there is a product that can compete with Internet Explorer.


IE7 is definitely an upgrade from IE5-6. But... until Firefox does something that turns me off in a similar fashion to what IE did, then I'd have to say that I'm glad IE is getting better, and Safari has come out, to continually push Firefox to further heights.

btw, one of the best articles I've read at DT for a long time. Good job Jason. These are indeed exciting days ahead for the Internet.


RE: Competition!
By MAIA on 3/28/2008 1:04:28 PM , Rating: 2
After watching the FF girl, i sure know what turns me on about browsers... and Internet Explorer can't compete with that.


RE: Competition!
By DigitalFreak on 3/28/2008 1:24:04 PM , Rating: 2
I think they were trying to find an article they could link to for every word in this one...


"death knell for Microsoft Silverlight"
By dever on 3/28/2008 1:46:22 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
...death knell for Microsoft Silverlight
This seems to be a complete misrepresentation of the core goals of Silverlight. I believe it to be primarily a competitor to Flash, and adding offline capabilities to Firefox should not interfere with that goal at all.




RE: "death knell for Microsoft Silverlight"
By MattCoz on 3/28/2008 2:05:00 PM , Rating: 2
Right, Silverlight was designed as a Flash competitor. They plan to eventually bring offline capabilities to it so that it can compete with AIR and Prism, but that is certainly not its main purpose.


By mikefarinha on 3/28/2008 2:54:56 PM , Rating: 4
I agree with you two... I don't know what this guy is talking about.

Part of the big excitement around Silverlight is the .net platform support behind it. Firefox, as great as it is, has no chance, nor reason, to declare itself a competitor to Silverlight.


One thing that I'd like to see
By phatboye on 3/28/2008 2:05:22 PM , Rating: 2
And I know this has already been talked about before (and may already be in the works) but I'd like to bring it up again, I'd like to see Mozilla Corp and the OpenOffice team collaborate together and make a bundled package which includes OO.o thunderbird, and FF to compete against MS office, outlook and IE. If both teams could come together and work on making and the ultimate office/internet/productivity suite maybe adoption of these products would increase a lot.




RE: One thing that I'd like to see
By phatboye on 3/28/2008 2:49:07 PM , Rating: 2
forgot to mention sunbird


Wooweee
By Operator911 on 4/3/2008 12:06:24 AM , Rating: 4
boy that girl in the picture shur does hav a purty mouth 8^)




To FF girl...
By LatinMessiah on 3/28/2008 2:58:00 PM , Rating: 2
Nice cookies!




By Odeen on 3/28/2008 8:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
Um... it's either "shaping up to be very nice" (adjective "nice" modifying a pronoun "it.") or "shaping up very nicely" (adverb "nicely" modifying the verb "shaping").

Usually, people make this mistake the other way around - using adjectives when adverbs are called for (i.e. "I'm doing good" instead of "I'm doing well.") - this is the first time I see an adverb used when it's not called for :)




By krwhite on 3/29/2008 10:50:37 AM , Rating: 2
Regarding Prism:

This is providing a framework for any web code to run on. It's not replacing Flash or Silverlight. It will create MORE Flash and Silverlight apps, as well as AJAX apps. This is due to their exposure scaling from the added 'make desktop app' feature.

It's a desktop-application container for the web. Not that that's not cool, I would just like to educate some people as to it's actual purpose as I see it.

Wouldn't you guys get upset when you hear someone say 'This new car is going to KILL the driver!'? ..

Google Photoshop Express beta. There's your web application, and it's all written in Flash. Try doing that in javascript, baby!

Can we please stop the mindless attacks @ Adobe & MS?




How about less integration?
By drwho9437 on 3/29/2008 1:03:16 PM , Rating: 2
Software seems to be like government, it just gets large and larger and more and more 'features' that few people need or want, and thus gets slow.

Specialized applications are easier to maintain because of their modularity. Extensions is a good idea in firefox. Every feature noted above ought to be an extension and not in the core browser.

Call be crazy but I don't want one software item. I use things like foobar2000 for music for instance. Where is that in the browser market? Firefox 1 was almost like that after Netscape and Mozilla suite but it is quickly moving away from it.




Kewl
By snownpaint on 3/31/2008 3:53:07 PM , Rating: 2
But I just clicked on the article because of the picture.

I still want better features: show new info updates to web pages/things I'm interested in (more then RSS) , show replies to all the blogs i give my 2-cents to, customizable home page layouts (composed of multiple different web pages, organized to my interests)
And of course pushed up bra picts on all links to draw my one track mind to new news..




WHat was this article about?
By eldakka on 4/2/2008 10:53:32 PM , Rating: 2
Could someone please summarise the article, I got distracted by the boobies...




hmmm
By coderman on 3/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: hmmm
By coderman on 3/28/08, Rating: -1
RE: hmmm
By Etsp on 3/29/2008 9:21:14 AM , Rating: 2
That may be a result of the fact that what they show is merely the default theme, which can be changed at the users will to make firefox look completely different. This means that your purely subjective view that firefox has a "kiddy" feel to it is a non-issue. It can easily be made to look like IE if it was really necessary.

I agree that the name "Firefox" does not automatically imply to some new to the internet that it is a web browser, however there are other examples of equally misleading names. Such as "Adobe Acrobat" or "Microsoft Outlook" or the oxymoron "Microsoft Works" (too often confused with Microsoft Word)

As far as useful extensions (that you asked about in another post) I really appreciate NoScript, as it goes farther than most anything else to get rid of adds and popups (and by default block any third party protocols that might have a security bug, such as Flash or Adobe Acrobat, enhancing the already more secure browser). Its only real drawback is the fact that most end users couldn't figure out how to use it. I'm sure others will post their favorite extensions as well.


RE: hmmm
By theslug on 3/28/2008 4:14:55 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm suit yourself, but I like Firefox because of the myriad of extensions I can get for it. IE doesn't have that.


RE: hmmm
By coderman on 3/28/2008 5:48:58 PM , Rating: 1
What extiontions do you actually use that are useful? I'd love to know actually.


RE: hmmm
By Shida on 3/29/2008 5:22:34 PM , Rating: 2
For me it's the following extensions that were available prior to IE ever applying them to their browser.

Sage-For reading RSS feeds.
Showcase-For easy navigation among many tabs I use
Forcastfox-Because I commute to work and need to know the whether instantly.
Flashblock-Because I don't need to see "Win a prize" ads
Noscript-Because I feel like surfing a little lighter and not have my bandwidth chewed up with unnecessary clutter from websites.
IETab-When I have to use IE rendering but don't want to click the IE icon (because I'm lazy that way).
PDF download-whenever I feel like bypassing the load and have the file directly downloaded to my desktop and read it later and not have to go wait until it loads on the browser.
Mailthis!-when I see something interesting, like this article, I can just with one click send this page link to my friends.
Speeddail-so I can go to the sites that I use frequently instantly without having to go to the address bar or bookmark menu all the time

Yep that would pretty much be it I mean I'm a very lazy user and these extensions guarantee me a cushy experience when surfing and have purpose. IE on the other hand....it's like the assmaster 3000: too much work to surf with.

oh and one more thing, with all due respect, and I mind you I am not going to say that Firefox is the best because there is no real "best" browser out there (I admit that there are some flaws with firefox) but dude chill out. No need to bash people around.


RE: hmmm
By theslug on 3/29/2008 11:19:30 PM , Rating: 2
In addition to a few that you mentioned, I also have adblock plus, add bookmark here, download statusbar, download helper, duplicate tab, fasterfox, imagezoom, nuke anything enhanced, remove it permanently, and tabbrowser preferences.

And it's not like I just installed them once and never use them. I actually use these on a consistent basis.


RE: hmmm
By Necaradan666 on 4/1/2008 5:26:11 AM , Rating: 2
I don't personally see anything that would be of use to me in those lists above. Some of the features that I would use are simply a part of IE7.
I don't like having to search the net and try out extensions just to get my browser running the way I want basically IE7 provides all I have needed in browsing so far.

I also find Firefox much less secure than IE7, recently I started visiting a site to watch tv shows. The site required me to use Firefox to run the videos properly but I got constant pop-under ads and I suffered from spyware for the first time in years.
I didn't see any at all when I was viewing the same site from IE7. I installed a few adblocker extensions to try get rid of these pop-unders but I still couldn't stop ads that didn't show at all in IE7.
I just don't think anything in Firefox is worth the trouble of switching my browsing habits atm or from the looks of it when Firefox 4 comes around either.


"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki