Print 44 comment(s) - last by Kamasutra.. on Oct 28 at 12:05 PM

RC3 is offically free of showstoppers

The first major update to the Firefox is slated to release tomorrow, as version 2.0 reaches final state. In actuality, the final release of Firefox 2.0 will be no different from the RC3 version released a week ago. 

The version released a week ago came with the statement from Mozilla VP Mike Schroepfer that "If there are no showstoppers, RC3 will be [the final version]." And apparently, there were no showstoppers, so Firefox 2.0 is officially complete.

With Microsoft's timely release of Internet Explorer 7, the comparisons between the two browsers are inevitable. Laptop Magazine gives a slight nod to IE7, though many users may choose to hold off after a Secunia security report of an IE7 vulnerability that may allow a website to access documents served from another web site and with it all the data the user entered.

The Washington Post reported on Microsoft's response to the security flaw, which doesn't solve anything other than shifting blame to Outlook Express. Still, the author recommended IE7 on the basis of all the security improvements it brings to Windows XP as a whole.

While Internet Explorer 7 will easily be embraced by all users and corporations familiar with version 6, Firefox is rapidly gaining ground in the business world. According to a survey conducted by JupiterResearch, 44 percent of businesses with 250 employees or more allow their workers to use Firefox, which is a considerable increase over the 26 percent from last year.

"That's a huge jump," said JupiterResearch's Joe Wilcox. "It's an enormous embrace of Firefox in a very short period of time."

Comments     Threshold

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

Take that IE
By encryptkeeper on 10/23/06, Rating: 0
RE: Take that IE
By Goty on 10/23/2006 3:54:07 PM , Rating: 1
It's not all rosy on the Firefox side either. This version seems to have a few problems with the flash plugin creating intermittent crashes.

RE: Take that IE
By stmok on 10/23/2006 4:34:50 PM , Rating: 2
Got a link to the site that's causing this crash?

RE: Take that IE
By Goty on 10/23/2006 6:21:38 PM , Rating: 1
Just look for any particular website with flash-based ads. It'll happen eventually.

RE: Take that IE
By theslug on 10/23/2006 7:30:30 PM , Rating: 1
I have version but have not seen this happen.

RE: Take that IE
By Christopher1 on 10/24/2006 12:50:59 AM , Rating: 2
If you are getting that "Flash has unexpectly tried to execute an illegal function" message or something similar to that, get Spybot or Ad-Aware and the latest defintions and search for spyware.

I was getting that message as well and found out that somehow I had Zlob virus on my machine and that was what was causing the problem. Removed it.... no more problems since then, and I surf HUNDREDS of sites everyday.

RE: Take that IE
By blwest on 10/24/2006 9:25:33 AM , Rating: 1
Quit watching anime pr0n...

RE: Take that IE
By RandomFool on 10/23/2006 4:26:22 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing is perfect especially when related software.

RE: Take that IE
By FITCamaro on 10/23/2006 4:51:30 PM , Rating: 5
But everyone assumes Microsoft products are complete crap and anyone else's are loads better because they're not Microsoft's. I love Firefox don't get me wrong, but IE7 is also very nice and offers many improvements.

As another said, nothing is ever perfect in software. Just because bugs haven't been found, doesn't mean they don't exist. You figure for every thousand people hammering Microsoft's products with attacks, theres maybe 10 going after the other guys at most.

RE: Take that IE
By umerok on 10/23/2006 5:09:10 PM , Rating: 3
Indeed. I have been using FF exclusively for a while now, but after trying IE7 and seeing the new interface and all it's improvements, I must say that I am slightly torn between the two. Couple that with my recent installation of Opera because of all the discussion of it being on the Wii and it results in an epic battle for default browser!

RE: Take that IE
By mindless1 on 10/23/2006 5:57:12 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe, but another angle might be that we assume that MS is a much bigger target for exploitERS, and therefore, MUCH more likely to be exploited. IE will have to be more hypothetically secure than Firefox to have the same realized security for users.

RE: Take that IE
By imaheadcase on 10/23/2006 6:52:00 PM , Rating: 2
Lots still have to use IE to view embedded video. I know since firefox started 1.5 phase I could never get CNN video to work regardless of the so called fixes.

RE: Take that IE
By Christopher1 on 10/24/2006 6:16:06 PM , Rating: 2
Sometimes some sites blacklist certain browser applications because of site video ripping. I know that one site I go to has started doing that, where it asks you browser if X extension is installed. If it is, the site won't come up.

RE: Take that IE
By Drexial on 10/24/2006 2:03:37 AM , Rating: 2
it's true that the only reason IE7 has problems is that more people are looking for them then in FF. but thats also a bonus, because more people are looking to exploit the problem in IE7 than FF. i would comment on my opinion between IE7 and FF2. but since IE7 wont let my enter any addresses then i guess i cant very well comment on it. however the spell check and recovery features are useful. its nice to be able to turn off my computer then boot it back up with the sites that i left there. as far as memory leaks... i have 2gigs of memory so i don't think ill be running into any issues with it.

RE: Take that IE
By Drexial on 10/24/2006 2:09:03 AM , Rating: 2
figure i should add that currently with the same tabs opened in dailytech (all of todays accept the hardware review)

IE7 - 111,424K
FireFox - 69,556K

Was it fixed?????????
By Marlin1975 on 10/23/2006 4:12:16 PM , Rating: 2
Does the final FF still have a problem with using a pile of memory? I tried it, before 2.0, and did not like that it used up a lot of memory.
Also have not tried ie7 either.

RE: Was it fixed?????????
By smitty3268 on 10/23/2006 4:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
It uses less memory than IE7, but more than Opera. At least before any memory leaks come into play.

RE: Was it fixed?????????
By inthell on 10/23/2006 4:30:02 PM , Rating: 2
i dont have an issue, in fact IE6 uses more ram then FF2 on my machine.

RE: Was it fixed?????????
By stmok on 10/23/2006 4:33:19 PM , Rating: 2
You have to try it out.

It uses slightly less RAM, feels a bit more faster. (Just a slight, not a major one). Uses up to 80MB for me when I open 20 tabbed windows.

Works with AdBlock Plus and NoScript.
(Spell checker thingy is working as I type this post.)

RE: Was it fixed?????????
By TomZ on 10/23/2006 5:22:54 PM , Rating: 5
Just download and try for yourself. There are too many browser zealots here that you can't really trust someone else's reports here, IMO.

I mean, really, who cares which browser wins the browser wars?!?

RE: Was it fixed?????????
By Hare on 10/23/2006 5:28:40 PM , Rating: 2
FF uses plenty of RAM for cache (previous pages, tabs etc). That means that it's smoother to use and rarely hits the HD cache. If there's very little free memory FF won't take as much as it otherwise would. You can even tweak it yourself if for some reason you have a problem with used RAM. I personally don't understand people that buy RAM and then critisize if a program actually uses it for some good.

For more information visit Mozilla-website. There's plenty of documentation about memory usage.

RE: Was it fixed?????????
By bunnyfubbles on 10/23/2006 5:37:21 PM , Rating: 2
I personally don't understand people that buy RAM and then critisize if a program actually uses it for some good.

I completely agree. Even when supposed "leaks" come into play. I've never really had any problem with any memory leaks with FF, and even when memory use was over 100MB it doesn't really matter to me with either of my machines with their 2GB or even 1GB of ram. And when I actually run programs that really lay into ram usage, I'm not exactly going to be browsing at the time - of which there are extensions for saving sessions...

RE: Was it fixed?????????
By TomZ on 10/23/2006 7:45:27 PM , Rating: 2
During late beta of this version, I was able to observe FF taking 600-800MBs of RAM - this is an order of magnitude that is worth complaining about, IMO. I haven't tried the final version yet, however.

Not too shabby...
By RandomFool on 10/23/2006 3:48:37 PM , Rating: 3
I just installed from the ftp above and it's not to shabby. The UI improvements are nice and I'm digging the spell checker. I'm still not sure it deserves the 2.0 name but it's nice.

RE: Not too shabby...
By stmok on 10/23/2006 4:36:31 PM , Rating: 2
I'm thinking "ver 1.6"

RE: Not too shabby...
By Lazarus Dark on 10/23/2006 4:47:39 PM , Rating: 2
have to agree. just dl'd it and- hehe i can see the spellchecker hates my shorthand- and its not much different. a couple of my extensions don't work like tab-x cuz they are now unnecessary but my blackjapan theme doesn't work! ach! I hate gray themes! hope they update blackjapan soon, its a popular theme.

who decided it warranted 2.0 status? should be 1.6 there's really not much changes.

hehe maybe next they should integrate an automatic grammar correction.

RE: Not too shabby...
By Kamasutra on 10/28/2006 12:05:08 PM , Rating: 2
Would Places have changed your mind? Because Mozilla made the decision to version it as 2.0 before Places was removed and it would have been pretty dumb to change it back after having announced what the next version would be and even having an official alpha released. I personally think the new features still warrant the version. Look through and see if you change your mind. Then again it's just a damn number, and irrelevant to the experience the browser can provide.

RE: Not too shabby...
By Spivonious on 10/24/2006 9:56:49 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. The interface is 99% the same, and the only new feature I've come across in general use is the spell checker.

Auto update?
By pyrosity on 10/23/2006 2:54:15 PM , Rating: 3
I am wondering if they're going to have this automatically download--or at least have a kind of notification that alerts 1.5 users of the new version.

I have not tried 2.0, but it sounds like it adds some fair features. FF > IE 7.0 due to extensions, in my opinion.

RE: Auto update?
By reactor on 10/23/2006 2:56:18 PM , Rating: 5
I would think it would inform you of the update within a few days. You can download yourself though...

RE: Auto update?
By FightingChance on 10/23/06, Rating: 0
RE: Auto update?
By ceefka on 10/23/2006 3:05:18 PM , Rating: 2
For some it takes a little longer because of availability in their native language. The Dutch version isn't out yet. In the mean time I've been noodling around with IE7 and I must say it's a big step forward. The look and feel is excellent.

By inthell on 10/23/2006 3:32:10 PM , Rating: 3
here is a good 2.0 theme

and use small icons so its more compact :)

RE: theme
By rkninc on 10/23/2006 7:13:56 PM , Rating: 2
Your right it is nice. Can you tell me if i can download this on any particular site or straight from the Mozilla organization?

RE: theme
By inthell on 10/24/2006 5:28:12 PM , Rating: 2
Hello good friend lol j/k. what you gotta do is download the .jar file using the link above then drag and drop the .jar file into the FF "add on" window.

the download link is not English but should be able to figure it out :)

RE: theme
By inthell on 10/24/2006 5:29:58 PM , Rating: 2
and checkout the Phoenity and Azerty themes too they're good ones too. right now im using Phoenity theme.

Should I care?
By Mojo the Monkey on 10/23/2006 3:58:58 PM , Rating: 2
Should I care? I mean, is there any real difference here? or are we talking about 1-3% better support for certain RSS feeds and a spellchecker.

I'm cranky and restless, give me something interesting, damnit!

RE: Should I care?
By stmok on 10/23/2006 4:35:41 PM , Rating: 2
Find a hot nympho and get laid.

RE: Should I care?
By Goty on 10/23/2006 7:31:33 PM , Rating: 2
Find a hot nympho and get laid.

Oooh, way to go above and beyond there. Interesting and fun!

By SprintSlash on 10/23/2006 8:27:01 PM , Rating: 2
You can switch tabs by using CTRL-UP and CTRL-DOWN. However, they don't work after you click in an input box (single line)...

Is it just me or is this a new Firefox 2 bug / 'feature'?

RE: Bug?
By Spivonious on 10/24/2006 9:55:51 AM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't call it a bug. There are probably cases where you wouldn't want to switch tabs while typing in a text box, so they had the text box swallow the keypress event.

By epsilonparadox on 10/23/2006 3:08:01 PM , Rating: 2
Its actually available for download on the firefox ftp site:

RE: Availability
By epsilonparadox on 10/23/2006 3:09:36 PM , Rating: 1
oh darn...maybe i should read previous posts b4 posting myself. I apologize for the dupe post.

2.0 - 1.6 would be better.
By rkninc on 10/23/2006 7:11:57 PM , Rating: 2
The improvements are really pretty good, but I think to be called 2.0 it needs a couple more.

"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner
Related Articles
Internet Explorer 7.0 Final Released
October 18, 2006, 9:48 PM
Mozilla Releases Firefox 2.0 RC3
October 17, 2006, 9:33 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki