Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th (Read 26254 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #50 –
I'll try with installing php on my machine

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #51 –
does not work

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #52 –
One thing that has always "troubled" me: Why in the world does Mozilla ask for permission to act as a server? I don't see any reason for that.

Benjamin: The PHP installation doesn't have anything to do with the browser (= the client), it depends entirely on the server configuration. (Let's discuss that via email/ICQ, it doesn't really belong here .)

CU

Dominic

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #53 –
Quote
Originally posted by YinYang
Can anybody give me an evaluation on Mozilla 1.x vs. Opera 6.x? 

I would like to know what I'm missing by using Opera.


At a core level:

- Opera has lackluster and buggy Javascript support in some areas (very poor to no regular expression support for one).
- Opera has almost no DOM support except for a few small items (enough to make some popup menu's work).
- Because of the first two items, DHTML support is largely non-existant.
- Opera doesn't render as quickly as Mozilla.

These two are related really.  CSS in Opera isn't quite as advanced as Mozilla either.  I can't recall specific properties that aren't supported in Opera than are in Mozilla at the moment, but I have come across a few in some of my recent web-design experiments.

Opera renders slower than Mozilla in many cases (so much for the fastest browser on earth part ).  This is especially so when the page is table heavy -- try loading HA in both as a comparison.  Opera also has the tendency to not display parts of the page "on the fly" like Mozilla, which further plays into this effect of showing up slowly.

Another area which may be worth mentioning is SVG support.  While the standard distributions of Mozilla 1.0 don't include SVG either (support exists, you just have to get a special version), I suspect Mozilla 1.1, which should come out some time in the fall I believe, will have this included out of the box.  Opera on the other hand, I seriously doubt is going to have native support for SVG.  This kind of falls under the standards compliance areas.... Opera isn't as up to date as Mozilla, and I suspect things are going to continue to get worse.  Keeping a browser up to date with all of the specs (and implementing them properly), is quite a monumental task.

Quick Summarization:

Opera is slower (in rendering, I'm not talking about efficiency in loading up, memory footprint, or any of that) and less standard compliant than Mozilla.  It's not free either  (no, bannerware doesn't count ).

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #54 –
Quote
Originally posted by Coolin
Should I enable pipelining as well?


I believe it's enabled by default, but if it's not, then enable it.

I'm likeing this newest RC of Mozilla. Can't wait till v1.

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #55 –
Quote
Originally posted by Dibrom
.....
Opera is slower (in rendering, I'm not talking about efficiency in loading up, memory footprint, or any of that) and less standard compliant than Mozilla.  It's not free either  (no, bannerware doesn't count ).


Ask in Opera, answer in Mozilla

In short, you persuaded me to try it. (Mainly because of the opensource-idea and because Opera doesn't display certain websites properly. Fortunately M. does).

End-user first impression. Not too many diffferences in "gimmicky"-options. M. is (expectedly) a bit more stripped-down. Glad the tabbed-window is available, though it doesn't seem to work on links from outside programs . Rendering is indeed better and pages loads more user-friendly.
Bookmark-exporting and -importing is (like for every browser) ridiciously one-sided. Bookmarks-manager looks capable/comprehensive.
Adjustment of placement of toolbars (very minor quibble) seems non-existant.
It browses and it browses well.

I need those mouse gestures though. Optimoz doesn't seem to work here (Doesn't show up after install). Anybody else have this problem too with Build 2002051006?
EDIT: Nevermind. I did the usual mistake of installing latest stable version of Optimoz (0.3.2) which doesn't work  with RC2. 0.3.3 works

All in all. Nice browser. The Opensource-concept, the rendering and better compliance makes for good reasons to switch to Mozilla. Besides it looks like theres an extensive support with plugins "out there"

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #56 –
One thing that still really pisses me off (and is one of the main reasons I won't switch to Mozilla) is the terribly slow-responding interface. I have a Celeron 500 and 384 MB RAM (which I don't consider a "very slow" computer), and no other application does it. (Yes, I know, Mozilla has a totally different GUI "system" than other standard windows apps, but this shouldn't happen.)

At least it can handle the Dial-Up Network properly, and the bookmark manager is actually usable, now

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #57 –
Mozilla is slow to load up for the first time (at least on Linux) but after it's loaded into memory it can be opened up within a couple seconds. On recent versions of Moz for Windows I notice they had an option to enable 'quickstart' which just means Moz gets loaded into memory at boot. Windows will automatically load Internet Explorer and Office into memory at boot so they always appear to be a lot more responsive than non Microsoft apps. No doubt they keep the 'nice' value pretty low for non MS apps too..  wou'ld put that past them ;-)

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #59 –
Is it just me or are the windows installer links broken ?

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #60 –
They are broken, and it hasn't made it to any of the mirrors that I have looked at.
flac > schiit modi > schiit magni > hd650

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #61 –
I have the same problem : FlashGet downloaded only 2k, then came 404 error...

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #62 –
Mozilla.org is getting pounded. Maybe they should have pushed it out to the mirrors before anouncing the release. Once it's posted on Slashdot, it's all over. China Syndrome.
flac > schiit modi > schiit magni > hd650

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #64 –
OK, I promise I won't use that link...
flac > schiit modi > schiit magni > hd650

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #65 –
I think the "official" links work again. Can any1 confirm this ?

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #66 –
Okay, I have it now from mozilla.org and have to say that I'm really impressed: No bugs or crashes yet (okay I use 1.0 since 5 minutes now) and fast as always...
Mozilla IS the best browser...
dev0
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #69 –
Quote
Originally posted by Volcano
One thing that still really pisses me off (and is one of the main reasons I won't switch to Mozilla) is the terribly slow-responding interface. I have a Celeron 500 and 384 MB RAM (which I don't consider a "very slow" computer), and no other application does it. (Yes, I know, Mozilla has a totally different GUI "system" than other standard windows apps, but this shouldn't happen.)

^^ this is exactly why I'm still using Opera. if it is fixed one day (now?), I'll switch to Moz. 
A riddle is a short sword attached to the next 2000 years.

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #70 –
Quote
Originally posted by ssamadhi97

^^ this is exactly why I'm still using Opera. if it is fixed one day (now?), I'll switch to Moz. 


Try using K-Meleon, Mozilla imbedded in the native win32 toolkit.  It's quite a bit less resource intensive and more responsive.

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #71 –
Congrat's to the moz team!! Now.. how long until Gentoo get the ebuild up ;-)

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #72 –
Quote
Originally posted by Dibrom
Try using K-Meleon, Mozilla imbedded in the native win32 toolkit.  It's quite a bit less resource intensive and more responsive.

yep, I've looked at k-meleon just last week, but all I found was a version based on moz 0.9.something which was really slow when rendering tables..

guess i'll have to look a bit harder *fires up Google* - or am I missing something here?  ???
A riddle is a short sword attached to the next 2000 years.

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #73 –
The latest stable version I think is still based only on .9 something, but they have a development version which should be based on one of the later 1.0 rcs I believe.

Edit:

Maybe not... oh well.  I'm pretty sure a new version will be released now that Moz has hit 1.0

Off topic: Mozilla is going to final 1.0. How do you rate th

Reply #74 –
I got it a few minutes after it was posted up on slashdot, pulled a nice 300KB/s from mozilla.org

Anyways, the browser is nice. Very very nice. They optimized it more, there are still a few little quirks though. For the most part, it works prefectly.

Fast, stable, and now with a little lighter footprint.