Mozilla aborted IE in Firefox clothing

Bye bye Mozilla

As the person above said, I used to use Mozilla and tell everyone else to use it. Now it's so slow it's blatantly obviously slow, they are resorting to talking nonsense. Even on the spread firefox page, people are having to really stretch for reasons to use firefox. Lame.

Use chrome, Firefox sucks. Single thread apps are so 1994.

What Microsoft are really saying

So what Microsoft are really saying here is that IE's security model is crap. They're saying that they've taken no steps to ensure that plugins have to follow the security policy set by the browser?

Arguing that Chrome is a security risk is a red herring. If Chrome is a security risk, any plugin is a security risk, and *hugely* increases the attack area of IE. What's worse is that malicious plugins would be relatively easy to create, blowing all of IE's security promises out of the water.

So, Microsoft, which is it? Are you just whinging about Google Chrome because you didn't want IE to suppot web standards and break your lock-in, or is your security model a complete joke?

Re: What Microsoft are really saying

That's bollocks. Any plugin can cause havoc on any browser - that's why you click the button to say you trust the source before you install it.

I like Chrome because it pushes Firefox

The reasoning is different at the different companies:

Firefox is the only reason for Mozilla to exist, helping IE does not make sense for them.

For Google the key is increasing advertising revenue, faster browsing = more searching. So helping IE6 users makes sense.

Of course Google's is a multi faceted strategy.

1st is the breakup MS's stranglehold on the web.

2nd is Speeding up the browser.

3rd is Help enable Google Apps.

Chrome helps in all of the above, its also a big stick with which to chivvy the other browser makers along the path Google wants. CF is a great idea from their point of view - stealing IE6 users from under MS's nose is just an added bonus.

You can see how much it wrong footed MS by the ridiculous response about lack of security! HAH ms talking of lack of security in IE6!!!

I am a great fan of Firefox but Chrome also helps me as the whole focus, over at Mozilla, has now switched to Speed, Speed, Speed.

This is a change long overdue, and hopefully FF3.6-3.7 and 4 will be better for it.

Chrome lit a fire under Mozilla and Firefox will be better for it :)

Thanks Google! - for helping to making Firefox better :)

RE: Chrome

Chrome is total toss, I've benchmarked Firefox and Chrome and the speed at which Firefox downloads web content is 10x better than Chrome, not only that but the lack of good plugins and total failure of the Chrome GUI makes me ill, Firefox for the moment is the best full-on browser, if you you want a cut down browser for your "Netbook" download Dillo you morons.

Pointless concept...

@asdf: Disagree. Up until 3.5 rolled around, yes, it was going that way - but from 3.5 onwards it has the lowest memory usage of any major browser (yes, ANY). Check the statistics for yourself if you don't believe me, they're very easy to find.

In terms of the topic...Chrome Frame is downright stupid. People who care enough to install it will just use another browser, and those who don't probably won't notice the difference anyway. The only use for it I can see is to install it domain-wide...but let's face it, how many sysadmins do you know who actively want to install plugins for IE?

Well I For One...

Think it was a wise move on Mozilla's part, if the people are hungry for cake don't hand them a can of frosting to spread on manure.

... and I'm content with FF's speed, beyond a single-digit # of seconds to first load it after rebooting a PC (only needed when some MS patch demands it be done), it relaunches and spawns plenty fast enough even with several add-ons.

I do agree though that they should consider their devoted followers who liked the more streamlined version and should offer a FF-lite edition, but truth be told the way the web is evolving there is less and less you can do with *defeatured* browsers these days, every tom, dick, and harry things you shouldn't be left to browse using mere HTML anymore.

Firefox slow?

I too don't have any problem with Firefox's speed. Perhaps the people moaning have 50 plugins installed or some other problem, but with adblock and a couple of other basic plugins it's plenty fast enough.

Maybe it's just the fact that as Firefox becomes more and more popular, some people think they are too cool to be part of the mainstream. :-p

clarification

On a desktop yes Firefox 3.5 speed is decent and not annoying. On a cut down netbook using ubuntu 9.10 it sucks even with a handful of plugins even with 2 gig of memory. Also try opening 25 tabs or so in both browsers and see how they both perform on any computer. Don't get me wrong I understand Googles aims are not always pure and chrome is a bit of a trojan horse (though chromium is open source and worries about google collecting info are easy to debunk). Still all around it seems there is a good reason many are switching to webkit instead of gecko. Webkit is not only much more streamlined but also a hell of lot easier to code with. It seems gecko suffered from an obvious case of overengineering early in its design and has been trying to recover ever since. Btw as an aside once you get past the rough edges on upgrade Ubuntu 9.10 netbook remixed is so much faster and more responsible on a netbook than windows xp. Ubuntu seems to screwed up making the os foolproof but it runs sick fast for the tech geeks that know what they are doing (sigh the target audience continues to be the same).

one final clarification

Yes the argument is somewhat valid about chrome and plugins. To get around the annoying ads at least on linux use privoxy. On windows privoxy is a bit annoying but in linux once setup well its seamless. The way to browse imho is to use chromium for promiscious browsing where you surf random sites and firefox for logging into critical money sites like banking. The reason is NoScript does a better job of preventing xss and webjacking (html coding flaws) but chrome and its sandboxing does a better job protecting against browser flaws. Not to mention at least on linux out of the box chrome can handle media plugins much better than firefox (I actually disable almost all plugins, extensions, etc on firefox because I do use for banking). I also recommend always using private browsing for both browsers as they tend to store passwords very insecure and web sites cant track crap if it gets deleted every time you close the browser). Just be sure very often clear the damn flash cookies (login scripts perfect for this).

@Silverwave

"I am a great fan of Firefox but Chrome also helps me as the whole focus, over at Mozilla, has now switched to Speed, Speed, Speed."

Are you kidding? The whole focus at Mozilla for Firefox is rearranging the deck chairs of the UI. My latest gripe is that all the cookie handling has been disappeared from the Tools/Options dialog, now buried deeply within about:config where you are (humorously? I'm not sure) warned against tampering with things. Its gone from something a user can logically configure on their own to something you have to research on the web before setting

- Cookies.Behavior.ArcaneValueOne = 4

- Cookies.Behavior.ArcaneValueTwo = False

- Cookies.Behavior.ArcaneValueThree = 0

Now that is progress! Meanwhile it frequently crashes when printing, often prints just "Page 1/1" for a page that requires 5 pages, and they haven't fixed bugs that existed back in Mozilla original recipe and Firefox 1.0. I have bugs I'm subscribed to on Bugzilla and I just watch them get passed back and forth, denied and justified, but never fixed.

As asdf said Firefox = FAIL now.

I've got an idea...

Why doesn't someone create some add-ons to make Windows seem like a real operating system?

Wait - why would they?

Cry foul

So hang on, this is chrome rendering in an IE window and that's bad.

But IETab, which is IE rendering in a Firefox window, is good?

I just want one browser and to be able to switch rendering engines depending on the site. Simples.

@Eddie Johnson

"all the cookie handling has been disappeared from the Tools/Options dialog"

I don't know what you're running, but it isn't the current Firefox release (3.5.5), as the cookie handling is right there, under Tools/Options/Privacy. Sounds like a PEBCAK issue.

As for Microsoft crying foul, is this the same MS who silently installed an non-uninstallable plugin to Firefox without permission? My heart bleeds.

so what?

i use IE8. it works, is as fast as the speed at which it can get hold of the data, i have no issues with regard to page rendering.

it is supported within corporate environments for citrix, vpn web portals etc....

i don't get what all the crying is about apart from people trying to stick it to the microsoft "man"?

i guess i must be missing something here.

RM Flash Cookies

@ wsm

rm -rf /home/tbw/.macromedia

done