Firefox Is Heading Towards Trouble
-
ditto what other people have said. As far as gripes about FF? My only issues are: the memory leaks when you have several tabs open all day the *really* slow initial load time Cheers, Simon sig ::
"Don't try to be like Jackie. There is only one Jackie.... Study computers instead.", Jackie Chan on career choices.
article :: animation mechanics in SVG blog:: brokenkeyboards
"Most of us are programmers, but a few use VB", Christian GrausSimonS wrote: the memory leaks when you have several tabs open all day so true :sigh: Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
-
To me the main advantage of open source/freeware/shareware is that the program is written by people who want to write the code, commercial software tends to be written by the cheapest people tha management can find, who probably have no interest in what they are writing!
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't." - Anatole France
Interesting - but I wouldn't say commercial development means only galley slaves hungry for an escape. The CP crowd is a good example - many people here are passionate about their daytime job. Aslo, a good product requires more than just cool software - IMO it's hard to balance the fun stuff with the things that need to be done.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
Interesting - but I wouldn't say commercial development means only galley slaves hungry for an escape. The CP crowd is a good example - many people here are passionate about their daytime job. Aslo, a good product requires more than just cool software - IMO it's hard to balance the fun stuff with the things that need to be done.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenAh but we are the best of breed :-O, it's Crufts in the UK! In my experince very few software people hang out in places like this, most aren't that bothered about learning anything new just for the sake of it. A lot of people here hate their jobs but they are passionate about software. To a lot of people a software job is just a 9 - 5 job, nothing else, I am not criticising that approach, after all jobs to most people are just means to make some money.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't." - Anatole France
-
There is some interesting reading here. Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Mike Connor, a core Firefox developer, writes in his blog, "In nearly three years, we haven't built up a community of hackers around Firefox, for a myriad of reasons, and now I think we're in trouble. Of the six people who can actually review in Firefox, four are AWOL, and one doesn't do a lot of reviews. And I'm on the verge of just walking away indefinitely, since it feels like I'm the only person who cares enough to make it an issue." If Firefox's reviewing developers, the key people of any open-source project, have burned out on the project, Firefox is in a lot of trouble. Forget about trying to get new and better versions out. They're not going to be able to keep up on security fixes and bugs. For example, it used to be that if you ran Firefox you never saw annoying pop-up ad windows. That was then. This is now. See: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1774091,00.asp[^] Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows www.getsoft.com and Surfulater www.surfulater.com "Save what you Surf"
Makes me wonder if there is a reason for this as maybe some other large company might be working on a version themselves and wants to knock this one down a peg or two... Yep, that is me, Mr. Conspiracy, but in today's world you have to be. Even more so when the big company is paying some of the workers. I personally love FF and use it all the time. For me it works and gets the job done, that is all I require. At least this browser is cross platform, IE is only Windows now. Rocky <>< All Kinds of Stuff[^]
-
Screw ANSI C++ compliance then. I mean, who gives a crap if Boost or Loki compile correctly. I mean seriously, if you're going to excuse IE for doing a crappy job of sticking to the standard, then you've got to excuse VC 6 for not compiling standard C++ properly. But that didn't stop C++ devs from complaining every time we had to include specialized templates in our code, did it? I know that HTML is a markup language, and is therefore treated as "less of a language" than compiled languages, but saying that you should render incorrect markup is like saying that you should compile C++ without the semicolons at the end of the lines. And saying that IE does something better than the standard is just plain wrong. CSS 2? Transparent PNGs? The list goes on... Something tells me you're not a web developer.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
From the perspective of web developers, you are right. On the other hand, why would the users of my programs care about standard compliance of my C++ compiler? They shouldn't even know which compiler I used to make my application. The same goes for browsers: I am not a web developer - why should I worry about w3c standards? For me, both IE and Firefox are just web browsers, and I use them to view web pages. The one which displays more web pages I visit wins. Period.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
-
Steve McLenithan wrote: Biggest problem I have with firefox is it's HORRIBLE copy/paste ability. Could you elaborate? :confused:
"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both."
-- Dwight D. EisenhowerMore often than not if I highlight the URL or other text it simply will not copy. I can hit Ctrl + C all I want and it won't go. I've tested it on three different systems and I get this same behavior in some form or another on all of them.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
-
From the perspective of web developers, you are right. On the other hand, why would the users of my programs care about standard compliance of my C++ compiler? They shouldn't even know which compiler I used to make my application. The same goes for browsers: I am not a web developer - why should I worry about w3c standards? For me, both IE and Firefox are just web browsers, and I use them to view web pages. The one which displays more web pages I visit wins. Period.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: The same goes for browsers: I am not a web developer - why should I worry about w3c standards? For me, both IE and Firefox are just web browsers, and I use them to view web pages. The one which displays more web pages I visit wins. Period. BS. Don't forget about mobile devices, text-only UA and blind people... those benefit from web standards. Right now I HATE person who deceded that overlapped tags in HTML aro no big deal for browser... If illegal markup didn't render correctly, no one would produce illegal markup. Now, it slows things down :mad: Of course users don't care about browsers or web standarts. That's how it should be. BUT it seems like other side (browsers and web devs) often don't care, too. And that's plain wrong! David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
-
Firefox isn't my browser either but development in the Open Source world is damn slow. Nevertheless, I am still reluctant to go back to Microsoft Internet Explorer especially after I came to know that there's a vulnerability in the browser that lets scammers to launch a phishing attack on your PC. Some even include a fake SSL signature padlock certificate to fool you and that too over the updated version of Windows, Service Pack 2.:wtf: Read it yourself. And, I thought Service Pack 2 was the most secure thing there is on this planet! We always are wrong about certain things that happen around us. The Open Source community around Firefox might have been dragging their development speeds, but who knows what might happen next? I still won't go back to Internet Explorer even if version 7.0 ends up with tabbed browsing and a promise of 50% more secure browsing.
The beginning of knowledge is the fear of God
Aaron Reginald wrote: Nevertheless, I am still reluctant to go back to Microsoft Internet Explorer especially after I came to know that there's a vulnerability in the browser that lets scammers to launch a phishing attack on your PC. Some even include a fake SSL signature padlock certificate to fool you and that too over the updated version of Windows, Service Pack 2. Patched in February[^]. There would have been less risk if the vulnerability hadn't been irresponsibly disclosed. Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder
-
Screw ANSI C++ compliance then. I mean, who gives a crap if Boost or Loki compile correctly. I mean seriously, if you're going to excuse IE for doing a crappy job of sticking to the standard, then you've got to excuse VC 6 for not compiling standard C++ properly. But that didn't stop C++ devs from complaining every time we had to include specialized templates in our code, did it? I know that HTML is a markup language, and is therefore treated as "less of a language" than compiled languages, but saying that you should render incorrect markup is like saying that you should compile C++ without the semicolons at the end of the lines. And saying that IE does something better than the standard is just plain wrong. CSS 2? Transparent PNGs? The list goes on... Something tells me you're not a web developer.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
Hmm, I think you need to read more standards. As a producer, you should always stick to the standard. As a consumer you should always be as forgiving as you can. It isn't correct to compare HTML to C++. They are at two totally different levels of standard. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
-
Hmm, I think you need to read more standards. As a producer, you should always stick to the standard. As a consumer you should always be as forgiving as you can. It isn't correct to compare HTML to C++. They are at two totally different levels of standard. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
It isn't correct to compare HTML to C++. They are at two totally different levels of standard. Why? They're both languages. They're both set by committees. Both standards describe proper syntax and usage. Why on earth are they two different levels? Because one's rendered and one's compiled? Because one's "real code" and one's markup? Imagine if everyone thought the XML standard, which describes a markup language, was something that we can ahere to as loosely as we adhere to the HTML standard. XML would be worthless.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
SimonS wrote: the memory leaks when you have several tabs open all day so true :sigh: Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
At least they are transparent about it. It'll be fixed in 1.1 if I remember correctly. Cheers, Simon sig ::
"Don't try to be like Jackie. There is only one Jackie.... Study computers instead.", Jackie Chan on career choices.
article :: animation mechanics in SVG blog:: brokenkeyboards
"Most of us are programmers, but a few use VB", Christian Graus -
From the perspective of web developers, you are right. On the other hand, why would the users of my programs care about standard compliance of my C++ compiler? They shouldn't even know which compiler I used to make my application. The same goes for browsers: I am not a web developer - why should I worry about w3c standards? For me, both IE and Firefox are just web browsers, and I use them to view web pages. The one which displays more web pages I visit wins. Period.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Right. And I wasn't placing the blame on users. I think I stated that pretty clearly in my original message when I said that the SwitchMessage function here on CP never calls the .focus() method on the TR element for the message header. If that was changed, then the forums would scroll to the right spot on both IE and Firefox. You see, I'm placing the blame on the developer. Not the end user. No. All the end user should really care about is viewing their websites. It's the browser devs and the site devs that should both care about the user experience. To that end, both should create good code. The browser devs should write good rendering engines. The site devs should create good markup and script. How would we make sure that both sets of developers work towards that common goal? Standards documents.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: The same goes for browsers: I am not a web developer - why should I worry about w3c standards? For me, both IE and Firefox are just web browsers, and I use them to view web pages. The one which displays more web pages I visit wins. Period. BS. Don't forget about mobile devices, text-only UA and blind people... those benefit from web standards. Right now I HATE person who deceded that overlapped tags in HTML aro no big deal for browser... If illegal markup didn't render correctly, no one would produce illegal markup. Now, it slows things down :mad: Of course users don't care about browsers or web standarts. That's how it should be. BUT it seems like other side (browsers and web devs) often don't care, too. And that's plain wrong! David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: The same goes for browsers: I am not a web developer - why should I worry about w3c standards? For me, both IE and Firefox are just web browsers, and I use them to view web pages. The one which displays more web pages I visit wins. Period. BS. Don't forget about mobile devices, text-only UA and blind people... those benefit from web standards. Right now I HATE person who deceded that overlapped tags in HTML aro no big deal for browser... If illegal markup didn't render correctly, no one would produce illegal markup. Now, it slows things down :mad: Of course users don't care about browsers or web standarts. That's how it should be. BUT it seems like other side (browsers and web devs) often don't care, too. And that's plain wrong! David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
Right now I HATE person who deceded that overlapped tags in HTML aro no big deal for browser... If illegal markup didn't render correctly, no one would produce illegal markup. Now, it slows things down Amen brotha! Preach it! :-D
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
It isn't correct to compare HTML to C++. They are at two totally different levels of standard. Why? They're both languages. They're both set by committees. Both standards describe proper syntax and usage. Why on earth are they two different levels? Because one's rendered and one's compiled? Because one's "real code" and one's markup? Imagine if everyone thought the XML standard, which describes a markup language, was something that we can ahere to as loosely as we adhere to the HTML standard. XML would be worthless.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
One is around 100 pages and the other is getting close to 2000 pages. It is like comparing a Yugo to a Ferrari. Read my message again. Producers must adhere, consumers should forgive. It is the reality of trying to implement a standard. The problems you are running into with IE and VC is that the consumer doesn't properly implement the core standard. If you have ever written an email server, you would realize what I am talking about. You have to deal with all the different clients that do not properly implement the standard. However, as someone who wishes to have wide market acceptance, you have to forgive bugs in the email clients or otherwise you are limiting your market base. The users don't care that their client isn't 100% standard, all they care about is that their client doesn't work with your server. They also see it as your fault because their client works just great with other servers who support the misbehaving client. Standards are great and I love them. However, they are only one small part of the equation. Talk to anybody who has tried to implement a standard and they will cry you a river about ambiguities, bad clients and poor documentation. I have to live in the real world. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
-
Right. And I wasn't placing the blame on users. I think I stated that pretty clearly in my original message when I said that the SwitchMessage function here on CP never calls the .focus() method on the TR element for the message header. If that was changed, then the forums would scroll to the right spot on both IE and Firefox. You see, I'm placing the blame on the developer. Not the end user. No. All the end user should really care about is viewing their websites. It's the browser devs and the site devs that should both care about the user experience. To that end, both should create good code. The browser devs should write good rendering engines. The site devs should create good markup and script. How would we make sure that both sets of developers work towards that common goal? Standards documents.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
The more you talk, the more it becomes apparent that you have never had to actually implement a standard. It is much harder than you can ever imagine. It is very easy that two 100% compliant implementations do two totally different things with the same input. The problem is that for every statement in a standard there can easily be five questions about ambiguities. Just take a look at the C++ standard with regards to unspecified behavior. At least with the C++ standard they are trying to point these things out. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
-
- This should help with your dialup problem. 2) The scrolling offset isn't random. It's offset by the amount of space that the last post took up. So if you're reading a freaking huge post and then click on a different post, the page won't focus on the new post, it'll keep you where you are. But since the large post has collapsed, the forum has moved back up the page. This is an issue with the forum code rather than Firefox. Nowhere in the SwitchMessage javascript function does the code call the focus() method on the tr for the message header. IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard. It's another case of IE doing its own thing.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
Can you please point to where in the standard it says that what IE does in that case isn't correct? Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
I don't have time right now to look through the w3c standards and give subsection numbers and all, but here's what I've run across in the last week alone. 1. Tables with explicit widths for columns instead of %s? It works perfectly on everything but IE. 2. If I make a cell background a particular color, then put a transparent png on top of it, IE does not render the transparent part to the cell background color (everything else I tried does). 3. The default font size is also not w3c standard (not as big of a deal however since users change font sizes themselves). 4. The "standard" html colors are not correct. For example, I have a green background on top of which I place an image with the matching html color background (see #2 for reason). It comes close to matching in IE, but small lines appear at the edge of the image and the color is slightly off (matches perfectly with FF/Safari). On the same page, I have an area that is a different shade of green but appears to be nearly the same in IE. There's a whole bunch more, but these are the past week's annoyances and I think you'll agree that they are an issue, even without seeing the W3C spec on them.