FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Firefox 2.0 Beta 2 Released!





niranvv
The newst beta version of the upcoming major revision of Mozilla Firefox has been released today!

The big news was posted to Slashdot in the last 24 hours and it seems it has yet to spread too far. This article on DesktopLinux.com describes the major changes between this beta version and the previous one. The new version can be obtained in a lot of languages and for a lot of platforms right here.

Some stuff you can notice straight away when installing Firefox 2.0 beta 2 is the updated default theme.

But many iof the previoys extensions is not compatible with the newest beta version!. The configuration panel changed slightly, mainly the RSS feeds section, which now lets you open your favorite "Live Bookmarks" with any program you choose (or any web-based syndication program).

Check It Now Itself!

Niran
Da Rossa
I'd like to know if the userChrome.css, user.js and prefs.js editions are suitable in Firefox 2.0...
calvinchin
Hi there,

Does it initialize faster and display things similar to IE? Sad
Qube
I tried Beta 2, and I honestly didn't like it.
I never realized how much customizing I put into my Fox.
Many of the plugins aren't scripted yet for this Fox.
And yes, I realize it's Beta.

I didn't really like the new RSS feed handler.
That and just something about the feel of it unnerved me.
I'll stick to 1.5 thanks.
Anyone else feel free to try it, I'm just picky. Wink
Teragonto
Yay FF 2.0 Beta 2 is out! Im downloading it right now. Hopefully my laggy computer won't lag until it's my school's open house Shocked ..Oh nevermind, it finished right now... Embarassed
BrainCracked
Opera is mutch better then FF. Opera is faster, smaller, better feautures and so on. It is simply the best browser on earth.
jayandsilo
yeah the ads are nice as well hey
Ranfaroth
calvinchin wrote:
Does it [...] display things similar to IE? Sad
No : Firefox engine (gecko) understand much more things than IE
BrainCracked wrote:
Opera is mutch better then FF.
No : Opera lacks many standards support compared to gecko browsers or Safari and Konqueror. And Opera is closed-source.
But that's not the subject of this thread !
{name here}
Ranfaroth wrote:
calvinchin wrote:
Does it [...] display things similar to IE? Sad
No : Firefox engine (gecko) understand much more things than IE
BrainCracked wrote:
Opera is mutch better then FF.
No : Opera lacks many standards support compared to gecko browsers or Safari and Konqueror. And Opera is closed-source.
But that's not the subject of this thread !

Opera 9.01 has fixed the problems in the past. I've to this date have not seen a page work incorrectly with Opera 9.
calvinchin
Hi Ranfaroth,

Thanks for your info...

I installed Opera before, but the pages look different and does not
support some scripts...I shall try the new one and see whether it
has improved... Wink
Ranfaroth
{name here} wrote:
Opera 9.01 has fixed the problems in the past.
Opera 9.01 is avaliable on my workstation, so I can test it, and I can confirm you that it's still behind gecko browsers, and has many bugs with standard supports.
For example, it doesn't understand E4X, MathML, XLink, XML Base, XPointer, the XSLT support is incomplete, some major features of CSS3 (especially very usefull selectors, but also border radius or columns) are missing, the DOM2 style module is quite unusable due to blocking bugs....
It's very disapointing....
{name here}
Ranfaroth wrote:
{name here} wrote:
Opera 9.01 has fixed the problems in the past.
Opera 9.01 is avaliable on my workstation, so I can test it, and I can confirm you that it's still behind gecko browsers, and has many bugs with standard supports.
For example, it doesn't understand E4X, MathML, XLink, XML Base, XPointer, the XSLT support is incomplete, some major features of CSS3 (especially very useful selectors, but also border radius or columns) are missing, the DOM2 style module is quite unusable due to blocking bugs....
It's very disapointing....

How many of those things are actually standard and commonly used anyways except for XSLT and XML anyways? Is it seriously holding web designers that much back to where they're using "bear skins and stone knives" to make a page? If it isn't then I really fail to see why they they should support it until all modern web browsers are actually common(IE 7, Firefox 2, Opera 9 or 10). Opera actually is seeking input for 10, so expect 10 to have some of those standards.

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/09/0458236
Ranfaroth
{name here} wrote:
How many of those things are actually standard and commonly used anyways except for XSLT and XML anyways?
More than you think.
Many features of my websites are not usable under Opera due to its limitations, and I don't want to waste time finding workaround, when more modern browsers are freely available...
But that was not the question : someone said Opera was better than Firefox, and I just proove how he was wrong, listing a few standards implemented in gecko browsers, and lacking in presto engine...
Quote:
until all modern web browsers are actually common(IE 7, Firefox 2, Opera 9 or 10).
IE 7 is already deprecated and years behind current browsers. Stop dreaming about it
{name here}
Ranfaroth wrote:
{name here} wrote:
How many of those things are actually standard and commonly used anyways except for XSLT and XML anyways?
More than you think.
Many features of my websites are not usable under Opera due to its limitations, and I don't want to waste time finding workaround, when more modern browsers are freely available...
But that was not the question : someone said Opera was better than Firefox, and I just proove how he was wrong, listing a few standards implemented in gecko browsers, and lacking in presto engine...
Quote:
until all modern web browsers are actually common(IE 7, Firefox 2, Opera 9 or 10).
IE 7 is already deprecated and years behind current browsers. Stop dreaming about it

Is Opera seriously holding you that much more back to the point where you're creating pages with "bear skins and stone knives"? I don't really think so. As I said before when Opera 10 comes out you will probably have your fancy-shmancy standards supported(though really what would be the point when IE is holding you that much more back). Oddly enough a recent Digg article mentions Opera as the premier browser for AJAX(supposedly the future of web development). I don't know if that counts for something.
Francisckrs
i was going to download it but i was told that not many changes where made so i figure i will wait for the official non beta realse
kd5nrh
Ranfaroth wrote:
{name here} wrote:
How many of those things are actually standard and commonly used anyways except for XSLT and XML anyways?
More than you think.


99% of those are the same kinds of sites that used to abuse the BLINK tag, and for the same reason; when they don't have enough useful content, they try to hide that fact behind flashy design to look cool.

If it can't be made into a useful site without all the extra junk, then it's still not going to be useful just because somebody added a bunch of stuff they found in TLAs for Dummies.
Ranfaroth
{name here} wrote:
Is Opera seriously holding you that much more back to the point where you're creating pages with "bear skins and stone knives"? I don't really think so.
No. But some modern features can't be used with Opera. That's all, that's prooved, no need to discuss it more..
Quote:
As I said before when Opera 10 comes out
As I said before, Opera 10 isn't available. Firefox 1.5, SeaMonkey 1.0.4, Epiphany 2.14.... are available, and understand modern standards.
(by the way, the same "you'll have standards support with next version" was also said for Opera 9.0...)
Quote:
(though really what would be the point when IE is holding you that much more back).
I really don't care about IE. My users don't use it (or drop it to see my websites)
Quote:
Oddly enough a recent Digg article mentions Opera as the premier browser for AJAX(supposedly the future of web development). I don't know if that counts for something.
I don't think so, since AJAX doesn't really mean something...
(If you're talking about XMLHTTPRequest : it's supported by all modern browsers)
kd5nrh wrote:
99% of those are the same kinds of sites that used to abuse the BLINK tag, and for the same reason; when they don't have enough useful content, they try to hide that fact behind flashy design to look cool.
Do you really think that XML technologies are a flashy design to look cool ? Or your just kiding ?
I suggest you to learn a bit about web technologies, and when you'll grow up, to look at what is used nowdays in industry.
I'm sure you didn't even understood half of the names of the standards I listed Laughing
PseudoKnight
Hello, Firefox fanboy. I love the browser, but I think you've got some things wrong. You're the only person I've run into that has said anything but Opera having the best standards support when compared to IE and Gecko. Can you provide some support for your claims?

... oh, and insulting the other posters was really top notch there, you pea-brained, loud-mouthed, short-sighted punk.
"..Guess I'm just a good man..."
*stab*
"...Well, I'm alright."

I guess we both ought to grow up, but I'm probably the only one who realizes it.

* I use both both FireFox and Opera on a regular basis. I prefer Opera for the majority of my tasks while going to FireFox for a few common, but select tasks.

** Gotta love when you can stick a Firefly quote in a thread about browsers. Don't judge me if you don't know what I'm referencing. Wink
Ranfaroth
PseudoKnight wrote:
Hello, Firefox fanboy.
I suppose you're not talking about me (since I don't like this browser), so I won't spend time understanding the end of your post (which apparently doesn't refer to me), and only answer to this :
Quote:
Can you provide some support for your claims?
This site is the reference for browsers'engine standards support. But you have to know very well all web technologies to understand the figures. (Don't stop to the first tables for instance...)
PseudoKnight
I suppose you're a heavy Linux user then? MAC? Or do you hate all browsers? God forbid you use something like Maxthon.

Thanks for the link. It seems to indicate that Gecko and Opera are more or less similar in standards support. Obviously it's expected for browsers to not fully support the newer standards. I don't consider it disappointing in that regard. It's more important that websites TODAY display the same TODAY on various browsers. IE seems way behind though -- off in it's own little world.

What's your thoughts on the Acid2 test? Do you consider it an artificial accomplishment that Opera is the only browser to pass it of the three?
Ranfaroth
PseudoKnight wrote:
I suppose
Honnestly, stop supposing. It does not fit to you Wink
Quote:
Thanks for the link. It seems to indicate that Gecko and Opera are more or less similar in standards support.
I though I was clear enought in my previous post about the fact that those figures have to be analysed by people knowing web technologies...
Quote:
What's your thoughts on the Acid2 test?
A quite artificial test that only check few properties, including some completely useless (like some dealing with obscure table styles). Too bad people refereing to this test doesn't actually know what's inside this page...
Quote:
Do you consider it an artificial accomplishment that Opera is the only browser to pass it of the three?
Which three ? Currently, in stable versions, 4 browsers pass the ACID2 test. And in development version you can add all the gecko browsers, which bring us to more than 10...
techack
Thanks for the information!
cg219
Wow firfox TWO. Thats crazy. Im still with 1.5xxx Any new features that it has that is worth downloading??? Also anyone think any other browsers are on par with Firefox???
PseudoKnight
Quote:
I though I was clear enought in my previous post about the fact that those figures have to be analysed by people knowing web technologies...
I typically don't bother myself with worthless new tech, but I'm familiar with current standards. There's a couple noticeable exceptions in the Opera list, but it's not "disappointing" and I personally don't think it's worse than Gecko.

Quote:
A quite artificial test that only check few properties, including some completely useless (like some dealing with obscure table styles). Too bad people refereing to this test doesn't actually know what's inside this page...
That too is my understanding of the test, but to me it seems equally worthless to compare CSS3 support, for example, at this point.

Quote:
Which three ? Currently, in stable versions, 4 browsers pass the ACID2 test. And in development version you can add all the gecko browsers, which bring us to more than 10...
I was specifically referencing the three major Windows browsers that were being discussed in this thread. Bon Echo displays Acid2 correctly? Nice.

I'd like to end this post with something we can agree on (hopefully): IE is a piece of trash. Wink Okay, I just like reminding everyone. I keep running into sites that only work in IE.
sceptileex
Im seriously not a fan of the new theme, all that icons getting smaller and stuff. Sticking to it tho, most of the extensions i use still work well, so no harm using it i guess.
Ranfaroth
PseudoKnight wrote:
I typically don't bother myself with worthless new tech, but I'm familiar with current standards. There's a couple noticeable exceptions in the Opera list, but it's not "disappointing" and I personally don't think it's worse than Gecko.
OK, let's simplify.
Gecko supports some features whereas Presto supports other.
The problem is that the features supported by gecko and not by presto are more usefull than the ones supported by presto and not gecko.
Quote:
but to me it seems equally worthless to compare CSS3 support, for example, at this point.
No : CSS3 are really usefull, and already used a lot on current websites. Developers are asking for CSS3 features for years, and each improvement on CSS3 support by a browser is a very good news for them
Quote:
Bon Echo displays Acid2 correctly ?
You should know that Bon Echo is from the 1.8.1.x branch Rolling Eyes
PseudoKnight
A friend of mine downloads the development releases since 2.* and it was and still is called Bon Echo. I don't personally bother myself with them so I shouldn't know anything.

Why are sites using CSS3 if there's almost no IE support? That kind of hampers the usefulness.

BTW, you say you don't like FireFox and yet you're using an FF avatar? What gives?
Ranfaroth
PseudoKnight wrote:
A friend of mine downloads the development releases since 2.* and it was and still is called Bon Echo.
Bon Echo is the code name for Firefox 2.X branch...
What' don't you understand ?
Quote:
Why are sites using CSS3 if there's almost no IE support?
Because it can degrade. For example, with CSS 3 you can add rounded-borders, collumns layout, multiple background images, you can style focused elements...
With an old browsers, you won't see this, but you wont realise you're loosing it, until you try with a modern browser...
Quote:
BTW, you say you don't like FireFox and yet you're using an FF avatar? What gives?
Because there're still few people using IE or IE shells here, and for them, the best alternative for the moment is Firefox.
PseudoKnight
Quote:
Because it can degrade. For example, with CSS 3 you can add rounded-borders, collumns layout, multiple background images, you can style focused elements...
With an old browsers, you won't see this, but you wont realise you're loosing it, until you try with a modern browser...
I'd just design with CSS2 in mind and not have to worry as much about things being displayed differently in different browsers. Take rounded-borders for instance, if they're important enough for your design to put in, then you'd want everyone to see it. If it's not important enough then you can just do without them and not even bother putting them in. But I suppose this isn't an issue with certain features like styling focused elements where it can increase useability for those browsers without impacting the look at all in another browser. It's just a head-ache having to code for all these variables. That list may help, so thanks for that. It looks like it's being updated quite regularly.

Quote:
Bon Echo is the code name for Firefox 2.X branch...
What' don't you understand ?
So, the 1.8.1.x branch is the developmental numbering while the 2.x branch is the release numbering? Simple mistake to make.
Ranfaroth
PseudoKnight wrote:
I'd just design with CSS2 in mind and not have to worry as much about things being displayed differently in different browsers.
You know, IE6 (and IE7) doesn't understand some important properties of CSS2...
Quote:
Take rounded-borders for instance, if they're important enough for your design to put in, then you'd want everyone to see it.
For me, design is not important, only content is.
But when I design, I prefere to use efficient tools : CSS3 selectors (really powerfull), and some good looking CSS3 features.
And if some one using a old browser complains, I just answer him : "You've got the content. If you want the design too, upgrade your browser".
Currently, one of my website is visited by Opera-users, and there's a feature that isn't available with this browser because it has a bug; this feature is the possibility to dynamically change the design of the site (and to keep trace of this in session). Well in fact, it works but Opera users have to change two times before the change is understood... You see, is not really important, and everybody can live without it. But if an Opera user complains, I have to reply that it's a bug from Opera, and if it's feature is really important for him, he'll have to use a gecko browser...
Quote:
So, the 1.8.1.x branch is the developmental numbering while the 2.x branch is the release numbering? Simple mistake to make.
No :
Firefox is a browser using the Gecko render engine. Right ?
Currently, there's 3 branches of Gecko : 1.8.0.x, 1.8.x, and 1.9.x.
And for each engine branch, there's a browser branch.
  • Gecko 1.8.0.x gives :
    Firefox 1.5.x
    Seamonkey 1.0.x
    Thunderbird 1.5.x
  • Gecko 1.8.1.x gives :
    Firefox 2.x (code : Bon Echo)
    Seamonkey 1.1.x (Alphas builds available)
    Thunderbird 2.x
  • Gecko 1.9.x (also called the trunk until it branches) will give :
    Firefox 3.x (code name : Minefied)
    SeaMonkey 1.5.x (I'm using nightlies from this branch)
    Thunderbird 3.x
Look at this roadmap to understand how branches are linked.

(I realise that for someone who don't follow Mozilla evolutions, those branches and version names are really confusing... But Mozilla Fundation wants to bump Firefox version number, even if it's silly...)
PseudoKnight
Quote:
You know, IE6 (and IE7) doesn't understand some important properties of CSS2...
And I try not to use those properties.

Quote:
Currently, one of my website is visited by Opera-users, and there's a feature that isn't available with this browser because it has a bug; this feature is the possibility to dynamically change the design of the site (and to keep trace of this in session).
It's funny. When I was doing something like this I found it was easier to design for Opera. The problem was getting it to work similarly across all browsers. Ultimately I dropped the feature for something I knew would work but might not be as flashy.

Thanks for clearing up the browser/engine branches, but that was essentially what I asked.

Quote:
(I realise that for someone who don't follow Mozilla evolutions, those branches and version names are really confusing... But Mozilla Fundation wants to bump Firefox version number, even if it's silly...)
I knew about branching and how that works, I just wasn't privvy to the which was what and using what terminology.
Ranfaroth
PseudoKnight wrote:
It's funny. When I was doing something like this I found it was easier to design for Opera.
Maybe because I prefer designing using web standards. It's easier for me.
orcaz
Ranfaroth wrote:
{name here} wrote:
Opera 9.01 has fixed the problems in the past.
Opera 9.01 is avaliable on my workstation, so I can test it, and I can confirm you that it's still behind gecko browsers, and has many bugs with standard supports.
For example, it doesn't understand E4X, MathML, XLink, XML Base, XPointer, the XSLT support is incomplete, some major features of CSS3 (especially very usefull selectors, but also border radius or columns) are missing, the DOM2 style module is quite unusable due to blocking bugs....
It's very disapointing....

same here, dumped Opera aft a few days of trying out as there are many things in the Internet it still doesn't support. So the best alternative after IE is actually still Firefox, though I have to agree hands down that Opera is the most secure browser.
chandanis
Same here, tried Opera 9 little, Firefox's still number one browser for me, memory usage could b smaller though Confused
Da Rossa
chandanis wrote:
Same here, tried Opera 9 little, Firefox's still number one browser for me, memory usage could b smaller though Confused


It will be, don't worry. And even with the memory eating problem it's still the best.
Related topics
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Computers -> Software

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.