9 thoughts on “Firefox 2.0 or not”

  1. Om,

    For faster FF surfing on OS/X try one of the optimized MacIntel or PPC builds. FF is way more responsive now on my G4.

    2nd tip for a much faster FF experience in OS/X is to disable Flash using the ‘Flashblock’ extension. Macromedia’s implementation of the Flash plugin for OS/X browsers is notoriously slow and buggy. Flashblock allows you re-enble flash elements with a click as needed.

    On second thought if you’re on macIntel I’m not sure if Flash is still a problem… won’t hurt to try it I suppose.

  2. FF 2.0 could hardly be slower or less responsive than FF 1.5 or it would cease to function altogether. I gave up on it — Camino is infinitely better on OS X, and Epiphany kicks its butt on Debian GNU/Linux. Don’t know about Windows.

    It’s a shame the once “lightweight” alternative to the Mozilla suite has now become more bloated and all-consuming (as in RAM) than the suite ever was, even with the built-in email client.

  3. hey mark,

    flash is still a problem which is why i split the time between camino and safari. i don’t think unless they do a proper intel-mac ready browser that i would consider using firefox.

    thanks for the tip on zapping flash plugin.

  4. david and mcubed, i have heard precisely the same stories. i think the ff 1.5 is bloated and boring, and that is why i find 2.0 refreshing from a speed perspective.

    opera, somehow doesn’t do it for me. don’t ask me why, but it just doesn’t …

  5. “have a more legitimate reason to use 2.0 than anyone else. “

    Firefox is build on many versions of Netscape and Mozilla technology. Its version number approaching 2.0 is as arbitrary as any version number.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.