Slashdot Log In
Mozilla Firefox 2 RC2 Released
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Oct 06, 2006 10:40 PM
from the popular-day-for-rc2s dept.
from the popular-day-for-rc2s dept.
Shining Celebi writes "According to the Mozilla Developer Center, Firefox 2 Release Candidate 2 is available for download. This looks like it could be the final release candidate, and offers a tweaked UI and improved stability over RC1, plus, of course, all the new in Firefox 2.0 features."
Related Stories
[+]
Firefox 2.0 RC2 Review 319 comments
segphault writes "Ars Technica has a comprehensive review of Firefox 2.0 RC2. It includes screenshot comparisons that illuminate the user interface changes that have transpired since the second beta, and it examines the similarities between the browser tab implementation from Internet Explorer 7 and the new tab management features in RC2. From the article: 'If RC2 is any indication, Firefox 2.0 is an incremental improvement of the 1.5.x series with performance improvements and a handful of relatively useful features. Based on my own experience, I consider it stable enough for regular use, but I endorse caution for users that rely on a lot of extensions, as most extensions aren't yet compatible with Firefox 2.0.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Bloat? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bloat? (Score:4, Funny)
The ultimate future of firefox: http://www.pbfcomics.com/archive/PBF036AD-Hugbot.
Good for the goose not good for the gander. (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://kadin.sdf-us.org/ | Last Journal: Tuesday October 16, @01:46PM)
It's not like (at least on most desktop, non-mainframe systems) like the OS is really competing for memory with any other OS. It's not shared. The OS knows who's trying to use the memory and how much is "extra" at any given time, thus it can just use whatever's left over at the moment for cache.
With an application, it shouldn't ever request more memory than it actually needs to operate, because it doesn't have the "god perspective" that the OS does, to determine how much is underutilized and ought to be taken up by stuff that's less-than-critical.
If every application did what you're describing Firefox doing, we'd be in a lot of trouble; the OS would never get to do any of those cute "spare" memory tricks that it does, because the apps would be trying to use way more memory than they actually needed to perform their core functions.
Applications should only take what they need to survive; there's only room for one bloated thing that hogs memory, and it has to be at the top of the food chain.
Re:Bloat? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe, just maybe, because Opera is closed-source.
Re:Two Versions plus (Score:4, Interesting)
That solution has been suggested more than once, but keeps getting rejected. I think it's a good idea but the powers at Mozilla think it will cause confusion.
Re:Bloat? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.opera.com/support/tutorials/opera/spell check/ [opera.com]
Opera still feels more responsive, uses less RAM. (Score:5, Interesting)
I had been hoping that Firefox 2 would be able to better compete with Opera. I was hoping that it would render faster, while also consuming far less memory. My Firefox 2 RC2 process from early this afternoon ended up hitting about 650 MB of RAM (measured with top) before I had to kill the process. And that was only after about three hours of use, in total. I didn't have any non-default extensions installed, so they aren't to blame.
My computer only has 512 MB of RAM, and I'm not in a position to purchase more. If Firefox 2 leads to my system thrashing after only several hours, then I don't think I'll be able to use it. Opera, on the other hand, only ever seems to ever consume 80 MB or so. I can't recall ever seeing it above 100 MB.
I really like the extensions of Firefox, many of which Opera does not offer. But Firefox suffers from some pretty severe memory management issues. Those in turn may lead to degraded system performance, even on computers with 512 MB of RAM, running Slackware 11. Unless Firefox deals with this excessive memory usage, I don't think I'll be able to use it on my system. Meanwhile, Opera functions without such problems, so I'll continue to use it until things improve with Firefox.
Re: Memory leaks in extensions (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Opera still feels more responsive, uses less RA (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Opera still feels more responsive, uses less RA (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Opera still feels more responsive, uses less RA (Score:5, Informative)
(http://robots.org.uk/)
Tweaked UI (Score:4, Interesting)
(http://www.insidebet.com/)
Re:Tweaked UI (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Tweaked UI (Score:4, Informative)
Unless I'm mistaken, I belive the interface was tweaked a bit (the Go button and stupid "drop down arrow" hover effects on the Back/Forward buttons seem a bit darker) on the Mac version (wouldn't surprise me if the Windows/Linux versions didn't change--RC 1 was at least decent for them), though it still looks terrible for a Mac app. For example, the toolbar icons increase in saturation when you hover over them. Note to theme devs: Mac icons don't do that; this isn't Windows XP. Plus, the whole toolbar is now this light gray instead of the OS X pinstripe background. It seriously looks like a poorly ported KDE app.
That being said, for Mac users who want a theme that actually looks decent, they should try the Gerich/Holander update of the original Pinstripe theme which they created for Firefox 1. Not only is it updated for Firefox 2, but it's been tweaked a bit and looks "20% more Macintosh" according to them--though more like 200% if you ask me: http://kmgerich.com/2006/09/27/pinstripe-for-firef ox-now-with-20-more-macintosh/ [kmgerich.com]
It's also available for Windows and Linux and will make Firefox look more or less like the 1.x theme.
pr0n protection (Score:5, Funny)
(http://www.google.com/)
Yeah, like I need my last open browser window coming back up on my screen. I "accidentally" kill the power strip when my boss walks in my cube for a reason.
Surprise me. Better than: Safari, IE, Opera, iCab (Score:1, Flamebait)
Firefox is hemorrhaging users. (Score:3, Interesting)
Many people have stopped using it due to it's bloat and slowness. I installed in on my uncle's new desktop computer several months back. He asked if there was an alternative he could use, because he found it was consuming all of the physical memory in his system, and then some.
At the college where I work, a number of researchers, professors, and students had switched to Firefox over the past few years. I know at least ten who have switched to browsers like Opera, Konqueror, and some even back to Internet Explorer, unfortunately. Of the people I have directly inquired with, they basically said it wasn't comparable, in terms of speed or memory usage, with other browsers.
I know of several open source developers who have stopped using it because of the recent Debian nonsense. Debates aside, their handling of the situation had a very negative impact. Many developers have gained a dislike for the Mozilla project, and others have switched. Those developers I know are now using Konqueror. One of them is using Opera on Windows.
Myself, I have stopped using Firefox for the aforementioned reasons. Konqueror has proven to be a better browser. It works perfectly fine with all of the sites I visit, and doesn't use excessive amounts of memory. I use KDE, so it integrates with my desktop far better than Firefox did.
You may think that it's only 20 or so people I'm talking about here, and that we're not that important. I'd beg to differ. Each one of us has recommended the use of Firefox to our relatives, friends, colleagues, and other acquaintances. Many of them have stopped suggesting it. I personally don't recommend its use. I suggest Konqueror or Opera for Linux users, and Opera for Windows users. Mac OS X users these days seem to go straight to Safari. At least five of the people I know are now making similar recommendations to people they know.
The Mozilla project will need to put forth much in the way of effort to stop this. We'll need to see rapid technological improvements, as well as changes in the way the project is run. I don't know if we'll ever see such things happen, but at least we have alternative browsers to move to if things continue to get worse.
Re:Firefox is hemorrhaging users. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://bondage.com/)
But I suppose my experience isn't valid, since I'm just "trying to make firefox look bad" because I've got nothing better to do with my time, eh?
Thing is, one of the reasons I (like so many other people) was so anxious to switch off of IE was Microsoft's arrogance and disdain for their users. Unfortunately for all of us, the "you become what you fight" principle seems to be in effect here. I still use firefox because it's the best overall browser, when it works. But the fanboys who engage in personal attacks on anyone who runs into difficulty sure don't help the browser's image.
-b
Re:Firefox is hemorrhaging users. (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://kruhft.info/ | Last Journal: Wednesday October 03, @08:12PM)
. ~/data/mozilla/browser/config/mozconfig
ac_add_options --prefix=/usr/local/stow/firefox-cvs
ac_add_options --enable-optimize="-march=pentium4 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -ffast-math -mmmx -msse -msse2 -mfpmath=sse,387 -pipe -funsafe-math-optimizations"
ac_add_options --disable-debug
ac_add_options --enable-default-toolkit=gtk2
ac_add_options --enable-xft
ac_add_options --enable-freetype
ac_add_options --disable-postscript
ac_add_options --disable-gnomevfs
ac_add_options --disable-gnomeui
ac_add_options --with-pthreads
ac_add_options --disable-ldap
ac_add_options --disable-xprint
This config made a world of difference in the usability of firefox, and I'm sure the main speedups are from using the native gtk2 toolkit rather than chrome/xul. For those that aree unhappy with the slowness of the default builds, I suggest trying something like this; it makes a world of difference.
And still ... (Score:4, Informative)
Everybody else (besides IE, of course) supports the first, and I'd love Firefox to be the first to support the second.
Just my $0.02, I'm sure everybody's got their own pet RFEs and bugs.
Re:And still ... (Score:4, Informative)
Screw Perl 6; Make Mine Javascript (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.5sigma.com/joseph)
I want JavaScript + a Mozilla-like UI that will let me write full-featured locally-hosted GUI apps that can do all the things other local languages can
Still missing? (Score:2)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Tuesday November 07 2006, @05:52AM)
(No, the bookmark sync extensions don't cut it...)
The real question... (Score:1, Funny)
Re:The real question... (Score:4, Informative)
There are bugs still in there that were first reported in 1999.
Any chance they've fixed (Score:3, Interesting)
Firefox Portable 2.0 RC2: Test Without Installing (Score:5, Informative)
(http://johnhaller.com/)
/. rendering champ... (Score:2, Funny)
live bookmark features are still so archaic (Score:1)
2.0? More like one and three quarters. (Score:1)
(http://127.0.0.1/)
o Icons are prettier.
o Tab bar doesn't work how I'm used to (an extension to make things Work Right)
o I already have session management via an extension.
o The new add ons manager is kind of nice.
o Scroll wheel no longer works on my tabs.
o Visual barfs all over in the theme (I figure those will be cleaned up by release date), in fact, there are all kinds of little inconsistencies with the theme I'm using; tabs don't match everything else, drop down lists, etc.
o The red squigglies are kinda nifty.
In all, I don't really see anything that's two point oh, or will make me do a "gotta have it" upgrade (unless, of course some "gotta have it" plugin doesn't work in the old one.
Big shrug.
Real World Browser Usage Stats (Score:2)
(http://www.ivorysky.com/)
IE6.x - 89.06%
Firefox 1.x - 5.29%
IE5.x - 2.05%
IE7.x - 1.51%
Safari 4.x - 0.92%
Safari 3.x - 0.37%
Mozilla 1.x - 0.12%
Opera 9.x - 0.12%
Firefox was up slightly from 5.22% in July. It surprised me how low it was, considering I keep reading stories of how FF is up to nearly 15%. Yes, some of this could be down to people spoofing the User-agent to show as IE, but how many people really do that? It still has a lot of catching up to do.
ping attribute (Score:2)
(On a related note: What other RMS-type "free" alternative do you work on, use or recommend? I'll probably switch to Konqueror as soon as FF2 goes through the update system), but I'd like to have a few options... And don't say Amaya, ok?
Broke my bookmarks (Score:1)
(http://rizole.deviantart.com/)
My Good, Bad and Ugly of Firefox 2 RC2 (Score:2)
MNG Support? (Score:2)
(Last Journal: Friday May 07 2004, @11:35AM)
-molo
Look of tabs is inconsistent & ugly (Score:1)
if I wanted tabs/buttons to be shaded and round-edged, then I would have selected a GTK theme with these features.
But I haven't, and APPLICATIONS SHOULD RESPECT THAT!!!
Why does Firefox 2.0rc2 use its own look & feel for the tabs, instead of respecting the theme that is currently set in the desktop environment (like Firefox 1.X did)? The tabs look ugly and don't match other GTK apps at all.
Also, nuisances that have been present for quite a while still aren't taken care of. E.g. after doing a search via the search field, the field doesn't auto-clear itself - so you can't just do another search later by pressing the middle mouse button in the search field to paste a keyword. Instead, you have to clear the field manually.
bye,
Till
First Firefox release that leaves me Blah (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Visual Refresh - so what?
2. Phishing protection - Good for "ordinary users", does nothing for me.
3. Enhanced search - I can already search pretty well across the internet, so this is bloat.
4. Tabbed browsing - each tab has its own 'x' close button? I call that a step backwards.
5. Resume brosing session - who cares?
6. Web feeds - the ONLY feature I might find useful
7. Inline spell chacking - Many people will benefit from this obviously, but not me, so it's nothing but bloat as far as I'm concerned.
There's more, but you get the idea. I am unimpressed by the new features of Firefox 2.0.
I still don't get this "bloat" thing... (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm running several optional extensions all the time, and regardless of how long I use Firefox or what I browse, I never see the problems some of you are reporting, not even close. Maybe it's because I mainly use Win2k, and the 'memory leak" issue is mainly a Linux thing, but somehow I doubt that memory management in Windows is better for any specific application at any time than the Linux equivalent.
And yes, I periodically do things like leave 5-10 tabs open in each of 1-5 instances of Firefox with each tab displaying svereal high resoultion photos, reams of text, and wacky formatting and CSS effects. I still don't see any problems with bloat. Ever.
I'm not saying that others' problems don't exist, I'm sure they do. I'm just saying that it doesn't sound anything at all like my own experiences with Firefox. Believe me, if I did, I wouldn't be using it at all. I'm only running 384 MB of RAM on a 5-6 year old computer... For soemthing to take up 2 GB of memory is not just unacceptable, but completely impossible. Thankfully, Firefox only uses between 30-100 MB for me. Guess I'm just lucky or something.
As for Opera... I'm not a fan. The Opera UI and I don't work well together, and I'm not of the opinion that my webbrowser should have much of a learning curve. Maybe if I ran into more rendering problems I'd work through it, but I don't, and the ones I do see are always because some idiot decided to make a web app that only runs in IE, and Opera doesn't exactly fix that (though the IE Tab extension does). There's nothing really wrong with it, and I tend to refer people to it as well as Firefox if they use IE, but not ever likely to use it myself.
where did microsummaries come from (Score:2)
(http://alicious.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday October 31, @07:36PM)
I don't like the comment at http://wiki.mozilla.org/Microsummaries [mozilla.org]
>>> "The microsummary generator dialect and the use of the <link rel> element to specify microsummaries should be standardized by the appropriate bodies, which may include the microformats group and the WHATWG."
_should_ be standardised? Has there been an RFC for this with efforts to get comments from other browser writers? (Link please, no pun intended).
What will the effect be on servers if all browser bookmarks use this system?
Detach Tab option? (Score:3, Insightful)
(http://slashdot.org/)
I like to use one window per topic I'm working on and if one tab leads to another topic I want to look at in more detail it would be nice to just detach that tab to a separate window rather that copy the URL, hit CTRL-N and middle-click in the new window.
I notice that both Konqueror and Konsole have had this functionality for some time.
viva la nightly's (Score:1)
Mozilla team losing focus! (Score:1)
(http://xk0der.wordpress.com/)
The lean and mean broswer is becoming fat and bad.
Size does matter, leaner the better. They should leave out extra features as plugins.
At least, this is what I think.
- xk0der
Xtreme K0ding
Re:Wtf! Advertising on the download page? (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re:Wtf! Advertising on the download page? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Google spyware included (Score:2)
Re:Google spyware included (Score:1)
(http://cumulo-nimbus.com/)
The one that very clearly tells you what it will be doing and verifies that you really want to do it first?
The Anti-Phising feature itself is enabled by default, but by default it does _NOT_ use Google, it uses a downloaded blacklist.
My impression of it is certainly not "Google Spyware", it's "Framework for allowing Firefox to check pages against search engine results", the default search engine you can use - if you enable it - being Google.
Totally! (Score:2)
(http://www.grantgorilla.com/)
Parent not REALLY a troll (Score:2)
Re:Search for text when I start typing (Score:2)
(http://www.hyperborea.org/journal/ | Last Journal: Tuesday September 11, @05:30PM)
Not sure why it doesn't show up with find-as-you-type, but it's still there if you hit Ctrl+F.