Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


BDFL - Memuneh
60801 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11681

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

Topic # 10004 29-Oct-2006 21:09
Send private message

Hyped by a good deal of fanfare, outfitted with some new features, and now available for download, Firefox 2.0 has already passed 2 million downloads in less than 24 hours. However, a growing number of users are reporting bugs, widening memory leaks, unexpected instability, poor compatibility, and an overall experience that is inferior to that offered by prior versions of the browser. Expanding on these ideas, this list compiles nine reasons why it might be a good idea to stick with 1.5 until the debut of 3.0, skipping the "poorly badged" 2.0 release completely." OK, maybe it's 10 reasons. An anonymous reader writes, "SecurityFocus reports an unpatched highly critical vulnerability in Firefox 2.0. This defect has been known since June 2006 but no patch has yet been made available. The developers claimed to have fixed the problem in 1.5.0.5 according to Secunia, but the problem still exists in 2.0 according to SecurityFocus (and I have witnessed the crash personally). If security is the main reason users should switch to Firefox, how do we explain known vulnerabilities remaining unpatched across major releases?"


Unpatched bug known for almost 4 months? Right, Open Source folks, are you going to bash FF 2.0 as much as you bashed IE7 even before its release?

http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/42910110/article.pl
 







View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2
Hawkes Bay
8477 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 50207 29-Oct-2006 21:22
Send private message

freitasm: Unpatched bug known for almost 4 months? Right, Open Source folks, are you going to bash FF 2.0 as much as you bashed IE7 even before its release?

The King of the Rhetorical Question is crowned!

I like FF2.0, some nice improvements, but will probably keep using 1.5.x for a few months yet...




Visit http://www.thecloud.net.nz for New Zealand based Hosted Exchange, Virtual Servers, Web Hosting, FTP Backup & more.
(1GB free FTP storage, or larger plans from $5.75)
 
 - Setup your own mailserver at home on Ubuntu Server - full step by step howto here.
 - Have you seen this: Nathan "KFC4LIFE" Dunn.


1246 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Trusted

  Reply # 50209 29-Oct-2006 21:46
Send private message

We tried it-found it totally unusable. Compatibility problems with previous extensions.
It was hard to get the old veresion back-we didnt have the set up file around for 1.5 so that was tricky.




GZMCC. Nokia Lumia 1020,Galaxy Note 5, Microsoft Surface Pro 4 i5 4Gb Ram,128gb, Cam Am Spyder F3 LTD.  GoPro 5 Black, Samsung Gear 3


437 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 7

Trusted

  Reply # 50212 29-Oct-2006 22:04
Send private message

Just to say I have been using firefox 2 from the start through all the beta versions etc and have not found any issues apart from non yet updated extensions and themes.

Does Firefox 2.0 have a security issue you should be worried about if runnings Windows as on the desription of the Mozilla Firefox JavaScript Handler Race Condition Memory Corruption Vulnerability issue lists linux distro's?

All our PC's run F 2.0 and have not noticed any performance  issues.

The main reason to update was to compare F 2.0 to IE 7 and how for web development what websites look like under these two browsers and our PC's run both ok and dont see any web site issues with the sites I have tested on so far.

Mind you they say you shouldnt upgrade for the sake of upgrading and if its not broken dont mess with it and your favorite extensions and themes should be available soon.




"The only way to learn some- thing is to do it"

51 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 50245 30-Oct-2006 10:37
Send private message

psychrn: We tried it-found it totally unusable. Compatibility problems with previous extensions.
It was hard to get the old veresion back-we didnt have the set up file around for 1.5 so that was tricky.
Firefox has never been compatible with previous extensions so I fail to see what you're complaining about.

The move to FireFox 1.5 from 1.4 saw the same issues, as well as themes.

I've used FireFox 2 when it was in alpha stage and found it to be reasonable back then. As a Mac user I'm currently running Camino 1.1 alpha which is based on the 2.0 engine and have so far not had any issues.

IE7 still doesn't handle CSS properly and in many cases actually is worse than IE6.

But the kicker in my opinion that makes this list bollocks is this:

Not all of these issues have been reported by all users, and several are matters of personal preference.

It's the same with anything. People have a few issues, most likely due to their setup, and they feel the need to say that it is a widespread issue.

Can you say FUD? I knew you could.

Personally between FF2.0 and IE7 I'll stick with FF2.0.



BDFL - Memuneh
60801 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11681

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 50246 30-Oct-2006 10:41
Send private message

[strong sarcasm on]

No... You are not implying that /. is spreading FUD. You couldn't seriousy say that, right?

[strong sarcasm off]







51 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 50251 30-Oct-2006 11:15
Send private message

freitasm: [strong sarcasm on]

No... You are not implying that /. is spreading FUD. You couldn't seriousy say that, right?

[strong sarcasm off]
Not saying you are.

There's been a number of people like this site that is trying to portray the problems of a few as though there is huge issues worldwide. The MacBook Pro issues come to mind here.

Throw in the media and you've got an explosion from a pop.

I've been using IE7 since the original beta release and I've found that to be less stable than the alpha release of FireFox 2.0. Of course to say my experiences are the same the world over is ludicrous.

One flaw that hasn't been patched yet doesn't make a flawed release. If that's the case then my god stay away from the numerous unpatched flaws of IE7.

Ultimately the choice is yours. If you have issues then say these issues are your experience but never say they are the experience of everyone who uses that product.

It is for this reason that this list IS FUD, of course you are only supplying a link and are not the arbitrator of the FUD.

I'm sorry if you took my comments the wrong way.


Oh and Slashdot was only linking to another site so they're not really to blame either.



BDFL - Memuneh
60801 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 11681

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 50253 30-Oct-2006 11:19
Send private message

I didn't take the comment in any way - I am not writing the FUD. It just strikes me that the community is quick to bash IE7, but let things go ok with other projects. But again, mom and pop don't care - they don't know about this.

As for your comments on IE7 beta not as stable as FF2 alpha - c'mon, I would never compare two strong contenders like these in the "beta x beta" or "beta x alpha". These are work in progress, and one has to wait until both are released to compare anything.

I really feel annoyed with some feeds I read when they come to "IE7 beta is buggier than FF 1.5". Hmmm, hello! One was under development, the other was in production. Same as saying "Everyone is doomed because Windows Vista CTP had a bug". OMG, the product is not even out yet and I read some strange and weird things around.





51 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 50269 30-Oct-2006 14:23
Send private message

I agree with what you're saying.

I made particular mention about beta and alpha versions instead of final releases. The fact that the Alpha version of FF2 was more stable than Beta 1 release of IE7 is notable though due to Alpha being a "see what we can do" release. Beta is generally a version that while not quite there is stable enough to be used for day to day stuff. So for an Alpha app to be more stable than a Beta app that IS a big thing.

Don't get me wrong, I like IE7 but I still feel that it has a long way to go before it gets close to FireFox in it's ability to view STANDARDS based web pages. I can prove it too.

Go to http://www.nzmac.com which is based on Joomla which is a standards based content management system. The main toolbar is not displayed correctly in IE7 but is displayed perfectly in Safari, FireFox, Camino, OmniWeb, Opera, etc. IE7 still has a long way to go in terms of support for the W3C standards with regards CSS. IE6 can even display this page correctly so in that regards IE7 is a step backwards.

Of course it probably displays more sites properly than FireFox based on the fact that lazy web developers use naff tools such as FrontPage to develop their pages instead of either code or apps like DreamWeaver which can produce proper code. Even iWeb produces Validated pages according to W3C standards.

4304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 50273 30-Oct-2006 14:41
Send private message

I'm sorry but thats rubbish.

I spend all day developing web sites and I now find that IE7 displays my standards compliant sites better than FF2 does.

I went to that site you mentioned and viewed with both IE7 and FF2. I couldnt actually see the difference. See if you can tell me which is IE and which is FF2


https://cdn.geekzone.co.nz/imagessubs/c1cbdbb4945bb2c1134dfb3ab82dfc90.jpg


https://cdn.geekzone.co.nz/imagessubs/09af6ba552d50ff59f46daacf72168f4.jpg
I have used FF since it was called Phoenix and version 2 is just a poor excuse to give it a new number.

Self edit: added links to full size images

51 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 50289 30-Oct-2006 15:56
Send private message

Could you please provide images that are viewable?

When I view the page in IE7 (actual release as well as previous beta releases) the black links bar at the top of the page is not displayed correctly. There is a white strip at the bottom of the bar which is not there in any of the other browsers I mentioned, including IE6. From what I can make out it seems your second image is the closest but I'm guessing at that because the images you supplied are effectively useless.

That's what I'm getting on my machine at work (going through proxy) and my Mac Mini running Windows (natively) with IE7 (not going through proxy). The Mac is just a bog standard build aside from the Windows Updates and IE7 so there's nothing to get in the way. I get the same issue running Windows on the Mac with IE7 running under Parallels as well. I can replicate the same issue on other machines running IE7 so it is an IE7 issue because I cannot replicate it on other browsers, including IE6.

652 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 50297 30-Oct-2006 16:07
Send private message

Hmmm... I'm with Brad on this one, there is absolutely no difference whatsoever between the site viewed in FF and the same site viewed in IE7 for me...

However, try reducing the horizontal window size in either IE7 or FF and you'll realise just how poor the site's design really is

4304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 50303 30-Oct-2006 16:20
Send private message

The images dont need to be full size to see there is no difference or problems rendering the page. But for your convenience i have added links to the full size images.

The top image is IE7. I get the same result in IE7 on Vista (pre release) and IE7 final on Server 2003 and XP.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with IE7. There must be something wrong at your end.

When I find differences between IE7 and FF, 90% of the time its FF that is causing problems.


4304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 50305 30-Oct-2006 16:23
Send private message

You will also note that IE has done a much better job of aligning objects on that page.

51 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 50317 30-Oct-2006 17:14
Send private message

Firstly thanks for the links to the fullsize images.

I see where the issue is for you. Drop your screen resolution to 1024x768 and tell me what you see. Your screen resolution is 1280x1024.

In IE7 it obviously doesn't resize properly but in FireFox et al it does. Whoever designed the template (not site developer) has made it for 1280x1024 which is another problem with lazy website developers, assumming that everyone uses the same resolution as they do. I'm surprised this still happens considering the mess that happened in early web developing days. I guess some people never learn.

Also with regards the IE alignment comment, all I see is IE ignoring padding and margin settings. You can't tell me that's a good thing. It's removed gaps in the columns which can make it more difficult to read.

Also look at the top right where the NZMac Widget logo is. The version number (Version 1.1.1) is NOT aligned correctly in IE7 but it is in FireFox. These are your admissions because you say the top image is IE7. Clearly your screenshots are not backing up your claims.

4304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152

Mod Emeritus
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 50320 30-Oct-2006 17:28
Send private message

This is IE7 at 1024x768. Still i see no resizing problems


https://cdn.geekzone.co.nz/imagessubs/ddfd3bb68cc32fe6ebf49fef96ece455.jpg

On examining the pages code, the reason IE does display a few things incorrectly is because the page is poorly coded.

 1 | 2
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central launches
Posted 10-Jul-2018 10:40


Spark completes first milestone in voice platform upgrade
Posted 10-Jul-2018 09:36


Microsoft ices heated developers
Posted 6-Jul-2018 20:16


PB Technologies charged for its extended warranties and warned for bait advertising
Posted 3-Jul-2018 15:45


Almost 20,000 people claim credits from Spark
Posted 29-Jun-2018 10:40


Cove sells NZ's first insurance policy via chatbot
Posted 25-Jun-2018 10:04


N4L helping TAKA Trust bridge the digital divide for Lower Hutt students
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:08


Winners Announced for 2018 CIO Awards
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:03


Logitech Rally sets new standard for USB-connected video conference cameras
Posted 18-Jun-2018 09:27


Russell Stanners steps down as Vodafone NZ CEO
Posted 12-Jun-2018 09:13


Intergen recognised as 2018 Microsoft Country Partner of the Year for New Zealand
Posted 12-Jun-2018 08:00


Finalists Announced For Microsoft NZ Partner Awards
Posted 6-Jun-2018 15:12


Vocus Group and Vodafone announce joint venture to accelerate fibre innovation
Posted 5-Jun-2018 10:52


Kogan.com to launch Kogan Mobile in New Zealand
Posted 4-Jun-2018 14:34


Enable doubles fibre broadband speeds for its most popular wholesale service in Christchurch
Posted 2-Jun-2018 20:07



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.