|
People who are uneducated about browsers usually argue with other people about why their browser is so much better.
Once they have been outargued about anything, they always will immediately reply with "it works fine for me". I am glad that something works fine for you. Unfortunately for you, we aren't discussing what works acceptably and what doesn't. The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication, however compared to email or the telephone is it complete and utter shit. This is similar to the relationship between Firefox and chrome/IE/other bad browsers.
An argument I hear a lot for chrome is "well it's faster". If you check and find out that the browser is actually hogging your computer, and therefore while the browser runs like a Kenyan the rest of your computer runs like the tortoise, and you reply "well it still works fine for me" you should steal the shell from your tortoise-speed computer and hide inside it before I find you and club you across the face with 100lbs of Firefox.
Before you tell me that chrome has everything Firefox has to offer, I'm going to stop you and say that it doesn't. Chrome has a very small amount of addons because there are fewer developers (google and 6 lifeless highschool dropout programs they found), and because there is a lack of demand for the addons. You don't have to use addons, in fact I encourage you to not use them simply so you can call yourself a rebel, however if you are only using a bad browser for the sake of rebelling against quality products, you should at least state it. Make us aware of the cause you are fighting for (as stupid as it may be)!
Internet explorer is the most decent browser I can find. It does everything acceptably, and certainly brings nothing new to the table, but its still decent. People who use internet explorer (because of their general ignorance towards everything) tend to say that they don't need anything else, "it works fine", etc, etc. The fact is, I don't need any vehicle other than my 12 speed bike. Sure it might take me 2 hours to get to school riding it, but I can always leave early, pack my backpack the previous night, or i can upgrade to a motherfucking car. I was once talking with someone about how internet explorer does everything worse than most other browsers. This person responded with "so what's wrong with it?" I said that there is nothing wrong with it, only you are better off without it, seeing as everything else works better. They didn't seem to understand my point. If that wasn't simple enough, firefox loads videos faster, pages faster, emails faster, runs any sort of anything faster, has tons of addons, constant updates, user friendly, visually appealing, IS NOT OPERATED BY A LARGE CORPORATION WITH MOTIVES OTHER THAN DELIVERING A QUALITY PRODUCT, makes you a happier person.
Firefox has Adblock plus. Maxthon 3 has a built in adblocker. Other browsers don't have this crap, yet the users of crap-browsers, who are aware of this fact, refuse to switch browsers. You don't have to get adblocking stuff, but if you don't have it don't complain about popups. Simple? Apparently not, since everyone still complains about their popups, their annoying sound-ads, etc.
Something I really don't seem to get is, if everyone today is so anti media, why do we all flock to the most advertized browser (chrome)? Its owned by a huge corporation -all you anti corporation people should be killing yourselves right now- and advertizes like a bitch. A good product sells itself. Do you know how much Ferrari spent on advertizing last year? $0. Same with the year before, and the year before that. The product sells itself because the product isn't total crap. Everywhere you go on the internet, you see ads for your chrome browser or IE9 or whatever. I say you specifically because I don't see them. I have adblock plus (which blocks ads....).
The thing is, I couldn't care less what browser you use. Its just that if you are ignorant about something, you should accept that fact, and not argue about something you know nothing about.
In conclusion: Firefox is the best browser ever. Maxthon 3 is a close second.
![[image loading]](http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/215561_196427210393820_100000796266447_408600_3714296_n.jpg)
Firefox: The most attractive web browser
Show your support:
http://www.iccup.com/starcraft/community/thread/171210.html
http://www.facebook.com/notes/shawn-williams/arguing-about-web-browsers/210363825654246
 
|
I'd still be using Firefox if it didn't take forever to load up. Since you're comparing Firefox to Ferrari, I'd say using Firefox is like trying to drive a Ferrari in rush hour traffic.
|
I think Chrome is better, good blog though!
|
On April 22 2011 09:38 red4ce wrote:
I'd still be using Firefox if it didn't take forever to load up.
same here 
|
On April 22 2011 09:38 red4ce wrote:
I'd still be using Firefox if it didn't take forever to load up.
Me as well, I personally love Firefox, but I stopped using it after realizing how much faster Chrome is.
|
On April 22 2011 09:41 RedLuck wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2011 09:38 red4ce wrote:
I'd still be using Firefox if it didn't take forever to load up. same here
yeah, firefox sucks.
|
That's cool, but I work in IT, and when I have to google an answer I want to have the limiting factor be my WPM, not firefox's load time.
Chrome ftw.
Though, chrome fails when it comes to heavy lifting.
|
i just plain like chrome better, yay opinions
|
I like to develop in gui but im not going to tell people that develop in minimalist IDEs (ie. VIM) that their method is worse.
|
I like the things in chrome better then firefox. I don't want to screw around for hours and hours to get it good enough when I can just use chrome.
and useing adblock makes your argument moot. Hate that program for what it does for the internet.
|
Agree~ I just like Chrome more! I have no problems with FF--it just loaded incredibly slowly for me, and also crashed a lot. I have a somewhat old computer, so the memory leak is terrible for me as well :<
Definitely a great blog though! :3
|
|
|
Firefox is definitely a good browser, but I kinda like using Chrome because of how easier it is to use for me.
|
I used chrome for over 2 months last year. I couldn't get used to the bad ad-blockers though (ad block wasn't good enough, and ad sweep actually removed some non-ad images from sites)
I might try again this or next year.
Edit: and I want to be able to set a master password in chrome.
|
lol I love this this guy he makes this huge argument about how he thinks that firefox is better but everyone in the thread so far use's chrom
|
I use Flock; Firefox with some neat features. Never liked the hype around Chrome.
|
chrome works fine for me.
|
On April 22 2011 10:41 divito wrote:
I use Flock; Firefox with some neat features. Never liked the hype around Chrome.
You should stop using flock. That browser is shutting down very soon!
|
Ya I read about that awhile ago. Not sure if I'll stop or not, we shall see what happens exactly. I'd either go back to Firefox or to Opera.
|
On April 22 2011 10:50 divito wrote:
Ya I read about that awhile ago. Not sure if I'll stop or not, we shall see what happens exactly. I'd either go back to Firefox or to Opera.
Opera has some pretty decent features actually. Its nice to see a browser come with things like speed dial and mouse gestures, but I find opera to be slow, and its features don't work fantastically.
I never really liked flock because I had no need to be connected to all those sites like that.
|
The only thing I really use it for is the RSS reader, and the accounts feature, and the advanced clipboard. I'm sure there are extensions that would do the same thing for vanilla Firefox, but this was all built-in so it was nice.
|
A browser that really needs to become more popular is + Show Spoiler [Maxthon 3] +http://www.maxthon.com/mx3/index.htm
|
Personally, I hate all those dam addons. To me, i use Chrome because its fast, simple, clean, and it don't want very many addons :/. There are a lot of other little cool features i've gotten used to on Chrome, so when i do boot up firefox, i find myself missing them.
Other than that, i've never really seen the point of browser bashing/arguing!
|
On April 22 2011 11:06 eazo wrote:
Personally, I hate all those dam addons. To me, i use Chrome because its fast, simple, clean, and it don't want very many addons :/. There are a lot of other little cool features i've gotten used to on Chrome, so when i do boot up firefox, i find myself missing them.
Other than that, i've never really seen the point of browser bashing/arguing!
I respect that. You don't have to like them addons man.
|
I remember when everyone was flocking to Firefox from IE, and now people are flocking to Chrome from Firefox and IE.
Opera, the true underground browser.
|
Firefox hates netbooks. Thats the only reason I need to use Chrome.
|
On April 22 2011 11:48 Kula wrote:
I remember when everyone was flocking to Firefox from IE, and now people are flocking to Chrome from Firefox and IE.
Opera, the true underground browser.
Nah man, Maxthon is the underground browser!
|
Firefox for life!
Even with the RAM increase useage of Firefox 4 I still love it as its added some great features since 3.
Lol at people saying Opera is the underground browser..!
|
IceCat is the best browser.
|
my browser usage timeline went a lil something like this:
ie6 > firefox > opera > chrome
and i stuck with chrome. as far as i am concerned, ff 3.6 is a bloated pos and when faced with that or the lightning that is chrome, i chose chrome. its simplicity is unrivaled for those of us who prefere a minimalistic interface. tbh this blog seemed to be an ignorant attack on other browsers by a die hard ff fanboy...
atleast base your argument on why ff is better on something other then "i haz the adblokx"
|
|
|
I personally use Chrome almost exclusively on my laptop.
Firefox is nice, but I find it to be a system hog on my computer that isn't as fast as Chrome. I also don't use IE since I was required to downgrade to an outdated version to get an online homework program to work for one of my core classes.
Plus, I'm currently just used to the Chrome interface after using it for so long. Most of my internet usage consists of browsing TL and Reddit, and I'm not very fond of add-ons.
|
I use chrome, and there's an ad block plus ad on for chrome too (maybe not as good as FF?), but it works just fine for me. Like everyone else has said i prefer the quicker chrome and it usually doesn't slow down my other processes at all whereas FF lags and crashes a lot for me.
|
INTERNET EXPLORER FTW!
jk.
I use Chrome AND Firefox.
Win? :D
|
I agree wholeheartedly with the OP; Firefox ftw 
I like opera too and used it a lot before Firefox 4, but now that decision is really easy to make. I tried Chrome before, but really didn't like it... I only use it on very low spec computers, where it actually feels faster than other browsers.
|
Opera4life or at least till I buy a new PC lol
|
I an more surprised by that pic than any arguments or preferences.
|
On April 22 2011 15:48 ketomai wrote:
but it works just fine for me.
Are you trying to make me mad!? 
|
Firefox + adblock + noscript
I don't know how people use IE though,
It crashes way to often...
|
On April 22 2011 22:21 JSH wrote:Firefox + adblock + noscript I don't know how people use IE though, It crashes way to often...
this
|
i have been rocking firefox for years, and haven't switched to chrome yet, though i like it's interface and it's instant language translation ability (which i find better than firefox add-ons). still, the privacy issues of chrome concern me and i'm still somewhat bitter than google outlawed any non google/gmail account from signing up on youtube
|
Opera is my preferred browser but I think it broke >:
firefox sucks.
|
I for one appreciate our Google overlords embrace their effort to make an all-around quality browser. All hail chrome! All hail Google!
|
This is pretty irrelevant but I am bothered by the fact that you chose to use a picture of Holo, (who is a wolf), to represent firefox.
chrome is the best btw.
|
On April 22 2011 09:35 the-Undermind wrote:
Once they have been outargued about anything, they always will immediately reply with "it works fine for me". I am glad that something works fine for you. Unfortunately for you, we aren't discussing what works acceptably and what doesn't. The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication, however compared to email or the telephone is it complete and utter shit. This is similar to the relationship between Firefox and chrome/IE/other bad browsers.
This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.
It all falls apart with "The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication."
Depending on the context, it's not.
If I need an answer tomorrow, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. If the speed at which the message arrives and is sent actually matters and creates a significant difference, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. Therefore, it is unsatisfactory in many respects.
The difference in browsers is a matter of comfort, but the primary objective of "Read web content accurately and securely" is fulfilled in a majority of them.
EDIT: Oh wait, you said something even more stupid.
A good product sells itself. Do you know how much Ferrari spent on advertizing last year? $0. Same with the year before, and the year before that. The product sells itself because the product isn't total crap.
No products ever sell themselves and I highly doubt that Ferrari's tout of "We spend no money on advertising" means "We don't do any marketing at all."
|
Rofl, for everyone complaining about FF speed - welcome to 2011 - get an SSD...
|
op what are your qualifications to judge browsers because you make no real technical points and just flail around about how your browser is better and then post some creepy ass anime picture
|
I use Konqueror for the Gopher support.
|
Internet Explorer is really funny. I use Chrome but every once in a while I need to use a website that's like "We dont support legitimate browsers, use IE bro." So I go to try to open up IE and my computer's just like "lol no thats not gonna fly" and turns off. I have to seek out this "Internet Explorer (Safe Mode)" thing or whatever and my computer grudgingly opens it after about 6 days.
+ Show Spoiler +Some elements of the story exaggerated a tiny bit.
|
I have IE, Firefox, and Chrome. I use Chrome primarily, and then pr0n it up in Firefox, as well do my facebook stalking there. Non stalking activities I do in Chrome. Plus, if ever a website is down or something crashes, I like having multiple browsers to check if its the browser or something else.
Also, Chrome has adblock and I believe it now also has adblock plus? I think my main reason for using Chrome over Firefox is that I can search straight from the url bar. Firefox does it weird. When I type something in the firefox bar without www or a .com it will take me to a random site with that name, rather than just search it for me. I just find the Chrome way of searching simpler, and thus more efficient. *shrugs*
|
On April 23 2011 04:35 des wrote:
op what are your qualifications to judge browsers because you make no real technical points and just flail around about how your browser is better and then post some creepy ass anime picture
I could go through specific technical points, however most of it would mean nothing to me, and nothing to anyone else who reads this. As someone who has experience using several browsers, and a semiskilled computer user, I am more than qualified to judge.
On April 23 2011 02:18 kainzero wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2011 09:35 the-Undermind wrote:
Once they have been outargued about anything, they always will immediately reply with "it works fine for me". I am glad that something works fine for you. Unfortunately for you, we aren't discussing what works acceptably and what doesn't. The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication, however compared to email or the telephone is it complete and utter shit. This is similar to the relationship between Firefox and chrome/IE/other bad browsers. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It all falls apart with "The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication." Depending on the context, it's not. If I need an answer tomorrow, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. If the speed at which the message arrives and is sent actually matters and creates a significant difference, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. Therefore, it is unsatisfactory in many respects. The difference in browsers is a matter of comfort, but the primary objective of "Read web content accurately and securely" is fulfilled in a majority of them.
Are you stupid, or were you trying your best to make yourself seem stupid? Before I get into why you are an idiot, I will compliment you for identifying a spelling error I made. I could go back now and correct the spelling, however I would much rather leave it the same way so that others who read your comment may be astonished by your clearly superior intellect.
I compared a carrier PIGEON to email/telephone BECAUSE it is an awful method of communication. This is why I later stated that the relationship between a carrier PIGEON and email/telephone was similar to the relationship between firefox and other shitty web browsers. Did you not read my post? Perhaps you decided to ignore key sentences? Do you need new glasses?
EDIT: Oh wait, you said something even more stupid. Show nested quote +A good product sells itself. Do you know how much Ferrari spent on advertizing last year? $0. Same with the year before, and the year before that. The product sells itself because the product isn't total crap. No products ever sell themselves and I highly doubt that Ferrari's tout of "We spend no money on advertising" means "We don't do any marketing at all."
Sure Ferrari advertizes. They do this by selling cars other people want. If I am driving down the road in my beat up honda, and I see a nice shiny convertible I ask myself these questions:
-what type of car is that?
-where can i get one?
-how much does it cost?
That is their advertizing.
Lots of products sell themselves. For example, Ferr-fucking-aris (as I previously stated).
I understand that there are unintelligent people out there + Show Spoiler [for example] +, and I try to be respectful. I really try to be tolerant. Its just that sometimes someone will come along who is just too stupid for me to ignore. You sir, are that someone.
If you have any other uninformed criticism please feel free to share. Otherwise, I would appreciate a full length written apology. Not for trying to insult my post, but for wasting all of my precious time, by forcing me to write this reply.
|
On April 23 2011 07:06 the-Undermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 02:18 kainzero wrote:On April 22 2011 09:35 the-Undermind wrote:
Once they have been outargued about anything, they always will immediately reply with "it works fine for me". I am glad that something works fine for you. Unfortunately for you, we aren't discussing what works acceptably and what doesn't. The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication, however compared to email or the telephone is it complete and utter shit. This is similar to the relationship between Firefox and chrome/IE/other bad browsers. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It all falls apart with "The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication." Depending on the context, it's not. If I need an answer tomorrow, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. If the speed at which the message arrives and is sent actually matters and creates a significant difference, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. Therefore, it is unsatisfactory in many respects. The difference in browsers is a matter of comfort, but the primary objective of "Read web content accurately and securely" is fulfilled in a majority of them. Are you stupid, or were you trying your best to make yourself seem stupid? Before I get into why you are an idiot, I will compliment you for identifying a spelling error I made. I could go back now and correct the spelling, however I would much rather leave it the same way so that others who read your comment may be astonished by your clearly superior intellect. I compared a carrier PIGEON to email/telephone BECAUSE it is an awful method of communication. This is why I later stated that the relationship between a carrier PIGEON and email/telephone was similar to the relationship between firefox and other shitty web browsers. Did you not read my post? Perhaps you decided to ignore key sentences? Do you need new glasses? .
I don't think you got his point. His point was that there is a scale difference. Comparing a carrier pigeon to email is an insurmountable difference. Comparing Firefox to Chrome is not. I believe the phrase here would be "making mountains out of molehills". The preferences in one browser over another do not drastically alter the way you enjoy your online experience. Now, if you change and change back quickly, you will notice it easily. But if you were stuck on only an "inferior" browser for a few months, then you would get used to it and you wouldn't care. On the other hand, losing email/telephone for carrier pigeon is something that no amount of time will help you get over. You can get used to using a carrier pigeon, but the way you communicate will be drastically altered. That doesn't occur with web browser changes.
|
On April 23 2011 07:13 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 07:06 the-Undermind wrote:On April 23 2011 02:18 kainzero wrote:On April 22 2011 09:35 the-Undermind wrote:
Once they have been outargued about anything, they always will immediately reply with "it works fine for me". I am glad that something works fine for you. Unfortunately for you, we aren't discussing what works acceptably and what doesn't. The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication, however compared to email or the telephone is it complete and utter shit. This is similar to the relationship between Firefox and chrome/IE/other bad browsers. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It all falls apart with "The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication." Depending on the context, it's not. If I need an answer tomorrow, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. If the speed at which the message arrives and is sent actually matters and creates a significant difference, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. Therefore, it is unsatisfactory in many respects. The difference in browsers is a matter of comfort, but the primary objective of "Read web content accurately and securely" is fulfilled in a majority of them. Are you stupid, or were you trying your best to make yourself seem stupid? Before I get into why you are an idiot, I will compliment you for identifying a spelling error I made. I could go back now and correct the spelling, however I would much rather leave it the same way so that others who read your comment may be astonished by your clearly superior intellect. I compared a carrier PIGEON to email/telephone BECAUSE it is an awful method of communication. This is why I later stated that the relationship between a carrier PIGEON and email/telephone was similar to the relationship between firefox and other shitty web browsers. Did you not read my post? Perhaps you decided to ignore key sentences? Do you need new glasses? . I don't think you got his point. His point was that there is a scale difference. Comparing a carrier pigeon to email is an insurmountable difference. Comparing Firefox to Chrome is not. I believe the phrase here would be "making mountains out of molehills". The preferences in one browser over another do not drastically alter the way you enjoy your online experience. Now, if you change and change back quickly, you will notice it easily. But if you were stuck on only an "inferior" browser for a few months, then you would get used to it and you wouldn't care. On the other hand, losing email/telephone for carrier pigeon is something that no amount of time will help you get over. You can get used to using a carrier pigeon, but the way you communicate will be drastically altered. That doesn't occur with web browser changes.
I was making a point! I wasn't trying to accurately describe the carrier pigeon!
|
On April 23 2011 07:06 the-Undermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 04:35 des wrote:
op what are your qualifications to judge browsers because you make no real technical points and just flail around about how your browser is better and then post some creepy ass anime picture I could go through specific technical points, however most of it would mean nothing to me, and nothing to anyone else who reads this. As someone who has experience using several browsers, and a semiskilled computer user, I am more than qualified to judge. Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 02:18 kainzero wrote:On April 22 2011 09:35 the-Undermind wrote:
Once they have been outargued about anything, they always will immediately reply with "it works fine for me". I am glad that something works fine for you. Unfortunately for you, we aren't discussing what works acceptably and what doesn't. The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication, however compared to email or the telephone is it complete and utter shit. This is similar to the relationship between Firefox and chrome/IE/other bad browsers. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It all falls apart with "The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication." Depending on the context, it's not. If I need an answer tomorrow, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. If the speed at which the message arrives and is sent actually matters and creates a significant difference, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. Therefore, it is unsatisfactory in many respects. The difference in browsers is a matter of comfort, but the primary objective of "Read web content accurately and securely" is fulfilled in a majority of them. Are you stupid, or were you trying your best to make yourself seem stupid? Before I get into why you are an idiot, I will compliment you for identifying a spelling error I made. I could go back now and correct the spelling, however I would much rather leave it the same way so that others who read your comment may be astonished by your clearly superior intellect. I compared a carrier PIGEON to email/telephone BECAUSE it is an awful method of communication. This is why I later stated that the relationship between a carrier PIGEON and email/telephone was similar to the relationship between firefox and other shitty web browsers. Did you not read my post? Perhaps you decided to ignore key sentences? Do you need new glasses? Show nested quote +EDIT: Oh wait, you said something even more stupid. A good product sells itself. Do you know how much Ferrari spent on advertizing last year? $0. Same with the year before, and the year before that. The product sells itself because the product isn't total crap. No products ever sell themselves and I highly doubt that Ferrari's tout of "We spend no money on advertising" means "We don't do any marketing at all." Sure Ferrari advertizes. They do this by selling cars other people want. If I am driving down the road in my beat up honda, and I see a nice shiny convertible I ask myself these questions: -what type of car is that? -where can i get one? -how much does it cost? That is their advertizing. Lots of products sell themselves. For example, Ferr-fucking-aris (as I previously stated). I understand that there are unintelligent people out there + Show Spoiler [for example] +, and I try to be respectful. I really try to be tolerant. Its just that sometimes someone will come along who is just too stupid for me to ignore. You sir, are that someone. If you have any other uninformed criticism please feel free to share. Otherwise, I would appreciate a full length written apology. Not for trying to insult my post, but for wasting all of my precious time, by forcing me to write this reply.
If you are unable to make a good technical argument, you are not qualified to judge. You are trying to present yourself as knowing batter based on your own preferences, and for that, sorry, you are full of yourself.
From a technical point of view, we are fortunate to have reached a point where the vendor is not that important as long as you have a modern browser. All modern browsers continuously catch up with each other in supporting web technologies, and the fastest and most complete browser today will be overtaken tomorrow. Of course, there are exceptions, mostly experimental or non-standarized features (advances CSS3, codec support in HTML5 video, etc). Even Microsoft has managed to be part of the modern browser game with IE9.
Historically, it is Mozilla who has struggled with performance, resource consumption, and visual theme. Architecturally, Mozilla has created more of a cross-platform internet foundation, and Firefox is the flagship application using such foundation. This results in a whole layer of code (Gecko, XUL) that allows a lot of flexibility (extensions) but can be very heavy on the system. This has improved especially in Firefox 4, in part due to the pressure of the competition by Chrome.
Your anti-corprate statement is very misguided. Mozilla foundation raises 100+ million in revenue, most of it coming from contracts with Google. They also have a for-profit, taxable subsidiary. At the end they have more idealistic principles than Google, Apple and Opera, but that does not necessarily translates to a better product.
Saying that Firefox sells by itself is incorrect. Firefox is where it is *because* of advertisement. It is mostly done at a grass-root movement, but there is certainly a lot of organization and resources invested into it. Firefox would never be able to break the IE hegemony without such investments, and stunts such as the NY Times two-page spread campaign.
You need to educate yourself a bit more on Chrome. The rendering engine, WebKit, is a very big open source project started by Apple, supported by many companies, and has been able to produce a feature-complete rendering engine, yet very fast, easy on resource consumption, and modular so it can be embedded on many applications. Safari, Chrome and most modern smartphone browsers are WebKit-based, and they provide most of the functionality available in desktops. Additionally, Google and Apple invest a significant amount of resources on their own Javascript engines, resulting in a increased acceleration of the modern browser development cycle. By the way, Mozilla's Gecko has really struggled on the embedding department due to architectural issues, and majorly missed the smartphone boat.
I'll continue pointing out your own ignorance if I feel like it, but for now serve yourself.
|
On April 23 2011 09:26 VManOfMana wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 07:06 the-Undermind wrote:On April 23 2011 04:35 des wrote:
op what are your qualifications to judge browsers because you make no real technical points and just flail around about how your browser is better and then post some creepy ass anime picture I could go through specific technical points, however most of it would mean nothing to me, and nothing to anyone else who reads this. As someone who has experience using several browsers, and a semiskilled computer user, I am more than qualified to judge. On April 23 2011 02:18 kainzero wrote:On April 22 2011 09:35 the-Undermind wrote:
Once they have been outargued about anything, they always will immediately reply with "it works fine for me". I am glad that something works fine for you. Unfortunately for you, we aren't discussing what works acceptably and what doesn't. The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication, however compared to email or the telephone is it complete and utter shit. This is similar to the relationship between Firefox and chrome/IE/other bad browsers. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It all falls apart with "The carrier pidgin is a satisfactory method of long distance communication." Depending on the context, it's not. If I need an answer tomorrow, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. If the speed at which the message arrives and is sent actually matters and creates a significant difference, I can't use the carrier PIGEON. Therefore, it is unsatisfactory in many respects. The difference in browsers is a matter of comfort, but the primary objective of "Read web content accurately and securely" is fulfilled in a majority of them. Are you stupid, or were you trying your best to make yourself seem stupid? Before I get into why you are an idiot, I will compliment you for identifying a spelling error I made. I could go back now and correct the spelling, however I would much rather leave it the same way so that others who read your comment may be astonished by your clearly superior intellect. I compared a carrier PIGEON to email/telephone BECAUSE it is an awful method of communication. This is why I later stated that the relationship between a carrier PIGEON and email/telephone was similar to the relationship between firefox and other shitty web browsers. Did you not read my post? Perhaps you decided to ignore key sentences? Do you need new glasses? EDIT: Oh wait, you said something even more stupid. A good product sells itself. Do you know how much Ferrari spent on advertizing last year? $0. Same with the year before, and the year before that. The product sells itself because the product isn't total crap. No products ever sell themselves and I highly doubt that Ferrari's tout of "We spend no money on advertising" means "We don't do any marketing at all." Sure Ferrari advertizes. They do this by selling cars other people want. If I am driving down the road in my beat up honda, and I see a nice shiny convertible I ask myself these questions: -what type of car is that? -where can i get one? -how much does it cost? That is their advertizing. Lots of products sell themselves. For example, Ferr-fucking-aris (as I previously stated). I understand that there are unintelligent people out there + Show Spoiler [for example] +, and I try to be respectful. I really try to be tolerant. Its just that sometimes someone will come along who is just too stupid for me to ignore. You sir, are that someone. If you have any other uninformed criticism please feel free to share. Otherwise, I would appreciate a full length written apology. Not for trying to insult my post, but for wasting all of my precious time, by forcing me to write this reply. If you are unable to make a good technical argument, you are not qualified to judge. You are trying to present yourself as knowing batter based on your own preferences, and for that, sorry, you are full of yourself. From a technical point of view, we are fortunate to have reached a point where the vendor is not that important as long as you have a modern browser. All modern browsers continuously catch up with each other in supporting web technologies, and the fastest and most complete browser today will be overtaken tomorrow. Of course, there are exceptions, mostly experimental or non-standarized features (advances CSS3, codec support in HTML5 video, etc). Even Microsoft has managed to be part of the modern browser game with IE9. Historically, it is Mozilla who has struggled with performance, resource consumption, and visual theme. Architecturally, Mozilla has created more of a cross-platform internet foundation, and Firefox is the flagship application using such foundation. This results in a whole layer of code (Gecko, XUL) that allows a lot of flexibility (extensions) but can be very heavy on the system. This has improved especially in Firefox 4, in part due to the pressure of the competition by Chrome. Your anti-corprate statement is very misguided. Mozilla foundation raises 100+ million in revenue, most of it coming from contracts with Google. They also have a for-profit, taxable subsidiary. At the end they have more idealistic principles than Google, Apple and Opera, but that does not necessarily translates to a better product. Saying that Firefox sells by itself is incorrect. Firefox is where it is *because* of advertisement. It is mostly done at a grass-root movement, but there is certainly a lot of organization and resources invested into it. Firefox would never be able to break the IE hegemony without such investments, and stunts such as the NY Times two-page spread campaign. You need to educate yourself a bit more on Chrome. The rendering engine, WebKit, is a very big open source project started by Apple, supported by many companies, and has been able to produce a feature-complete rendering engine, yet very fast, easy on resource consumption, and modular so it can be embedded on many applications. Safari, Chrome and most modern smartphone browsers are WebKit-based, and they provide most of the functionality available in desktops. Additionally, Google and Apple invest a significant amount of resources on their own Javascript engines, resulting in a increased acceleration of the modern browser development cycle. By the way, Mozilla's Gecko has really struggled on the embedding department due to architectural issues, and majorly missed the smartphone boat. I'll continue pointing out your own ignorance if I feel like it, but for now serve yourself.
How does my supposed inability to provide a technical argument make me unqualified to judge? There is preference and then there is performance, and as someone who has used browsers most people have never even heard of, I am definitely qualified to judge. <-- i could have sworn I already said something like that
My anti-corporate statement is not misguided, seeing as google has no interest in having the highest quality web browser. Their goal is to get every computer user onto their google things. Gmail, chrome, etc. Many other web browsers exist for the purpose of being a good web browser. Not for the purpose of being one stepping stone along the path to technological domination.
I don't really care if mozilla jumped onto the smartphone bandwagon or not. That has nothing to do with the quality of their products. I am glad that companies a, b and c are doing so well in that sector, however its completely irrelevant.
What it all boils down to in the end is that people (as seen here) are going to hate on firefox because its a good, but unpopular product. Its the same way that all the macwhores hate on microsoft products for no reason other than "microsoft made it". If you all hate firefox so much, go use maxthon. Quality is quality is quality, and that quality is something missing from most browsers.
Attack on?
|
You have no objective grounds on which to quantify or even judge performance without technical knowledge. If you make a claim, and someone asks for evidence of that claim, it isn't acceptable to berate them because it should be enough that you have anecdotes(even if you haven't shared them).
Edit: To make this clearer, you're responding to a request for evidence by saying you don't need evidence because you're the one making the claim, and that should be enough for anybody. It's the most narcissistic thing I've ever heard. Get over yourself.
|
On April 23 2011 22:31 Turgid wrote:
You have no objective grounds on which to quantify or even judge performance without technical knowledge. If you make a claim, and someone asks for evidence of that claim, it isn't acceptable to berate them because it should be enough that you have anecdotes(even if you haven't shared them).
Edit: To make this clearer, you're responding to a request for evidence by saying you don't need evidence because you're the one making the claim, and that should be enough for anybody. It's the most narcissistic thing I've ever heard. Get over yourself.
No I'm not! I don't think it is at all narcissistic for me to say that I have experience using many browsers. The reason for that being that IT IS A FACT! Similarly, it is not narcissistic for me to say that I am qualified to judge because I am a semi-experienced computer user, and because I have lots of experience with different browsers.
Its not narcissistic for me to have a valid opinion on something, and for me to back up that opinion with my own experience.
I don't really care if you kids think that chrome is a better browser. I don't really care if you think that internet explorer 1's alpha version is the best browser ever created! Just please avoid attacking me personally, because somewhere deep inside me, it stings </3.
......Are we done yet?
|
I have lots of experience with different browsers as well. I have been using computers since about the mid-90s(when I was a child) and have used every major browser, as well as many strange or obscure ones. I've pondered using an email daemon to wget all my pages for me like Richard Stallman does, but I realized I'm not insane.
I see no significant difference in the general browsing experience between any of the major browsers. If you don't have a specific technical reason why Firefox is better(that is, unless you can actually demonstrate that IT IS A FACT rather than just asserting it), then you have to stop this argument. Your technical expertise and general browser knowledge so far does not seem to be any better than mine. It actually seems a little worse, so asking me to take you at your word just because you're you is indeed narcissistic.
|
Firefox is pretty sexy, but i prefer Safari. Mac users unite!
I like the way apple does things and speed is important to me but i've never been irritated so i see no reason to investigate the possibility of perceiving an opportunity to reconfigure myself to be an operator of a different web browser.
|
Chrome still looks beta stage to me, never managed to get used to it. I'm not a firefox whore either but I'm used to it.
Coming to adblock..
I do take the time and adjust it so it is disabled on sites I want to let make money from ads. I just don't want to see a million irrelevant ads and popups just to read a recipe. Don't hate adblock for what it does to internet. Hate internet leeches who made us need it in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
On April 23 2011 23:35 the-Undermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 22:31 Turgid wrote:
You have no objective grounds on which to quantify or even judge performance without technical knowledge. If you make a claim, and someone asks for evidence of that claim, it isn't acceptable to berate them because it should be enough that you have anecdotes(even if you haven't shared them).
Edit: To make this clearer, you're responding to a request for evidence by saying you don't need evidence because you're the one making the claim, and that should be enough for anybody. It's the most narcissistic thing I've ever heard. Get over yourself. No I'm not! I don't think it is at all narcissistic for me to say that I have experience using many browsers. The reason for that being that IT IS A FACT! Similarly, it is not narcissistic for me to say that I am qualified to judge because I am a semi-experienced computer user, and because I have lots of experience with different browsers. Its not narcissistic for me to have a valid opinion on something, and for me to back up that opinion with my own experience. I don't really care if you kids think that chrome is a better browser. I don't really care if you think that internet explorer 1's alpha version is the best browser ever created! Just please avoid attacking me personally, because somewhere deep inside me, it stings </3. ......Are we done yet?
Just so you better get the point:
It is not narcissistic to say that you have experience using many browsers.
It is narcissistic to say that you are entitled to judge when all you got is your subjective experience using the browsers, especially if you have no understanding, nor care, of the technical aspects. Even not-easy-to-measure aspects like usability and human factors have a technical aspect behind them.
And yes, Mozilla missing the mobile/smartphone opportunity is a huge deal. They got the wake up call long time ago, when Apple decided to use the KHTML project as the basis of WebKit rather than Gecko, and developers admitted they lost the bid because their code was too complex and difficult to modularize. Its an example where the "one codebase fits all" model is not always the best. Embedding will become more important as the trend on personal computers leans more towards specialized devices (smartphones, tablets), where management of limited resources becomes more critical.
Oh, and just so you know, I don't hate Mozilla nor Firefox. Firefox is no longer my main browser, but I have deep respect for them, as they jumpstarted a new era of browsers where vendors (Mozilla, Apple, Opera, Google, even Microsoft now) focus more on delivering the best experience based on a relatively agreed set of standards, rather than relying on proprietary technology and extensions (IE vs Netscape war). I have been following the Mozilla project since day 1, supported them, and donated to their cause (my name is in the NYT spread). Just because I am aware of some of the problems their platform has, or can be critical, doesn't means they I hate on them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
