Why I won't abandon Firefox
I think MrTom's testimony about why he's not abandoning Firefox is interesting so I should provide my own take on that: I think the alternatives are inferior.
- Chrome/Chromium: (forget for the moment about the part where I won't use Chrome because it has the sources closed, there is his Free brother Chromium) I won't use it because its weird user interface. Give me an app following the GNOME HiG, something that will fit my desktop, a browser with a normal titlebar and tab label below the URL bar and then we may talk. I stopped using themes in the Mozilla Suite ages ago and never looked back.
- Epiphany: is nice to have but it is quite low on features. Probably I could live with that, but the pain of moving my current data from Firefox is just too big. However, I have it always installed and use it from time to time.
- Seamonkey: that's a reliable browser I always keep handy as a secondary option, having fond memories of the old times when I kept using the suite and resisted to move to Firefox. After its development was re-started and synced with Firefox, it has become more usable but is still visibly one or two steps behind.
- I also tried Kazehakase, which looks interesting but seems to have the same downsides as Epiphany.
However... what I see from the design mockups for Firefox 4 make me think harder.
Posts
> but is still visibly one or two steps behind.
ReplyDeleteWon't agree. SeaMonkey is ages behind. Its interface is not as comfortable as Firefox' one. And it's missing many simple everyday features.
Although recently it gets all the features in sync, it lacks significant visual polish and UI repairment, according to Firefox' UI team experiences and knowledge....
Integrating few web-related apps is really wonderful idea, but when they can be used as tabs inside the app, and when all the toolbars around are customizable.
Livio: the Firefox UI team is what brought oddities like the keyhole or personas and is preparing the monster of Firefox 4. Honestly, the Firefox UI is mostly a mix of Internet Explorer, Safari and Opera, now with more and more influences from Chrome. Seamonkey is clean and simple, still a bit unpolished.
ReplyDeleteYou may also want to look at Arora, a QT/Webkit based browser. It's still relatively new, but shows much promise.
ReplyDelete@Felix: won't have Arora the same downsides as Epiphany with an added slow start due to the need to load all the Qt stuff which, as opposed to gtk+, is not already in memory?
ReplyDeleteUh, I tried Arora and as expected: the same lack of features as Epiphany, the same problem with importing data from Firefox, the expected slow start but also ugly fonts in menus and bad menu layout (Tools>Options instead of Edit>Preferences). For a GNOME desktop like mine Epiphany is a better choice.
ReplyDeleteI think Firefox devs made an error when they introduced tabs but not process per tab. That opened the door for Chrome/Chromium, as mult-core machines are common at this point. Once Firefox introduces the functionality they should be OK.
ReplyDeleteThe key for end-users is functionality. The best word processor in the world, if it can't open any of your documents, is just a paperweight. With Google switching YouTube to HTML5/h.264, and other video sites following, Chrome has become an attractive option.
Hopefully, Google's strategy is to switch users to Chrome, then switch YouTube to Theora before the license fees kick in. That way, Firefox won't be left out in the cold.
macemoneta wrote:
ReplyDelete> I think Firefox devs made an error when they introduced
> tabs but not process per tab. That opened the door for
> Chrome/Chromium, as mult-core machines are common at
> this point
Then you don't remember the time when tabs were introduced in the Mozilla Suite... then we started using tabs because opening a new window was sloooooow and the resource consumption was less with two pages opened in tabs than two pages opened in windows (back then I had a PII with 32MB of RAM).
Only recently the computers became powerful enough to handle one process per tab.
Regardin YouTube and h.264 (is still a long time until this become the default, won't happen until IE is able to use that) Mozilla shouls to the right thing: let the system libraries (Gstreamer) to take care of multimedia playback.
> Then you don't remember the time when tabs
ReplyDelete> were introduced in the Mozilla Suite.
Oh, I realize that there wasn't a driver initially. There was a long time between tabs and Google Chrome however. That's why competition is a good thing - it pointed out where Firefox devs had become complacent.
> Mozilla shouls to the right thing: let the
> system libraries (Gstreamer) to take care of
> multimedia playback.
This would solve many problems, including Flash video playback performance and stability.
Mozilla used to be a leader with their design in my opinion. Last time I saw some UI mockups I thought it was borrowing too much from both IE8 and Chrome.
ReplyDeleteFirefox needs per-process tabs and a better home screen. Speed improvements also welcome. Now I've started using Weave I'm hooked, I think synchronisation is going to become even more important.
I also like Firefox but I use Chrome instead because its much faster.
ReplyDeleteOpera is THE navigator.
ReplyDelete