Does anyone use Firefox? [Archive]

sccsux

07-06-2005, 14:34

Originally posted by JoePritchard
I've had it installed for a while but I've found it more sluggish than IE.

Perhaps this is because I'm running it on some pretty old PCs.

Not had any problems with FF here (running Win 98 on some olde PII systems, with small memory).

Originally posted by JoePritchard
Also, I've had issues with it rendering some CSS.

FF renders CSS perfectly. Maybe you're coding your CSS for use with IE (which doesn't render CSS correctly - neither does it render PNGs with transparancies properly). All the sites I've built display the same regardless of OS/browser combo

soupy

07-06-2005, 14:53

Ive used FF for almost a year now and will never go back to IE

JoeP

07-06-2005, 15:13

Originally posted by sccsux
Not had any problems with FF here (running Win 98 on some olde PII systems, with small memory).

FF renders CSS perfectly. Maybe you're coding your CSS for use with IE (which doesn't render CSS correctly - neither does it render PNGs with transparancies properly). All the sites I've built display the same regardless of OS/browser combo

Mmmm....no, I don't write CSS to suit IE. I've been doing web site development for a good few years now and have been involved in writing quite a few multi-browser sites for both Intranet and Internet environments.

I'm pleased to hear you have well developed sites; all I was saying was that I'd had some problems with FF. I'm not denigrating it, just answering the question raised!

Joe

Phanerothyme

07-06-2005, 15:13

It's worth it for the extensions alone.

Ad-block is just amazing - wave goodbye to banners, google ads etc - everywhere you look the web becomes ad-free

and the web developer toolbar is without question the most useful extension I've used - I've lost count of the number of uses it has, but has made web page debugging much more straightforward.

Adding an RSS feed to the status bar was a cinch, likewise adding mouse gestures to make it more opera like.

Its performance in SF chat is irritating as it seems to have some sort of dispute with the JRE about focus.

So I use opera for that....

Phanerothyme

07-06-2005, 15:20

Originally posted by sccsux

FF renders CSS perfectly.

try this (from http://www.digital-transition.com/)

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head><title>TEST</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<style type="text/css">
#float {
float: left;
overflow: auto;
}
#nofloat {
overflow: auto;
}
p {
clear: both;
}
</style>
</head>

<body>
<p>Not working in Firefox.</p>
<dl id="float">
<dt>Floated</dt>
<dd><select name="dropdown"><option value="1">Option1</option><option value="2" selected="selected">Option2</option></select></dd>

</dl>

<p>Working version, not floated.</p>
<dl id="nofloat">
<dt>Not floated</dt>
<dd><select name="dropdown"><option value="1">Option1</option><option value="2" selected="selected">Option2</option></select></dd>
</dl>

</body></html>

SilentStatic

07-06-2005, 15:33

Yep, been using Firefox since last year. It's faster, easier to use, more secure, has better features (eg tabbed browsing). Best of all, it isn't Microsoft :thumbsup:

Phanerothyme

07-06-2005, 15:38

anyone readin this thread in FF notice anything strange about the right hand margin?

Vini

07-06-2005, 17:03

used firefox since it was wee baby firebird. will never look back ( i dont think )

evildrneil

07-06-2005, 17:09

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
anyone readin this thread in FF notice anything strange about the right hand margin?

I've noticed that your previous post had very long unbroken lines and has forced the page width extra large!

LesleyB

07-06-2005, 17:52

I started off using Opera on NT when that came out. Moved to Firefox in it's previous incarnation (can't remember what it was called). Once you get used to tabbed browsing it's too hard to stop.

I have noticed Firefox being slow on 'doze boxen but it's fine on Linux machines. this link
http://forevergeek.com/open_source/make_firefox_faster.php

has instructions for speeding up Firefox. Google for 'firefox + speed'
and you'll find more info out there.

As far as web standards go, I've even caught a release of Opera with non-standard Javascript behaviour so no browser is immune from problems adhering to the standards.

Whatever was there in the standards that said you can only use the 16 defined colours for foreground and background colours for example? Yet that is what Netscape implemented in HTML 4.01.

Both Firefox and Opera are far far more secure than IE on 'doze boxen.

Phanerothyme

07-06-2005, 19:53

Originally posted by evildrneil
I've noticed that your previous post had very long unbroken lines and has forced the page width extra large!

and that shouldn't happen, should it? regardless of what I post, it should wrap within the browser window surely?

.................................................. .................

Lurch

07-06-2005, 19:57

Looks fine here, but then I am on 1600x1200. I'd have thought it was not wrapping because of the fixed line width that the code\script tags enforce.

EDIT As you've no doubt just found out after posting the really long bit which I assume you're now going to edit so it's a bit more normal!

Nazo

07-06-2005, 20:16

Opening up the previous page in Explorer, it's exactly the same in terms of width of mine so what that proves about Firefox I'm not sure.

I've not come across many people who've given Firefox a serious try and not liked it more than Explorer. It's like that advert on the tele with the lightbulbs - you can use a crap browser with minimal features and gaping security holes or for the same price (ie free) you can use a feature rich, more secure, highly customizable browser.

Hell, even the Pentagon recommended people don't use Internet Explorer because of all the security risks involved.

DanSumption

07-06-2005, 20:20

I've used FF as my main browser for about six months now, it's pretty good but I still have to use IE a lot because FF doesn't display buttons when adding/editing entries in Moveable Type, discussion forums built using Discus don't seem to pick up new posts correctly when browsed with FF, and whenever I browse to a PDF page in FF my system locks up for about a minute and even then fails to display the PDF. The latter is almost certainly some quirk of my own system, as I've not heard other people complain about the same thing, the former two may also be fixable if I had the time and inclination to investigate further which frankly I haven't.

But as Phano says, the plugins for FF kick serious butt, especially the Web Developer toolbar.

sccsux

07-06-2005, 20:40

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
try this (from http://www.digital-transition.com/)

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head><title>TEST</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<style type="text/css">
#float {
float: left;
overflow: auto;
}
#nofloat {
overflow: auto;
}
p {
clear: both;
}
</style>
</head>

<body>
<p>Not working in Firefox.</p>
<dl id="float">
<dt>Floated</dt>
<dd><select name="dropdown"><option value="1">Option1</option><option value="2" selected="selected">Option2</option></select></dd>

</dl>

<p>Working version, not floated.</p>
<dl id="nofloat">
<dt>Not floated</dt>
<dd><select name="dropdown"><option value="1">Option1</option><option value="2" selected="selected">Option2</option></select></dd>
</dl>

</body></html>

OK.

FF handles CSS much better than IE on a Windows™ platform.:P

It's even faster on a none bloatware OS (nice & fast under Linux).

sccsux

07-06-2005, 20:45

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
and that shouldn't happen, should it? regardless of what I post, it should wrap within the browser window surely?

.................................................. .................

That's just how vBulletin is set up (as has been mentioned above).

Captain_Scarlet

07-06-2005, 21:54

Originally posted by LordChaverly
On another forum I use they are advising posters to switch to Firefox. Does anyone use it and what are the advantages? Nope, tried it.

Tabbed browsing sucks.

Phanerothyme

07-06-2005, 22:34

Originally posted by Captain_Scarlet
Nope, tried it.

Tabbed browsing sucks. can you qualify that?

I find tabbed browsing incredibly useful.

Lurch

07-06-2005, 23:03

Originally posted by DanSumption
I've used FF as my main browser for about six months now, it's pretty good but I still have to use IE a lot because FF doesn't display buttons when adding/editing entries in Moveable Type, discussion forums built using Discus don't seem to pick up new posts correctly when browsed with FF, and whenever I browse to a PDF page in FF my system locks up for about a minute and even then fails to display the PDF. The latter is almost certainly some quirk of my own system, as I've not heard other people complain about the same thing, the former two may also be fixable if I had the time and inclination to investigate further which frankly I haven't.

To sort out your first 2 'quirks' Firefox renders webpages properly. Lazy web designers who don't know their arse from their elbow build pages that are crap but IE displays them so who gives a ****, apparantly.

The PDF thing is Adobe PDF, not Firefox. PDF's are slow and cumbersome on anything but the latest 4.97 bazillion mega light years per nanosecond CPU's.

I've not used IE once since I installed Firefox.

DanSumption

08-06-2005, 05:29

Originally posted by Lurch
To sort out your first 2 'quirks' Firefox renders webpages properly. Lazy web designers who don't know their arse from their elbow build pages that are crap but IE displays them so who gives a ****, apparantly.

The PDF thing is Adobe PDF, not Firefox. PDF's are slow and cumbersome on anything but the latest 4.97 bazillion mega light years per nanosecond CPU's.
Hello, Earth calling Lurch, I was talking about my experiences in the real world, not in the browser nirvana where you live. Your argument is not dis-similar to if I had said "I keep getting run over when I used the zebra crossing in town" and you replied "ah yes, but that's the drivers' fault". You still wouldn't get me using the zebra crossing without taking great care.

I use MT and Discus most days, if I used FF exclusively then my life would be hell, end of story. With MT, perhaps the developers are using a "feature" of IE (admittedly a non-standard one) to make life a little easier for IE users: the buttons are not essential for posting (they just allow me to add formatting and anchors to my posts, something I can do anyway using HTML) but they do speed things up for me. As for the Discus problem, you cannot have understood my original post, the problem is nothing to do with page rendering, it appears to be cookie related: when I visit a forum using IE, all of the new posts since my last visit are flagged; if I visit using FF, it appears as if every single thread is new. Again, this may well be because Discus's developers have relied upon some non-standard cookie implementation within IE; I don't care, all I know is that it makes Discus forums virtually unusable within FF.

The PDF thing is not Adobe PDF, it is either Firefox or the interaction between Firefox and Adobe PDF. If I browse to a PDF using IE, it loads within the browser in a matter of seconds on my 4.97 bazillion mega light years per nanosecond CPU. If I browse to the same PDF using FF, FF locks up (all windows/tabs) for around 60 seconds and then, when I can finally switch back to FF, all I can see is a blank window, no sign of the PDF.

I'm glad to hear that you haven't used IE since installing Firefox (seriously), but I have a life to live and I won't compromise it for petty ideological reasons.

For the record, in my time I have been an enthusiastic advocate of Cello, Netscape, IE and now Firefox: I use whichever browser works best for me in the job I am doing at the time.

JoeP

08-06-2005, 06:24

Hi Lurch,

Phan already posted some CSS that won't render in FF, so it's not that we're all ****heads if we write pages that FF can't render.

Also, I use Adobe PDF reader frequently on this old and slow 300 MHz PII laptop of mine with IE and it loads up within 5-10 seconds.

Like every browser, FF has has good parts and bad parts - as someone who has few problems with IE, I run it along with Opera because I want to see what my pages look like in other browsers. Quite WHY I have few problems with IE, I have no idea, but maybe Bill's toys are occasionally nice to God's chillun'.

:)

Joe

Captain_Scarlet

08-06-2005, 09:23

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
can you qualify that?

I find tabbed browsing incredibly useful. I can't stand anything tabbed (hence the Windows XP option is deactivated).
I like a window for each action I'm doing, that includes one per website, per Word document etc.
Originally posted by DanSumption
The PDF thing is not Adobe PDF, it is either Firefox or the interaction between Firefox and Adobe PDF. If I browse to a PDF using IE, it loads within the browser in a matter of seconds on my 4.97 bazillion mega light years per nanosecond CPU. If I browse to the same PDF using FF, FF locks up (all windows/tabs) for around 60 seconds and then, when I can finally switch back to FF, all I can see is a blank window, no sign of the PDF. For the record, PDF is Adobe, and PDFs are slow to show up whatever your connection, whatever the browser, that's because PDFs are lame ! Honnestly, 3 minutes to load up is just taking the michael, knowing how lame Adobe are, I'm sure Acrobat 1 would work better than the current version (6 no ?).
Any format so slow and requiring an outside application to run within your browser window is wrong (Quicktime, WMP, Acrobat Reader etc). Honnestly, don't embed things !
Doh !

DanSumption

08-06-2005, 09:39

Originally posted by Captain_Scarlet
For the record, PDF is Adobe, and PDFs are slow to show up whatever your connection, whatever the browser, that's because PDFs are lame !
I'm well aware of that (although PDFs are certainly not lame, they're extremely useful if you do anything at all print-related, they're just not ideal for sticking on the web unless it's a document which will only ever be printed, rather than read onscreen, or a document which must be rendered exactly as the author intended, and not edited in any way).

But you can't tell me that my problem is down to Acrobat alone. I just did an experiment: browsed to the same PDF (this one (http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/creating_bulleted_lists.pdf), as it happened to be in my Google search results at the time). In Internet Explorer, it took approximately 3.5 seconds to load Acrobat and render the PDF. I browsed to the same document in Firefox, Acrobat fired up almost immediately (approx. 2 seconds), then all of my Firefox windows locked up for a further 131 seconds before I was finally presented with... a blank page (this using a machine with a 64-bit Athlon 3500+). If that's an Adobe error than I'm an imbecile and you're free to lart me.

Phanerothyme

08-06-2005, 09:48

Originally posted by JoePritchard
Hi Lurch,

Phan already posted some CSS that won't render in FF, so it's not that we're all ****heads if we write pages that FF can't render.

Also, I use Adobe PDF reader frequently on this old and slow 300 MHz PII laptop of mine with IE and it loads up within 5-10 seconds.

Like every browser, FF has has good parts and bad parts - as someone who has few problems with IE, I run it along with Opera because I want to see what my pages look like in other browsers. Quite WHY I have few problems with IE, I have no idea, but maybe Bill's toys are occasionally nice to God's chillun'.

:)

Joe

Doctype sniffing and three rendering modes are to blame for all this (dunno about the pdf - is that on winxp there Joe).

To be fair to FF, I had to search a bit for an obscure CSS rendering problem, and the errors are, generally, fewer in number on FF than IE.

I think part of the problem is that many web designers are still using 4.01 transitional doctype tags, which activate quirks mode in all browsers, and they render it as common or garden tag soup, regardless of whether the page validates or not.

In terms of writing CSS, firefox is about the best tool for the job, as you can watch the page change before your eyes as you edit the css markup. Awesome (web developer toolbar extension required).
Originally posted by Captain_Scarlet
I can't stand anything tabbed (hence the Windows XP option is deactivated).

I like separate windows for separate sessions, and inside each window I can group several different pages on tabs. This is great for organising web research material.

Nevertheless, tabbed browsing is an option, which can be switched off, so don't let tabbed browsing put you off Firefox. It is just about the most fully configureable browser currently available, but is relatively secure 'out of the box' so it does a good job of satisfying average web users with no desire to tinker, and web geeks who love to twiddle and tweak.

As far as the OP goes, I think LordChaverly should give firefox a go, as he has nothing to lose but security risks and lots of things to gain.

Nazo

08-06-2005, 17:24

But you can't tell me that my problem is down to Acrobat alone. I just did an experiment: browsed to the same PDF (this one (http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/creating_bulleted_lists.pdf), as it happened to be in my Google search results at the time). In Internet Explorer, it took approximately 3.5 seconds to load Acrobat and render the PDF. I browsed to the same document in Firefox, Acrobat fired up almost immediately (approx. 2 seconds), then all of my Firefox windows locked up for a further 131 seconds before I was finally presented with... a blank page (this using a machine with a 64-bit Athlon 3500+). If that's an Adobe error than I'm an imbecile and you're free to lart me. [/B]

To repeat your experiment I loaded up that PDF in Firefox on my Athlon 64 3000+ It was loaded and fully displayed in the time it took me to middle click the link and switch to the tab. *shrug*

DanSumption

23-06-2005, 11:06

Here's another reason (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/22/firefox_access_limited/) why it's not practical to use solely Firefox for web-browsing. Obviously these companies ought to be making properly accessible websites, and one can always take the moral high ground and boycott their sites, but personally I prefer an easy life.

And my copy of Firefox still isn't working with PDFs (I have no idea why, and I acknowledge that this is due to some unique bug on my machine).

So... does anyone here use Opera, the world's best browser (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/23/whos_your_sugar_daddy/)?

(This message posted using Safari)

Skatiechik

23-06-2005, 11:11

Originally posted by DanSumption
And my copy of Firefox still isn't working with PDFs (I have no idea why, and I acknowledge that this is due to some unique bug on my machine).

internet exploder is a pile of **** not in a good mood with it today, never had any problems with pdfs in firefox.

ToryCynic

23-06-2005, 16:13

As I found FF didn't display every site properly, I switched over to Avant - built upon IE. However, the Ad-blocker is a bit poo, so I use FF for Digital Spy. :)

slh73

23-06-2005, 16:17

Originally posted by amhudson119
As I found FF didn't display every site properly, I switched over to Avant - built upon IE. However, the Ad-blocker is a bit poo, so I use FF for Digital Spy. :)

Firefox does display every site properly, and thats the problem, It shows up sloppy code that would work fine in IE, but isnt standards-compliant, so Firefox shows up the mistakes in it.

DanSumption

23-06-2005, 16:25

Originally posted by slh73
Firefox does display every site properly, and thats the problem, It shows up sloppy code that would work fine in IE, but isnt standards-compliant, so Firefox shows up the mistakes in it.
Depends how you define "properly". For me showing something "properly" means showing it as the person who designed it intended. So although FF is much more standards-compliant than IE, it doesn't show every site properly, as the Register article I linked to above shows.

richard

23-06-2005, 16:41

Firsfox is essential for me as a web developer, the "Web developer" extension is a god send. There are very few things that IE can do that firefox can't, that are actually worth doing anyway.

simpleton

23-06-2005, 16:43

Firefox:thumbsup: I.E:nono:

sccsux

23-06-2005, 16:48

Originally posted by DanSumption
So although FF is much more standards-compliant than IE, it doesn't show every site properly, as the Register article I linked to above shows.

Just use the ieview extension for viewing poorly coded sites ('cause that's what these sites are - poorly coded).

The ElReg article you link to also informs coders should check their work in browsers other than IE.
Which beggars the question "Why would they say this"?
Could it be because IE is (generally speaking) a bit crap?

Personally, I design for FF, then test in IE, then tweak the resulting code to make them as close to each other in look & feel as possible, without breaking my code.

DanSumption

23-06-2005, 16:55

Originally posted by sccsux
The ElReg article you link to also informs coders should check their work in browsers other than IE.
Which beggars the question "Why would they say this"?
Could it be because IE is (generally speaking) a bit crap?
Yes, obviously that is why. I'm not denying that IE is crap, I'm just saying that it is (at present) a necessary evil for me. At the moment FF is my default browser, but I still end up using IE about 50% of the time because many of the sites I use daily don't work "properly" in FF (I'd be interested to see what causes my problems with Discus-based sites in FF though, as it obviously isn't an HTML-related problem, but seems to be cookie related).

Actually, tell a lie, since I bought a PowerBook last week, I browse about a third of sites with Safari, a third FF and a third IE.

Originally posted by sccsux
Personally, I design for FF, then test in IE, then tweak the resulting code to make them as close to each other in look & feel as possible, without breaking my code.
Exactly the same as wot I do :)

Phanerothyme

23-06-2005, 17:01

Originally posted by DanSumption
So... does anyone here use Opera, the world's best browser (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/23/whos_your_sugar_daddy/)?

Safari does a good job of rendering some of the more esoteric CSS 2.0 declarations too.

I bought Opera back at version 7.something. The integrated mail was far too intrusive so I switched to FF.

FF is my default browser but still has some strange focus behaviour, especially with Java applets in the main browser window (may be related to RSS feed plugin though)

Opera 8 is storming. I am using it more and more for browsing, although the Web developer plugin for ff is universally acknowledged IMO as the one thing that makes Firefox much more than a browser.

How many programs can allow you to edit CSS on the fly seeing the results updated realtime? That single function makes all the rest of the minor problems totally insignificant.

spiffymonkey

24-06-2005, 12:24

Originally posted by DanSumption
Here's another reason (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/22/firefox_access_limited/) why it's not practical to use solely Firefox for web-browsing. Obviously these companies ought to be making properly accessible websites, and one can always take the moral high ground and boycott their sites, but personally I prefer an easy life.

Hmmm... well, the jobcentre one seems to work OK in Firefox for me, and I wouldn't go to the odeon one with UGC just round the corner :)

Seriously, though... it is really just a matter of time before hideous monstrosities of websites such as www.odeon.co.uk (just look at it, you'll see what I mean) go away and you really can use whatever browser you want for everything. The only reason I still use IE is because I am forced to use an ActiveX based application.

Posted using Opera 8, but I've been using FireFox since it was known as Phoenix 0.1 (Pescadero) :)