Firefox 2.0 RC2 Review 319
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.'"
Solid, but no biggie (Score:4, Informative)
Of course, as a web developer, I'm really looking forward to Firefox 3, which will be built on Gecko 1.9 and should have some good improvements to the rendering engine. (Firefox 2 jumps from Gecko 1.8 to 1.8.1 -- minor changes only.)
Oh, yeah, on the extensions issue -- admittedly I don't use very many, but most of the ones I rely on have been updated by now. At this point I'm mainly waiting for the HTML Tidy-based validator.
extensions and themes (Score:1, Informative)
Almost ready.. (Score:5, Informative)
Though there are some bugs - esp the toolbar customization needs to be looked at. My V1.5 toolbar customization is not sitting well with RC2 - esp the Search Engine. Its hogging all the screen from left to right, and I had to move it to its own bar (previously, it was sitting with Google Toolbar).
And of course, better memory management was a welcome change.
All extensions except on worked fine (had to disable extension compatibility check for Greasemonkey, and it worked perfectly fine).
"most extensions"? FYI ! (Score:5, Informative)
Improvements for developers, too (Score:5, Informative)
Good stuff.
Re:Is the big fat memory leak fixed? (Score:5, Informative)
Because there is no big fat memory leak. There are a whole bunch of little ones that add up. They've fixed a lot of them. They fixed a bunch of 'em in the 1.5.0.x series, and a bunch more in 2.0.
I doubt they've got everything, but 2.0 should have less of a memory problem than 1.5.
Re:Why ActiveX? (Score:5, Informative)
ActiveX [wikipedia.org] is just an implementation of OLE and COM via the Internet Explorer browser. Anyone is able to write an interface that supports ActiveX controls. The idea that they are inherently insecure is an oft-proclaimed falsehood on Slashdot. IE's implementation has had problems, but that's not the same thing as the technology behind it.
ActiveX : Internet Explorer
It all comes down to implementation of the interactive extension to the browser.
Sometimes, security means not implementing something if it cannot be implemented securely.
That is true enough, although the problem is usually between the chair and keyboard. The biggest problem with ActiveX, and the way it got it's bad reputation is users who click 'Yes' to everything. Give Firefox enough market share and it will become profitable for these malware authors to write extensions that screw a computer/browser the same way ActiveX can.
useful tip (Score:5, Informative)
Unfortunately, the green arrow button is difficult to remove from URL bar, but it can be accomplished by hitting about:config and tweaking the browser.urlbar.hideGoButton, changing it to "true."
Re:extensions and themes (Score:5, Informative)
1. Download the
2. Unpack it (it's a ZIP file, really) into a directory
3. Edit the install.rdf file - find the line with "maxVersion:" and change it to (for example) "3.*"
4. Replace the install.rdf in the
5. Install the extension/theme: in Firefox, browse to "file:///wherever-you-put-it/whatever.xpi"
in Thunderbird, use the Installer
I have yet to see an extension for 1.5.x that didn't work with 2.x after doing this
still has UI consistency/key command problems (Score:5, Informative)
I reported this bug years ago and was told "probably won't happen until 2.0" and the bug was promptly closed/ignored:
In most modern operating systems, lists in dialog boxes can have a range of items selected by holding down shift, and individual items flipped on/off with a modifier key that varies slightly; in OS X, it's the apple/command key. Open up the cookies box, a place where selecting lots of items would be REALLY handy (ie, deleting all the crap cookies that will expire in "2046"), and try selecting multiple cookies. Bzzzzt, no go. And guess what? In pre-1.5 versions, you COULD do this, so it really WAS a bug/feature delete with 1.5. Now, select one cookie and hit the delete key. NOTHING HAPPENS. Why the hell not?
If you have partially typed anything in the URL bar and hit tab, half the time you aren't taken to the next text box in the browser window. Similar behavior happens elsewhere, only on a page.
It gets worse: just like older versions of 1.0/1.5, the current release candidate suffers from "keyboard-go-dead-itis." I've had to close Firefox FOUR times today because I could no longer enter text ANYWHERE. Not in forms, not in the URL bar, not in the search bar. Command keys (ie, apple-T for new tab) stopped working as well (1.5 still does this, though now usually only when Flash is on the page. Why Firefox allows flash to intercept command keystrokes is beyond me.)
Oh, and I still haven't figured out how to do the resume-where-you-left-off bit, despite having poured through the prefs pages several times.
mozStorage (SQLite) and Zotero (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Tab changes suck! (Score:2, Informative)
Go to about:config
Change the value of browser.tabs.closeButtons
1 - the usual look
0 - only the active tab has the close widget
2 - no close widgets.
Have fun
Nightly Tester Tools (Score:5, Informative)
Re:useful tip (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Extensions (Score:4, Informative)
Re:What big fat memory leak? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Firefox 2 fixes the most common leaks (Score:5, Informative)
ActiveX support for Firefox (Score:1, Informative)
The IETab extension allows Firefox to switch between Gecko and the embedded IE rendering engine for any given tab, which naturally enough has full ActiveX support. The extension also allows you to define a filter of pages that are rendered using embedded IE by default - if you preconfigure filters so that all crucial ActiveX-dependant pages are automatically rendered using embedded IE, your users may never notice.
The main problem for casual users would likely be the changes in interface (especially right-click menus) between Gecko-rendered tabs and IE-rendered tabs. They might find this quite confusing.
Re:Tab changes suck! (Score:5, Informative)
0 - only the active tab has the close widget
1 - the usual look (close widgets on each tab)
2 - no close widgets.
3 - global close widget (at far right)
To see more tabs and minimize scrolling... (Score:3, Informative)
SQLite enables new extensions like Zotero (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Improvements for developers, too (Score:1, Informative)
Re:extensions and themes (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What big fat memory leak? (Score:1, Informative)
Imagine a web page that refreshes itself periodically and uses any of the examples in this bug -- https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2133
Re:Is the big fat memory leak fixed? (Score:2, Informative)
Just because it hasn't released it to the system doesn't mean it won't reuse it internally.
Re:extensions and themes (Score:1, Informative)
Re:RC2 woes (Score:2, Informative)
Best bug fix in FF 2.0 (Score:2, Informative)
See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1417
Re:Improvements for developers, too (Score:1, Informative)
Gecko Javascript 1.7 == ECMA-262, revision 3, with some bits from E4X.
Hope that helps.
Re:What big fat memory leak? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm saying I don't see the memory leak that others are reporting. Most other Firefox users never see it either. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. However, people who complain about the problem need to explain in detail what the problem is so we have an idea what they're referring to. Remember that even if only 0.1% of the tens of millions of Firefox users see a problem, that's still tens of thousands of people seeing the problem. Just because many people are complaining about the problem, that doesn't mean that we have any clue what they're referring to.
Bug 213391 [mozilla.org] does have some example pages that use lots of memory in Firefox. This is because Firefox stores all images on the page uncompressed in memory. For pages that have lots of large images, that can take quite a bit of memory. But when you leave the page, the memory is released. If you can demonstrate a way in which the memory is not released, causing a large memory leak, be sure to describe step-by-step how to see the problem, and it can be fixed.
Re:Extensions (Score:2, Informative)
For added security, you can make the icon you open firefox with as the "safe" "firefox -P default".
It also makes it marginally safer too as cookies and stuff are seperated for different profiles.