Home

News: IE7 and Firefox 2.0: new browsers all round

  1. IE7 and Firefox 2.0: new browsers all round (25 messages)

    Microsoft has released Internet Explorer 7, and the Mozilla Foundation has released Firefox 2.0 (even though the home pages don't show it yet.) Two major browsers to update and verify against; what are your experiences, if any, with these two? Firefox feels faster, but that's hardly something that can be validated without some real measuring tools; plugin and theme support isn't up to the level of the 1.5.0 series. Browser incompatibilities seem at a minimum. Memory consumption seems decent, too, although time will tell if Firefox' memory usage skyrockets as it did in 1.5.x in some use cases. IE7 has been reported as having some new layout quirks, which is sure to please (or displease) some web designers. However, your author has to refrain from installing it until some third party vendors support IE7, so I can't offer any further impressions. If you've installed either or both of these, what are your experiences?

    Threaded Messages (25)

  2. IE7 Blocker[ Go to top ]

    Also worth mentioning. MS has released an IE7 blocker for those who want to manage the update to IE7 in a controlled way. Kit
  3. plugins work fine[ Go to top ]

    Plugins work fine since the plugin api did not change (and has not changed for a long time). So flash, java and other plugins should work out of the box just like on 1.5. Some extensions are a problem though even though the extension API changes are minimal. The largest problem is that some extension authors still need to bump their version numbers a bit. Over the course of the next few weeks most extensions that are still maintained should be available for firefox 2 (if not already). I've been using the betas and rcs for the past few weeks and it all works just fine here. Most of the extensions I use have been ported to firefox 2 during this period (e.g. sage).
  4. After a post a week or two back about how AJAX seems broken without threading constructs in Javascript, I was told that Javascript is single threaded. Well this is just to tell people that that's not true if the thread comes from a Java applet calling out via the JSObject package. In fact in Firefox 1.5 a thread like that can cause 99% CPU usage by deadlocking itself if the applet calls out before the page has finished loading. When a thread calls out into javascript and the javascript calls back in, the java.lang.Thread it is assigned to is different, so you get deadlocks with one genuine thread. None of these problems in IE - I had a whole set of other threading issues in IE instead. So I really don't trust that part of the plugin API that allows call-outs. Any comments from people who've used that API and know how it actually works would be most welcome ;) Michael
  5. After a post a week or two back about how AJAX seems broken without threading constructs in Javascript, I was told that Javascript is single threaded. Well this is just to tell people that that's not true if the thread comes from a Java applet calling out via the JSObject package.
    Disable Java in the browser settings :-)
  6. Re: plugins work fine[ Go to top ]

    No LiveHeaders yet! Anyone know an ETA for this?
  7. LiveHttpHeaders[ Go to top ]

    I was also missing LiveHttpHeaders a lot in Firefox 2.0 Recently I searched through the project Bugzilla issues and I found a working, fixed copy :) The issue is here: http://bugzilla.mozdev.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15235 Search for the 7th comment and the attached file. It just upgrades the existing version. Works perfectly.
  8. IE7 Actually Is More Secure[ Go to top ]

    IE7 finally addresses its primary security problems by requiring user confirmation prior to any JavaScript code that accesses COM objects. The new layout (where's the menu?) will definitely require a lot of time to get used to it. I have not gotten used to it yet. The integrated spell checker in Firefox 2 is a killer feature.
  9. I installed IE7 some days ago. It's a big improvement. Now its almost as good as FireFox 1.5.x! My only complaints are that the menu locations are not convenient, not configurable enough and the icons can be hard to make out. FireFox 1.5.x is better in that respect. Of course I have to use IE with many sites including the company intranet because too many developers are too lazy/narrow minded to support anything else.
  10. IETab (Firefox add-in) is a godsend here. It seems to be a little buggy, but very nice all the same.
  11. My only complaints are that the menu locations are not convenient, not configurable enough and the icons can be hard to make out.
    I've got to say that I like the new "menu bar". Well look at every computer program: Menus are everywhere and they're just there because the user interface isn't good enough in presenting the features when you need them. I heard MS Office will go the same menu way. And I'm quite interested in it. I've never been a fan of menu bars, you know. Maybe just because I want to save my brain space for different things than remembering where the heck the font sizes have gone. Now the're just 2 menus. It's easier. Not to forget that I've a little bit more space in my browser UI on my notebook with 1024x... that is if, ummm, I would actually use IE7. But I only use IE7 for customers. I keep supporting Firefox and hope that they clean up their UI as well instead... :-)
  12. I installed IE7 some days ago. It's a big improvement. Now its almost as good as FireFox 1.5.x! My only complaints are that the menu locations are not convenient, not configurable enough and the icons can be hard to make out. FireFox 1.5.x is better in that respect.

    Of course I have to use IE with many sites including the company intranet because too many developers are too lazy/narrow minded to support anything else.
    Or because they don't have the time that you may have to support other sites. We tend to have very short periods of time to do our work and if the customers for an internal site OR 95% of the users are using IE, IE will receive the testing. It has nothing to do with lazyness or narrowmindedness. It is easy for web-only people(if you are even that) do dimiss the priorities of people who have to do front-end, middle-tier, DB, external system integration, deployment, error handling, etc as lazy when they have only limited responsibilities.
  13. Well if you are a commercial site supposedly serving the world and you only support IE as a browser then some decision maker is narrow minded or ignorant and/or someone is lazy. I've also talked to a number of intranet developers at the places I've worked to ask them why they don't support anything but IE and the answers I get reflect narrow-mindedness, ignorance and/or laziness. It's not always the person I'm asking who is at fault, sometimes it is their management who has the problem. And we are not just talking about minor incompatibilities, we are also talking about the full embrace of some proprietary Microsoft technologies in order to get a rich client instead of considering alternative strategies. This is bad because a big reason we have browser-base applications is to gain client neutrality. Instead we find we still must use Windows and IE in order to access our own apps. Its funny how in the projects I've worked on where the customer requires some browser neutrality (IE and FireFox at a minimum) we seem to get it done. Of course we start with the premise that we will embrace open standards to meet our requirements and then test with the major target browsers to work around the anomalies. Poor browser compliance also eliminates the use of some standards completely, but if you plan for it, it is not so bad. What is difficult is trying to make something designed to work with one browser work similarly well with others. You cannot economically retrofit a very different architecture and design to an existing app.
  14. I installed IE7 some days ago. It's a big improvement. Now its almost as good as FireFox 1.5.x! My only complaints are that the menu locations are not convenient, not configurable enough and the icons can be hard to make out. FireFox 1.5.x is better in that respect.

    Of course I have to use IE with many sites including the company intranet because too many developers are too lazy/narrow minded to support anything else.

    Or because they don't have the time that you may have to support other sites. We tend to have very short periods of time to do our work and if the customers for an internal site OR 95% of the users are using IE, IE will receive the testing.

    It has nothing to do with lazyness or narrowmindedness. It is easy for web-only people(if you are even that) do dimiss the priorities of people who have to do front-end, middle-tier, DB, external system integration, deployment, error handling, etc as lazy when they have only limited responsibilities.
    Agreed with David. Also, who pays the bills? Unbelievably there are commercial realities. Most sites that are geared around IE are there because companies stipulate that IE needs to be supported and anything else is great, but don't waste money on it. In other words, they spent their money wisely. IT is a business activity and as such is governed by shareholders. Shareholders want bang for buck (lots of profit), not technical correctness. Of course, technical correctness is required in some areas, such as pacemakers, and other hospital equipment, but not web sites. Get real. It'd be great if the industry settled not only on standards, but on a single rendering engine. Browsers could then be built on top of that engine, with differentiators such as plug-ins and look and feel. But, as at now, one browser is used by 90+% of people - de facto standard?
  15. I am still waiting to see which one is going to implement w3c standard like SVG and XForms Looks like Firefox is trying to adopt, by IE is ignoring standards completely. since I am still using firefox 1.5, this week all my friends who were using IE are infected with a virus which was spreading through IE messages convincing them to view a Trojan web site. Since I need my computer, then I will stick with next version of Firefox, and I won't even think about trying IE and endangering innocent defenseless windows on my computer.
  16. Multiple processes in Firefox[ Go to top ]

    I'm a die hard Firefox fan, but when the process dies, it takes down all the windows with it. Well, I could install an extension in 1.5 (or the built in Session Restore feature in 2.0), but it will be really nice to be able to create multiple firefox processes. Also, Firefox 2.0's new feature list is not too impressive.
  17. Firefox 2.0 has an option that you can select that will restore the last tab layout that wa sin use before the browser closed (or crashed) on startup.
  18. yes rory, That is the session restore feature that i was talking about. But, there is no inherent support for running multiple processes of firefox.
  19. Re: Multiple processes in Firefox[ Go to top ]

    Many times, I want to log-on to the same site at the same time as two (or more) different users. With IE, I can open multiple browsers, each as separate processes (and separate sessions). With Firefox, I can't because the session is the same for all browser windows for the same site.
  20. And still both manage to fail the acid2 test http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/test.html ie in a spectacular way
  21. I am running WebSphere Portal at my company and have started receiving a message stating that "the portlet cannot be displayed because your browser does not suppoert iframes". If I switch to another workstation running MSIE 6 the portlet renders correctly. The portlet also renders correctly in FireFox. We are running WebSphere Portal 5.1.
  22. Could it be related to this bug? http://tagneto.blogspot.com/2006/10/ie-7-breaks-iframe-apis-that-use.html
  23. Hello, I have a puzzle. The FireFox installer downloaded via link (the link is released by the post) http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/2.0/win32/en-US is different from the one downloaded via link http://www.mozilla.com/en-US I only find the size of the two installer is different. The former is about 5.62M, but the latter is about 5.42M. All are at Windows2000. a cup of Java, cheers! Sha Jiang
  24. Try using Firefox behind a proxy server when you are not a member of the domain. Every time the proxy server requests authentication from the browser, you get an input request. IE will cache the login information per session, so you only have to enter it once. Firefox will remember the username/password, but won't send it back to the proxy server. VERY ANNOYING. It's a known bug and hasn't moved in well over a year. John Murray Sobetech
  25. Great release from IE closing the gap with FF. However,FF has still an advantage in providing a large collection of very useful extension. Well,it's what web-developers are telling me ;-) Rgds-Claude
  26. IE 7 crashs eclipse 3.x[ Go to top ]

    I installed IE7 and had to remove it. Whenever I broswe eclipse help system, it just crashs (3.1 and 3.2). Uninsall IE7 solved problem. Anyone exprienced the same problem?