IE vs Mozilla Debate (from GTA3 + VC on XBox)

[pandamoan]

Flow... 3rd party doesn't mean inferior in any way.

And when the browser is technically, practically, and developmentally better than the MS version there is no reason not to harp about it. Doesn't mean every end user needs to switch, doesn't mean a stack of plugins and extra programs can't make IE do what the others do by themselves. Just means that they are... better.

So... we don't care about resource usage (honestly true, if your browsing what else will you have running that takes up so many resources that it matters?), we don't care about CSS, or multi-layer transparencys, or W3C standards (cause everything is built for IE right?), or any pages with odd code that might happen to run better on a browser that supports a wider range of abilities. What sets these 3rd party browsers apart? For me... thats tabbed browsing. For others hand signals (mouse gestures.. whatever ). For others the tons of little convienence features.

A more reasonable question is what does I.E. have that they don't..? I'm sure there are technical differences, but so far what Mozilla doesn't do that I.E. does is open the favorites menu when I push the favorites button on the logitech KB.

Oh, and I do have lots of praises for anything (browser and otherwise) that doesn't have an install program that puts shit everywhere, contains itself to two directorys, and has a finite number of registry entries.

flow... that's a good enough endorsement...

i may try foobar.

as for getting people to switch to mozilla/thunderbird, that's a very real way for ME to get less virii, and for other people to improve their own lives.

so there's a point there, nerdy or not. if you post in an emulation forum at all, you're probably a little bit nerdy, so get over it. hell, i know more about tcp, isp's and other (afaik) not necessarily un-arcane certainly (imho) not-especially-public www and html(php?) knowledge, than i could possibly, if i wasn't at least ABIT nerdy.

so don't pretend to be the super jock with no interest in improving your computer life, get over to http://www.mozilla.org/products/firebird/
download it, and run it. there's no installer, and it works phenomonelly, and if it doesn't work, it's the easiest FULL delete available, just delete it's uncompressed directory and it's gone.

which is yet one of MANY reasons that it is vastly superior to IE.

try and delete THAT some day!!! LOL

i'm just trying to help YOU, and a few other people out there, so that *i* get a few less virii, because open source ALWAYS patches that kind of stuff MUCH faster than any corporate spy-bloatware put out by ANY company.

it's good for you, it's good for society, it's easy, it's free.....

why the hell not switch? give it a full week and i promise you'll like it better, and.... you'll thank me maybe.

 

[AlphaWolf]

So... we don't care about resource usage (honestly true, if your browsing what else will you have running that takes up so many resources that it matters?), we don't care about CSS, or multi-layer transparencys, or W3C standards (cause everything is built for IE right?), or any pages with odd code that might happen to run better on a browser that supports a wider range of abilities.

Well, for one, if you have ever visited a page like www.darkengine.net before, you'd notice how slowly huge ammounts of transparent gifs can rasterize on even a fast PC Transparent gif is a hack...if pages like this were in CSS, you wouldn't have this problem.

alphawolf i think it it did display correctly

i saw all the transparencies effects in the fishbowl
and the colurful circles,,,, the first circles/demo not the third demonstration although they looked very colorful aswell.

Try looking at that page again in mozilla...theres a HUGE difference. IE6 does NOT render it correctly at all, unless you are using the mac version.

 

[AlphaWolf]

And just for the record, I don't use something simply because its open source. If that was the case, then I would have switched to mplayer instead of winamp. (although that isn't a bad idea since mplayer win's feature list is so much bigger, its win UI just kinda sucks, since it doesn't exist and all )

I just use it if its better.

 

[pandamoan]

And just for the record, I don't use something simply because its open source. If that was the case, then I would have switched to mplayer instead of winamp. (although that isn't a bad idea since mplayer win's feature list is so much bigger, its win UI just kinda sucks, since it doesn't exist and all )

I just use it if its better.

honestly, this is also true for me.

hence i use winamp and dreamweaver as well. they are the best i've seen/tried, as is firebird.

 

[sytaylor]

xbox and gamecube debates i can't really claim being 100% sure on anything.. i just read some things, and get a general impression.

those of you who claim IE even COMPARES to firebird are simply ignorant, and need to try firebird for a month.

you'll thank me.

give it a month though, it takes some getting used to.



http://www.mozilla.org/products/firebird/

well ive had it installed two months and find myself reaching for IE constantly.. firebird seems to take longer to first load than photoshop.. tab browsing is over-rated, and it can't handle a lot of aspx web control features.. i think my biggest beef with it, is that i can smell netscape in there. I tend to just use it for sites with insane popups :nuke:

 

[pandamoan]

well ive had it installed two months and find myself reaching for IE constantly.. firebird seems to take longer to first load than photoshop.. tab browsing is over-rated, and it can't handle a lot of aspx web control features.. i think my biggest beef with it, is that i can smell netscape in there. I tend to just use it for sites with insane popups :nuke:

very strange.... about the long load time. for me it loads almost 2x faster than IE!!

are you really using firebird, and not Mozilla? Mozilla is a very long loader, as it is quite a bit larger (bloatware), and not as sweet to use either.

the only reason i ever open IE is for torrent links, as my n00bish self hasn't set firebird up for those exactly right, nor do i know exactly how...

 

[AlphaWolf]

bittorrent worked right out of the box for me in firebird.

 

[sytaylor]

no no im quite sure its firebird, cos i tested that link alpha gave earlier in the thread etc.. and have messed around with themes.. i dont know what it is about it.. if they get it working fully with asp.net and stop formatting things to look netscape-ish ill make the jump

 

[pandamoan]

bittorrent worked right out of the box for me in firebird.

lucky bastard (grumble)

 

[vampireuk]

The only problems I ever have with firebird is lazy web designers >_<

 

[Acorn]

Well, for one, if you have ever visited a page like www.darkengine.net before, you'd notice how slowly huge ammounts of transparent gifs can rasterize on even a fast PC Transparent gif is a hack...if pages like this were in CSS, you wouldn't have this problem.

Alpha, note the sarcastic tone of my paragraph I do agree. It was just an 'even if' then still paragraph.

Panda, Moz load speed is the same as IE here, can't say its faster as they both have loaded before I can move the mouse away from the icon. And never had any problem at all with asp? Can you link to a page you have a problem with?

Finally, Bit Torrent works out of box here too. What BT client are you using? Default? BT++?

 

[AlphaWolf]

no no im quite sure its firebird, cos i tested that link alpha gave earlier in the thread etc.. and have messed around with themes.. i dont know what it is about it.. if they get it working fully with asp.net and stop formatting things to look netscape-ish ill make the jump

There shouldn't be anything wrong with ASP generated pages...whether its PHP or ASP generated, HTML is still the result.

/me is a bit curious

Which website has this problem btw?

 

[flow``]

i'm not pretending to be super-jock or anything, i just dont care to people *cough* alphawolf *cough* to try to ram things down people when they're content with what they have. (for me, ie6sp1). this isn't the first timethis 'debate' has came up..

since ie a pretty core part of windows in general, i'm not suprised by a lot of tied-in files and reg. entries. but (to me) big deal. that's all under the hood and not really in my way of what i do.


for the few websites i visit on a pretty daily basis, everything seems fine even though it may not be properly rendered or my browser doesnt comply or support x standard. it gets me by

and lol panda, you are a master at persuasion

your post kinda sounds like a commercial or something. hehe

 

[Hyper19s]

did some testing with mozilla .turns out
that some pages i cant see them at all
part of www.newegg.com didnt work for me
but did work in ie 6sp1.
also one page of nintendo.com didnt work
either this was the sonic heroes page in the master
game list for those who know what im talking about!!!

 

[AlphaWolf]

I think with some websites, they have intentionaly broken support with mozilla browsers, namely because their popups don't work. For reasons like this I am kinda glad that more people don't start using mozilla. However, on the other side of that coin is microsoft who is allowing the market to hold back like this.

In fact, some sites like bestbuy.com work fine in mozilla if you set the browser tags to look like your using internet explorer.

 

[sytaylor]

alpha, do you have the .net software? if so just make a page with an aspx table control.. and set the backcolour property of that table at run time.. then look at the page in ie, and try it in firebird.. you'll be suprised how many more aspx controls are broken as well

 

[AlphaWolf]

alpha, do you have the .net software?

No point in installing it...No software that I even remotely care about uses it, and like you just pointed out, it lacks compatibility.

 

[sytaylor]

no no i mean the development software

 

[AlphaWolf]

no no i mean the development software

Well, for too many reasons, if I ever planned on developing any software, I would do it in C. I would under no circumstances learn .NET, because its a proprietary standard, and like you pointed out earlier, it lacks compatibility.

If I wanted web based page generation, I would just use PHP:

1. It's free
2. It's compatible with anything. (the page you are looking at right now is PHP)

 

[sytaylor]

yeah i agree, but coporations adapt policies, such as "we will develop using .NET" which is the line where i work.. thus theres still a need for it of sorts