Mozilla 1.0 - impressions?

[Adcadet]

Has anybody installed Mozilla 1.0? If so, what are your impressions, especially as compared to RC3?

I've tried downloading 1.0, but I get "file does not exist"...I assume it's 'cause the mozilla server(s) is (are) being hit very hard right now.

Adcadet

 

[Buck]

Adcadet,

I am still using 0.9.9 and have forgone RCx in wait of downloading 1.0. When the time is right (which is not now), I will download and install this software.

 

[Clocker]

What, if anything, does Mozilla do better than IE? What is the compelling reason to switch to Mozilla when IE works so nicely?

From what I hear, the Mozilla UI is 'painful' and Mozilla is not as compatible with websites as IE (probably 97% vs. 99.9% compatible is my take on what I'm hearing).

Mozilla seems like a good idea....just seems like too little too late?

Please educate me as to what make the Moz. so good. I tried it at RC2 (or was it 3?) and it didn't jump out at me as anything great so I didn't reinstall it during my system rebuild...

C

 

[Cliptin]

What, if anything, does Mozilla do better than IE? What is the compelling reason to switch to Mozilla when IE works so nicely?

It's not made by MS. The compelling upside is that you get to stick it to the man.

 

[CougTek]

The first appeal of Mozilla is that it's not from Microsoft. There's also the bookmark handling. You can place all your bookmark folders inside the "Personal Toolbar" folder and you'l be able to access all your bookmarks quicker this way.

Mozilla also let you manage better your cookies than IE, and it probably doesn't have one tenth of the security vulnerabilities IE has. Besides, when you use another OS than Winblows (like me on Linux these days), you have to find something else than the so-beloved Internet Explorer.

I had to work a bit on the font size (in my Linux installation) in order to make it nice-looking. The default options, which let the font be displayed at the default web site settings, result in tinny and barely readable text on many web site (like our front page). Setting the minimal font size to 10 and using the Helvettica font type improved the readability a lot. Speed is decent too.

 

[Tea]

1: Much better compliance with web standards

2: Much more room for user customisation

3: It doesn't insult my intelligence nearly as grossly

4: Better security

5: Cross-platform

6: Not from Microsoft

7: If you hose your browser, you don't have to reinstall your OS

8: If you hose your OS, you don't have to reinstall your browser - a quick over-the-top will keep your settings, bookmarks, preferences, email servers, and so on.

9: Open source means faster bug-fixes and improvements

10: If it was any better, it would be almost as good as Opera!

 

[CougTek]

10: If it was any better, it would be almost as good as Opera!

But have you tried Opera on Linux? It's trully pittyful on that OS. Opera is good for Winblows, but Mozilla rUlEz on Linux.

 

[Tea]

I actually own an Opera licence for the Linux version (I rashly bought a dual OS licence to "save money" instead of just the Windows one) but I've never tried it. I don't have a Linux box at present.

But I can assure you, Opera on OS/2 is as terrible as the Windows version is good.

 

[Clocker]

Ok Ok Ok .... I'll download it tonight!!!

C

 

[Tannin]

Reasons why IE is better than Mozilla.

1: Mozilla has the worst looking grapics and icons of any browser I have ever seen. By a mile. (Well, maybe some of the 'nix specific ones are worse, but not that I remember.)

2: Although Mozilla has now copied Opera's tabbed browsing feature, it still has the worst multiple window management of the big three. There is still no way to open a new window or tab in the background (which you can do in Opera) or at least have it open in a smaller-size window which is easily clicked to the background (IE).

3: Mozilla wins the clunkiness war by a huge margin. It still has difficulty with sizing tables quite often. (Well, the ones up to RC 2 do, have yet to test with 1.0.)

4: Although vastly improved over the 0.9x versions, (at least on the Windows platform) Mozilla takes the longest time to load of any browser. (Actually, IE almost certainly takes even longer, but because Bill wants it this way, you have to wait while IE loads during Windows boot whether you want it or not. Unless you run 98Lite, of course.)

5: Once loaded, Mozilla is no faster than IE, and a lot slower than Opera.

There is no way I'm goning to be able to think of ten reasons, so I'll just have to stop at 5.

 

[Clocker]

I think the time is all screwed up again....my post should have come after Tannin's...

C

 

[Tannin]

Not this time, Clocker. Look again - you were responding to Tea's post from last night (Oz time). I read your "OK, OK" post and responded to that with a case for the negative, then (I think) you mistook my pro-IE post for Tea's pro-Mozilla post and thought the clocks were going weird again.

As it happens I was haunting the Computers forum at the time, so I saw them appear in order.

 

[Clocker]

Not this time, Clocker. Look again - you were responding to Tea's post from last night (Oz time). I read your "OK, OK" post and responded to that with a case for the negative, then (I think) you mistook my pro-IE post for Tea's pro-Mozilla post and thought the clocks were going weird again.

As it happens I was haunting the Computers forum at the time, so I saw them appear in order.

No no no I meant the clock inside my head

C

 

[Groltz]

What I would like to know is how this Mozilla browser stacks up against the current Opera release. Has anyone used both and be willing to offer an unbiased opinion?

--Steve

 

[Bartender]

Under what OS Groltz?

 

[Groltz]

Windows XP

 

[Tannin]

I use all three under W2K, Steve. Of the three, I like Opera the best but it is a matter of taste.

I like Opera because of:

Superior window management

Superior speed, though all three are OK in this department, if we ignore Mozilla's terrible start-up time

Good look and feel

Against Opera: still a little odd compatibility-wise sometimes. It's rare to have problems with 6.x versions though. You have to pay for it. Password management not as good as IE or Mozilla.

I like I.E 5.0 because:

Nice and fast - in the same class as Opera.

Excellent appearance and reasonable if you like to customize for maximum screen space, minimum billshit.* Though al three are (finally!) reasonable in this regard.

The most "professional" feel to it. (But I can't stand the way that, like all Microsoft products, it treats me like an idiot. If I wanted to be treated like an idiot I'd buy a Mac.)

(* Ha! That "billshit" was a typo - I meant to say "bullshit" - but maybe my fingers are smarter than I am, so I'll let it stand.)

I like Mozilla because:

Very flexible

Possibly even better than Opera at doing what I want it to - where IE always wants to be the boss.

Least wasted screen space of all.

Excellent password management, though sometimes a bit too helpful. (I get tired of always being asked who I want to be.)


-----------------------------

In summary, on Win9X, I use:

Opera for front-line browsing.

IE for maybe 1/3rd of sites

Mozilla about 1/10th of the time.

I have the passwords and cookies set such that we get automatic log-ins as follows:

Opera: Tannin at Storage Forum and Storage Review

IE 5.0: Tea at both sites

Mozilla: my various and assorted other aliases.

 

[Buck]

I'm trying Opera for the first time under XP. So my report will describe: Opera 6.03, Mozilla 1.0, and IE 6

 

[Groltz]

I asked about Mozilla versus Opera since I would be interested if something came out that was faster than Opera. Like Tony, I am restricted to a narrowband connection and have found Opera (with images turned off) to smoke IE in terms of page rendering speed and the ability to click backwards through the cache. I only use IE when I absolutely have to: Shockwave Flash equipped web pages etc.

Another nice thing is that if you want to make a backup of your Opera installation (this is relevant to Win2K and XP) just make a copy of the entire Opera folder, compress it, and save it somewhere. You can take that Opera folder and simply place into the "Program Files" directory of a new XP installation, for instance, and start running it with all your settings and bookmarks intact. A new setup and installation is not needed. This is one of the few programs that lets you do that, and has worked great for me through several Win2K and XP installations.

By the way, Opera 6.04 build 1120 came out yesterday. Get your mitts on it here



--Steve

 

[Tannin]

Now that is a really handy tip. Thanks Groltz.

 

[time]

Does anyone know what changes are in 6.04? The only difference I could tell with 6.03 vs 6.01 is it seemed to have fewer pauses.

Still no change with my list of broken sites. I'm beginning to wonder if they care ...

Why don't you use Opera to view Shockwave pages? It almost always works fine for me and my kids.

 

[Groltz]

Does anyone know what changes are in 6.04?

Certainly....

• Fix for bookmark loss.
  
• Fixed problem seen on Korean Windows with garbled text in Date-field (related to 77068).
  
• Added "English to Japanese" and "Japanese to English" translation.
  
• Fix to allow bookmarklets (generally javascript: URLs) to be used as URLs of special buttons.
  
• Check for both http and html when checking if Opera is default browser.
  
• 77068 bad asian characters in email subject sent from yahoo mail.
  
• 74335 "Save with images as" truncated the file.
  
• 74598 webmail attachments (Asian).
  
• Help button on file upload dialog now goes to help.
  
• Fixed crash in bookmarks, choosing File->New would crash.
  
• 76951 crash when saving pages.
  
• Fix for headers and footers printing outside of paper.
  

 

[Mercutio]

Mozilla 1.0 = Very stable. Awesome, configurable email client, amazing privacy handler and yes, the popup killer and image blocking. Very fast for me. I think it's faster than IE, anyway.

I don't care for tabs, though. I'd just ratheer not browse in tabs. I'd rather have the space on-screen.

It's better than anything else I've used.

For Windows users, though, there are alternatives based on Moz - if you think it's ugly or something. Of those, my favorite is K-Meleon. The download is under 2MB and it borrows most of the UI elements from IE (not a strong point for me, but maybe others), and it supports both IE and Moz-style bookmark handling.

Opera, IMO, blows goats.

 

[Adcadet]

Opera does seem fast. So why is it that is doesn't clearly win in bechmarks?