Firefox 1.0 Final Released!
 

IE users, you have no exuses anymore. Firefox is faster, better and more stable than IE by far. Powerful extensions enhances this already excellent browser, making its defeat over IE absolute.
Go on, try it out. I give you my personal guarantee, you will not be disappointed.



:)
//peace

/me agrees
after trying to use FireFox today after I got stuck with IE.

Great news :) Amazing how fast the site went down with the traffic rush..

Really nice news :D

Just not a compatible to HTML ^^

But i would add a more secure instead ;)

Clicks install :D

You mean IE is not as standards compliant as Firefox, right?

No, he means Firefox cannot process all the HTML tags that IE can...

Basically stuff like glowing text, superscript, subscript (I believe) :rolleyes:

Satan

Chris is right.

and some other things, which are valid html, but don't show up correctly in FF (at least not in the last PR, didn't check it with the final ^^)

@hellsatan
filter:glow is not a part of any standard, superscript & subscript do work just fine in Firefox

@Xenon
Examples?

I think IE got way more problems with compliance (PNG alpha transparency, position: fixed, collapse borders model in CSS2, etc.) then Firefox or Opera.

You mean FF doesnt supoprt non-standard css :P

Bah nothing much has changed since the PR.

Stupid silly little find bar is still there :( Cant they use a regular search bar?? -_-

FireFox 1.0 Full - Big disappointment

Stefan your arguement lacks substance. If you use correct and valid html and know the tricks and flaws and how to fix them then it'll work fine. Standards pay off in the long-run. You'll see just like I have :)

i like the stupid silly little find bar i dont want a whole bar across my screen like that for the url and it sure makes googling/searching source forge alot quicker

Well, that's true, but does not proof anything.
If you know the flaws then you can exploit them or fix them.
As long as those flaws exists in any browser, you can always write pages compliant along the standarts as currently EVERY browser has some problems on some standarts.

For example CSS2.0 is mostly impossible for IE right now.
as well as boxed table tags are horror for the other browsers.

also there are a few css1.0 flaws forin Firefox (if you need an example, look at the bug forum directly after the vb3.0.0 release. Boxed div tags in the postbit template made a little design problem on FF even so the code was absolutelly valid.)

As said, if you know the flaws you can create pages which look ok in one browser but horrible in another, but still is 100% valid :)

That's the real fun behind standards i think ^^

then someone should tell the world just use one browser for coders to be safe....

Standards. I love them, but Micro$oft are my biggest enemy and see it fit to destroy my web pages whilst rendering them.

Firefox or Opera are safe options for all users. Opera kind of annoys me but no way is it as bad as IE. Someone needs to create a virus that disables IE and installs Firefox.

Just installed. Nice. The main thing one notices is how fast it renders pages!

There are a few minor nits, but they are very likely the result of the IE non-standard (but familiar) behaviour. IE is the default standard, regardless of published standards, but I'll use this for regular browsing and test code with IE.

Sir, it is attitudes like this that allows M$ Spyware Explorer to remain the "default standard". If every web developer would follow ACTUAL standards and code webpages for Firefox and other browsers, not only would we see an increased awareness that there's actually a safer and better alternative to IE, but we would also possibly see M$ making their browser Standards compliant.

For the above reasons, I will not visit your site under any circumstances. Period. ;)

Unfortunately that's not going to happen. Microsoft are more than aware of standards. The reason they are refusing to keep up to date is because they want people's websites to function correctly even if they aren't up to the latest standards. Too lazy to get the quote from the IE dev blog but to sum it up they want backwards compatiblity :)

I agree with you Reavan. But if you run a business site you normally can't afford your site not being compatible with IE ...

nahh, that would eliminate those funny discussions and browserwars ^^

the sites still not performing properly but firefox is the one for now :)

I hear ya, but I am too old and have seen this sort of thing too many times in nearly 30 years to get religious about standards. Sure, MS is evil, yada, yada. I just can't get excited over this "injustice". Product managers do not give a rat's-ass what should be done. We must design for the standard, and the standard is, for now, IE. 98% of my users are IE and users are my boss.

(Now, the entire back-end is Linux, where I do have control. :) )

Re: Standards.

Here on the web we love standards. That's why we have so many of them.

Organization ideals of the modernized and forth-coming age.

one thing I've just realized, firefox support streamload doesn't as well as IE6, I almost got no buffering with IE but not with Firefox, I'm using DSL connection.

but so far FireFox is appearently good

IMO IE just happens to be so widly used because it just happens to ship as the default browser in the biggest OS world wide.

I find it very stupid to code in such a way that will prevent 98+ % of the users world wide to visit your site. The push for standards is a good one yes, but at the moment if something must be broken (a standard) in order for IE to see your site correctly, I would do it.

IE follows the standards but not all of them, this is true
Firefox is guilty of the same, they do not follow all the standards and it does not render the code 100% correctly 100% of the time.

Both IE and Firefox have propeitery tags, which all the FF/Mozilla Nuts rant about ie having its filter: css setting, but Firefox has quite a few of its own.

Firefox is ok, it has tabbed browsing, and thats all it currently offers me, which is not enough to switch to.

the main advantage FF has, is that it's not directly embedded into the OS, and therefore a security hole cannot cause that much damage than a security hole in IE can.

apart from that it's mostly a question of personal preferences, nothing more, nothing less.

IE still makes a better interface to the admincp than Firefox by far. Other than that though I run them both to verify that everything displays properly in both.

True. Personaly I find firefox faster at loading web-pages so I use it. I like the idea of tabs because it lets me see alot of things at once and load stuff in the backround while I read anthor page.

I used IE for years and it served me well, but now I think firefox is alot better. I think everyone should find what suits them best, im real picky about what I install on my computer and I know alot of you are to ;)

We are supposed to see some improvements in 3.1.0 if I remember correctly, the admin interface in IE kicks ass, I would love to see it working in firefox :D

It's most likely a malformed test for compliance, as opposed to the script not functioning properly. It's the case with the WYSIWYG editor, IIRC.

You two. I dare you to visit my site, Ultimate FF. I have its coding in, IIRC, XHTML 1.0 Strict.
View it in IE, and FF side by side.
You will see that the ONLY difference is that the header image has a small 1-2px misalignment in FF, else the entire page renders just perfect in both browsers.
If it were not for my news script, the entire page would validate 100 % against XHTML 1.1
I realise that my webpage does not have any fancy JScript, or sells anything, but it shows that the base level of websites is 100 % possible to code for both IE and FF. I spent less than 5h redoing the original coding into XHTML, it was the first time I touched XHTML, and I had rarely touched HTML before. So I think any pro can do it in a fraction of time ;)

Onto what I find might be a problem for businesses, JScript. As we know, not all JScript works 100 % equal in both IE and FF. But I also completely believe that there are other ways of coding that function, using possibly "FF-only" code. And as you can see in vB, it is possible to have "browser-specific" JScript.

I find it EXTREMELY stupid for businesses to code sites that do not work at all in FF, because FF's download counts will only rise in the future. I boycott any site that either displays "Optimised for IE", or shows that its code does not work in FF, regardless who made it. (You can ask one of my MSN friends....)
What do you think is better business, spending $50 extra for a coder to make your site FF compliant, or losing ~8 million potential customers? ...I rest my case :p


As mentioned above, coding sites for FF too would be very easy, using some JScript ;)


IIRC, they said that at the time of producing vB3 ACP interface, Firefox was not able to display the IE interface. I think they said that they would give FF this too, once it was able to display it :)

Very good to see someone using code for what it is ment to do for once. I never said that could'nt be done, infact it is exactly what you should be doing :).

My comments where based on all the sites I have seen going 'firefox only' or 'mozilla only' because the authors of the code want it to be standards compliant and they think it won't work in IE. Or they use new standards that IE can't even work with.

Thats what I mean when I say if you need to break something for IE, do it. IE is just used by to many users not to support it. You might be able to get away with not supporting firefox now, but for how long remains to be seen.

But your right, anyone serouis about there site damn well better be making sure there xhtml works in most browsers at least to the point that the site is readable.

Hopfully god awful IE will get a big update, but we are still going to have to live with IE has it is today for along time to come :(

Meh, ill save the wap support rant for anthor day. :ninja:

On this note, it only took me around 20 minutes per style to bring up XHTML and CSS compliance on my site: this is on Forumhome, Site homepages (CMPS) with may custom modules on a *heavily* hacked-up board: not hard to do, and it looks pretty much identical on IE, FF, and only a few deviations on Opera (that Opera users are used to)...

No excuses really... ;)

Unfortunately Brad, methinks MS won't update IE until they update the OS again sometime late next year or early 2006.

It really dose not matter when it is updated. The number of systems running older versions of IE will always be large.

Just because we see IE 7 dose not mean we won't be supporting IE 6 for along time to come. As it looks now the new version of IE won't even run on XP or older systems, at least as I have heard it.

All speculation. :p

Not all speculation. I have a friend in the comp sci dept at the University of Kentucky and they have a couple machines running Longhorn beta. Longhorn is being designed to force an upgrade in order to jumpstart slumping PC sales.