Internet Explorer 8 - Yet more IE specific tags..

[nub]

Dude screw Internet Explorer. Get Firefox, or that new one called Flock which is a build on Firefox that allows you to instantly upload files and share them and such. It's supposed to be way better than the original Firefox.

I never liked Internet Explorer. IE7 is a mimmick of Firefox, except it's half as efficient and always lags out.

[BaRRaKID]

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/03/17.html

A VERY interesting article regarding this subject. After reading it i kind of wished that standards didn't existed

[Mr. Happy]

I'll look into Flock, but I won't use Firefox (was giving it a shot here and there). Web standards be damned, Firefox is a poorly written memory hog with an ugly interface. Supposedly the newest beta will be better, I sure hope so.

[Blink]

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/03/17.html

A VERY interesting article regarding this subject. After reading it i kind of wished that standards didn't existed

I didn't agree with it, and not many people on the WSG mailer did either. He talked a lot of crap.

I'll look into Flock, but I won't use Firefox (was giving it a shot here and there). Web standards be damned, Firefox is a poorly written memory hog with an ugly interface. Supposedly the newest beta will be better, I sure hope so.

Have you got examples of the memory usage? I've run FIrefox on so many different computers without hindrance.

[rb_lestr]

Firefox is a poorly written memory hog with an ugly interface.

You mean the faster, optimal Internet browser with the fully customizable interface?

You can't honestly say there are any better browsers than Firefox.

[The Wanderer]

I'll look into Flock, but I won't use Firefox (was giving it a shot here and there). Web standards be damned, Firefox is a poorly written memory hog with an ugly interface. Supposedly the newest beta will be better, I sure hope so.

I'm sorry but firefox uses less memory, runs faster and is safer than IE and above all is more customizable than IE. IE is even starting to copy FF as they see that FF is doing something right because its growing rapidly in userbase even though it isn't standard supplied with Windows and isn't enforced on the windows users...

[Mr. Happy]

You guys didn't know this? I was talking to some uber nerds and they said it's generally accepted that Firefox has memory management issues (search google) Apparently it's going to be fixed in the next version though so I'll give that a shot.

It was causing massive computer slow downs and crashes when I was using it, we checked on my brothers computer (forgot to look on mine) and it was using 650mb of memory!

p.s. I didn't know it was customizable, that's awesome! Can I get rid of the download manager?

[Blink]

http://www.tweakguides.com/Firefox_1.html

[dissonance]

Have you got examples of the memory usage? I've run FIrefox on so many different computers without hindrance.

I just booted this machine, so I'll have to wait overnight or so before taking a screenshot, but the latest patch completely fucked up firefox. It's hit 1.6gb before.

[RobQ]

Try firefox with adblock (or the alternative with a very similar name I can't recall at the moment) and filterset.g updater.

[BaRRaKID]

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/03/17.html

A VERY interesting article regarding this subject. After reading it i kind of wished that standards didn't existed

I didn't agree with it, and not many people on the WSG mailer did either. He talked a lot of crap.

I was being sarcastic
Although it is good to hear both sides of the problem, that guy obviously has no clue of what he is talking about.

Firefox is a poorly written memory hog

I heard about this also, although i haven't experienced it myself. If i remember correctly if you start opening and closing lot's of tabs with firefox it starts consuming lots of memory, much more than iexplorer does. But since this is do to some sort of cache that Firefox uses to avoid making a request to the server in certain situations (for example when you press the back button) it doesn't affects performance that much, although if you push it you will get some performance drops.

[rb_lestr]

Firefox has had some critisisms due to memory usage that develops through firefox's cacheing methods, it cached up to the last 8 websites you viewed so you can easily head back without any lag whatsoever. This can be adjusted in firefox's configuration so that gets rid of that problem.

Also firefox has a problem with things like adobe acrobat reader, when it opens the browser keeps the application running until firefox is closed completely, which sucks.

But other than that, in my experience, firefox has been more efficiant at browsing the web more than anything else, its simple, and it gets the job done quickly and securely.

[Blink]

Firefox has had some critisisms due to memory usage that develops through firefox's cacheing methods, it cached up to the last 8 websites you viewed so you can easily head back without any lag whatsoever. This can be adjusted in firefox's configuration so that gets rid of that problem.

Also firefox has a problem with things like adobe acrobat reader, when it opens the browser keeps the application running until firefox is closed completely, which sucks.

But other than that, in my experience, firefox has been more efficiant at browsing the web more than anything else, its simple, and it gets the job done quickly and securely.

4 gigs of RAM = no problem for me

However, I never noticed a drop when I used to run it on a 1 gig system. I guess you have to do certain things to cause the issue.

[Jest@]

No, Firefox is a rather well-made memory hog Sure, it does have a heavy footprint and - worse - occasionally leaks memory badly - but beyond that you can't fault anything major about it. And apparently FF3 beta is way, way better on the memory front, although I haven't yet played with it meself.

ANYWAY, back on topic. For those of you who wish to whine about how IE broke the internet....here's a (rather lengthy, but do try and get to the last half, that's the interesting bit) article from good ole' Joel on the issue of the IE new-doctype.

In short - it's a necessary evil. And not actually all that evil. Designers' new-found zealotry about standards implementation shouldn't overrule practical, end-user considerations. IE is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't, and they've picked the most pragmatic choice for end-users. designers may have to suffer the horrible fate of adding one line of code to their head templates, but the end result is that the internet works better for more people. Web developers have become religious in their approach to the standards: standards obviously have merit, and I'm as big a supporter as the next dev, but the merits of standards are for their end purposes, not as gospel in and of themselves. If the standards, for historical reasons which aren't all MS's fault, aren't the most practical solution, fixes must be made, and this is by far the most eloquent, non-invasive, streamlined solution I for one can envision that ensures future- and backward- compatibility

[BaRRaKID]

For those of you who wish to whine about how IE broke the internet....here's a (rather lengthy, but do try and get to the last half, that's the interesting bit) article from good ole' Joel on the issue of the IE new-doctype.

I already mentioned it a few posts above
And like both me and Blink said, the guy has no clue tbh. He starts from the presumption that microsoft/iexplorer "created" the internet and the standards, when actually iexplorer has always been trying to catch up with everyone else. Most of the standards comply with the Netscape rendering engine, microsoft never accepted that and tried to force a different way for creating webpages on developers by bundling iexplorer with windows (and they got sued for doing it, and are loosing billions of money), which brings us to the point that microsoft is responsible for "breaking the internet", and now is facing the consequences of their (bad) decisions.
Since most pages are rendered properly in firefox, safari, opera, etc, it's safe to say that if iexplorer 8 uses the standards compliance mode by default, everything will be fine, and no special tag is needed. The problem with the "special tag" solution its not because it doesn't follow any standard (because let's face it, there are many situations where we can't follow the standards, and just need to use what ever is need to make it work), but its because it makes everything worst then before, because we would then have to make pages that work with iexplorer 6, iexplorer 7, iexplorer 8, and with firefox/opera/safari. If iexplorer stays as it is now in the beta (standards mode by default, and a special tag for old pages), we will basically just have to make pages that follow the standards and they will work in every browser. If we than add to the equation that microsoft will most likely force everyone to use iexplorer 8 by using windows update, iexplorer 7 will be taken out of the equation in the future, and that special tag won't be needed anymore.

To add to this discussion the Firefox 3 beta 4 was just released, and it is said that this is the last beta, so get it while it's hot