Notings of Attention™
Acmlmboard 2 Released
Github/GIT | @acmlmboard
Chatting Places
Discord

Affiliates
Super Mario Bros. X | Kuribo64
Views: 8,952,291
Main | FAQ | IRC chat | Memberlist | Active users | Latest posts | Stats | Ranks | Online users | Search
03-28-24 03:36 PM
Guest: Register | Login

0 users currently in msg db 'Computer Address',0xa | 2 bots

Main - msg db 'Computer Address',0xa - Browser Wars™
Next newer thread | Next older thread

Pages: 1 2 3 4

What is your favourite browser?
Opera
Firefox
Chrome
Safari
Internet Explorer
Other (no derivative of the main 5)
Multiple voting is not allowed. Changing your vote is allowed. 16 users have voted so far.

Kiyoshi
Posted on 03-21-12 11:19 PM Link | ID: 10060
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED
Level: 64


Posts: 794/1016
EXP: 2164866
Next: 49231

Since: 01-02-12

Last post: 4356 days
Last view: 4327 days
Posted by Gywall
I see a general opinion from a fair few of "I'm happy with it, so I'll stay with it" in general. >_>
I encourage everyone to try all of the big 5, they are all different ways to experience the web.
It was an interesting adventure for me when I did :)

____________________
I don't give a flying feather

Lili~ ♥
Posted on 03-21-12 11:22 PM Link | ID: 10062
Normal User
Queen Lesbian of Kafuka
Level: 159


Posts: 773/8412
EXP: 51554463
Next: 256294

Since: 01-06-12

Last post: 2725 days
Last view: 1248 days
I did.

* Firefox is slow
* Chrome crashes all the time
* Safari is insecure as shit
* IE is just bad (and they dropped support for XP so I can't try it no more)


Epele
Posted on 03-21-12 11:42 PM (rev. 2 of 03-21-12 11:42 PM by Epele) Link | ID: 10067
Site Administrator
The Sorceress.
Boing~

Level: 235


Posts: 1430/20774
EXP: 200180186
Next: 1745706

Since: 01-01-12
From: UK

Last post: 813 days
Last view: 3 hours
Just decided to give Chrome another run.. still not that impressed. I like my bookmarks as a vertical list, not having to search through a toolbar. :/

Although, on a positive note - it didn't crash.


The world could always use more heroes!

Arisotura
Posted on 03-22-12 12:27 AM (rev. 2 of 03-22-12 12:27 AM by Arisotura) Link | ID: 10088
Developer
pancakes
Level: 83


Posts: 176/1868
EXP: 5395392
Next: 36829

Since: 01-05-12
From: France

Last post: 654 days
Last view: 193 days
I tend to prefer Firefox mostly for historical reasons. Back then, I had tried Opera and Chrome, and both would end up deadlocking if I let one or two youtube tabs open (or anything with a Flash applet). They probably improved by now, but hey, too lazy to switch. Firefox improved too, their best improvement for me being plugin-container.exe. Now when Flash fucks up, Firefox doesn't crash. :D

Another reason is that I tend to keep several tabs open. When there are too many tabs to fit in the screen width, Firefox makes the tab bar scrollable, which is my favorite behavior. Other browsers will all squish the tabs until they all fit within the given space. This is nice but I don't want 3-pixel wide tabs D: (I'm probably exaggerating but you get the point).


inb4 someone tells me I shouldn't leave 150 tabs open

____________________
Kuribo64 - melonDS

want some revolution in your coffee?

Kiyoshi
Posted on 03-22-12 12:42 AM Link | ID: 10095
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED
Level: 64


Posts: 798/1016
EXP: 2164866
Next: 49231

Since: 01-02-12

Last post: 4356 days
Last view: 4327 days
Posted by Mega-Mario
Firefox improved too, their best improvement for me being plugin-container.exe. Now when Flash fucks up, Firefox doesn't crash. :D
Chrome was first with out-of-process plugins, and Opera 12 alpha has it too.
But really, Flash is the problem here. Ever since Adobe took over Macromedia it is going downhill.

Posted by Mega-Mario
inb4 someone tells me I shouldn't leave 150 tabs open
Vous êtes très paresseux et totalement fou.

____________________
I don't give a flying feather

Epele
Posted on 03-22-12 12:47 AM Link | ID: 10098
Site Administrator
The Sorceress.
Boing~

Level: 235


Posts: 1442/20774
EXP: 200180186
Next: 1745706

Since: 01-01-12
From: UK

Last post: 813 days
Last view: 3 hours
Posted by Kiyoshi
Flash is the problem here. Ever since Adobe took over Macromedia it is going downhill
Indeed. I actually have an addon to disable flash by default.

It's amazing how much better a system performs after you do that. Seriously.


The world could always use more heroes!

Kiyoshi
Posted on 03-22-12 12:50 AM Link | ID: 10099
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED
Level: 64


Posts: 799/1016
EXP: 2164866
Next: 49231

Since: 01-02-12

Last post: 4356 days
Last view: 4327 days
Posted by Gywall
Posted by Kiyoshi
Flash is the problem here. Ever since Adobe took over Macromedia it is going downhill
Indeed. I actually have an addon to disable flash by default.

It's amazing how much better a system performs after you do that. Seriously.
I know, Opera does not need an extension for it, there is the "enable plug-in on demand" function which works for WMP content as well.
I enabled it on my netbook and there it was noticeably faster.

____________________
I don't give a flying feather

Ailure
Posted on 03-22-12 08:19 AM (rev. 5 of 03-22-12 08:29 AM by Ailure) Link | ID: 10124
Retired Staff

Buzzy Beetle
Red pandas and stuff
Level: 43


Posts: 193/398
EXP: 530842
Next: 34204

Since: 01-01-12

Last post: 2458 days
Last view: 660 days
Posted by Kiyoshi
Posted by Gywall
I see a general opinion from a fair few of "I'm happy with it, so I'll stay with it" in general. >_>
I encourage everyone to try all of the big 5, they are all different ways to experience the web.
It was an interesting adventure for me when I did :)
When Opera and Internet Explores goes open source, I try em. Otherwise I stay the hell away, I always bias towards Open source unless the advantage of the propriety version is huge. Which I found to be overblown by people sometimes too.

I do agree that flash is a piece of shit nowadays. I would love to see HTML5 video totally replacing it (youtube have a HTML5 beta that works fine, but... it seems to be stuck in a typical google eternal beta phase).

I use Firefox, but I like the webkit engine as well.

____________________
AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org, YouTube



Arisotura
Posted on 03-22-12 10:34 AM Link | ID: 10126
Developer
pancakes
Level: 83


Posts: 178/1868
EXP: 5395392
Next: 36829

Since: 01-05-12
From: France

Last post: 654 days
Last view: 193 days
I'm so much agreeing with you. Except it's unlikely that IE ever goes open-source, knowing Microsoft. There are more chances that this board's software gets replaced by vBulletin...

Posted by Kiyoshi
Posted by Mega-Mario
inb4 someone tells me I shouldn't leave 150 tabs open
Vous êtes très paresseux et totalement fou.

C'était une blague, je n'ai jamais eu même 60 onglets ouverts :P

____________________
Kuribo64 - melonDS

want some revolution in your coffee?

Kiyoshi
Posted on 03-22-12 01:51 PM Link | ID: 10145
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED
Level: 64


Posts: 807/1016
EXP: 2164866
Next: 49231

Since: 01-02-12

Last post: 4356 days
Last view: 4327 days
Posted by Ailure
Posted by Kiyoshi
Posted by Gywall
I see a general opinion from a fair few of "I'm happy with it, so I'll stay with it" in general. >_>
I encourage everyone to try all of the big 5, they are all different ways to experience the web.
It was an interesting adventure for me when I did :)
When Opera and Internet Explores goes open source, I try em. Otherwise I stay the hell away, I always bias towards Open source unless the advantage of the propriety version is huge. Which I found to be overblown by people sometimes too.

I do agree that flash is a piece of shit nowadays. I would love to see HTML5 video totally replacing it (youtube have a HTML5 beta that works fine, but... it seems to be stuck in a typical google eternal beta phase).

I use Firefox, but I like the webkit engine as well.
Why the strong tendency towards open-source?
In my experience, free closed-source software often has much higher quality code, better stability, and a more consistent interface. Piriform's software is a great example of this.
The "many eyeballs make bug-free code"-effect of open-source has not only been debunked, but it often leads to an inconsistent software design model because you don't get a community of thousands of developers to agree on anything. Look at how many different looks Firefox extensions have, for example.
Open-source software is always made with IT enthousiasts in mind, that's why many people still use Windows, you need a solid company design model to keep software user-friendly.

Opera has clearly stated that their browser will never be open-source, and it basically comes down to the reasons above. They don't want to drown it in a pool of tweakers and geeks.

____________________
I don't give a flying feather

Ailure
Posted on 03-22-12 04:03 PM (rev. 2 of 03-22-12 04:05 PM by Ailure) Link | ID: 10158
Retired Staff

Buzzy Beetle
Red pandas and stuff
Level: 43


Posts: 196/398
EXP: 530842
Next: 34204

Since: 01-01-12

Last post: 2458 days
Last view: 660 days
Posted by Kiyoshi
In my experience, free closed-source software often has much higher quality code, better stability, and a more consistent interface.
Open or closed source is irrelevant to this. I seen horrible examples of UI and stability in both closed and open software. Main advantage is that it's harder to include a backdoor in open source software (it's pretty much isn't a secret that Skype have backdoors).

Posted by Kiyoshi
The "many eyeballs make bug-free code"-effect of open-source has not only been debunked, but it often leads to an inconsistent software design model because you don't get a community of thousands of developers to agree on anything. Look at how many different looks Firefox extensions have, for example.
Opera have extenstions as well. I doubt that they would all be consistent as well. Closed source software is not consistent itself to start with, there is tonnes of examples within Microsoft software of this, famously with how the open dialog can vary between different MS software for no reason at all.

Posted by Kiyoshi
Open-source software is always made with IT enthousiasts in mind, that's why many people still use Windows, you need a solid company design model to keep software user-friendly.
You certainly hadn't used a userfriendly Linux distro recently, as some of them they are made with some rather strict design models, and are a bit userfriendlier to install than Windows! Sometimes taking a direction I don't agree with that seems to produce actually less productive interface (Ubuntu) but then again it's not like closed source is innocent (Ribbon and Metro). Yes, some software are made for enthusiasts and clearly aren't catering to the average user. But there is also plenty of userfriendly stuff.

____________________
AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org, YouTube



Lili~ ♥
Posted on 03-22-12 04:04 PM Link | ID: 10159
Normal User
Queen Lesbian of Kafuka
Level: 159


Posts: 780/8412
EXP: 51554463
Next: 256294

Since: 01-06-12

Last post: 2725 days
Last view: 1248 days
The main problem is that open source is usually = cross-platform. And cross-platform applications tend to use an interface which may be uniform across all platforms, but doesn't fit with other applications at all.


Kiyoshi
Posted on 03-22-12 04:50 PM (rev. 2 of 03-22-12 05:07 PM by Kiyoshi) Link | ID: 10169
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED
Level: 64


Posts: 810/1016
EXP: 2164866
Next: 49231

Since: 01-02-12

Last post: 4356 days
Last view: 4327 days
Posted by Liliana
The main problem is that open source is usually = cross-platform. And cross-platform applications tend to use an interface which may be uniform across all platforms, but doesn't fit with other applications at all.
Many closed-source software also is, and trying to be native is hard but often done. Opera and Piriform are again great examples.

Posted by Ailure
Posted by Kiyoshi
In my experience, free closed-source software often has much higher quality code, better stability, and a more consistent interface.
Open or closed source is irrelevant to this. I seen horrible examples of UI and stability in both closed and open software. Main advantage is that it's harder to include a backdoor in open source software (it's pretty much isn't a secret that Skype have backdoors).
Open-source software mostly has more security holes though. It should be the other way around when anyone can read the code, you would think.

Posted by Ailure
Posted by Kiyoshi
The "many eyeballs make bug-free code"-effect of open-source has not only been debunked, but it often leads to an inconsistent software design model because you don't get a community of thousands of developers to agree on anything. Look at how many different looks Firefox extensions have, for example.
Opera have extenstions as well. I doubt that they would all be consistent as well. Closed source software is not consistent itself to start with, there is tonnes of examples within Microsoft software of this, famously with how the open dialog can vary between different MS software for no reason at all.
Opera allows HTML/CSS/JS extensions only. Firefox's XUL allows deep access to the code, that's why these extensions can be very unsafe, and XUL is exploited a lot.
The open dialog is different from one app to another, but that is mostly the app's fault. At least we don't se radically different designs as the freedom is limited to just a few types.
Windows and Mac OS X both have a solid design philosophy, avoiding the fragmentation hell Linux and Android have.

Posted by Ailure
Posted by Kiyoshi
Open-source software is always made with IT enthousiasts in mind, that's why many people still use Windows, you need a solid company design model to keep software user-friendly.
You certainly hadn't used a userfriendly Linux distro recently, as some of them they are made with some rather strict design models, and are a bit userfriendlier to install than Windows! Sometimes taking a direction I don't agree with that seems to produce actually less productive interface (Ubuntu) but then again it's not like closed source is innocent (Ribbon and Metro). Yes, some software are made for enthusiasts and clearly aren't catering to the average user. But there is also plenty of userfriendly stuff.
I have tried many distros over the last 10 years. So many different packages, desktops, configuration files etc. seems like they have learned almost nothing in the past 10 years. Simply because there is no solid design philosophy. The installer being easy like the one of Windows 7 is a first step, but the desktop environments nowadays just want to look flashy and don't care about stability or consistency. Even with well-developed ones like KDE or Gnome you still need the command line and the package manager a lot.
The 3 distros I have found to be somewhat close to user-friendly are OpenSUSE (at least it welcomes you nicely), Ultimate Edition (great out of the box but a bit too flashy and crashy) and Knoppix (many useful things preinstalled but confusing at times). Don't even start about the overrated Ubuntu.
Of course this won't matter to an enthousiast as you, but if Linux is ever going to want a serious market share, Torvalds will have to do things like making some tight design constraints, and make much more things work with just a mouse. In other words, make Linux consistent and solid. But if he does that the fanboys will complain because they lost their freedom...
If freedom is worth more to you than anything else, go for it of course. But I prefer stability, consistency and quality code. Don't just count some flaws of MS, look at companies like Opera and Piriform (CCleaner, Defraggler, Speccy) as well.

The Office 2007/2010 Ribbons? I did not like them at first, but it visualizes things a lot more, which is actually better. It just takes some time to get used to if you have used the classic Office since 1992 like I did, but when you have never worked with Office before it's much less confusing than tons of toolbars and menu options.

Metro? It works pretty well on tablets, on the desktop not so much (although since the beta you can do everything wiith the mouse). I will stay at Windows 7 for now, and I expect Windows 9 to be pretty awesome, as there is a clear suck-rule-suck-rule pattern in Windows releases (8, 7, Vista, XP, Me, 98, 95, 3.1).

Edit: only 152 coins for such a long post?

____________________
I don't give a flying feather

Ailure
Posted on 03-22-12 05:42 PM (rev. 2 of 03-22-12 06:09 PM by Ailure) Link | ID: 10171
Retired Staff

Buzzy Beetle
Red pandas and stuff
Level: 43


Posts: 197/398
EXP: 530842
Next: 34204

Since: 01-01-12

Last post: 2458 days
Last view: 660 days
Posted by Liliana
The main problem is that open source is usually = cross-platform. And cross-platform applications tend to use an interface which may be uniform across all platforms, but doesn't fit with other applications at all.
This depends on the application. I don't consider it even relevant though to open source. Some applications like well.. pretty much all web browsers does the native thing well IMO.
Posted by Kiyoshi
Open-source software mostly has more security holes though. It should be the other way around when anyone can read the code, you would think.
Citation needed. It's also possible that more security exploits are reported with open source software than closed source ones. How would you know? You do know that Windows and a lot of other software does base itself on open source, BSD is open source as well. They didn't replace the BSD TCP/IP stack in Windows until Windows Vista.

Posted by Kiyoshi
Windows and Mac OS X both have a solid design philosophy, avoiding the fragmentation hell Linux and Android have.
Err, have you made any native Windows applications? You probably find it's several layers of legacy basically. I would call it anything but solid. A lot of Windows code is really just hacks to support old software as well.

Posted by Kiyoshi
Of course this won't matter to an enthousiast as you, but if Linux is ever going to want a serious market share, Torvalds will have to do things like making some tight design constraints, and make much more things work with just a mouse.
Shows you don't really understand Linux, since what Linus Torvalds is responsible for is the kernel and nothing else. What you ask for sounds a lot like what Ubuntu is already doing (even if I don't really like the direction they're taking).

Posted by Kiyoshi
Even with well-developed ones like KDE or Gnome you still need the command line and the package manager a lot.
Er, honestly you don't ever need to use command line to set something up in Ubuntu if you use it casually. Keep in mind that any guides for Linux on the Internet does it the commandline way, cause that's faster to describe than making a whole guide with screenshots how to get around in the UI.

Also package managers are wonderful. So what's wrong with em? :P

____________________
AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org, YouTube



Kiyoshi
Posted on 03-22-12 08:28 PM Link | ID: 10186
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED
Level: 64


Posts: 812/1016
EXP: 2164866
Next: 49231

Since: 01-02-12

Last post: 4356 days
Last view: 4327 days
Posted by Ailure
Posted by Kiyoshi
Open-source software mostly has more security holes though. It should be the other way around when anyone can read the code, you would think.
Citation needed. It's also possible that more security exploits are reported with open source software than closed source ones. How would you know? You do know that Windows and a lot of other software does base itself on open source, BSD is open source as well. They didn't replace the BSD TCP/IP stack in Windows until Windows Vista.
I'm getting tired of linking Firefox Myths :P
But if holes are easy to find, the developers are not stupid either, they see them too.
Secunia advisories are mostly found through extensive testing and trial-and-error, not by looking at the code.

BSD? Isn't that were the closed-source high-priced Mac OS X is largely based on? ;)

I know @Ailure, I am not saying open source software is always a bad thing. I use some of them too, but most really feel like hobbyist projects, tailor-made to the developer's way of doing things, not to clear design constraints.
In your defense, let's not forget these constraints vary from company to company as well. This is why Microsoft is forcing their constraints, albeit mostly consisting of open standards like HTML5 and XAML, with Metro.

I am open to the idea of open-source though, but it's like communism.
It's free and accessible, but it's in people's nature to push their own ideas. There is not much integrity and consistency unless it's lead by a higher power.

This chat I had with @Nina might be an interesting read.

20:38 <Nina> Have you tried the latest version?
20:38 <Nina> Since 11.04 it got a huge boost in ease-of-use.
20:40 <Kiyoshi> There are way easier distros anyway
20:40 <Kiyoshi> The problem with Linux is mainly the lack of clear constraints
20:40 <Kiyoshi> Therefore it will always be a hobbyist project
20:41 <Nina> I still think you should give it a fair try. It is a really good OS, IMO.
20:42 <Kiyoshi> Ubuntu is overrated, you should try Ultimate Edition or OpenSUSE
20:43 <Nina> I've heard good things about SUSE, but I've never actually used it.
20:43 <Nina> But I'm happy with Arch as I have it now.
20:44 <Kiyoshi> Arch
20:44 <Kiyoshi> That is a difficult distro though
20:44 <Nina> Yeah. I'm not saying you should try that.
20:44 <Nina> I like to tinker with and customize my system, so Arch is nice for me.
20:46 <Kiyoshi> Downloading ubuntu-11.10-dvd-amd64.iso
20:48 <Kiyoshi> I have a few distros to try
20:48 <Nina> The WUBI thing creates a boot entry that loads a virtual disk of Ubuntu, BTW.
20:48 <Nina> Should be completely safe and won't touch Windows.
20:48 <Kiyoshi> I just don't understand what people find so special about open source
20:48 <Nina> Open source is great... In many cases. But not good in some.
20:48 <Nina> Like, look at drivers.
20:48 <Kiyoshi> If an open source app is better than a closed source, I will use it
20:49 <Nina> There is open-source drivers for ATI and NVIDIA cards.
20:49 <Nina> Do they get the job done? Yes.
20:49 <Nina> Can you play games with them? Nope!
20:49 <Kiyoshi> I know, but both ATI and NVIDIA provide Linux drivers, albeit closed source
20:49 <Nina> (Well, technically you can, if you don't mind graphical glitches and low framerates, but well)
20:50 <Nina> That was just to give an example.
20:50 <Nina> An example of where closed-source beats open-source.
20:50 <Kiyoshi> I just don't understand why people like you, Ailure or Nova prefer open source over closed source nearly every time
20:51 <Nina> I prefer open-source when the closed-source alternative is not better for what I want to do.
20:51 <Kiyoshi> The open source software apps I use are Notepad++ and MediaCoder, and I see a lot that can be improved in both, but I don't see a better alternative for them
20:52 <Nina> The thing is, that lot that can be improved... You could improve it, if you can code.
20:52 <Nina> That's the nice thing about OSS right there.
20:55 <Kiyoshi> Sadly though, a lot of people want to bring improvements, but the idea of "better" is something people have very different opinions on
20:55 <Kiyoshi> The result is either fragmentation, like with the many distros, or the program barely improving because there are only a few shared opinions on what to improve in what way
20:56 <Nina> This is very true.
20:56 <Nina> And fragmentation and all those distros is a problem about GNU/Linux.
20:56 <Kiyoshi> Fragmentation does not have to be a bad thing per se though
20:57 <Kiyoshi> I mean, Linux is very customizable
20:57 <Kiyoshi> But that's of no use to Average Joe
20:59 <Nina> Exactly.
20:59 <Nina> This is, IMO, where a distro like Ubuntu comes into play.
20:59 <Nina> Because Ubuntu is different. it offers what the others don't.
20:59 <Nina> They made their own desktop, their own cloud services, etc.
21:01 <Kiyoshi> Yes, what Ailure is saying to, they are trying to become a serious OS with design constraints


____________________
I don't give a flying feather

GreyMaria
Posted on 03-22-12 08:36 PM Link | ID: 10188
Normal User
~</3
Outta here.
Level: 99


Posts: 890/2758
EXP: 9682118
Next: 317882

Since: 01-03-12

Last post: 3912 days
Last view: 3701 days
I still use Firefox 3.

It's amazing how functional the internet is with this dinosaur. :D

Nicole
Posted on 03-22-12 08:37 PM Link | ID: 10190
Administrator
Goddess of the Apocalypse
Level: 199


Posts: 457/14042
EXP: 111220437
Next: 1916647

Since: 01-03-12
From: Boston, MA

Last post: 229 days
Last view: 229 days
457 4467 2
Posted by GreyMaria
I still use Firefox 3.

It's amazing how functional the internet is with this dinosaur. :D

Is there really any reason to keep Firefox 3 nowadays? I mean, yes they crapped all over the UI to make a Chrome clone, but thankfully it's still customizable enough that you can change it back.


Kawa
Posted on 03-22-12 08:39 PM Link | ID: 10192
Retired Staff

Not okay
Prophet of Celestia
Level: 93


Posts: 1110/2423
EXP: 7973913
Next: 78897

Since: 01-01-12
From: The Netherlands

Last post: 1999 days
Last view: 315 days
"Functional" + no media element support = a good reason to whine whenever someone uses such an element, it seems.


Kiyoshi
Posted on 03-22-12 08:53 PM (rev. 2 of 03-22-12 08:55 PM by Kiyoshi) Link | ID: 10205
Normal User
HEY HEY HEY STAY OUTTA MAH SHED
Level: 64


Posts: 813/1016
EXP: 2164866
Next: 49231

Since: 01-02-12

Last post: 4356 days
Last view: 4327 days
Posted by GreyMaria
I still use Firefox 3.
Yet in another thread you complain about software using too much memory.

Posted by Nicole
I mean, yes they crapped all over the UI to make a Chrome clone, but thankfully it's still customizable enough that you can change it back.
Firefox 4.0's interface was an almost identical copy of Opera 10.50, actually.

____________________
I don't give a flying feather

Ailure
Posted on 03-22-12 08:58 PM (rev. 2 of 03-22-12 09:01 PM by Ailure) Link | ID: 10213
Retired Staff

Buzzy Beetle
Red pandas and stuff
Level: 43


Posts: 198/398
EXP: 530842
Next: 34204

Since: 01-01-12

Last post: 2458 days
Last view: 660 days
The browsers have been copying from each other for a long time now. Nothing new. ;)
Posted by Kiyoshi
I'm getting tired of linking Firefox Myths :P
A source from 2006 is not very relevant. Keep in mind is that when Firefox userbase grew the most too. Chrome didn't even exist yet! I looked up the Firefox myths page and eh, if you use that source in any kind of browser wars debate then sorry it's just too outdated. It was correct in 2006 but not today.
Posted by Kawa
"Functional" + no media element support = a good reason to whine whenever someone uses such an element, it seems.
And HTML5 is awesome! :|

____________________
AIM: gamefreak1337, MSN: Emil_sim@spray.se, XMPP: ailure@xmpp.kafuka.org, YouTube


Pages: 1 2 3 4


Next newer thread | Next older thread
Main - msg db 'Computer Address',0xa - Browser Wars™


Acmlmboard v2.5.5 (10/04/2020)
© 2005-2024 Acmlm, Emuz, et al.

Page rendered in 0.094 seconds. (925KB of memory used)
MySQL - queries: 217, rows: 615/649, time: 0.068 seconds.