Please read this post and this post of mine before you post a reply.
Why has Firefox become so bad?
It's becoming more and more bloated and less like what it was intended to be (fast and functional) when it was first released to compete with IE.
It takes up insane amounts of ram memory. It also crashes so easily whenever the flash plugin crashes.
Compare it to another browser like Chrome and the consumption and stability differences are so vast, even though Chrome was created after Firefox.. Chrome consumes 1/5 as much memory, doesn't lag at all even when many tabs are open and doesn't crash at all even if its flash plugin crashes.
I hate to use Chrome over Firefox but it's proving to be superior to Firefox in the most important areas of memory consumption, lag speed and stability. Chrome has major problems ensuring that downloads do not become corrupted, which is a nail to its heart.
Firefox, please take care of the important core issues before fiddling around with issues concerning user-created plugin...
Why has Firefox become so bad?
It's becoming more and more bloated and less like what it was intended to be (fast and functional) when it was first released to compete with IE.
It takes up insane amounts of ram memory. It also crashes so easily whenever the flash plugin crashes.
Compare it to another browser like Chrome and the consumption and stability differences are so vast, even though Chrome was created after Firefox.. Chrome consumes 1/5 as much memory, doesn't lag at all even when many tabs are open and doesn't crash at all even if its flash plugin crashes.
I hate to use Chrome over Firefox but it's proving to be superior to Firefox in the most important areas of memory consumption, lag speed and stability. Chrome has major problems ensuring that downloads do not become corrupted, which is a nail to its heart.
Firefox, please take care of the important core issues before fiddling around with issues concerning user-created plugin...
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx 
Why has Firefox become so bad?
It's becoming more and more bloated and less like what it was intended to be (fast and functional) when it was first released to compete with IE.
It's becoming more and more bloated and less like what it was intended to be (fast and functional) when it was first released to compete with IE.
Personally I don't think it's slow when browsing but I did notice that the latest builds of FF 3.6 got slower starting up, but I guess it's to do with your hardware more than anything.
In my experience with Firefox 4 I think it's lost it's usability a little compared to 3.6, I wish they'd thought more about the Orange button.
It's the UI of Firefox 4 that pushed me to another browser, I'm glad it did because after using Chrome, Firefox to me now is a speck in the dust.
In my experience with Firefox 4 I think it's lost it's usability a little compared to 3.6, I wish they'd thought more about the Orange button.
It's the UI of Firefox 4 that pushed me to another browser, I'm glad it did because after using Chrome, Firefox to me now is a speck in the dust.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by G1LLY Personally I don't think it's slow when browsing but I did notice that the latest builds of FF 3.6 got slower starting up, but I guess it's to do with your hardware more than anything.
In my experience with Firefox 4 I think it's lost it's usability a little compared to 3.6, I wish they'd thought more about the Orange button.
It's the UI of Firefox 4 that pushed me to another browser, I'm glad it did because after using Chrome, Firefox to me now is a speck in the dust.
In my experience with Firefox 4 I think it's lost it's usability a little compared to 3.6, I wish they'd thought more about the Orange button.
It's the UI of Firefox 4 that pushed me to another browser, I'm glad it did because after using Chrome, Firefox to me now is a speck in the dust.
It's not the hardware, it's firefox.
The true bloat usually shows up with Add-ons and such. On it's own, it's still small, lightweight and fast.
What is happening is that FF is reaching the dreaded version "4.0"
Mozilla killed Netscape with version 4.0. It was so buggy and "bloated" (at the time) that it made IE 4.0 look good and they completely lost their user base. I was a 100% loyal Netscape user utill 4.0 stabbed me in the eye.
They seem to be doing it again with FF. They just cant get past that magic number for some reason. They need to start over again with a new browser "Water Weasel 1.0" or something and just skip 4.0 altogeather
Edit: "Earth Ermine"? "Sky.. uh... Scallop"?
Mozilla killed Netscape with version 4.0. It was so buggy and "bloated" (at the time) that it made IE 4.0 look good and they completely lost their user base. I was a 100% loyal Netscape user utill 4.0 stabbed me in the eye.
They seem to be doing it again with FF. They just cant get past that magic number for some reason. They need to start over again with a new browser "Water Weasel 1.0" or something and just skip 4.0 altogeather
Edit: "Earth Ermine"? "Sky.. uh... Scallop"?
�� Quote: Originally Posted by fseal What is happening is that FF is reaching the dreaded version "4.0"
Mozilla killed Netscape with version 4.0. It was so buggy and "bloated" (at the time) that it made IE 4.0 look good and they completely lost their user base. I was a 100% loyal Netscape user utill 4.0 stabbed me in the eye.
They seem to be doing it again with FF. They just cant get past that magic number for some reason. They need to start over again with a new browser "Water Weasel 1.0" or something and just skip 4.0 altogeather
Mozilla killed Netscape with version 4.0. It was so buggy and "bloated" (at the time) that it made IE 4.0 look good and they completely lost their user base. I was a 100% loyal Netscape user utill 4.0 stabbed me in the eye.
They seem to be doing it again with FF. They just cant get past that magic number for some reason. They need to start over again with a new browser "Water Weasel 1.0" or something and just skip 4.0 altogeather
Granted, Chrome is faster (always was) but
Have you counted your Plugins recently?
Start Firefox with the switch -P (Profile manager) create a new profile and see if it's still slow and sluggish.
-DG
Have you counted your Plugins recently?
Start Firefox with the switch -P (Profile manager) create a new profile and see if it's still slow and sluggish.
-DG
Firefox...is slow? I use Firefox and I find that almost all web pages load faster than a blink of an eye, even multimedia heavy one.
Isn't Chrome the browser that opens up a new process for each tab? I prefer my single 100MB~150MB Firefox process than 10 x 150mb~ Chrome processes (just for a simple browsing session too~)
The newer Firefox versions have a 'plugin container', so if Flash crashes in Firefox, only the Firefox plugin container crashes, not the whole Firefox.
Isn't Chrome the browser that opens up a new process for each tab? I prefer my single 100MB~150MB Firefox process than 10 x 150mb~ Chrome processes (just for a simple browsing session too~)
The newer Firefox versions have a 'plugin container', so if Flash crashes in Firefox, only the Firefox plugin container crashes, not the whole Firefox.
Right you are, ReiTumult
In my experience, if Firefox gets sluggish and slow it's in either too many plugins or simply a corrupted profile
I'm not worried about how much RAM my browser uses. Why do I have RAM to begin with if not for running processes.
-DG
In my experience, if Firefox gets sluggish and slow it's in either too many plugins or simply a corrupted profile
I'm not worried about how much RAM my browser uses. Why do I have RAM to begin with if not for running processes.
-DG
What version of Firefox are you running?
What are the insane amounts of ram?
Ken
What are the insane amounts of ram?
Ken
�� Quote: Originally Posted by fseal What is happening is that FF is reaching the dreaded version "4.0"
Mozilla killed Netscape with version 4.0. It was so buggy and "bloated" (at the time) that it made IE 4.0 look good and they completely lost their user base. I was a 100% loyal Netscape user utill 4.0 stabbed me in the eye.
They seem to be doing it again with FF. They just cant get past that magic number for some reason. They need to start over again with a new browser "Water Weasel 1.0" or something and just skip 4.0 altogeather
Edit: "Earth Ermine"? "Sky.. uh... Scallop"?
Mozilla killed Netscape with version 4.0. It was so buggy and "bloated" (at the time) that it made IE 4.0 look good and they completely lost their user base. I was a 100% loyal Netscape user utill 4.0 stabbed me in the eye.
They seem to be doing it again with FF. They just cant get past that magic number for some reason. They need to start over again with a new browser "Water Weasel 1.0" or something and just skip 4.0 altogeather
Edit: "Earth Ermine"? "Sky.. uh... Scallop"?
Oh I think they should just call it Mozilla Navigator since it is based on Netscape Navigator and Netscape died off.
Here's an interesting link.
My FF is v3.6.12 and it uses up to 150K and runs nice and stable thus no complaint here.
-DG
-DG
I use Firefox, every now & again i find it gets a tad sluggish because the user files (username/AppData) folders become badly fragmented.
I just give those Two folders a quick defrag & Firefox is running crisp & clean again
You have to have "Show hidden folders" enabled in folder options
C:\Users\Username\AppData\Local\Mozilla
C:\Users\Username\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla
I just give those Two folders a quick defrag & Firefox is running crisp & clean again
You have to have "Show hidden folders" enabled in folder options
C:\Users\Username\AppData\Local\Mozilla
C:\Users\Username\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG Granted, Chrome is faster (always was) but
Have you counted your Plugins recently?
Start Firefox with the switch -P (Profile manager) create a new profile and see if it's still slow and sluggish.
-DG
Have you counted your Plugins recently?
Start Firefox with the switch -P (Profile manager) create a new profile and see if it's still slow and sluggish.
-DG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Rei Tumult Firefox...is slow? I use Firefox and I find that almost all web pages load faster than a blink of an eye, even multimedia heavy one.
Isn't Chrome the browser that opens up a new process for each tab? I prefer my single 100MB~150MB Firefox process than 10 x 150mb~ Chrome processes (just for a simple browsing session too~)
The newer Firefox versions have a 'plugin container', so if Flash crashes in Firefox, only the Firefox plugin container crashes, not the whole Firefox.
Isn't Chrome the browser that opens up a new process for each tab? I prefer my single 100MB~150MB Firefox process than 10 x 150mb~ Chrome processes (just for a simple browsing session too~)
The newer Firefox versions have a 'plugin container', so if Flash crashes in Firefox, only the Firefox plugin container crashes, not the whole Firefox.
Meh when I'm using Google Chrome, I didn't even notice that flash crashed because Chrome was functioning as normal with not even a single second of lag when the flash crashed.
It was until Windows had a popup alerting me that Chrome stopped working (although Chrome didn't stop working for even one second, and was still working while that alert appeared) that I got curious enough to check what happened and I realized that flash had crashed.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by zigzag3143 What version of Firefox are you running?
What are the insane amounts of ram?
Ken
What are the insane amounts of ram?
Ken
Insane amounts of ram = 1.2GB of RAM.
I'm calling bull$** on this whole issue.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
Otherwise:
You have a ton of toolbars and add-ons
you've never cleared your history
never defragged your HDD
your system is infected with spyware
one or all of the above.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
Otherwise:
You have a ton of toolbars and add-ons
you've never cleared your history
never defragged your HDD
your system is infected with spyware
one or all of the above.
I don't think you can't chalk that all up to "Mozilla = Major Fail". It's certainly not that simple.There must be something seriously wrong with your system.
Looks to me like a good candidate for a clean install.
-DG
Looks to me like a good candidate for a clean install.
-DG
Aw, I was about to say that. Sure, I have had problems with the Chrome browser, mainly my dislike of its UI and multiple processes creations. But I'd leave it at that, unspoken. Rather than posting a general-ism about how something "sucks" because for some reason or another the software didn't work correctly for me. Not the most professional move.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG I don't think you can't chalk that all up to "Mozilla = Major Fail".
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot I'm calling bull$** on this whole issue.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
Chrome can handle 20+ tabs without lagging and without consuming half as much memory as firefox.
Firefox handles 20+ tabs with lagging and consuming 1.2GB of RAM.
I don't understand what happened to Firefox.. Seriously. It used to be the standard but it has fallen behind by so much.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Rei Tumult Aw, I was about to say that. Sure, I have had problems with the Chrome browser, mainly my dislike of its UI and multiple processes creations. But I'd leave it at that, unspoken. Rather than posting a general-ism about how something "sucks" because for some reason or another the software didn't work correctly for me. Not the most professional move.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG I don't think you can't chalk that all up to "Mozilla = Major Fail".
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot I'm calling bull$** on this whole issue.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
Chrome can handle 20+ tabs without lagging and without consuming half as much memory as firefox.
Firefox handles 20+ tabs with lagging and consuming 1.2GB of RAM.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot �� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot I'm calling bull$** on this whole issue.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
trying to run 20+ tabs simultaneously might use 1.2GB.
Chrome can handle 20+ tabs without lagging and without consuming half as much memory as firefox.
Firefox handles 20+ tabs with lagging and consuming 1.2GB of RAM.
Attachment 112839
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx Have you kept your laptop on for two weeks (or at least a few days) consecutively while keeping the 20 tabs there without exiting firefox or rebooting your laptop? Would the result be the same?
Your problem with firefox has little or nothing to do with firefox itself, but the way you use your computer. Chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes. If you leave almost any application running, then do something else and go back it it, you'll find it runs a little slower than before if your system doesn't have enough memory to avoid reverting to the pagefile for multiple running apps. I would bet the pagefile is in hundreds of fragments because you don't shut your computer down and do basic maintenance. When's the last time you cleared the browsing history, cleaned up and defragged your HDD? I would bet if you ran ccleaner it would remove at least a GB from your system.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot �� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx Have you kept your laptop on for two weeks (or at least a few days) consecutively while keeping the 20 tabs there without exiting firefox or rebooting your laptop? Would the result be the same?
Your problem with firefox has little or nothing to do with firefox itself, but the way you use your computer. Chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes. If you leave almost any application running, then do something else and go back it it, you'll find it runs a little slower than before if your system doesn't have enough memory to avoid reverting to the pagefile for multiple running apps. I would bet the pagefile is in hundreds of fragments because you don't shut your computer down and do basic maintenance. When's the last time you cleared the browsing history, cleaned up and defragged your HDD?.
I suggest the perceived problem lies with the user not Firefox.
No complaints re FF here.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by jmh �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot �� Quote: Originally Posted by ravanx have you kept your laptop on for two weeks (or at least a few days) consecutively while keeping the 20 tabs there without exiting firefox or rebooting your laptop? Would the result be the same?
your problem with firefox has little or nothing to do with firefox itself, but the way you use your computer. chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes. If you leave almost any application running, then do something else and go back it it, you'll find it runs a little slower than before if your system doesn't have enough memory to avoid reverting to the pagefile for multiple running apps. I would bet the pagefile is in hundreds of fragments because you don't shut your computer down and do basic maintenance. when's the last time you cleared the browsing history, cleaned up and defragged your hdd?.
I suggest the perceived problem lies with the user not firefox.
No complaints re ff here.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by JMH �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot �� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx Have you kept your laptop on for two weeks (or at least a few days) consecutively while keeping the 20 tabs there without exiting firefox or rebooting your laptop? Would the result be the same?
Your problem with firefox has little or nothing to do with firefox itself, but the way you use your computer. Chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes. If you leave almost any application running, then do something else and go back it it, you'll find it runs a little slower than before if your system doesn't have enough memory to avoid reverting to the pagefile for multiple running apps. I would bet the pagefile is in hundreds of fragments because you don't shut your computer down and do basic maintenance. When's the last time you cleared the browsing history, cleaned up and defragged your HDD?.
I suggest the perceived problem lies with the user not Firefox.
No complaints re FF here.
Let's see. How am I supposed to defrag my hard disk when it is 0% fragmented?
As I said before, bull$h** .. Post a screenshot of FF and task manager that shows FF using more than a GB of RAM. If you simply hate firefox and are looking for sympathy, this was the wrong place to go looking for it. If you actually have the problems you're describing, clearing browsing history, running ccleaner, and defragmenting your HDD will solve it, unless you have a bunch of toolbars and addons or your system is full of spyware.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx �� Quote: Originally Posted by JMH �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot you just proved my point.
Your problem with firefox has little or nothing to do with firefox itself, but the way you use your computer. Chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes. If you leave almost any application running, then do something else and go back it it, you'll find it runs a little slower than before if your system doesn't have enough memory to avoid reverting to the pagefile for multiple running apps. I would bet the pagefile is in hundreds of fragments because you don't shut your computer down and do basic maintenance. When's the last time you cleared the browsing history, cleaned up and defragged your HDD?.
Your problem with firefox has little or nothing to do with firefox itself, but the way you use your computer. Chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes. If you leave almost any application running, then do something else and go back it it, you'll find it runs a little slower than before if your system doesn't have enough memory to avoid reverting to the pagefile for multiple running apps. I would bet the pagefile is in hundreds of fragments because you don't shut your computer down and do basic maintenance. When's the last time you cleared the browsing history, cleaned up and defragged your HDD?.
I suggest the perceived problem lies with the user not Firefox.
No complaints re FF here.
Let's see. How am I supposed to defrag my hard disk when it is 0% fragmented?
�� Quote: Originally Posted by yowanvista Addons, Toolbars, AVs can slow FF
or worse
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot Chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes.
Yeah, I'm not buying it either. I use FF as well without issue.
I am seeing a Chrome commercial here.
BTW, Google's real ethics are still in huge question.
I am seeing a Chrome commercial here.
BTW, Google's real ethics are still in huge question.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot �� Quote: Originally Posted by yowanvista Addons, Toolbars, AVs can slow FF
Attachment 113089
or worse
Attachment 113091
The first pic is how I see some people actually running FF.
The second was actually a joke pic by someone trying to see how many toolbars they could get installed at once.
The second was actually a joke pic by someone trying to see how many toolbars they could get installed at once.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by malexous �� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot Chrome rates higher on the benchmarks because it has almost no security built into it, which makes it lighter on a system, but fills it full of holes.
How is that anything to do with a benchmark test? Chrome has no privacy (that's why ChromePlus, SRWare Iron and others exist) but it uses lots of security.
Unless a person wants to tell someone, it is nobody else's business who they talk to, what they search for, what they read, what videos they watch, where they live, what they buy, where they're planning to go on vacation, what religion they have, their mother's maiden name, what political views they have ..I could go on ad infinitum.. If you have no privacy, you have no security. Therefore chrome has no security... but besides that fact.. chrome has been the #3 reason my xp-and-vista-using customers ended up with rouge AVs, trojans, spyware and other infestations. Malware in P2P downloads and IE were #1 and #2 respectively. Until very recently (the past 15 days to be exact) Google has done absolutely nothing to protect people from malicious sites. And besides that, benchmarks don't always reflect real world performance. It wouldn't matter if a browser could render a 50MB java app in 3 milliseconds if it crashes at least once every time you use it
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx I hate to use Chrome over Firefox but it's proving to be superior to Firefox in the most important areas of memory consumption, lag speed and stability. Chrome has major problems ensuring that downloads do not become corrupted, which is a nail to its heart.
Firefox, please take care of the important core issues before fiddling around with issues concerning user-created plugin...
Firefox, please take care of the important core issues before fiddling around with issues concerning user-created plugin...
Chrome has never crashed for me or for many others while other browsers have crashed on every use for some.
What has Google started doing recently that protect people from malicious sites? They already have Google Safe Browsing API - Google Code
What percentage of your customers became infected while using Chrome without any interaction from the customer and how do you know it wasn't caused by a Flash or Java or other exploit and how do you know if they were using another browser at the time that they wouldn't get infected?
What has Google started doing recently that protect people from malicious sites? They already have Google Safe Browsing API - Google Code
What percentage of your customers became infected while using Chrome without any interaction from the customer and how do you know it wasn't caused by a Flash or Java or other exploit and how do you know if they were using another browser at the time that they wouldn't get infected?
Why do have the people on this thread assume the user is to blame for his/her problem with firefox. You will find that a lot of people don't like firefox, which is why chrome has become as popular as it has in such a short time. A lot of people have problems with firefox running slowly or crashing regularly, even after deleting cookies, browsing data, and what have you. If you don't have problems, good for you, but don't assume everyone that does run into a problem is to blame, just like we don't like people blaming their problems on Bill Gates or Win7.
BTW can I see some secondary source stating that all your browsing data gets sent to google? I see people saying it, but no evidence for it. And chromes speed and reliability has a lot to do with the fact that it opens a new process for all tabs and plug-ins.
BTW can I see some secondary source stating that all your browsing data gets sent to google? I see people saying it, but no evidence for it. And chromes speed and reliability has a lot to do with the fact that it opens a new process for all tabs and plug-ins.
If I drive a car without ever doing basic maintenance like say changing oil and filters I can't possibly blame BMW or Dodge for building such unreliable cars.
As for your notions about chrome being wrongfully accused: Do you really think Google put a unique ID in each of their browsers because they were bored....or even that this has been done with the users best interest in mind?
Didn't think so.
Excuse me, I call it as I see it.
I'm just very pragmatic: If somebody enters a bank with a ski mask over their head I don't automatically assume they're having a winter social I didn't know about.
-DG
As for your notions about chrome being wrongfully accused: Do you really think Google put a unique ID in each of their browsers because they were bored....or even that this has been done with the users best interest in mind?
Didn't think so.
Excuse me, I call it as I see it.
I'm just very pragmatic: If somebody enters a bank with a ski mask over their head I don't automatically assume they're having a winter social I didn't know about.
-DG
How about the fact that the OP has confirmed that their HDD is 0% fragmented, and that they use now toolbars, plugins or extensions but everyone keeps saying that it is the users fault because they use to many plugins and don't defrag their HDD or do other simple maintenance.
Also, you're reaching a lot on what you say about Chrome. Let me guess. MS makes a unique product ID on every computer with Windows to track everything you do one them.
Also, you're reaching a lot on what you say about Chrome. Let me guess. MS makes a unique product ID on every computer with Windows to track everything you do one them.
Well, the original poster is making a statement that Firefox has gotten bad and that seems to insinuate it must be that same way for everybody using it.
This is why some of us firefox users and responding back...because we aren't seeing or experiencing the same problems as the OP. Therefore, there must be something different about our setups.
This is why some of us firefox users and responding back...because we aren't seeing or experiencing the same problems as the OP. Therefore, there must be something different about our setups.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot �� Quote: Originally Posted by yowanvista Addons, Toolbars, AVs can slow FF
Attachment 113089
or worse
Attachment 113091
I wonder if anyone will ever take credit for that screenshot of IE6
In my opinoin(and yes, it's just an opinion) I wouldn't say that anyone means bad as in "not good"
Why did I move away from FF? I loved FF years ago, it was great, flawless and fast. In my experience, it's not that FF has gotten bad really. It's just that I compare how FF3+ runs compared to the previous versions that I loved. I liked FF for the reason of speed, which, compared to what it used to be, simply isn't the same. I rarely ever used any extentions aside from the more important 2 or 3.
I have never actually had a real "problem" with FF3+ , it's just that it isn't the same. I still have FF3 as a backup since I use Opera as my main, but after messing with IE8 and now the 9 beta, I see no advantage of FF over IE at all, they're both comparably slow-ER, not necessarily slow.
On another note.....the plan to have extentions in Opera now kinda pisses me off. I always liked this browser because it was simple and fast.. I just worry that it's going to be another FF. Who knows, maybe i'll just go to IE9 when it finally arrives.
I did like FF4 beta a lo for the time I used it though.
EDIT: Also, don't say a word about switching to Chrome. Sick of google, don't trust Chrome, whether what is said is true or not. I won't ever touch it.
Why did I move away from FF? I loved FF years ago, it was great, flawless and fast. In my experience, it's not that FF has gotten bad really. It's just that I compare how FF3+ runs compared to the previous versions that I loved. I liked FF for the reason of speed, which, compared to what it used to be, simply isn't the same. I rarely ever used any extentions aside from the more important 2 or 3.
I have never actually had a real "problem" with FF3+ , it's just that it isn't the same. I still have FF3 as a backup since I use Opera as my main, but after messing with IE8 and now the 9 beta, I see no advantage of FF over IE at all, they're both comparably slow-ER, not necessarily slow.
On another note.....the plan to have extentions in Opera now kinda pisses me off. I always liked this browser because it was simple and fast.. I just worry that it's going to be another FF. Who knows, maybe i'll just go to IE9 when it finally arrives.
I did like FF4 beta a lo for the time I used it though.
EDIT: Also, don't say a word about switching to Chrome. Sick of google, don't trust Chrome, whether what is said is true or not. I won't ever touch it.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Tepid Yeah, I'm not buying it either. I use FF as well without issue.
I am seeing a Chrome commercial here.
BTW, Google's real ethics are still in huge question.
I am seeing a Chrome commercial here.
BTW, Google's real ethics are still in huge question.
Oh? Let's see. I shall quote myself from my first post.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx Why has Firefox become so bad?
It's becoming more and more bloated and less like what it was intended to be (fast and functional) when it was first released to compete with IE.
It takes up insane amounts of ram memory. It also crashes so easily whenever the flash plugin crashes.
Compare it to another browser like Chrome and the consumption and stability differences are so vast, even though Chrome was created after Firefox.. Chrome consumes 1/5 as much memory, doesn't lag at all even when many tabs are open and doesn't crash at all even if its flash plugin crashes.
I hate to use Chrome over Firefox but it's proving to be superior to Firefox in the most important areas of memory consumption, lag speed and stability. Chrome has major problems ensuring that downloads do not become corrupted, which is a nail to its heart.
Firefox, please take care of the important core issues before fiddling around with issues concerning user-created plugin...
It's becoming more and more bloated and less like what it was intended to be (fast and functional) when it was first released to compete with IE.
It takes up insane amounts of ram memory. It also crashes so easily whenever the flash plugin crashes.
Compare it to another browser like Chrome and the consumption and stability differences are so vast, even though Chrome was created after Firefox.. Chrome consumes 1/5 as much memory, doesn't lag at all even when many tabs are open and doesn't crash at all even if its flash plugin crashes.
I hate to use Chrome over Firefox but it's proving to be superior to Firefox in the most important areas of memory consumption, lag speed and stability. Chrome has major problems ensuring that downloads do not become corrupted, which is a nail to its heart.
Firefox, please take care of the important core issues before fiddling around with issues concerning user-created plugin...
�� Quote: Originally Posted by fseal The first pic is how I see some people actually running FF.
The second was actually a joke pic by someone trying to see how many toolbars they could get installed at once.
The second was actually a joke pic by someone trying to see how many toolbars they could get installed at once.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot Unless a person wants to tell someone, it is nobody else's business who they talk to, what they search for, what they read, what videos they watch, where they live, what they buy, where they're planning to go on vacation, what religion they have, their mother's maiden name, what political views they have ..I could go on ad infinitum.. If you have no privacy, you have no security. Therefore chrome has no security...
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot but besides that fact.. chrome has been the #3 reason my xp-and-vista-using customers ended up with rouge AVs, trojans, spyware and other infestations. Malware in P2P downloads and IE were #1 and #2 respectively.
Be thankful for that "thing" because it brings you customers.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot Until very recently (the past 15 days to be exact) Google has done absolutely nothing to protect people from malicious sites.
And Chrome didn't force it upon those users or kill off all the other alternatives by assassination or something. People CHOSE to use Chrome.
If you admired an actress, would you blame the actress for turning your date offer down? You chose to admire her and she didn't kill off all the other women on the planet.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by madtownidiot And besides that, benchmarks don't always reflect real world performance. It wouldn't matter if a browser could render a 50MB java app in 3 milliseconds if it crashes at least once every time you use it.
I only know that Chrome has never hanged on me YET... for the one month duration that I switched to it.
More importantly, Chrome has never crashed on me yet. I have never had to reopen Chrome because it stopped working and I had no other way of continuing to use Chrome other than to close it and then reopen it.
Though the flash plugin has crashed several times on Chrome, it doesn't cause Chrome to lag or hang while it crashed. That's what I care about.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Prof Kerfuffle �� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx I hate to use Chrome over Firefox but it's proving to be superior to Firefox in the most important areas of memory consumption, lag speed and stability. Chrome has major problems ensuring that downloads do not become corrupted, which is a nail to its heart.
One corrupted download is enough reason to distrust it's download capabilities because I've never had corrupted downloads when using Firefox to download small files of 100MB or less.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Petey7 Why do have the people on this thread assume the user is to blame for his/her problem with firefox. You will find that a lot of people don't like firefox, which is why chrome has become as popular as it has in such a short time. A lot of people have problems with firefox running slowly or crashing regularly, even after deleting cookies, browsing data, and what have you. If you don't have problems, good for you, but don't assume everyone that does run into a problem is to blame, just like we don't like people blaming their problems on Bill Gates or Win7.
BTW can I see some secondary source stating that all your browsing data gets sent to google? I see people saying it, but no evidence for it. And chromes speed and reliability has a lot to do with the fact that it opens a new process for all tabs and plug-ins.
BTW can I see some secondary source stating that all your browsing data gets sent to google? I see people saying it, but no evidence for it. And chromes speed and reliability has a lot to do with the fact that it opens a new process for all tabs and plug-ins.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Petey7 How about the fact that the OP has confirmed that their HDD is 0% fragmented, and that they use now toolbars, plugins or extensions but everyone keeps saying that it is the users fault because they use to many plugins and don't defrag their HDD or do other simple maintenance.
Also, you're reaching a lot on what you say about Chrome. Let me guess. MS makes a unique product ID on every computer with Windows to track everything you do one them.
Also, you're reaching a lot on what you say about Chrome. Let me guess. MS makes a unique product ID on every computer with Windows to track everything you do one them.
I see that another person, whose judgement has a clear perspective is not clouded any hint of fanboyism. Note that I'm not insinuating that anyone who defends Firefox is a Firefox fanboy. Only those who fervently defend it without taking a step back to look at the whole picture are.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG If I drive a car without ever doing basic maintenance like say changing oil and filters I can't possibly blame BMW or Dodge for building such unreliable cars.
As for your notions about chrome being wrongfully accused: Do you really think Google put a unique ID in each of their browsers because they were bored....or even that this has been done with the users best interest in mind?
Didn't think so.
Excuse me, I call it as I see it.
I'm just very pragmatic: If somebody enters a bank with a ski mask over their head I don't automatically assume they're having a winter social I didn't know about.
-DG
As for your notions about chrome being wrongfully accused: Do you really think Google put a unique ID in each of their browsers because they were bored....or even that this has been done with the users best interest in mind?
Didn't think so.
Excuse me, I call it as I see it.
I'm just very pragmatic: If somebody enters a bank with a ski mask over their head I don't automatically assume they're having a winter social I didn't know about.
-DG
Hell Yes I should.
The reasonable expectation would be that it should stay in tip top condition for at least a year because all my other cars did so, including the previous car I bought from them.
Firefox starts lagging within a day... while it didn't use to.
I have a minimal level of standards set already, thanks to Firefox. (see rising expectations & relative deprivation) To add fuel to the fire, another browser like Chrome doesn't lag like Firefox.
I know firefox is free and I have no right to complain. But hey, I'm not giving nonconstructive complains like "F** this sucks"; I'm giving proper feedback about the causes of the problem.
Now, let's alter the car scenario a bit to tailor it to my case.
I'm smart enough to only use clean petrol, which doesn't damage my filters.
(think programs and AV software)
I also make sure I don't drive on bumpy lousy roads. Neither do I drift.
(think malicious websites, overclocking and other abuses of the PC)
I'm also smart enough to avoid parking my expensive car out on the road at night so that thieves won't get a chance to mess around with my car.
(think clicking on malicious links that have a stupid/unbelieveable promise)
As such, I only do a minimal amount of maintenance. It can't be my fault that the car starts to seriously degrade in performance within 1 month of buying it right?
�� Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 Well, the original poster is making a statement that Firefox has gotten bad and that seems to insinuate it must be that same way for everybody using it.
This is why some of us firefox users and responding back...because we aren't seeing or experiencing the same problems as the OP. Therefore, there must be something different about our setups.
This is why some of us firefox users and responding back...because we aren't seeing or experiencing the same problems as the OP. Therefore, there must be something different about our setups.
I'm on the fence.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 Well, the original poster is making a statement that Firefox has gotten bad and that seems to insinuate it must be that same way for everybody using it.
I'm sure that you can tell that the opinions were all mine. Mine!
Do I need to add a "for me" at the end of every sentence to make that crystal clear?
Didn't think so.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 because we aren't seeing or experiencing the same problems as the OP. Therefore, there must be something different about our setups.
None of you have mentioned anything about your setups.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by MWRed In my opinoin(and yes, it's just an opinion) I wouldn't say that anyone means bad as in "not good"
Why did I move away from FF? I loved FF years ago, it was great, flawless and fast. In my experience, it's not that FF has gotten bad really. It's just that I compare how FF3+ runs compared to the previous versions that I loved. I liked FF for the reason of speed, which, compared to what it used to be, simply isn't the same. I rarely ever used any extentions aside from the more important 2 or 3.
I have never actually had a real "problem" with FF3+ , it's just that it isn't the same. I still have FF3 as a backup since I use Opera as my main, but after messing with IE8 and now the 9 beta, I see no advantage of FF over IE at all, they're both comparably slow-ER, not necessarily slow.
On another note.....the plan to have extentions in Opera now kinda pisses me off. I always liked this browser because it was simple and fast.. I just worry that it's going to be another FF. Who knows, maybe i'll just go to IE9 when it finally arrives.
I did like FF4 beta a lo for the time I used it though.
Why did I move away from FF? I loved FF years ago, it was great, flawless and fast. In my experience, it's not that FF has gotten bad really. It's just that I compare how FF3+ runs compared to the previous versions that I loved. I liked FF for the reason of speed, which, compared to what it used to be, simply isn't the same. I rarely ever used any extentions aside from the more important 2 or 3.
I have never actually had a real "problem" with FF3+ , it's just that it isn't the same. I still have FF3 as a backup since I use Opera as my main, but after messing with IE8 and now the 9 beta, I see no advantage of FF over IE at all, they're both comparably slow-ER, not necessarily slow.
On another note.....the plan to have extentions in Opera now kinda pisses me off. I always liked this browser because it was simple and fast.. I just worry that it's going to be another FF. Who knows, maybe i'll just go to IE9 when it finally arrives.
I did like FF4 beta a lo for the time I used it though.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by MWRed EDIT: Also, don't say a word about switching to Chrome. Sick of google, don't trust Chrome, whether what is said is true or not. I won't ever touch it.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Tepid BTW, Google's real ethics are still in huge question.
In all honesty - who cares? There are plenty of options to choose from and when a once favourite browser loses it's appeal, switch to another. If a person doesn't like that, they can switch back later or try yet another one.
They're all as equally good/bad as each other in their own way.
Just because it fit's the topic and some users might not know that:
If you really want to run Chrome but would like to limit Google's Data mining a little, there are several solutions
#1 SWare IRON (based on Chromium minus the automatic data transmission to google Servers)
Install or portable version here: SRWare Iron - The Browser of the Future
downside: you'll be limited to their update cycles and it's based on Chromium (if that's a downside at all)
#2 a portable Version of Chrome from a german board which a working Updater (as a separat program)
the language can easily be switched and the Updater allows to switch between the latest Chrome version, the latest BETA, the latest DEV version and the latest Chromium
http://stadt-bremerhaven.de/download-manager.php?id=250
-DG
If you really want to run Chrome but would like to limit Google's Data mining a little, there are several solutions
#1 SWare IRON (based on Chromium minus the automatic data transmission to google Servers)
Install or portable version here: SRWare Iron - The Browser of the Future
downside: you'll be limited to their update cycles and it's based on Chromium (if that's a downside at all)
#2 a portable Version of Chrome from a german board which a working Updater (as a separat program)
the language can easily be switched and the Updater allows to switch between the latest Chrome version, the latest BETA, the latest DEV version and the latest Chromium
http://stadt-bremerhaven.de/download-manager.php?id=250
-DG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ravanx Chrome is the only stop-gap solution, which is fast, that I know of and have at the moment... until Firefox gets its frickin act back together. I hope Firefox does so soon.
Opera is another browser thats fast.
Conclusion : Web Browser Grand Prix 2: The Top 5 Tested And Ranked
�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve All the Firefox 4 versions pror to Firefox 4.0.b7 have been slow but the latest version seems fast enough.
Opera is another browser thats fast.
Opera is another browser thats fast.
Firefox is very easy to mess up, particularly when installing other browsers alongside it. I uninstalled all my browsers, except for IE, then reinstalled Firefox. I made sure all of them bits left from the uninstall were wiped as well. After doing this, Firefox ran great again.
Chrome is the fastest at executing JavaScript at the moment, but that position is always changing.
Chrome is the fastest at executing JavaScript at the moment, but that position is always changing.
I recommend you use portable versions of browsers you'd like to test.
It wouldn't mess with your settings plus you could have as many parallel as you have HDD space
-DG
It wouldn't mess with your settings plus you could have as many parallel as you have HDD space
-DG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG I recommend you use portable versions of browsers you'd like to test.
It wouldn't mess with your settings plus you could have as many parallel as you have HDD space
-DG
It wouldn't mess with your settings plus you could have as many parallel as you have HDD space
-DG
Firefox 4 b7 is a lot faster on my PC than previous 4 betas starting & loading tabs but the Peacekeeper scores have hardly changed.
And now I've found the
Hide Caption Titlebar Plus (Smart) 2.1.0 add on it will be useable on my laptop
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG I recommend you use portable versions of browsers you'd like to test.
It wouldn't mess with your settings plus you could have as many parallel as you have HDD space
-DG
It wouldn't mess with your settings plus you could have as many parallel as you have HDD space
-DG
I mean portable like in "put it on a stick and use it wherever you go-portable" .
And NO it's not released by mozilla but from a trusted supplier of portable Applications (PortableApps.com)
After all what's the big difference between install and portable versions?
It's not like that's a complete new program. Mainly a few config changes as to where to keep the profile/extensions and where/how to use the cache function.
Unzip to a directory of your choice instead of some installation process.
The main advantage is, that due to those config changes the browser wouldn't mess with the system default settings for browser/HTML protocol etc. To "uninstall" you just delete the folder it resides in and you're golden...no garbage leftover files, no superfluous registry entries.
I always have a portable version of almost every browser at hand
Get your actual last stable version here:
Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition | v3.6.12
and your last Beta of the next branch here:
Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition 4.0 Beta 7 and Gecko Layout Engine Test Versions | PortableApps.com - Portable software for USB drives
-DG
And NO it's not released by mozilla but from a trusted supplier of portable Applications (PortableApps.com)
After all what's the big difference between install and portable versions?
It's not like that's a complete new program. Mainly a few config changes as to where to keep the profile/extensions and where/how to use the cache function.
Unzip to a directory of your choice instead of some installation process.
The main advantage is, that due to those config changes the browser wouldn't mess with the system default settings for browser/HTML protocol etc. To "uninstall" you just delete the folder it resides in and you're golden...no garbage leftover files, no superfluous registry entries.
I always have a portable version of almost every browser at hand
Get your actual last stable version here:
Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition | v3.6.12
and your last Beta of the next branch here:
Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition 4.0 Beta 7 and Gecko Layout Engine Test Versions | PortableApps.com - Portable software for USB drives
-DG
Quote:
SledgeDG
"I mean portable like in "put it on a stick and use it wherever you go-portable"
"I mean portable like in "put it on a stick and use it wherever you go-portable"
When you run it using a USB flash drive it will be very slow & only really good enough for checking a a few sites.
If you install it to a folder on your own or a friends hard drive you get full speed.
I don't run it from a stick...I just use the stick for transportation purposes
If you're allowed to do so it surely makes sense to copy the whole folder to the computer first and then run it from there. That's basically self understood, isn't it.Only on PCs where you're not allowed to install/save anything to the local harddrive one would run it from the stick.
-DG
If you're allowed to do so it surely makes sense to copy the whole folder to the computer first and then run it from there. That's basically self understood, isn't it.Only on PCs where you're not allowed to install/save anything to the local harddrive one would run it from the stick.
-DG
Firefox 3.612 is holding out well for me with a few extensions and a ton of bookmarked sites
I do backup my bookmarks on occasion
anyone know why embedded youtube videos cannot be seen though?
my flash appears to be up to date
I do backup my bookmarks on occasion
anyone know why embedded youtube videos cannot be seen though?
my flash appears to be up to date
Do you block Javascript on those sites by any chance?
-DG
-DG
not that I know of - one site was Prof Messer's tutorials and they all just up and disappeared.
gonna check if all my FF plugins are up to date, we'll see
gonna check if all my FF plugins are up to date, we'll see
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG I don't run it from a stick...I just use the stick for transportation purposes
If you're allowed to do so it surely makes sense to copy the whole folder to the computer first and then run it from there. That's basically self understood, isn't it.Only on PCs where you're not allowed to install/save anything to the local harddrive one would run it from the stick.
-DG
If you're allowed to do so it surely makes sense to copy the whole folder to the computer first and then run it from there. That's basically self understood, isn't it.Only on PCs where you're not allowed to install/save anything to the local harddrive one would run it from the stick.
-DG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by mr pc not that I know of - one site was Prof Messer's tutorials and they all just up and disappeared.
gonna check if all my FF plugins are up to date, we'll see
gonna check if all my FF plugins are up to date, we'll see
I've had that before as well. It was the corruption of flash files, which occurred during the update. I forget what I did exactly but it was one of the following two:
1. uninstall flash completely. then reinstall flash.
2. uninstall flash completely. uninstall firefox. reinstall firefox, reinstall flash.
It's pretty evident that some long time users of FireFox are switching to alternatives such as Chrome. Perhaps maybe its substantially down to the modern user interface and better user experience than FireFox, but could also be down to how fast it is. Either way, I don't think there is anything wrong with FireFox per se, but there are better alternatives to FireFox and a lot of this to the long term FireFox user is not because FireFox is slower to start up or perhaps takes more RAM but because Chrome has a great UI, is fast and has a more enjoyable user experience using Chrome compared to FireFox and IE.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by bastones It's pretty evident that some long time users of FireFox are switching to alternatives such as Chrome. Perhaps maybe its substantially down to the modern user interface and better user experience than FireFox, but could also be down to how fast it is. Either way, I don't think there is anything wrong with FireFox per se, but there are better alternatives to FireFox and a lot of this to the long term FireFox user is not because FireFox is slower to start up or perhaps takes more RAM but because Chrome has a great UI, is fast and has a more enjoyable user experience using Chrome compared to FireFox and IE.
In the end, as I have mentioned previously, stick with the browser that works for you and one you are comfortable with. I've found mine, thank you, and it is FF.
�� Quote: Originally Posted by mikedl �� Quote: Originally Posted by bastones It's pretty evident that some long time users of FireFox are switching to alternatives such as Chrome. Perhaps maybe its substantially down to the modern user interface and better user experience than FireFox, but could also be down to how fast it is. Either way, I don't think there is anything wrong with FireFox per se, but there are better alternatives to FireFox and a lot of this to the long term FireFox user is not because FireFox is slower to start up or perhaps takes more RAM but because Chrome has a great UI, is fast and has a more enjoyable user experience using Chrome compared to FireFox and IE.
In the end, as I have mentioned previously, stick with the browser that works for you and one you are comfortable with. I've found mine, thank you, and it is FF.
I tried the FF4 beta and although it looks nice (alot like opera, may I add) it is laggy and slow. The new features look really nice, including Panorama, but it is just too slow for me. The actual loading of pages is ok, it is just the ui that is laggy. The animations for opening and closing tabs isn't smooth at all, it gets choppy. Scrolling webpages is slow and sometimes freezes. I'll take another look when the final version is out, until then I'll stick with opera. It could be that I'm not using the most powerful laptop around but I have absolutely no performance issues at all with opera, so why should I expect anything less for firefox?
i see, firefox is slow... i dont know why... maybe because of many firefox-updates =( i'm waiting on firefox4 fullversion
�� Quote: Originally Posted by devize I tried the FF4 beta and although it looks nice (alot like opera, may I add) it is laggy and slow. ...
-DG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG �� Quote: Originally Posted by devize I tried the FF4 beta and although it looks nice (alot like opera, may I add) it is laggy and slow. ...
-DG
Sorry noobvious, I lied...I forgot that I recently got rid of some extensions I didn't need anymore so I'm "down" to 40 right now
-DG
-DG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG Sorry noobvious, I lied...I forgot that I recently got rid of some extensions I didn't need anymore so I'm "down" to 40 right now
-DG
-DG
�� Quote: Originally Posted by noobvious �� Quote: Originally Posted by SledgeDG Sorry noobvious, I lied...I forgot that I recently got rid of some extensions I didn't need anymore so I'm "down" to 40 right now
-DG
-DG
One ? LOL I couldn't just get rid of 39 extensions if I had to
Here they are..I never planned to have that many but it compiled over the years and I came to rely on those and some are just necessary if you beta test FF nightly builds
-DG
Here they are..I never planned to have that many but it compiled over the years and I came to rely on those and some are just necessary if you beta test FF nightly builds
Code:
Generated: Mon Dec 06 2010 12:40:24 GMT-0500 (Eastern Standard Time) User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729) Build ID: 20101026210630 Enabled Extensions: [39] - About:Tab 0.0.36: Mozilla Labs - Add Bookmark Here � 3.6.20101102: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/3880 - Add to Search Bar 2.0: http://firefox.maltekraus.de/extensi...-to-search-bar - All-Glass Firefox mod, based on Glasser 2.1.4: All-Glass Firefox v2! - Neowin Forums - Anonymizer Nevercookie 0.1: Firefox Anonymizer Nevercookie - Google Search - BetterPrivacy 1.48.3: NettiCats Firefox extensions, Erweiterungen - CountdownClock 1.4.5: Mercille.org - CountdownClock - Home - Dictionnaire fran�ais �Classique & R�forme 1990� 3.9.2: Accueil • Dicollecte • Dictionnaire français - Download Statusbar 0.9.7.2: mozdev.org - downloadstatusbar: index - DownloadHelper 4.8.1: DownloadHelper - Media download Firefox extension - Favicon Picker 2 0.6.1.14: Firefox Favicon Picker 2 - Google Search - FEBE 6.3.3.2: Firefox Extensions by Chuck Baker - FireShot 0.87: Capture web pages and take screenshots of Firefox, Internet Explorer, Seamonkey and Thunderbird with FireShot! - Flagfox 4.0.11: Flagfox - flashget3 Extension 1.0: FlashGet(快车)-Best Download Manager - FlashGot 1.2.6: Firefox FlashGot - Google Search - Forecastbar Enhanced 0.9.6: Forecastbar Enhanced - Gmail Manager 0.6: tLo : Gmail Manager - Gmail Space 0.5.995: Gspace - IE View 1.4.5.1: IE View - Launch pages in IE from Firefox - Image Zoom 0.4.4: Image Zoom - Home - ImageBot 4.2.3: [Ext] ImageBot • mozillaZine Forums - Java Console 6.0.22: Firefox Java Console - Google Search - MoM Forums NavMenu 1.7: MoM-Community - MR Tech Toolkit 6.0.4: MR Tech's Mozilla Extensions - NoScript 2.0.7: Firefox NoScript - Google Search - Password Exporter 1.2.1: http://passwordexporter.fligtar.com - Paste and Go 3 1.0.5: Taking you to the right page... - PDF Download 3.0.0.1: PDF Download — Free Tools to Create, Control and Convert Web-Based PDF Files - QuietUrl 1.6.0.7: QuietUrl Add-on :: QuietUrl.com - Redirect Remover 2.6.4: Better Browser's Extensions - Home - Remove It Permanently 1.0.6.7: mozdev.org - rip: index - ScribeFire 3.5.3.2: Firefox ScribeFire - Google Search - SkipScreen 0.5.14amo: SkipScreen - a Megaupload, Mediafire, and Rapidshare Plugin for Firefox. - Smart Bookmarks Bar 1.4.3: http://remy.juteau.******** - Tabs on top 1.4.4: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/13091/ - User Agent Switcher 0.7.2: User Agent Switcher - Wortliste von TKLTrans- Dictionary English-German-Hungarian and TKLSpell - spell check English, German, Hungarian (alte und neue deutsche Rechtschreibung) 20060716: Firefox Wortliste von http://tkltrans.sf.net (alte und neue deutsche Rechtschreibung) - Google Search
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét