Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox May Already Be Dead

pcworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 67 posts

Re: Firefox May Already Be Dead

#2

Post by evdawg »

Sensationalism. If you're looking for a faster Firefox look towards the 3.1 betas. If you're willing to use unstable software (alpha Chrome), there's no reason not to check out 3.1. The new Javascript engine is just as fast as Chrome's.

Re: Firefox May Already Be Dead

#4

Post by whopa »

evdawg wrote: post #2

Sensationalism. If you're looking for a faster Firefox look towards the 3.1 betas. If you're willing to use unstable software (alpha Chrome), there's no reason not to check out 3.1. The new Javascript engine is just as fast as Chrome's.

The article links to another article comparing Chrome to Firefox 3.1b2, with Chrome still coming out ahead on performance. The JS engine is only one part of the equation. Chrome is faster than Firefox in a host of other things, like DOM manipulation and startup time, as well as the process-per-tab design makes it scale to multiple cores far more effectively.

Mozilla's lagging pretty hard on the innovation front. Everyone (except IE) has fast JS engines now. It's not really a differentiator. They aren't really doing anything notable long term, they're just gliding on their inertia. At least Google is actively working on Mac and Linux ports and extensions for Chrome, which are their two big catchup areas. Mozilla isn't even thinking about process-per-tab.

Re: Firefox May Already Be Dead

#5

Post by snowstorm »

It's not just about the browser by itself. Don't forget all the great extensions built on top of Firefox. Until Chrome has attracted developers to build great extensions on it, Firefox is going to stay as my main browser.

Re: Firefox May Already Be Dead

#6

Post by vaksel »

thatguycheese wrote: post #3

Ad Block Plus. Once Chrome has it, I'm switching full time. I realize there's other ways to block ads with chrome, but they don't seem as efficient as ABP

ditto, the lack of Ad Block is the only reason why I haven't opened Chrome since trying it out.

Re: Firefox May Already Be Dead

#7

Post by graemep »

whopa wrote: post #4
evdawg wrote: post #2

Sensationalism. If you're looking for a faster Firefox look towards the 3.1 betas. If you're willing to use unstable software (alpha Chrome), there's no reason not to check out 3.1. The new Javascript engine is just as fast as Chrome's.

The article links to another article comparing Chrome to Firefox 3.1b2, with Chrome still coming out ahead on performance. The JS engine is only one part of the equation. Chrome is faster than Firefox in a host of other things, like DOM manipulation and startup time, as well as the process-per-tab design makes it scale to multiple cores far more effectively. Mozilla's lagging pretty hard on the innovation front. Ever…

The faster JS is attractive if you use a lot of JS heavy sites,. I do not - in fact I mostly browse with JS off. Start up time is a once a day issue, it is not significant given all the other apps usually in my session, and will be even less so once I solve an issue with suspending to RAM.

I would like process per tab, but I like my Firefox extensions more (Scrapbook, Clear fields, No Script, Its All Text, Errorzilla, Download Helper, Add to Search Bar, Web Developer, No Squint, Search Status).

Re: Firefox May Already Be Dead

#8

Post by skawaii »

whopa wrote: post #4
evdawg wrote: post #2

Sensationalism. If you're looking for a faster Firefox look towards the 3.1 betas. If you're willing to use unstable software (alpha Chrome), there's no reason not to check out 3.1. The new Javascript engine is just as fast as Chrome's.

The article links to another article comparing Chrome to Firefox 3.1b2, with Chrome still coming out ahead on performance. The JS engine is only one part of the equation. Chrome is faster than Firefox in a host of other things, like DOM manipulation and startup time, as well as the process-per-tab design makes it scale to multiple cores far more effectively. Mozilla's lagging pretty hard on the innovation front. Ever…

It'd be more interesting to see an article comparing Chrome to Firefox 3.1b3, which recently came out. See https://developer.mozilla.org/devnews/index.php/2009/03/12/f.... You'll notice that one of the improvements in b3 is performance increase in the javascript engine.

You're right, though, when you say that it isn't just about the javascript engine's speed. So maybe we should wait until Chrome becomes a full-featured browser before we start touting its unbelievable performance. Remember when Firefox went 2.0 and one of the biggest complaints (that I remember) was how it had become bloated and wasn't as fast? Guaranteed the same will eventually happen to Chrome.

Re: Firefox May Already Be Dead

#9

Post by jballanc »

Ugh, really? Perhaps the author hasn't checked the latest market share statistics for Internet Explorer? If FireFox couldn't kill IE when it was the technologically superior browser, then why would Chrome kill Firefox?

I'll tell you why: Google has lot's o' cash and just might start paying OEMs to install Chrome in place of IE. That's something that Mozilla can't do (at least, not on the same scale as Google), and most people use the browser that's installed for them anyway. So what should Mozilla do?

Well, here's a thought: once Google starts paying OEMs to install Chrome, Microsoft is going to have to take a long, hard look at what they're doing in the browser space. Once they do that, they'll find there's no compelling reason to keep draining resources into the black hole that is Trident. That leaves them two choices: WebKit or Gecko. WebKit might be the obvious choice, since it would bring them close to feature parity with Chrome, and isn't controlled by an ex-arch-nemesis.

On the other hand, the Mozilla foundation could write a couple of nice, soothing, "I'm sorry for that whole anti-trust litigation deal" letters to Ballmer. That way they could swap one sugar-daddy (Google) for another (Microsoft), give Microsoft the rendering engine they so desperately need, and continue to develop XUL and Firefox off on their own.

Post reply on HN