Firefox is back. Party!

Dude, IE > Firefox
We don't need an emoticon of a guy molesting Firefox and being violent to IE

Seamonkey > IE... Why? Beats the hell out of me.

djbob, you're still on about that? As one who would use IE if it weren't for a few features in Firefox (found in the tools menu and context menu) and the abundance of extensions, I would say Firefox and IE are just as good as each other, I still have never heard one good reason why you think IE is better...

Here's a slew of reasons for you: http://www.ireallydontcare.com/index.php?page=fun/firefox. Firefox is not really all that great. In what people claim it to be good for (security, speed, modification), I see no advantage. I have been using IE all my life, never got a virus or anything. As for speed, I've actually tested it on my computer, and IE is faster, especially in terms of load time. And I find no use for any modification of any sort.

On stock Windows, IE is faster because it's integrated. Firefox also does some weird things when it comes to checking for up-to-date cached stuffs, I believe.

I'm not much of a browser fan boy. I don't care, period. Whatever I feel like using, I will use. I have the Mozilla Suite, Avast, IE6 and IE7, Firefox 1.5 and 2.0, Opera 6 and 7, and I cycle through them regularly. Why does it matter? It all takes you to the same internet.

I started with FF because of the tabbed browsing. By the time IE7 rolled around it was MUCH too late to switch just because it now has tabs as well. I'm already wicked comfy with my extensions and bookmarks and such.

Also, there is the matter of having a computer in which IE 7 is able to run. Like mine, it's a piece of junk. But at least I have one and am able to be on the internet. Without the internet I feel so cut off from the world.

Newsflash... I never said Firefox was great, it is just better because of the extensions. Again, you are twisting my words, what I clearly said was that I would use something else like IE if it were not for a few features and extensions of Firefox. I don't know why you brought up security, interesting that you have to point out that you never got any viruses with it without being asked though. As for speed, Firefox loads in 2.5 seconds compared to IE's 1 second for me and that is with "Session saving (remembers tabs - essential for me)"
and a number of extensions. If you can't find any decent extensions, here's a quick list of my ones, search on the mozilla add-ons page for more info:
ChatZilla - IRC client (saves another program running)
DOM Inspector (for web developers)
Dictionary for Spell checker
Fasterfox - prefetching
Firebug (debugger - for web developers)
FireFTP (a surprisingly nice FTP client - again saves another program running)
HTML Validator (works with View Source nicely)
IE Tab (see if your CSS works with quirky IE engine without loading IE)
Image Zoom (quick individual zoom of images in the page)
Mozilla Accessibility (for web developers)
SessionSaver (never lose what you have open - works great for unexpected system shutdowns)
Web Developer (many great functions)
Yoono (my favourite, go to a website and it will show you what else other people visit (so if another Yoono user visited the page you are on and visited a similar page also, it will show the similar page), I have found many great resources using this - there is a great number of users considering the number of sites covered)

As for the site's comments, they did not sway me at all as I already knew the disadvantages and also, some of what he said has now been rectified or if not, exaggerated, particularly:
Since unpatched v1.0, I have never waited more than 3 or 4 seconds for it to load and pages load very fast - and that is with all my extensions. Does anyone else wait anywhere near 30 seconds when Firefox loads? If so, you have probably done something yourself.
I hated that as well, had to restart after using it for an hour or two. But that was before, it is perfectly fine now.
Again, the extensions and in-built tools are too essential for me, that is the reason I switched as I was reluctant at first. Opera comes close to what I want with some features that Firefox doesn't when you combine Opera with its add-ons, but not enough, yet.
The security and speed myths are false, and anyone tech-savvy enough already know that and it doesn't make a difference as to why Firefox is better. Page loads are near instant and the same as on IE for me (Opera is a bit faster, something I like), and the extra second or two loading easily justifies the half hour or whatever period of time of better browsing.

Again, you are misinterpretting things. How many times is this gonna happen?
The phrase "all that great" is different from "great." "All that great" means something like "not all it's hyped up to be." You are saying it's better. I am saying it really isn't. That simple.

I never said you wouldn't.

You clearly asked me for reasons as to why I use IE. That is a reason. At least comprehend your own posts

A lot of extensions such as these are available for IE, such as the DOM thing, the dictionary, the web developer, etc. However, although I know these toolbars/addons/extensions/whatever exist for IE, I don't use them. All I have is a Google Toolbar on my IE. Nothing more... I really find no use for extensions.

Really? I heard from Firefox users that 2.0 used more memory than before...

OPERA!

Opera is the best.

I used to be a dedicated IE user - until i downloaded firefox.

I used to be a dedicated FF user - until i downloaded opera.

Yes, firefox has extensions, but opera has a great sidebar, with many addable panels, and also, it has WIDGETS.

just like dashboard for the Mac, and just like yahoo widget engine for the PC.

anyway - i dont use them...

but, opera is the most customizable web browser available.

also, i have tried out FF, IE, Netscape, Flock, Maxthon and Avant Browser, and Opera is not only IMO the best of those, it uses the least CPU (with the exception of Maxthon, but thats rubbish anyway.)

Firefox all the way. I need to get the new Firefox sometime...

The new FF is bloated and slow. 1.5.0.8 is better than 2.0 IMO. New memory leaks are present in 2.0; Leaving it on over time eats up ram. I've switched over to another alternative, K-Meleon. It uses Gecko 1.8 (same as FF2.0) and is faster and more lightweight than FF.

All I have to say is that both are good. I used Firefox for a few years. But since IE 7, I've reverted to IE. And personally, since Microsoft has gotten serious again, I'm more with IE. But Firefox had many good innovations at the time (although some were STOLEN from Apple Safari).

Really? Like?

Most famously, tabbed browsing.

Again, my theory has proven true. You become arrogant and confident due to your own ignorance. It pisses me off so much.

Emacs was the first app to have tabbed windows back in '88. InternetWorks by BookLink Technologies was the first commercial corporation to make a tabbed browser in '94. Opera 6.0 had tabbed browsing in late '03, but a preview release was out in '96 that featured tabs. Mozilla had tabbed browsing in '01, and FF was derived from it. o, Apple Safari came in pretty late with tabs in mid '03.

The first to haveit in widespread use was Safari. That's what is good. Kind of like the PlayStation being the first console to SUCCESSFULLY and WIDELY implement optical storage.

Uh-huh, so Opera and the Mozilla Suite as well as the Sega Saturn were complete crap-in-the drains?

Oh and by the way, in the arrogance department, you win first place.

You are misinterpreting what I'm saying again, as usual. I'm not saying these products are bad, I'm just saying they pale in comparison to the competition. Oh, btw, Opera makes you pay to not have ads displayed.

Opera 6 pwned. The Mozilla Suite was a step ahead of the Netscape Suite.

Nope, another example of your stupidity.

Peace people, or I shall break out my mod stick*

*A "stick" that symbolically represents my ability to moderate ( )

"Opera was commonly criticized for having been ad-sponsored, which was seen as a barrier to gaining market share. In the newer versions the user was allowed a choice of generic graphical banners, or text-based targeted advertisements provided by Google based upon the page being viewed. Users could pay a licence fee to remove the advertisement bar. "

Looks as though it was just you being gay.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Opera_Internet...er_goes_ad-free

No... looks like Fury was right. And you're applying a double-standard here. When Linux is for free, you blame it for weakening the economy because it meant that Microsoft doesn't earn as much, and some people lose their jobs or something. But when Safari is free, that's okay, even though the competition means that some workers at Opera Software lose their jobs?

It's myscrnnm, what do you expect? He might spin into how Safari helps sell the Macs, even though a lot of the Mac users I know use Firefox.

Looks as though you can't see that it's in the past tense, idiot. I've used Opera 9, I would know better than you.

Because when more people use Safari, it's good for Apple Computer.

See?

The point is, Firefox did not steal tabbed browsing from Safari. Any other "stealing" you'd like to accuse the Mozilla Foundation for?

And why is that?

Does anyone need a reason not to like something? Some people just doesn't like things for no real reason.

Internet Explorer 7 is quite possibly the best web browser ever made. The only one that I would consider using besides IE 7 is Mozilla Firefox.

OKay, then that is just being pregidous.

Actually, you do. Or at least in your case. Because when you bash things that are good for no real reason, even though someone out there has put the time and effort to make a great effort, that is just downright disrespectful and sinful.

btw, "Some people just doesn't like things"? lol, another tribute to your stupidity.

Please, and your arrogance and close-mindedness is any better? Idiot.

Close-mindedness is not giving Internet Explorer 7 a chance. Ironic how you should call me an idiot despite your description of me being a self-portrait of yourself.

Idiot, I have it installed and I've tried it. I've also set it as the default browser on his laptop without installing any other browser. It's pretty good. Nice job making a fool of yourself.

The only idiot here is you. My philosophy is that when something is good, you support it to the full. You're just being gay when you criticise something that you use and like. It just shows utter disrespect to the makers as well as outright stupidity on your part.

Why should I not critically reanalyse things that I've already decided are good? Why not weigh the differing weaknesses and strengths between two products, in the context of specific situations? Critical thinking is logical, rational thinking. Blind faith is irrational.

I'm talking to The Fury.

You can't truly like (or not like) something unless you have no knowledge of it

Are you sh*tting me?! That would contradict the rules of logic.

Uh-huh, that's said because I've already kicked your butt right?

No, it just shows you being a complete fool, because you were dissing me, and then using my argument as your own.

Ahaha, you're funny. I've turned your arguments back at you because it's actually true for, well, you. At every turn, I've disproven you. You're the one that's being irrational, you are the fool.

You didn't disprove me. You just make completely random claims and then attempt to baffle me.

Orly? If Lappy512 has IP and browser logs, you'll see that I've posted on these forums on IE7 several times. If you download Opera 9, you'll see it's ad-free. The Mozilla foundation had tabbed browsing before Safari had the feature, so Firefox's tabbed feature wouldn't be stolen from Safari. These are not "random claims" as you've put it, these are FACTS.

I'm not saying that you DON'T use IE 7, mofo. Again, you're shoving words in my mouth.

And Opera just became ad-free. Previously, it required you to PAY MONEY to not have ads. Which personally, is gay. I mean, if it had more features than IE, then I would consider it good. But when it's a piece of sh*t, AND it costs money, then no.

Safari was the first MAINSTREAM web browser to implement tabbed browsing.

What you're saying are facts, but they do not disprove what I'm saying. And when I said random comments, I wasn't referring to this sh*t.

-EDIT-

Wow, which makes me realize, you just made ANOTHER f*cking random statement, by completely deviating from what the f*ck I was talking about.

You're the one "shoving words into my mouth".

I've given IE7 a chance just by using it and setting it as the default for my father. That's why I brought up the whole logs thing in the first place. My statement about using IE7 is in response to that, but you felt like going on a tangent.

Opera's been ad-free for over a year, it's no news and it's not recent. It's quite obvious that someone behind the times like you wouldn't get that. So much for your source, eh?

So? You said that to detract away from the previous statement you said, which was that Firefox stole tabbed browsing from Safari. It doesn't matter which was mainstream first.

gg

No, you were just being gay and talking sh*t about Internet Explorer. I was trying to defend Internet Explorer, NOT go on a f*cking tangent.

Trying to break off from truth again, eh? You seem to like to do that. Or is this another of your "culling" of my "irrelevant" facts.

Nope, I never said anything negative about IE7 on this thread, other than that one, ignored statement about Seamonkey > IE7 that I said jokingly.

You said that, plus dissing Safari.