| 4:51 am on Dec 22, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Version 9.0.1 was just released [ghacks.net] a few hours ago.
| 5:41 am on Dec 22, 2011 (gmt 0)|
FF sold out to Google for 100M after first choosing Bing for a short time, now they can afford making the browser faster.
| 6:15 am on Dec 22, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|FF sold out to Google for 100M after first choosing Bing for a short time, now they can afford making the browser faster. |
More like Mozilla put Google's feet to the coals by threatening to set Bing as the default search engine until Google coughed up the $$ that Mozilla wanted.
At this exact moment in history, Mozilla is in a strong position to play spoiler in the search market. Microsoft/Bing would pay a hefty fee for the additional search share that would accrue from being the default Mozilla search engine. Google can't afford to take the black eye that would result from the lost search share, with the extra bruising from being seen dumping sponsorship of a darling of the open source community.
All FF has to do is maintain a 20-30% market share, and they will get to continue to play spoiler, and extract a ransom from Google or Bing once every three years.
Nice business model for a "Non-Profit".
| 6:43 am on Dec 22, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Well said grelmar. Could not agree more. But at the rate Chrome' usage percentage is rising, may be google won't have to worry about such factors in 3-4 years.
| 4:04 pm on Dec 22, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I agree with all that is said here.
It was likely a fun chat. Mozilla likely knows exactly how much traffic Firefox is sending to Google, and they likely have a very good idea of how much it is worth to Google. And you know Google has the exact number. So, the only discussion was, "How much do we lose from not being the default?" I wonder if Google's guys said, like every webmaster hears from their clients, "We just can't afford to pay more than x." Think they said that?
Meanwhile....ya gotta admire Apple keeping Safari or only browsers willing to pay for the honor (using Safari as the base) on their iPad. Ol' Safari's share of the user market, while still small, has almost tripled in the last three years.
| 1:15 pm on Dec 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I like Firefox though I remove the google toolbar immediately and default the search box to wikipedia while deleting the google search box completely.
The browser still "calls home" to many places when you use it, sending google and microsoft data about how you use various features/sites, but it looks like it does so less often now.
HOWEVER - a fix I had used on my computer to disable Internet Explorer no longer works. I cannot set IE to use the LAN setting of 0.0.0.0 anymore since microsoft features will now use firefox instead if IE is unavailable... yuck.
I have nothing to hide but nobody asked me and I didn't ok for ANY information to leave my computer withou my express consent... ya know?
Is there ANY current browser available, besides old IE6, that doesn't call home to various places with various data by default?
| 1:25 pm on Dec 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
| 10:22 pm on Dec 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Sgt_Kickaxe - how did you determine the "calls home" thing?
And do you actually mean info is sent back to google / MS about how you are browsing?
Using Firefox here on Linux and Windows.
| 3:54 am on Dec 25, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Sorry I was wrong, the agreement is 300M/year. This way Chrome will win more and more market share and in a few years FF will be history.
I believe some people at Moz. enjoy a luxurious lifestyle at the top of the food chain until they sell out FF market share completely ;)
| 2:34 am on Dec 26, 2011 (gmt 0)|
FF is still too slow. Chrome is quicker and more stable.
| 5:53 pm on Dec 29, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I have tried to hang in there with Chrome but after countless hangs and "Oh, snaps!" and re-installs I've dumped Chrome for FF 9.0 which has been performing flawlessly.
FF has really ramped up their effort since 3.6. Congratulations!
| 3:33 am on Dec 30, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I moved to Chrome because FF has been too buggy this year.
Is everyone else finding FF 9.0 stable?
| 10:02 pm on Dec 30, 2011 (gmt 0)|
No problem with extensive use of FF since before 3.6. This is on Linux Ubuntu (me) and Windows 2000 (wife). My own use is typically 6 windows open with about 50+ tabs between them.
I would never use chrome because a) it has a lot of exploitable flaws in it and b) it's google, which means a privacy issue at the very least.
| 12:29 am on Dec 31, 2011 (gmt 0)|
First, Chrome does not have a lot of "exploitable flaws" in it. In fact, recent security reports found that Chrome's sandboxing and plug-in security make it more secure than Firefox and IE.
Second, assuming that because it's Google means it's a privacy issue is just that... an assumption. This is the same age old tin-foil-hat-wearing argument that keeps being made without ANY data to support it. I wish people would stop making such statements without providing even a speck of supporting data. Otherwise, it's just silly rumors.
To get back on topic, though, I have not yet tried the latest FF. I keep meaning to give it another look, but I stopped using it a while ago because it just seemed so slow. I still use it for development purposes (you can't beat Firebug), but it's not the browser I use for day-to-day web browsing.
| 9:33 pm on Dec 31, 2011 (gmt 0)|
"Recent security reports" having bneen compiled by "Google-commisioned research". Webkit has flaws. That's it.
It is known that google traces browsing habits using whatever means they can. I always block GA and similar and I shudder every time I have to pass private data to someone using gmail!
| 2:20 am on Jan 1, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Again, feel free to trust rumors over actual data.
*walks away from discussion, sans-tin-foil-hat*
| 7:18 am on Jan 3, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I use IE, FF, and Chrome. Chrome is good for some things while Firefox for some. Don't see that big of a difference in the new version though...