* New, less cluttered UI.
* Built-in sync of bookmarks/tabs/history/passwords, fully encrypted on the client (unlike Chrome's sync which encrypts passwords only).
* Sync your bookmarks, tabs, history, passwords, and form data to Firefox for Android!
See also this thread for answers from various members of the Firefox team: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/g197r/iama_were_on_the...
And the menu the Firefox button in the top left brings up is simply horrible.
It's like someone said "I like the fact that the Windows Start button looks and acts differently to every other menu or dialog anywhere, but wouldn't it be good if it looked a bit more like a menu to make it more confusing and was generally a bit uglier and more amateurish".
It's very clear that 4 > 3.6, the features you listed are awesome ... they just aren't very appealing to a current Chrome user.
As for the differences from Chrome, those are mostly the same as they've always been: Deeper extensibility, more customization points, and made by a non-profit organization dedicated to openness.
Anyway, the one thing that keeps Firefox competitive is that they built a platform in a fast yet very awkward language, then they built an application on top of that using a much more pleasant, flexible language. None of the other browser vendors understand this; Chrome devs parrot the "but Javascript is too slow to build our UI in" even though they have the fastest JS engine in the world. It boggles the mind and cripples them in the long term for anything other than your standard point-n-grunt interfaces.
1) the Awesomebar, which I love, although some people hate, plus more advanced functionality -- like in Chrome you can't search your history and delete items in the search results, which I think is retarded as your only option is to purge your entire history
It also seems pretty clear that Chrome is built to use the Google Search Engine whenever possible. For example if you search for something in the location bar, Firefox can redirect you to the very first result on Google for that search if it has a high degree of certainty. The Awesomebar is also designed such that you'll do less searching on Google.
However, the ties of Chrome to Google can be seen by the way the browser makes you search on Google, even in cases where a local search in your history would make much more sense.
2) Firefox plugins can do pretty much anything -- Chrome plugins are basically useless. I.e. Firebug can be a Firefox plugin, while on Chrome this had to be baked in. It means Firefox can have things like proper ad-blocking and Delicious integration on the push of a button
3) a non-profit organization behind it -- when dealing with companies and organizations the concept of "trust" applies heavily, and personally I trust that Mozilla looks after my interests much more than I trust Google
Sure you can. Control-H or Menu->History.
> Firefox plugins can do pretty much anything -- Chrome plugins are basically useless.
It's worth noting that Firefox is working on adding Chrome-like 'useless' extensions to their browser.
https://jetpack.mozillalabs.com/index.html
> a non-profit organization behind it
Sure, but remember that they don't run on rainbows and dreams. Mozilla is basically funded by Google affiliate payments.
-
I do agree about AwesomeBar (miss it) and extension support (though I don't miss any from FF, myself) though.
Sure you can. Control-H or Menu->History
No you CANNOT. Mozilla is basically funded by Google affiliate
payments
That doesn't say much or anything at all. Mozilla wasn't founded by Google and could always find other sources of revenue.Also, Mozilla isn't a public company with shareholders, it's also not a company masked as a non-profit to evade taxes, which means Mozilla's interest isn't profit, just survival. It's a totally different ball game.
EDIT: also about Jetpack, Chrome-like plugins have been available for Firefox for quite some time, you just need to install a plugin -- https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/greasemonkey/
Well, with elaborate replies like that ... I'm not sure whether I should bother, but: http://i.imgur.com/rxFgd.png
> Greasemonkey
Chrome plugins can do a lot more than Greasemonkey. Why do you think Jetpack exists?
Well, with elaborate replies like that ...
Perhaps you should bother reading what I wrote first, instead of doing screenshots to prove me wrong?Take a look at the phrase you yourself quoted ...
you can't search your history and delete items
in the search results
Do I really need to elaborate more on it?1) Search my history 2) Delete items in the search results
As shown in that screenshot.
EDIT: Since I can't reply to him (yet?), thank you mbrubeck for replying and explaining the comment instead of just typing "YOU CANNOT."
So to summarize -- (1) misread what I said, (2) assumed I'm an idiot who can't find Chrome's History panel and (3) replied with "works on my machine" just to prove me wrong.
If you like Chrome, great, personally I love both browsers; but the issue here is that you should stay as far away as possible from real customers.
Not to say it's never a possibility, but it's not just because we don't want to!
Other points (not so major for most):
* Audio api (allows you to synthesize audio)
* Better language support (Chrome on Linux has tons of issues with non-latin languages)
Oh, and I like that flash is sandboxed and autoupdated. I like a built-in PDF reader. I can't imagine going back to the stone age of browsers with FF or IE and downloading all the various readers and plugins for a basic web experience (Adobe reader, flash, etc).
I'm sure FF4 is good by Firefox standards, but Google is doing something very new with Chrome. The out of the box experience is stellar and end users are secure because they really have no idea how to update flash or adobe reader on their own.
Also, I actually don't like the built-in PDF reader in Chrome. Scrolling was weird in it last time I checked.
For a lot of basic stuff, yes. GMail checker, Adblocking (afaik), simple stuff that just requires the equivalent of a Greasemonkey userscript or a button.
However, for deeper stuff that really changes the UI of the browser, Chrome is no where near Firefox. Take a look at TreeStyleTab, DownThemAll, Pentadactyl, and similar feature rich extensions. Those simply cannot be done in Chrome as is. There are some weak alternatives, but they don't do half of what Firefox's do. Vimium has issues with focus and nothing like Pentadactyl's customization; Vertical tabs doesn't allow proper grouping, UI, or options; I don't think DownThemAll's separate window is even possible on Chrome but I could be wrong.
This isn't to score points for Firefox; it's a serious weakness in Chrome that's the main thing that's kept me from switching. I don't know if Google intends to allow this kind of extensibility, but damn I hope they do.
Oh, and I like that flash is sandboxed and autoupdated.
I was a huge critic of it initially but the auto-update is now what seems to be locking me into recommending Chrome to all my non-technical friends and relatives. When I think "which browser shall I give to my mother that will give her a good experience and keep her safe at the same time?" - knowing that she's getting auto updated and that the updates are coming frequently is just hugely reassuring. With Flash auto updated, PDFs out of the picture due to native rendering, Google's proactive stance (offering bounties and an extra $20k in pwn2own which even still nobody took) - Chrome just seems unbeatable.Agree. Compare for example iMacros for Firefox and iMacros for Chrome, and you see the limitations of the Chrome extension API.
I'm also a Chrome user but I'd quite like to switch back if they've sorted out the chronic lag issues I've always had.
Update: In ff4 now, looks and feels great, if a little sluggish with page scrolling. I don't know, Chrome just feels slicker.
Update 2: Just froze up loading a flash game, shame.
My understanding is that the out-of-process rendering used by Chrome forces blitting the whole page from the child process to the parent chrome on systems predating Snow Leopard.
I would say it is a carbon-copy of Opera, but that's just me: http://imgur.com/IzVxJ
Better Tab handling and has the ability to hold tabs in "groups" and a "panorama" view which allows you to view all tabs across groups.
The awesome bar has also improved significantly and has some smart features (like the option of tab switching instead of opening a new tab when you already have a URL open).
Better Add-ons management interface and some add-ons work without a restart of the browser.
Websockets disabled (for security)
I still prefer Chrome though.
PS. I've been using the FF 4 beta version for a 3-4 months now and probably dont remember the other significant changes.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/vertical-tabs...
Does it work with your FF4? Mine doesn't!!!
DL: http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/xpi/confirm.cgi?treestyletab.xp...
This link: http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/xpi/confirm.cgi?treestyletab.xp...
gives me: Forbidden Installation You don't have a permission to install XPI package directly from other websites. You have to access this extension from the home page of itself.
Am I doing something wrong?
I imagine it will get worked out, but its not until something fails that you realize your dependence.
The big thing about Firefox is the Addons: FireBug, NoScript, Adblock Plus, and Pentadactyl (was known as Vimperator) all add up to a fantastic experience.
With Firefox 4 I get the fantastic experience with something much closer to Chrome's speed and tab usability. I don't know if I would say Firefox 4 is quite there yet but it is much much closer.
For me it's one of the worst things about Chrome; this window currently has ten tabs open and that's at the _very_ low end for me. With Firefox I can see what I've got open no matter how many I've got because of the pop-down list and the scrolling bar, while Chrome just mashes the list into invisibility.
1: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tree-style-ta...
btw... TabCandy is now called Panorama.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/vertical-tabs...
Firefox has improved a lot. 4 is a fantastic piece of software but it isn't quite as polished as Chrome is.
Despite these issues I greatly prefer Firefox over Chrome. Chrome might be more polished but Firefox is (imho) a much more powerful piece of software and at the end of the day I care much more for power than polish.
In my experience, at least as of last Friday, you have to use a nightly to get a working version of Pentadactyl, while the version of Vimperator up on the Mozilla add-ons site is fine. I'm personally using Vimperator, just b/c I haven't yet had an itch that it doesn't scratch, and I'm not really clear on what Pentadactyl actually does better (because I'm too lazy to figure it out myself and haven't been able to find a current bullet-pointed list that tells me).
https://sites.google.com/a/chromium.org/dev/developers/desig...
(And you can use the "Customize toolbars" window to remove the search bar if you want.)
Firefox intentionally does not show suggestions in the address bar by default, because we don't want to send everything you type there to a third party.
See http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/technology/ for a longer list.
http://lifehacker.com/#!5784396/browser-speed-tests-firefox-...
If startup speed is your main criteria, you want Opera.