Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Firefox > firefox 2 should not have been released when it was

Reply
Thread Tools

firefox 2 should not have been released when it was

 
 
Toedipper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2006
Obviously not finished and full of bugs, it seems it was rushed out to grab
the same limelight that ie7 was in when it was released.

I have been using it on Windows for a couple of years and have recently just
moved to Linux as I am not getting brainwashed by the Redmond machine that
says I need a new pc that is 'Vista ready' so that I can essentially see a
pretty desktop.

My web still works the same as does my word processing and spreadsheets, a
pretty desktop won't make them better.

Anyway back to Firefox - why does Firefox HQ assume that anyone who uses
Linux is a rocket scientist? The install routine on Linux for Firefox needs
a Phd.

Linux is now at a crucial time, believe me there are man many disgruntled
Windows users who are looking @ Linux as an alternaive. I've made the move
but Firefox on Windows XP ran / installs 100 times better than Linux, why
do you assume that newbie Linux users are brain surgeons? Mozilla (and
other Linux software providers) need to realise that there is a new breed
of Linux users who are arriving from an environment whereby they download a
file, click it and it magically installs on their system with icons etc,
they don't need to go wandering under the bonnet. You do it for Windows
users so why not Linux users!

that's my 2p worth

toe.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Olgierd
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2006
*Toedipper* wrote:

> The install routine on Linux for Firefox
> needs a Phd.


I'm LLM only so 'sudo apt-get install mozilla-firefox' as well as simple
unpacking a tar.gz file work perfectly.

--
pozdrawiam serdecznie, Olgierd
|| JID(E-Mail Removed) || http://olgierd.wordpress.com ||

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Snooky
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2006
Toedipper wrote:
> Obviously not finished and full of bugs, it seems it was rushed out to grab
> the same limelight that ie7 was in when it was released.


I've been running it for 3 weeks or so now and haven't experienced any bugs.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mozilla Champion (Dan)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2006
Toedipper wrote:
> Obviously not finished and full of bugs, it seems it was rushed out to grab
> the same limelight that ie7 was in when it was released.
>
> I have been using it on Windows for a couple of years and have recently just
> moved to Linux as I am not getting brainwashed by the Redmond machine that
> says I need a new pc that is 'Vista ready' so that I can essentially see a
> pretty desktop.
>
> My web still works the same as does my word processing and spreadsheets, a
> pretty desktop won't make them better.
>
> Anyway back to Firefox - why does Firefox HQ assume that anyone who uses
> Linux is a rocket scientist? The install routine on Linux for Firefox needs
> a Phd.
>
> Linux is now at a crucial time, believe me there are man many disgruntled
> Windows users who are looking @ Linux as an alternaive. I've made the move
> but Firefox on Windows XP ran / installs 100 times better than Linux, why
> do you assume that newbie Linux users are brain surgeons? Mozilla (and
> other Linux software providers) need to realise that there is a new breed
> of Linux users who are arriving from an environment whereby they download a
> file, click it and it magically installs on their system with icons etc,
> they don't need to go wandering under the bonnet. You do it for Windows
> users so why not Linux users!
>
> that's my 2p worth
>
> toe.
>
>


What bugs? You say full of bugs and then fail to list any.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mumia W. (reading news)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2006
On 11/18/2006 03:55 PM, Toedipper wrote:
> Obviously not finished and full of bugs, it seems it was rushed out to grab
> the same limelight that ie7 was in when it was released.
>
> I have been using it on Windows for a couple of years and have recently just
> moved to Linux as I am not getting brainwashed by the Redmond machine that
> says I need a new pc that is 'Vista ready' so that I can essentially see a
> pretty desktop.
>


I've been off the Windows treadmill for years.


> My web still works the same as does my word processing and spreadsheets, a
> pretty desktop won't make them better.
>
> Anyway back to Firefox - why does Firefox HQ assume that anyone who uses
> Linux is a rocket scientist? The install routine on Linux for Firefox needs
> a Phd.
>


It used to not be so bad. The release notes for Firefox used to have
instructions for installation on Linux--then they removed them for
Firefox 2.0

:-\

The instructions for installing FF 1.5 are thin, but they're here:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox...8.html#install



> Linux is now at a crucial time, believe me there are man many disgruntled
> Windows users who are looking @ Linux as an alternaive. I've made the move
> but Firefox on Windows XP ran / installs 100 times better than Linux, why
> do you assume that newbie Linux users are brain surgeons? Mozilla (and
> other Linux software providers) need to realise that there is a new breed
> of Linux users who are arriving from an environment whereby they download a
> file, click it and it magically installs on their system with icons etc,
> they don't need to go wandering under the bonnet. You do it for Windows
> users so why not Linux users!
>
> that's my 2p worth
>
> toe.
>
>



--
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
John Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-20-2006
On 2006-11-18, Toedipper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Anyway back to Firefox - why does Firefox HQ assume that anyone who uses
> Linux is a rocket scientist? The install routine on Linux for Firefox needs
> a Phd.


What did you find difficult about it?

--

John "not a PhD" ((E-Mail Removed))
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-21-2006

"Snooky" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ejoobk$6ce$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Toedipper wrote:
>> Obviously not finished and full of bugs, it seems it was rushed out to
>> grab
>> the same limelight that ie7 was in when it was released.

>
> I've been running it for 3 weeks or so now and haven't experienced any
> bugs.



I've been running FF2.0 since day one, and I've had no end of browser hangs,
and long wait times for pages to refresh. It aint a interweb speed issue
either as I have IE7 on this box as well, and the pages load way faster,
even with IE and FF running in parallel.
Doing a speed test with my 2 laptops, shows that IE7 is faster and more
reliable but the "new zingy" style is a bag 'o' shyte..
That said, I do prefer FF2.0 when it works.... FF1.5 was more stable.

More Beta testing needed, and stop trying to beat Microsoft.. FF will win,
as it will be better once the few bugs are ironed out...

FF install on my Suse Linux box was sooo simple... Works fine..



paul.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ike packet from x.x.x.x was not encrypted and it should have been Robert Lewis Hardware 1 09-24-2008 08:45 PM
Pixel counts in P&S's should have been held to 5 megapixels Rich Digital Photography 9 08-09-2008 04:41 PM
What the...? Hash does not have a key it really should have! Joshua Muheim Ruby 5 08-11-2007 02:17 PM
Another good reason not to go to any form of Hi Def DVD. This is what the subject should have been.. Mutley DVD Video 5 06-02-2006 12:51 PM
Has v1.5 of Firefox been released, or not? Vrodok the Troll Firefox 21 11-30-2005 04:58 PM



Advertisments