firefox 2 should not have been released when it was

Discussion in 'Firefox' started by Toedipper, Nov 18, 2006.

  1. Toedipper

    Toedipper Guest

    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.
     
    Toedipper, Nov 18, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Toedipper

    Olgierd Guest

    *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:eek: || http://olgierd.wordpress.com ||
     
    Olgierd, Nov 18, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Toedipper

    Snooky Guest

    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.
     
    Snooky, Nov 19, 2006
    #3
  4. 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.
     
    Mozilla Champion (Dan), Nov 19, 2006
    #4
  5. 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/releases/1.5.0.8.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.
    >
    >



    --
     
    Mumia W. (reading news), Nov 19, 2006
    #5
  6. On 2006-11-18, Toedipper <> 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" ()
     
    John Thompson, Nov 20, 2006
    #6
  7. Toedipper

    Paul Guest

    "Snooky" <> wrote in message
    news:ejoobk$6ce$...
    > 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.
     
    Paul, Nov 21, 2006
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Vrodok the Troll

    Has v1.5 of Firefox been released, or not?

    Vrodok the Troll, Nov 29, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    906
    Leonidas Jones
    Nov 30, 2005
  2. Mutley
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    443
    Justin
    Jun 2, 2006
  3. Geronimo
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    370
    Dave - Dave.net.nz
    Oct 28, 2004
  4. Robert Lewis
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    5,226
    jaroslavremen
    Sep 24, 2008
  5. Rich
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    260
    Scott W
    Aug 9, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page