Mozilla's first Beta of 3 was a piece a crap. I beta'd it for a bit and couldn't stand it. It wouldn't load Hotmail for f*** sake. It got to where u clicked login and the loading bar just continually went in a circle. I left it for 10 minutes with no success. Then videos didn't play, it did randomly crash. Defiantly wasn't a successful first Beta. Hope the 2nd will be better!

On Beta 2 browser right now and STILL the same problem as the first Beta. ** If you plan to use Hotmail don't bother using Beta 2. It still doesn't load. **

Uninstalling now.

one considerable note is that it uses A LOT less memory than current Gen firefox. 2.0.0.11 uses about 120,000 K, this firefox uses 65,000 K with the same pages open in both browsers on the same system. Very nice improvement.

Why are they all of a sudden so active with Internet Explorer and some of the other software they haven't updated in a long time?

I've got 5 advertising heavy tabs open now in 2.0.0.11 and it's using only 60mb. Dunno what you've done to your system but somethings messed up. Probably find the differences are the plugins that aren't installed in the beta.

yeah :D
like the promissed Add-ons on Windows Vista Business...

MS tends to pay more attention to the software that has competition. Look at IE in the past and it made more versions when Netscape was big. Then it laid dormant until Firefox started to make a push.

I'm sure you guys already know this, but a great fun way to make firefox faster is to turn on pipelining and open up to 30 connections at once to the server instead of 1 a time.

In the address bar, type in 'about:config'

Scroll down to network.http.pipelining, double click on it to set it to TRUE.

Go down to the next line below, double click on it and set it to 30.

Huge difference, our customers are shocked at how quickly their old computers can run when tuned properly. (Also rip out Norton/McAfee and toss in something fast/tight like Eset Security Suite/NOD32).

I developed a web application with asp.net AJAX.net and firefox 2 was terrible with memory consumption. If I left the site up over night memory usages was hovering around 2 gigs. Where as IE7 stayed at approximately 60K. Hopefully these issues are resolved in the new firefox.

The problem with pipelining is that you're making multiple connections to the server, which increases the bandwidth bill for whoever owns the website, as well as unnecessarily increasing server load. This makes webmasters unhappy campers.

Just make sure you understand the risks before pipelining.

internet explorer is a perfect example of competition.

IE6 would still be around if it wasnt for rival technologies like Firefox and Opera to force change in the area.

If you are the best, spending more isnt going to increase the ammount of people who use your software. If competition comes, you have to improve to keep the userbase you have...

Even IE fans can be happy knowing that their product is better off since Firefox came along :)

(i still use firefox though, better plugins ftw)

True and real competition can only come when they all have an equal and fair entrance a market.

Far too many of you don't get what is going on. If there was a REAL competition we would have other anxious players ready to enter the market and compete. This means there might be someone out there capable of outdoing them all.

This competition is like doing a 40 yard dash and inserting microfluff of the 39th yard line.

Here is a great example, since many of you still don't get it. When I asked any and many to name 10 features that makes vista the to die and must have OS.

Diode stepped up (and has been running every since) and named things like 'Support from MS', 'Media Center', 'calender' and 'dvd burning' as XP lacking features causing a need for vista.

The last time I check I burned dvd's quite well with a competitive tested and reviewed product, not one shoved down my throat.

www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34455/140

So I'm lead to believe that people like Diode didn't do DVD burning in the XP era, because he list DVD burning as a new feature that you should upgrade to vista for.

If you're sitting back and only getting an application if microfluff bundles it into the OS then you are a HUGE loser.

So here is the mental test scenario for you all...

MICROFLUFF HAS CREATED A DVD BURNING APP

MICROFLUFF IS SCRAMBLING TO CASH IN ON A WEAK STRIPPED DOWN VERSION OF LONGHORN AKA VISTA AKA WIN ME2.

You created roxio and a friend created nero. You had sold 3 billion copies at $90 and your friend sold 2 billion at $70.

Instead of releasing thier DVD APP onto store shelves as a stand alone. They add it in with the purchase of the OS. Instantly making every purchaser of the OS a customer of their DVD burning app.

And lets say they sold 10 billion copies of vista and internally estimated their dvd app to have a $60 dollar value.

Now your sales of roxio dropped to 10 copies and your friend only sells 5 copies of nero.

microfluff says in court and to the public "We added dvd burning for FREE"

Where is your competition?

There would have been possibly 5 billion copies sold at a $60 value to people who most likely didn't need it, because they have no use for it. And probably 90% of the remaining 5 billion that didn't need it because they previously owned existing dvd burning software.

microfluff would have gotten 10 billion $60 copies of their DVD burning instantly sold without ever having to compete. Leaving the other companies turn into the business of giving their product away FREE and trying to get revenue in other ways. And please differentiate the FREE mozilla and others have, from the fake "FREE" microfluff reports. As the cost of the OS continues to fluff up with the number of included apps.

Is this still going over your head?

If you're roxio or nero do you abandon dvd burning market? How do you continue development and compete by now making your product free?

If so what do you move too when your success will only prompt microfluff to move in your market.

I really hopes this helps, because we as consumer need to get on the same page. Microfluff has shown that they can't be fully trusted.