# Firefox Should Have a Warning Label



## Amie (Apr 12, 2006)

And the label should say: "Warning: Highly Addictive!" 

Anyone else in love with Firefox? I started using it a while back but became aware of all the extensions, add-ons, themes, etc. only recently. Wow! I'm utterly amazed. I had no idea that a browser could do all that. I've downloaded probably 10 different themes and extensions in a matter of days. With all the different themes, it's like exploring a whole new world each time you browse the 'Net. 

Firefox developers, I hope you're reading this. Keep up the awesome work!


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 12, 2006)

Even though I love Camino, I find myself using Firefox more and more.  I love the extensions but I also use it because it's what I use on every other platform.  Plus, it's very consistent, partly why it's not very Mac-ish unfortunately.  But personally, I think its consistency is what wins me over.


----------



## Amie (Apr 12, 2006)

I use Camino as well. But Firefox is definitely my prefered browser of choice. It's not very Mac-ish by default ... oh, but with the themes and extensions you can *make* it Mac-ish.


----------



## Mikuro (Apr 12, 2006)

Amie said:
			
		

> I use Camino as well. But Firefox is definitely my prefered browser of choice. It's not very Mac-ish by default ... oh, but with the themes and extensions you can *make* it Mac-ish.


What themes are you using?

I love Firefox's flexibility, but it's poor scrolling performance (especially via the keyboard) and hackish interface keep me using Safari (with PithHelmet, of course).


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 12, 2006)

For me, the performance isn't that bad to keep me away from it.  Then again, I'm running it on an iMac G5.  But even still I use it on and G3 iMac at work and it's not that bad.  Of course, Firefox does tend to be a memory hog so the 256 MB of RAM on that G3 iMac tends to push its boundaries.


----------



## eric2006 (Apr 12, 2006)

I have a rather old computer, and I have found that Safari is faster, so I generally stay away from firefox (except when Safari dosent work on a page - Firefox always works). It's great on windows or linux, though.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 12, 2006)

Actually, I've noticed it also be a memory hog in Windows and Linux.  I'm hoping that 2.0 will remove the memory issues.


----------



## eric2006 (Apr 12, 2006)

Well, in Windows, Firefox is a much better option than IE.. no matter what resources it uses. If you really want a fast browser, try lynx or elinks. I'm using lynx (on linux) right now, it's _fast_. Then again, it's text based, but for forums, you don't really need images..


----------



## Amie (Apr 13, 2006)

Yes, I've noticed that on most older Macs, Safari runs faster than Firefox. However, rendering Web pages accurately is a whole other issue. 

As far as Firefox themes go, I currently have Noia 2 (eXtreme) and SphereGhome 1.5, which are two of my favorites (I just love the colors and graphics and the cute little things that the tool bar icons do when you mouse over them); Aluminum Kai, which is very cool (sort of underwater-like); BlackJapan, which I'm not too impressed with; Red Cats (blue flavor), which I haven't used yet; BlueShift (haven't used it yet); and Kids Scribbles (I don't care if it says it's a kids' theme--it ROCKS). 

I also have Metal Lion, which I probably WOULD like ... if I could understand Mr. Lion's instructions on how to change the options and use the chrome scroll bars instead of the green. I've downloaded the Edit Config Files extension, but I have no idea what to do with it. His instructions are made for friggin' computer programmers! How am I supposed to know what all that crap means??? LOL So, if anyone cares to take a shot at helping me, please feel free...


----------



## CaptainQuark (Apr 13, 2006)

I use Firefox on the PC (on the odd occasion that I use the PC for internet browsing), but IMHO, nothing beats Safari on the Mac. I can't give you any techy reasons, it's just personal preference.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 13, 2006)

eric2006 said:
			
		

> Well, in Windows, Firefox is a much better option than IE.. no matter what resources it uses. If you really want a fast browser, try lynx or elinks. I'm using lynx (on linux) right now, it's _fast_. Then again, it's text based, but for forums, you don't really need images..




Well, I think that goes without saying when it comes to IE on Windows. LOL

But yes, Lynx/Links/eLinks is definitely faster than anything out there...even Safari...if you don't mind the lack of media...


----------



## symphonix (Apr 13, 2006)

Amie said:
			
		

> As far as Firefox themes go, I currently have Noia 2 (eXtreme) and SphereGhome 1.5, which are two of my favorites (I just love the colors and graphics and the cute little things that the tool bar icons do when you mouse over them); Aluminum Kai, which is very cool (sort of underwater-like); BlackJapan, which I'm not too impressed with; Red Cats (blue flavor), which I haven't used yet; BlueShift (haven't used it yet); and Kids Scribbles (I don't care if it says it's a kids' theme--it ROCKS).



Wow. You've just listed pretty much every one of the Firefox themes that I absolutely hate. I prefer my browser minimilast, with no buttons, no effects, and a neutral colour scheme. Each to their own I guess.

For me, Firefox wins out 70% of the time. Safari still beats it for RSS feeds, and for its privacy features. Firefox has far superior ad blocking, quick-searches, and a lot of other useful plugins. Both have earned a place on my Dock.


----------



## fryke (Apr 13, 2006)

Browsers are for weak people.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Apr 13, 2006)

firefox doesn't have PithHelmet.  firefox does have horrible buttons.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 13, 2006)

I don't know.  I actually like the buttons on FF as well as those on Camino.  It's definitely much better than any theme or button available in Mozilla/Seamonkey.


----------



## symphonix (Apr 13, 2006)

Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> firefox doesn't have PithHelmet.  firefox does have horrible buttons.



Firefox has the FREE AdBlock plugin, which is far superior to PithHelmet. I found PithHelmet a little unstable for my tastes. AdBlock works well because you can add in new filters on the fly, very quickly, with wildcards.

As for the buttons, Firefox has themes. The default theme is about as dull as anything can be, but some are quite smart and elegant.


----------



## Mikuro (Apr 13, 2006)

symphonix said:
			
		

> Firefox has the FREE AdBlock plugin, which is far superior to PithHelmet. I found PithHelmet a little unstable for my tastes. AdBlock works well because you can add in new filters on the fly, very quickly, with wildcards.


PithHelmet can use wildcards, too, just like Adblock. It does everything Adblock does and lots more. It's not just a filtering tool. But if you really like Adblock (it _is_ easier to use), try SafariBlock. It's like a stripped-down version of PithHelmet that mimics Adblock pretty closely.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Apr 13, 2006)

i like pithhelmet because i installed it and i've not seen an advert since.  or even been told that there was any. or was even aware that there was a space for adverts on the internet  (pithhelmet resizes the page to erase the blank space the advert would have taken up).  money well spent.


----------



## Amie (Apr 13, 2006)

CaptainQuark said:
			
		

> I use Firefox on the PC (on the odd occasion that I use the PC for internet browsing), but IMHO, nothing beats Safari on the Mac. I can't give you any techy reasons, it's just personal preference.


Firefox runs faster on my Mac, and it renders Web pages that Safari can't.


----------



## Amie (Apr 13, 2006)

symphonix said:
			
		

> Wow. You've just listed pretty much every one of the Firefox themes that I absolutely hate. I prefer my browser minimilast, with no buttons, no effects, and a neutral colour scheme. Each to their own I guess.
> 
> For me, Firefox wins out 70% of the time. Safari still beats it for RSS feeds, and for its privacy features. Firefox has far superior ad blocking, quick-searches, and a lot of other useful plugins. Both have earned a place on my Dock.


Yeah, I hate those really lame, plain buttons. Which is why I chose those themes. Add some fun and color to your life! 

I have both Firefox and Safari on my Dock, too. Right next to each other, in fact.


----------



## Amie (Apr 13, 2006)

fryke said:
			
		

> Browsers are for weak people.


Then we all must be dead.


----------



## Amie (Apr 13, 2006)

Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> firefox doesn't have PithHelmet.  firefox does have horrible buttons.


Firefox's original default buttons are much better than Safari's, IMO. Still, I like the variation of themes. Which Safari doesn't even have.


----------



## Amie (Apr 13, 2006)

I don't use any ad blocker (free or otherwise), because I don't see any ads, anyway. Explain that.


----------



## Veljo (Apr 13, 2006)

To be honest I don't really like Firefox. It isn't really built into the interface properly, and it feels sloppy and wrong.

I only use it when something in Safari doesn't work, which is pretty rare nowadays.


----------



## Amie (Apr 13, 2006)

Veljo said:
			
		

> To be honest I don't really like Firefox. It isn't really built into the interface properly, and it feels sloppy and wrong.


Themes! Themes!


----------



## Mikuro (Apr 13, 2006)

Themes can only change the look, though. If it were just the looks that bothered me, then...well, it wouldn't really bother me. The problem is that Firefox doesn't _act_ or _feel_ like a Mac program. And so far all the themes I've tried only make it even less Mac-like. 

Just to give one example, look at the popup menus anywhere in Firefox (e.g., control-click, or use a menu in your personal toolbar). They're complete hacks, and don't look _or act_ the way Mac menus should. Appearance-wise, I don't really care; I don't like OS X's menu transparency anyway. But working with these menus, especially when they have sub-menus, is a pain in the kiester, because it doesn't work the way _every other program_ does. Using Firefox, I feel like I might as well be running Windows-in-a-Box. Applications should not invent their own basic UI controls. That's what we have OSes for.

Most other controls in Firefox have similar problems. It's a big turnoff.

Firefox also doesn't get some of OS X's goodies like the floating dictionary (Tiger only), built-in spell checker, etc.

I really _want_ to like Firefox. It's so flexible, and it makes the geek in me happy. But it makes the Mac user in me very, very sad.

Firefox is still my second browser, though, and has earned a place in my Dock, right below Safari. It's by no means a bad browser. But it has an awful lot of rough edges.


By the way: I just recently tried OmniWeb again. It really doesn't get the attention it deserves. Of course, that's probably because it's not freeware like every other popular browser. I recommend checking it out.


----------



## fryke (Apr 14, 2006)

I like my browser _without_ visible interface besides a titlebar and scrollbar(s). OmniWeb therefore has been my default choice since the days of Rhapsody DR 2 and Mac OS X DP 4/Public Beta, back then because there _wasn't_ anything else (IE5 in Public Beta was s.l.o.w.!) and later on because it was simply too good.

And wow, Amie: You seem to be on a roll...


----------



## powermac (Apr 14, 2006)

Safari is my default browser. Although I hope that Leopard brings some well needed improvements. 
Camino is my second choice, I enjoy the speed of the browser. I don't use it often because of no spell check. 
FireFox, is a great browser, very robust. Like everyone has mentioned, it is not Mac enough to capture my daily use. The themes are fun, and I do play around with them. In the end I still prefer the basic buttons, etc.


----------



## symphonix (Apr 14, 2006)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> By the way: I just recently tried OmniWeb again. It really doesn't get the attention it deserves. Of course, that's probably because it's not freeware like every other popular browser. I recommend checking it out.



Yes, OmniWeb does do some things really well, especially archiving an entire page and all its links. It also seems to have one of the best download managers you'l find. It seems to have way too many configuration options for my taste, though, and because it is the last browser on the market that isn't actually free, I only try it out every so often, when they release a major update.



			
				Amie said:
			
		

> I don't use any ad blocker (free or otherwise), because I don't see any ads, anyway. Explain that.



Err, you live under a rock in some sort of desert and post messages on the forums by passing them to a mysterious stranger who takes them to the Internet Cafe for you in exchange for your advice on religious matters?

Seriously, Amie, I know Safari blocks pop-up ads. But AdBlock, SafariBlock and PithHelmet block *ALL* the ads on the pages themselves. With the GoogleExtensions and YahooExtensions tools, you won't even see Google or Yahoo text advertisements on the page, and when you run Google searches you'll only see results based on Page-Rank, and not sponsored links.

Just as well, I couldn't tolerate Google once more coming back with top results like "You can save money on all kinds of MEDIEVAL CHIVALRY on eBay! Click here" or "Books and DVDs about THE PHONE NUMBER FOR YOUR LOCAL PIZZA PLACE available now on Amazon.com!"


----------



## Amie (Apr 14, 2006)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> Themes can only change the look, though. If it were just the looks that bothered me, then...well, it wouldn't really bother me. The problem is that Firefox doesn't _act_ or _feel_ like a Mac program. And so far all the themes I've tried only make it even less Mac-like.
> 
> Just to give one example, look at the popup menus anywhere in Firefox (e.g., control-click, or use a menu in your personal toolbar). They're complete hacks, and don't look _or act_ the way Mac menus should. Appearance-wise, I don't really care; I don't like OS X's menu transparency anyway. But working with these menus, especially when they have sub-menus, is a pain in the kiester, because it doesn't work the way _every other program_ does. Using Firefox, I feel like I might as well be running Windows-in-a-Box. Applications should not invent their own basic UI controls. That's what we have OSes for.
> 
> ...


You know too much. LOL

Seriously, I see what you mean now, though I hadn't really noticed it until you mentioned it. I just enjoy the functions and appearance. I don't really think about whether it's "Mac-like" or not.

Two features that I really do like in Safari that Firefox is lacking:  1) The check-spelling-as-you-type option. Not sure why FF developers left that out. Copy editors/designers like myself sure would appreciate the added feature. 2) The single tab close button for each individual tab. Fortunately, FF has a feature to alert you if you're about to close multiple tabs, so I'm not too hung up about the missing tab buttons on each tab. Still, it would be nice.


----------



## Amie (Apr 14, 2006)

fryke said:
			
		

> I like my browser _without_ visible interface besides a titlebar and scrollbar(s). OmniWeb therefore has been my default choice since the days of Rhapsody DR 2 and Mac OS X DP 4/Public Beta, back then because there _wasn't_ anything else (IE5 in Public Beta was s.l.o.w.!) and later on because it was simply too good.
> 
> And wow, Amie: You seem to be on a roll...


B-o-r-i-n-g!

Yeah, I'm on a roll. Wanna slather some butter all over me?


----------



## Amie (Apr 14, 2006)

symphonix said:
			
		

> Err, you live under a rock in some sort of desert and post messages on the forums by passing them to a mysterious stranger who takes them to the Internet Cafe for you in exchange for your advice on religious matters?


How did you know?! 



			
				symphonix said:
			
		

> Seriously, Amie, I know Safari blocks pop-up ads. But AdBlock, SafariBlock and PithHelmet block *ALL* the ads on the pages themselves. With the GoogleExtensions and YahooExtensions tools, you won't even see Google or Yahoo text advertisements on the page, and when you run Google searches you'll only see results based on Page-Rank, and not sponsored links.


Ah ... yes, OK. I see what you mean. I was thinking of pop-up ads. Gee, I don't even notice those ads in Google or Yahoo anymore. Been using them for so long, it doesn't even phase me. Truth be told, I don't mind 'em at all ... and sometimes ... I even read 'em.


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Apr 14, 2006)

it's only when they've gone do you realise just how subconciously irritating they were. pithhelmet forever baby.


----------



## Amie (Apr 14, 2006)

Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> it's only when they've gone do you realise just how subconciously irritating they were. pithhelmet forever baby.


But ... but ... but ... I might want to read them sometime.

PithHelmet was actually developed by a 16-year-old Alaskan boy. I was impressed to learn that. Smart little cookie.


----------



## fryke (Apr 14, 2006)

It's not boring. It's maximising screen real estate! Why spend 20-50 vertical pixels for buttons that can _all_ be controlled via the keyboard anyway? I mean: Why have back and forward buttons (of _whatever_ theme...) if you're going to hit Cmd-RightArrow/LeftArrow anyway... At least that's how it is for me. I don't like wasted space...


----------



## Amie (Apr 14, 2006)

fryke said:
			
		

> It's not boring. It's maximising screen real estate! Why spend 20-50 vertical pixels for buttons that can _all_ be controlled via the keyboard anyway? I mean: Why have back and forward buttons (of _whatever_ theme...) if you're going to hit Cmd-RightArrow/LeftArrow anyway... At least that's how it is for me. I don't like wasted space...


'Cause clicking is fun. Animated tool bar icons are fun. And why spend all that finger work and keystroke combinations when you can accomplish the same thing with a single click of a mouse. Ah well. To each his own.


----------



## simbalala (Apr 14, 2006)

Has anyone noticed a speed improvement in Firefox with the 1.5.0.2 update? I think it's faster but I've waited a while to be sure.

This is on a G4 1.5 Mhz PB (with Fasterfox running). Over at Daring Fireball John Gruber reports that it's very quick on Intel machines.


----------



## HateEternal (Apr 14, 2006)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> Just to give one example, look at the popup menus anywhere in Firefox (e.g., control-click, or use a menu in your personal toolbar). They're complete hacks, and don't look _or act_ the way Mac menus should. Appearance-wise, I don't really care; I don't like OS X's menu transparency anyway. But working with these menus, especially when they have sub-menus, is a pain in the kiester, because it doesn't work the way _every other program_ does. Using Firefox, I feel like I might as well be running Windows-in-a-Box. Applications should not invent their own basic UI controls. That's what we have OSes for.



Totally, definitely one of the biggest issues. However, there are some instances where this is nice compared to Safari. I dislike how Safari always uses its buttons/text fields regardless of the CSS. I like creating my own control look, meaning, I like defining border colors and background colors for my controls in CSS because it often fits the overall site design better than big aqua buttons, Safari does a poor job of representing those.



			
				fryke said:
			
		

> t's not boring. It's maximising screen real estate! Why spend 20-50 vertical pixels for buttons that can _all_ be controlled via the keyboard anyway? I mean: Why have back and forward buttons (of _whatever_ theme...) if you're going to hit Cmd-RightArrow/LeftArrow anyway... At least that's how it is for me. I don't like wasted space...



Exactly! I can't say I do it all that much on my Mac, but at work and on my Windows machine I manually shrunk every thing. Title bars are tiny as hell, scroll bars are about 8 pixels wide and the task manager is tiny (all at 1600x1200). I love it but anyone that comes over to work with me on my computer absolutely hates it.


----------



## Mikuro (Apr 14, 2006)

Fryke, I don't understand what you mean about OmniWeb using less screen space. You can collapse the toolbars of Safari and Firefox, too. Actually, my biggest gripe so far with OmniWeb is that it takes MORE space than other browsers. Its tab drawer is much bigger than regular tab bars. Am I missing something?



			
				Amie said:
			
		

> You know too much. LOL


 Uhh...thanks? 



> Two features that I really do like in Safari that Firefox is lacking:  1) The check-spelling-as-you-type option. Not sure why FF developers left that out.


It's because Firefox is written with Carbon, whereas Safari uses Cocoa. Cocoa apps get a lot of things "for free", like spell checking. It might be possible to access these things from Carbon (I'm not sure), but it certainly takes work, whereas with Cocoa you'd have to go out of your way NOT to have these features. Most Carbon apps, like Firefox, AppleWorks, and even the Finder, don't have these features.

It's a pity there are still such clear differences between Carbon and Cocoa in practice.



> The single tab close button for each individual tab.


I've been looking around Firefox's extension page, and I found a gem called Tab Mix Plus. It gives you a close button on every tab, plus a lot more. With this, Firefox's tab system skyrockets past Safari's. Finally I have the option to have links that open in a new window open a new TAB instead! (A feature I've previously seen only in iCab.)

This has me seriously reconsidering Firefox. Ohhh...here I go again.


----------



## simbalala (Apr 14, 2006)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> Finally I have the option to have links that open in a new window open a new TAB instead! (A feature I've previously seen only in iCab.)


umm, that's a standard feature in Firefox preferences, have a look.


----------



## Amie (Apr 15, 2006)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> I've been looking around Firefox's extension page, and I found a gem called Tab Mix Plus. It gives you a close button on every tab, plus a lot more. With this, Firefox's tab system skyrockets past Safari's. Finally I have the option to have links that open in a new window open a new TAB instead! (A feature I've previously seen only in iCab.)
> 
> This has me seriously reconsidering Firefox. Ohhh...here I go again.


Really! Interesting. Will definitely check out Tab Mix Plus. Thanks. 

Although, having a link that opens in a new tab from a new window is a standard FF preference option. But I still want the extension for the purpose of giving each tab its own close button.


----------



## simbalala (Apr 15, 2006)

Amie said:
			
		

> Really! Interesting. Will definitely check out Tab Mix Plus. Thanks.
> 
> Although, having a link that opens in a new tab from a new window is a standard FF preference option. But I still want the extension for the purpose of giving each tab its own close button.


Tab X is another Firefox extension which does exactly that and nothing more. Very simple and it doesn't alter the interface as much as Tab Mix Plus.

I've been using it for a long time.

https://addons.mozilla.org/addon.php?id=785


----------



## Lt Major Burns (Apr 15, 2006)

Mikuro said:
			
		

> It's because Firefox is written with Carbon, whereas Safari uses Cocoa. Cocoa apps get a lot of things "for free", like spell checking. It might be possible to access these things from Carbon (I'm not sure), but it certainly takes work, whereas with Cocoa you'd have to go out of your way NOT to have these features. Most Carbon apps, like Firefox, AppleWorks, and even the Finder, don't have these features.
> 
> It's a pity there are still such clear differences between Carbon and Cocoa in practice.



i'm noticing this more and more.  i long for a cocoa set of pro apps.  i'm sick of these cross platform, hacked tacky and ugly applications that we pay through the nose for.  yes they're good, but they aren't cocoa. they';re not as powerful ,as they should be.  they're ported windows apps.  look at maya.  that's hideous.


----------



## Amie (Apr 15, 2006)

I just installed Tab Mix Plus. Thank you, I love it! Two questions, though: 1) How can I get rid of the original FF default close tab button on the right side of my tab bar? I don't need it now that each tab has its own close tab button. 2) I want to use the crash/restore feature of Tab Mix Plus, and I have the boxes checked, but what do all those other options mean, such as Exit/Start? I don't see the word "crash" or anything like that that gives you the option of restoring all tabs/windows if the browser crashes. It's worded weirdly...


----------



## Mikuro (Apr 16, 2006)

Amie said:
			
		

> 2) I want to use the crash/restore feature of Tab Mix Plus, and I have the boxes checked, but what do all those other options mean, such as Exit/Start? I don't see the word "crash" or anything like that that gives you the option of restoring all tabs/windows if the browser crashes. It's worded weirdly...


Just check the "Enable Crash Recover" box. Everything else is for managing tab sets under normal circumstances, like quitting Firefox normally. I have mine set to "Don't Restore" and "Don't Save" on launch/exit, so that it only remembers my tabs when it crashes.

Here's a tip: You can easily simulate a crash by forcing Firefox to quit ("Force Quit" under the Apple menu, or control-click on Firefox's Dock icon and press Option when you see the menu).




			
				Lt Major Burns said:
			
		

> i'm noticing this more and more.  i long for a cocoa set of pro apps.  i'm sick of these cross platform, hacked tacky and ugly applications that we pay through the nose for.  yes they're good, but they aren't cocoa. they';re not as powerful ,as they should be.  they're ported windows apps.


I actually blame Apple for this, not developers. Apple can't expect everyone to move to Cocoa. In fact, they didn't. That's why they made Carbon. But they've let Carbon rust and rot, and have not brought it up to par with Cocoa. They're perfectly happy to treat Carbon programmers as second-class citizens.

Cocoa is simply not practical in many cases  cross-platform programs being one. Carbon is a vital part of OS X. There's no reason Apple couldn't integrate things like automatic spell checking into Carbon. But they don't. They leave a wide gap between Carbon and Cocoa in terms of both technology and behavior.

I suppose you could say that this is part of a much larger issue that's been plaguing OS X since day 1: Apple no longer seems to care about *consistency*. (Yes, I will harp about consistency until the day I die! And I'll do it consistently.  )


> look at maya.  that's hideous.


Yeah, but...name me one 3D app in the history of computing that _wasn't_ hideous. Ray Dream came close, but even that hardly blended with the OS. It's really, really hard to make a good interface for a 3D program. They all suck, on all platforms.


----------



## Amie (Apr 16, 2006)

Thank you, Mikuro!


----------



## hawki18 (Apr 18, 2006)

I put the new universial version on macpro it loads in about 7 seconds with old versoin took 22 to 30 secs.


----------



## Amie (Apr 18, 2006)

hawki18 said:
			
		

> I put the new universial version on macpro it loads in about 7 seconds with old versoin took 22 to 30 secs.


Universal version ... of what? Firefox? PithHelmet? Safari? We were discussing a lot of different apps.


----------



## nixgeek (Apr 18, 2006)

I believe he's talking about Firefox.  There's a new version: 1.5.0.2


----------



## Amie (Apr 18, 2006)

nixgeek said:
			
		

> I believe he's talking about Firefox.  There's a new version: 1.5.0.2


Oh. Yeah. I have that one. Installed the update a few days ago. One thing I've noticed is that the newest version seems to be a lot less buggy and a lot more stable than previous versions. I have not yet experienced one single crash. Knock on wood.


----------

