<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Firefox 4 beta looks promising</title>
		<description>Discuss Firefox 4 beta looks promising</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 04:47:46 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/19396/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Fud_u says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-826</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I uses both Chrome and FF. I still think Chrome look cleaner. Also, some website isn't functioning correctly ever since 3.4. However, FF4beta seem to load faster than chrome. I'm excited to see the final build.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Fud_u</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 04:02:36 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-826</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-811</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Another thing to remember is that Opera was payware not so long ago and switched to freeware since they got worthy competition, which, funny, surpassed them quite quickly. On the other hand Mozilla offered everything for free long before Firefox was an idea. An they still do, continue to improve, bring new products to the table and make money on the side from partnerships without forcing anything down people's throats. Last I heard using Google as a default search engine scored them something so if these developers get payed because I use a service in their way that I would've used anyway, why not? Most of the times I do find myself searching from the address-bar, which is convenient and hey, it funds this very product I'm using. All of this without me spending anything.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:42:33 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-811</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-810</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In terms of security there is also the problem of non-accessible source, i.e. non-open-source. As M$ demonstrated, having its source closed can be worse for security because people that have as jobs to analyze such matters don't have the access to its guts, so who knows what's going on. Who knows what gets fixed and what not. In an open-source community, things get dealt with differently, i.e. they fix things or people find out about it pretty soon. So unless they want their image to get stained they do it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:35:46 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-810</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-809</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As to FX, all the user settings and user data are stored in editable plain-text or sqlite files. Opera's settings not so much. I was going through its file structure, while the cookies and history were stored in separate files, they were inaccessible outside Opera. By using sqlite files however I can alter data, shrink the database or use it in other profiles without the worry that it might be signed strictly to that profile or that data will get corrupted.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:31:24 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-809</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-808</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Tweaking... I know Opera can be tweaked per menus and clicks, check-boxes and so on and so forth. I hate that! I like my browser to store its settings in a place where can intervene in a simple manner. Either to alter, remove, update or back up those settings. Sadly a lot of the add-ons don't have such a function. But one add-on in particular actually surpassed my expectation. Nosctipt not only does a fine job but it stores its settings in a special bookmark making the need to back up its settings superfluous since the bookmarks already get backed up, so Noscript's settings as well. One add-on I've found to be useful... pretty useful, SubmitToTab. A function that Opera doesn't have, not even widgeted.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:21:44 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-808</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-806</link>
			<description><![CDATA[OK, I'll be fair... We talked about add-ons, which Opera calls widgets and some unite apps. you can't compare rubbishes (per translation) with the amount of add-ons FX has? Opera has only some things most of which are just that, widgets. Many of the add-ons I use in FX actually have a background function... they perform something, eg I don't allow a site to do something, they take care of that for me. An Opera's widget is more like a kids toy vs the actual thing the toy represents. They have far too few apps/wiggies while FX has too many, sometimes I wonder which one to try and after a long tryout I decide.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:15:48 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-806</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-805</link>
			<description><![CDATA[One of the magic wands is this damn character limit. I don't think I represent... all I'm saying is that I'm part of a group of people called Mozilla users or Firefox users, which continues to grow overtaking IE in web traffic. Since IE is preinstalled it will mos likely be the most used (by anyone who doesn't mind it) but in traffic we, FX users have the higher score.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:06:00 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-805</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>ASilver says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-803</link>
			<description><![CDATA[And with a magic wave of the hand (as you cannot be bothered), I have been disproven. Still, how can one argue with someone who thinks they represent the rest of the web?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>ASilver</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 18:28:38 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-803</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-800</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'm informed enough despite your failed efforts to prove otherwise. They've been changing things, but the main point is that they came late to the party. When I had the chance to use Opera it was lousy... maybe today things have changed, just not good enough to make me or the rest of the web switch. Most of what you said was remotely related to my points so I won't go into detail just telling I disagree and I'll let you know that greasemonkey and every other add-on listed are non-integrated add-ons. They need to be installed manually, at will, so I tell you to inform yourself before going against someone that might know more about it than you.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 18:11:06 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-800</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>ASilver says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-796</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Myeah... Greasemonkey was incorporated into Firefox years ago, so I have no idea why you would be adding it. As to the tweaking, Opera can be tweaked fine, if you bother to inform yourself, and more so when it comes to menus. The format of cookies files in Opera is identical to Firefox. Again, inform yourself before complaining about non-existent problems. Opera also has tons of add-ons to enhance the browsing experience. FYI, on my main desktop, I use FX, as it has been my standard for years, but I also have the latest Chrome, Opera, etc and do try to have an informed opinion about their strengths and weaknesses.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>ASilver</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 17:06:38 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19396-firefox-4-beta-looks-promising#comment-796</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
