Reader Comments

Agreed. A truly uncompelling upgrade. Yawn. But it did just notify me that it thought "uncompelling" was not spelled correctly (a la MS Word).

I like it. Still prefer it over the interface and rendering disaster that is IE7.

Preston has cited this website before, http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35293 I'll upgrade to FF2.0 at lunch and see whats up.

P.S. Apple has revealed a more developer details for Leopard: http://developer.apple.com/leopard/overview/

"correctly puts a Close Tab button on each tab. " I don't want one on each tab, I like the one close at the far left, you can arrange your tabs, ones you want to keep on the left, ones you want to close on the right, then click the single "X" the appropriate number of times without having to constantly move your mouse.

"I don't want one on each tab, I like the one close at the far left, you can arrange your tabs, ones you want to keep on the left, ones you want to close on the right, then click the single "X" the appropriate number of times without having to constantly move your mouse." You can still use the keyboard shortcuts, "Ctrl-Tab" and "Ctrl-F4" for this purpose. I somehow like the latest release of Firefox and am not able to go back to IE7. It appears to be faster than IE7, which in turn is faster (time to open and load a web page) than FF 1.5. Moreover, the "session restore manager" thing is pretty useful. By the way, is it just me or has anyone else noticed that preseton is getting more and more vocal on this site?

"P.S. Apple has revealed a more developer details for Leopard:" Yawn! If your a developer who likes to starve, I highly recommend developing for the Mac.

"Preston has cited this website before, http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35293" Doesn't mean anything. It hasn't happened yet.

@will84: Ha, nice FUD article. "Symantec says a Mac virus could happen someday!" Yeah, meanwhile, it never happens, and Microsoft has to ship "Defender" software built-in to Vista just to protect it from itself. @anonymous: "Yawn! If your a developer who likes to starve, I highly recommend developing for the Mac." On the contrary, the Mac has a thriving shareware market, unlike Windows (just ask Wil Shipley of Delicious Monster fame). So if you're an independent developer, Mac users will actually pay for your software, unlike Windows users who just run off to Bittorrent and pirate everything. You also don't have to waste money on the very expensive Visual Studio, since Apple has shipped Xcode developer tools for free since 10.0 back in 2001, the very same tools Apple uses to develop OS X.

Wait, now you're actually recommending switching from Firefox to IE?! Are you saying that the UI drawbacks and/or lack of features in Firefox 2.0 are so bad that we should switch back to old IE7 technology? Since when did usability outweigh security?

"You also don't have to waste money on the very expensive Visual Studio" This is just for you bonchypoo, http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/xetas/vs05order.jpg mmm, I love the smell of MS developer support in the morning.

bonch/preseton/vandil- So, you make a bundle on that shareware, huh...I guess its because no software distributor will pick up your awesome Mac software, because they know it WILL NOT SELL!!! Mac OS X is not an Enterprise OS...not even in the foreseeable future!!! Get a clue, its just a desktop OS that can't even run modern software that keeps 99% of businesses in America(and worldwide) going. --tayme

Nice article Paul, and though I don't argue agressively about browsers here's my experience thus far. I generally browse on my Sawtooth, as that's the machine that's at home. I browse faster on Safari, personally. But perhaps that has to do with it being optimized by Apple specifically for mac os x, and say Mozilla doesn't put as much time into developing for os x as they do for Windows. Not sure though. Never-the-less Safari tends to render the source and load images faster than both FF and Camino, so that's the only browser I use. I have FF for a backup, and for that it's not even on my dock. It's there just incase... That said, I went ahead and tested out FF 2.0 and have not been too impressed myself. My biggest drawback is the user interface, and it loads images a little slower than Safari does as expected. Then again that's not too different from what I was experiencing before. But for a new version release and not a beta anymore, I expected better performance and a nicer look than what we got. Have to say I'm not too partial to 2.0.

"Mac OS X is not an Enterprise OS...not even in the foreseeable future!!! Get a clue, its just a desktop OS that can't even run modern software that keeps 99% of businesses in America(and worldwide) going. " Macs also run Office, and Windows. They're productive for work, and good for home use.

"But perhaps that has to do with it being optimized by Apple specifically for mac os x, and say Mozilla doesn't put as much time into developing for os x as they do for Windows." I'm not sure its as much to do with OS localization as it is to do with plugins and extentions. I've noticed that with more of the two page renders with jscript and php generally take longer than with a naked installation of the ferrit. I've only played with FF a few times on mac though, so I have no solid comparison, all I can say is its not blistering on the old XP.

Thanks for the feedback Will. When I first started using FF it was back a few years ago when I purchased a Cyperbower PC. Which granted was a mistake, as after the first year my power supply burned up and I had a "shorted motherbird" as the techs called it here in Charlotte, NC. But upon purchasing that machine everything was new, and I was all excited and tried some new browsers and I really enjoyed FF at the time. Although to be honest, it wasn't exactly the fastest thing on this side of the moon either. That's one thing that has made my browsing experience more pleasurable on Safari, loading times are incredibly fast. Even on my old Sawtooth.

"You also don't have to waste money on the very expensive Visual Studio" You don't have to do that on Windows either. they're called the Express Editions and they're free. There's also a whole bunch of free compilers for Java, C, and a tonne of other languages.

"Macs also run Office, and Windows. They're productive for work, and good for home use." Notice, I said OS X...OS X does not run Windows... How about Oracle, Sybase, db2, SAP, PeopleSoft, etc. But, you are right...they do make a good Web Terminal!!! Mac OS X is not an Enterprise OS...not even in the foreseeable future!!! Get a clue, its just a desktop OS that can't even run modern software that keeps 99% of businesses in America(and worldwide) going. --tayme

"But, you are right...they do make a good Web Terminal!!!" Actually I never mentioned anything about a web terminal to you, and perhaps I should rephrase my inital statement. Macs also run Office, on OS X. I see now that I really have to go in-depth when explaining my comment to you though, so maybe this will help. In addition to OS X also having the capability of running Office, Microsoft's pro suite which plays a dominant roll in their success of the corporate environment, upon purchasing a mac that runs OS X you could also opt to run Windows natively upon command. Therefore providing a solution to potential problems one would have if they needed Windows for something specific instead OS X, while purchasing a mac. PS. Let your guard down, I wasn't disagreeing, attacking, or objecting to your initial statement.

"Actually I never mentioned anything about a web terminal to you" But, you did mention "and good for home use". I would estimate that is 99% of what bonch/preseton/vandil uses it for...along with probably most home users... My point is that OS X is absolutley not an Enterprise OS, especially in the datacenter...and as long as OS X is locked into Apple hardware, it will not make a dent in the Enterprise desktop space either. Desktops in the Enterprise are a commodity, and should be priced as such. That is not Apple's model. --tayme

Preseton/Bonch: Sorry - just can't let these go: "On the contrary, the Mac has a thriving shareware market, unlike Windows (just ask Wil Shipley of Delicious Monster fame). So if you're an independent developer, Mac users will actually pay for your software, unlike Windows users who just run off to Bittorrent and pirate everything." Please show me one stat/survey anywhere that even comes close to supporting the nonsense you're spewing right now. Please. Just one. Heck - make up a website and create some numbers and post it. But until then, stop with the needless personal attack. As a side note, I'd also question the legality of any person's iPod music collection that numbers into the thousands. "You also don't have to waste money on the very expensive Visual Studio, since Apple has shipped Xcode developer tools for free since 10.0 back in 2001, the very same tools Apple uses to develop OS X." I don't need to spend a dime on Visual Studio. I can go get VS Express. I can go get SharpDevelop.

I still don't know if I like this 2.0 more or less than 1.5. One thing that is correct in the article is that not much has changed. :/ -- "Ha, nice FUD article. "Symantec says a Mac virus could happen someday!"" Mmm, attack vectors, abound. Did you know OSX is rolling high with about 6 known security vulnerabilities? How many is Windows XP running with? Oh thats right, 0. Microsoft patches its OS when there is a problem instead of ignoring it. "Oh, they wunna attaxor us! We dunna need patch! Patch bad, me no likie!"

Will: "I don't want one on each tab, I like the one close at the far left, you can arrange your tabs, ones you want to keep on the left, ones you want to close on the right, then click the single "X" the appropriate number of times without having to constantly move your mouse." At the very least, you can right click on one tab and choose "Close Other Tabs" if there's just one that you want to keep. (I know, you're looking to keep X and close Y, but at least you can keep 1 and close Y).

I do enjoy the close other tabs feature, if they would extrapolate it to where you can say hold down a hotkey and click multiple tabs then rightclick and close all the unhighleted ones, that would be perfect. Its usually a moot point anyway, my browser gets closed by my significant other when I'm away from the desk, I guess some don't see the elegance in 25+ tabbies... "You can't even see the title on the tabs!" "I remember the positions!" *exits browser* "NOOOO!" *main memory sighs in relief*

Will- If you go to quick tabs you can quickly close out a group of tabs.

I HATE having the close button on every freakin tab! I've already found an about:config entry to put it back to the right side. That should be available under options. Still though, this version is very slooowww on my Dual-Core 1.8Ghz Sony Vaio laptop. Sometimes I can open up IE7, go to the webpage loading in FF, and pull it up in less time than FF does! Truly ridiculous. I do like the new in-line spell checker though...

Derek: When your power supply burned up, I bet it was a shoddy, fairly light aluminum one right? When you get a system case that costs less than $40, the power supply is usually the majority of that price, but is still a piece of junk. Name brand power supplies like Antec (the ones I use) last a minimum of 3 years and will cost around $75US (I'm guesstimating based on current exchange rate) for a decent 400W. The no-name brand ones included in the cheap cases that a lot of pathetic system builders use only have 30-90 days warranty. Also, they said the motherboard "burned up"? If it was from a few years ago, I can almost bet you got one of those crappy mobo's with defective capacitors that popped. They were in abundance around the 1999-2003 era. There was a whole article on numerous websites about the issue (including on Wikipedia). After working at a shop before owning my own, I used to see system after system built around that time that had the same issue. Most of the systems wouldn't last more than 2 or 3 years without having popped a few caps. Probably the worst ones were black IBM Aptiva P3's and Celerons around 1GHz with the slanted front that had Windows ME installed just before XP came out. I don't think I can find one today that isn't dead or has popped a few. A poorly constructed power supply can also cause that, but the major problem had to do with Taiwanese employees of capacitor manufacturers trading incomplete engineering design secrets. The result was poorly constructed capacitors with a water based electrolyte that converted to gas and vented out (popped) the capacitor at fairly low temperatures for the voltage. Every major (and minor) motherboard manufacturer ended up with the inferior parts at one time or another, but now it's not so much of an issue.

Intel, Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, Epox, Jetway, VIA DFI etc. etc. all had the issue. Some of the cheaper motherboard makers such as Jetway and Epox STILL buy the cheaper capacitors from that company though, where the more expensive brands mostly don't. I've seen 3 Jetway nForce SLI boards with the problem in less than a year, and several Epox boards with it. The Jetway boards actually came from my old boss (a pretty sleazy system builder that hasn't touched a computer since he used to sell hot P2's), but he wouldn't cover them under warranty, claiming that it was a power surge that caused it, even though the power supply works fine. I personally dealt with several of those junk motherboards that he insisted on selling though. They're crap and very unreliable anyway, but you get what you pay for. I'd rather pay more money for a quality Intel-branded board. I haven't had any problems with them in the last 2 years of building systems with them.

Sticking with Firefox 1.5? Sounds good. But how much longer until Mozilla doesn't produce security updates for 1.5? They've already stopped producing fixes for 1.0. Say what you want about Microsoft, but their support lifecycle policy is clearly more in line with the requirements of the corporate world. Of course, you could always argue that since Firefox is open source, that you (or someone else) could step in and produce security patches yourself...

Concerning powersupplies, When I build a A64 3000+ some 3 years back, I found a dirt cheap Powmax Demon 650W powersupply. (I'm talking like 55USD) This thing has been rediculously rock solid and I love it. About a year after I bought it they have went off the market and I can't find them anywhere. Sometimes you get lucky I guess. If you find one, get it, its worth the few pennies. And the thing about tech support confirming that you have a "shorted motherbird" all I can say is wow... I've seen those cyberpower PCs for a good 150 to 300 cheaper than anything I could build with OEM parts... I never could see how they cut a profit, I guess they just use ridiculously low end stuff.

In Canada, we have Cicero, which is sold at Future Shop stores. Do you really know what they use in those things??! They use refurbished parts out of broken name brand machines that came back to the store, or off the shelf items that are either discontinued or returned by customers. Cicero also repackages stuff like optical and hard drives. I saw several customers bring in computers where I last worked to have a cheap Cicero-rebranded hard drive or optical drive that they bought at Future Shop installed in their computer, and ALL of the hard drives had the words REFURBISHED or RECERTIFIED on them!! For many of them, I showed them the label and told them what it meant, and most of them ended up taking the stuff back and buying from the store I worked at. Most people remember me from situations like that and buy from MY store now though. For you yanks, eMachines is about the same. They often use Gigabyte motherboards that have noticeable defects, and their power supplies are sub-par. They get their parts at or below FMV for OEM parts because of the defect rate. And you wonder why Gateway wanted to break into the sub-budget market when they purchased eMachines?? Let that be a lesson to you all: NEVER accept a Recertified or Refurbished hard drive. In fact, it's best not to buy OEM hard drives in the first place. The reason hard drive manufacturers brand a hard drive as OEM or Retail is due to the lot's failure rate, as OEM hard drives only carry a 1 Year (or less) warranty, and retail drives are most often 3 or more. There is a reason for this! More failures in the "extended" period past 1 year costs the hard drive manufacturer more to fix the problems. It's better just to reduce the warranty on that lot and hope they hold out for the 1 year than try to cover it for longer.

Internet Explorer 7 Popup Address Bar Spoofing Weakness (http://secunia.com/advisories/22542/) I wouldn't call that "surprising solid" .. But feel free to keep on dreaming of "superior" software from MS..

"Let that be a lesson to you all: NEVER accept a Recertified or Refurbished hard drive. In fact, it's best not to buy OEM hard drives in the first place. " I thought all manufacturers used OEM parts... its either that or retail no? I've got 5 OEM HDDs, one is almost 6 years old (Go little 60GB go!) now. None have given me a spat of trouble.

"I thought all manufacturers used OEM parts" Most do. It's to keep costs down by reducing the warranty. If the user wants a better warranty, they have to pay for it, but it doesn't give them superior parts - it's just to cover the manufacturer's cost to replace the part. Here's a quick test: Take any hard drive and run SpinRite 6 on it (there are other programs but this one is the best). Run a Level 5 test for 10 minutes and leave it on the SMART status screen. If you have over 1000 corrected errors or any of the bar graphs in red, your hard drive is failing or is likely to fail very shortly and is not reliable. The number count will show how many errors the SMART status of the drive is self-correcting. Each time it corrects an error, it slows down the drive. If it stays at all zero's after 10 minutes, your hard drive motor and drive head are in near-perfect operation. Of course, that's generalizing. In order to get real status, it's best to test the whole drive, which will show if the drive doesn't seek to certain parts of the platter, or if there are any other surface errors. Generally speaking though, the 10-minute test is pretty accurate as it shows that the drive arm is not seeking to the correct position or the head is not reading or writing data accurately. As far as 60GB desktop drives, I've found them to be VERY unreliable and have not seen one without errors yet. If any of the bar graphs on the SMART screen are red, it means that one or more of your sectors were bad and the drive used one of the reserve sectors to replace it. Do you notice that hard drives no longer have a defective sector count on the label of the drive like the old ones did (PRE-2GB drives)? That's because they automatically come with some reserve sectors to replace defective ones. *ONE* defective sector is bad though, as it's a general warning sign that there will eventually be others, due to declining surface conditions.

Until MSIE gets Live Bookmarks (Which will be at least a year - assuming they do it for the next release, since that's how long the future IE release is going to take, according to the folks at official Microsoft IE blog), i'll probably stick to Firefox :P. Maybe they'll get around to implementing XForms and true XHTML support.

Is FireFox 2.0 a HUGE improvement over 1.5.x? Not so much, but it is an improvement. If FireFox 2 had not been released, I would still be using 1.5.x over IE7. Why? because a) it does a better job of rendering. b) It has more USESFUL webdeveloper plugins. That said, I am all but forcing my browser challenged friends to accept the IE7 upgrade when it gets pushed out to them, but still suggest they use FireFox, or better yet Opera as their primary browser.