Firefox has extensions or add-ons or whatever they are called this week.
That is very different from: Opera, IE, Safari.
I only use two Firefox add-ons, but AdBlock Plus alone is the cat's pajamas for me as I enjoy reading ZDnet without any adverts.
What browser battle? They're more alike than different
Summary
A panel discussion among browser executives shed a little light on the philosophical differences between four major browsers but more than anything showed how these products are moving in the same direction.
Topics
A panel discussion among browser executives shed a little light on the philosophical differences between four major browsers (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome, and Opera), but more than anything showed how these products are moving in the same direction.
Left to right: Moderator Stephen Wildstrom of BusinessWeek, Christen Krogh Opera, Sundar Pichai Google, Dean Hachamovitch Microsoft, and Mike Shaver Mozilla. (Credit: Rafe Needleman)
Responding to an audience question at the end of the panel, the browser reps set their products apart from the others this way:
Christen Krogh, Chief Development Officer, Opera: "Our claim to fame is that we can make a Web browser run on anything." He was referring to the numerous mobile and game platforms that Opera runs on.
Sundar Pichai, VP Product Management, Google: "Speed. We only have so many seconds before we die."
Dean Hachamovitch, General Manager Internet Explorer, Microsoft: "It's about how real people use the web every day." The least-satisfying response to this question.
Mike Shaver, VP Engineering, Mozilla: "We believe the internet is too important to have anyone exclded from it." That explains the numerous localized versions of Firefox. Shaver went on to explain that Mozilla is a non-profit, "chartered to protect the Internet."
Other important browsers were not represented. Apple declined to send a representative for Safari. Reps from other browser companies (like Flock) were not invited.
To my mind, the standout product was Opera. It's the only one succeeding with a business model different from the others. Rather than put all its effort into a desktop product, Opera's success lies in its mobile versions.
After the panel, I asked Pichai of Google about a potential new version of a mobile version for Chrome, now that Apple is opening up a bit and allowing alternative browsers on to the iPhone -- and with the knowledge that the Android team uses a mobile version of Chrome. But he said, "We're focused on the desktop right now." He did say Apple's move both surprised and pleased him, and he plans to work with people inside Google to figure out what to do about it. He said those conversations haven't started yet. I find that hard to believe.
One of moderator Stephen Wildstrom's most interesting questions was about the inherent conflict that each browser maker faces: How do you innovate when the core of the product must adhere to strict standards? Pichai of Google said, "We wouldn't add another rendering engine to the world," which is why they used the Webkit engine (which also powers Safari).
"It's a problem we haven't solved," said Shaver of Mozilla, "but we're getting better at knowing when to standardize and when to innovate."
This blog originally appeared on CNET News.com's Webware.
Talkback Most Recent of 24 Talkback(s)
-
davebarnes16th Jan 2009 -
Really?
I am typing this on IE8, with the IE7Pro addon, which adds several features, including Ad Blocker, Flash Blocker, and a spell checker to IE. FireFox is not the only browser that supports extensions.
I also use, and like, FF, but I run into too many sites that just don't display properly. I understand that this is not specifically a FF issue, but because of it I find myself using IE more.
itpro_z16th Jan 2009 -
IE Tab 4 FF
IE Tab for Fiefox...use it, love it, and when u figure out how little u need it, switch to Linux.Seriously, on my winbox I use IEtab and then set a local sec0 policy to block iexplore. Works great.
Socratesfoot16th Jan 2009 -
Flash-block, but not Ad-block -- fair's fair.
For example, if I can be bothered to visit ZDNet, they get to show me their adverts -- I may ignore them, but that's another story.
That is the deal, right? They (in this case ZDNet) bear the expenses of producing content that I'm interested in viewing, and in exchange I let myself be exposed to adverts that might conceivably interest me too. That's how We pay for the benefit of having "free" access to the content on sites like this one.
I might not have the highest opinion of ZDNet in general, but no one's making me come here. I doubt anyone's making you come here, either.
- - -
(Flash is more intrusive, so I may block that with a clear conscience, depending on how intrusive, and on how hard I'm pushing my hardware. I wonder if netbooks will encourage net-advertisers to use less flash?)
bswiss26th Jan 2009 -
Once upon a time...
Once upon a time, I might have agreed with you. However, it's not just ads being served up. It's tracking cookies, adware, spyware, trojans, ad infinitum - much of it served up through these ad networks via compromised servers and unchecked ad code provided by the folks that paid for the ads, all served up with no oversight by the site you're visiting, and trust.
With a bit of logging, and a whole lot of protection in place, I found that in one hour of surfing, going only to big name, reputable sites, there were more than 400 attempts to download/install unwanted software on my system. And, that's just the malware attempts.
I don't mind the ads. It's all the other crap clawing its way onto our systems that I don't want.
Dr. John27th Jan 2009 -
Ah, well. You might have a point, in part...
I'm not sure how much that ties in to blocking advertisements. (aside from tracking cookies and web-bugs). Not that I believe most users of Ad-block are thinking about that.
Still, that's one of the reasons I quit Windows. For a few years, now:
* I run Linux only
* even before I switched, I ran non-IE browsers/email
* and my cache, cookies, etc get flushed whenever I close my browser
* I have a daily script to delete "Flash-cookies" (.sol files)
* when I'm using my "secure" computer, I run a proxy that filters web-bugs, etc. (since I'm using Linux, I still get snappier performance than under Windows). I'll probably install one one this box too, now that I've been reminded -- there's 2 or 3 common, easy (pre-configured, even) ones that screen out that stuff.bswiss27th Jan 2009 -
alternative
Using OpenDNS you can block specific domains so they can't sneak those ads in, and don't accidentally block something you might want. Just block advertising.com, adclick, etc... No wasted bandwidth, and no accidental blocks of relevant content.
Secondary to that, NoScript is THE net explorer's tool. Nothing gets to dump itself to your system without your prior okey-doke.Dr. John27th Jan 2009 -
RE: What browser battle? They're more alike than different
Correct, Firefox has tons of extensions, from Adblock Plus to Greasemonkey (scripting) to things like Ctrl+Tab (yes, that is the name of the extension, it`s something like alt+tab in Windows, but between tabs)
It`s the best browser, hands down.
Soulstorm16th Jan 2009 -
"Speed. We only have so many seconds before we die."
I would point out to Google that they might want to balance speed with "quality", something that should be sprinkled liberally over those seconds we're alive.
ejhonda16th Jan 2009 -
Also
Were Flock invited, the response could easily have been "Why not do as much as possible during those few seconds?"
While I type this, I'm also on facebook, myspace, twitter, digg, checking my RSS feeds, checking my email, finding out if any new youtube vids have been added to those I've subscribed to. I could also be writing a blog, uploading photos to flickr, photobucket, facebook or myspace and of course, I could just do a simple google search from my browser, just like any other can do.
Funny thing, on the worst days, Flock only runs at the same speed as FF. It tends to be slightly faster on my PC and I've checked between both Windows and Ubuntu.
Chrome is pure speed, that's it. Firefox is great for extensions, but otherwise is just a really good replacement for IE, albeit, more secure. Opera didn't make it so well on the desktop, but for mobile devices, it's awesome. IE wouldn't exist except that it's bundled into 80% of the worlds PCs. Flock representatives should have been invited, it's more unique in its functionality, more unique in the way the community works, more unique in how quickly any problems are solved not having to do with the gecko rendering engine.
Recently, Facebook changed part of its code, giving problems with the compatibility to the site from the sidebar in Flock. Within a day, the problem had been noticed and fixed and the update had already been sent out. When going into the forums, you'll notice there is staff presense, not just other users, not moderators, but people who work on Flock for a living, people who built the product, that's not something to be taken lightly.
Perhaps the next time one of these "discussions" takes place, all browsers should be represented.
tmsbrdrs27th Jan 2009 -
RE: What browser battle? They're more alike than different
The new version of FireFox that Mozilla put out sucks! This is totally unacceptable! I expect more from FireFox! This is the kind of crap that Microsoft does with IE and that's why people who know avoid Microsoft products like the plague.
drrose197716th Jan 2009 -
g2g59117th Jan 2009 -
Gee how many people can reinvent the wheel
All this for a glorified picture frame. Just like the obsession with OSs makes people forget we actually need applications, the obsession with browsers makes people forget that it's the web content that's important.
Just use the one that came with your OS and let the fanbois and shutins worry about the rest.
tonymcs@...18th Jan 2009 -
Why don't users just suck it up? Here's why.
Yes- content is important, but a browser is like a
car. It takes me to different locations on the
internet. Sometimes, when I'm using a crappy car, it
will get me to my location slowly, and it might crash
a few times.
"Content is king," as we all know, and "Just use the
[browser] that came with your OS" used to work
perfectly when the web was text-only, but now we
actually have applications that are demanding more and
more.
The reason that users are so obsessed with better
browsers is because their experience can vary so
greatly depending on what web application they are
using.
thealexbaron19th Jan 2009 -
Not exactly
"The reason that users are so obsessed with better browsers is because..."
Because of a few reasons actually. Sure, a users experience can vary on the internet with different browsers. There are some differences in performance in differing ways with each browser, to be sure.
But the bottom line truth is, except for a few user specific instances the differences are minimal in most cases. Speed test differences usually only amount to a second or two here and there and the vast majority of FF page rendering difficulties have long since been mostly resolved.
Where a user has a legitimate preference for one browser over another its usually due to some specific function in the browser or the way a particular feature works. I for example by far prefer the way IE favorites menu works over the FF type. Every time I use FF the bookmarks look like the layout was designed 10 years ago by someone who didn't foresee how ludicrous it was to have your bookmarks flailing out and about the web page.
In the end most browser preferences, particularly the strong overstated preferences that are often professed, come out of nothing more then an over zealous loyalty to a particular software producer, often accompanied with a peculiar hatred of all things Microsoft in those cases where a user might even state that they have a personal policy of "anything but MS".
All the browsers are pretty good these days and unless you have a good and proper reason for preferring one over another, any one of the major browsers will do the job and do it right. If you want to criticize a specific issue with a particular browser that seems reasonable, but to write any of them off as incompetent generally, is nonsense.
Cayble27th Jan 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
