Dance and Rejoice - FF 3

I'll dance and rejoice when I can download it :rolleyes:

Honestly, you'd think they would get out of bed early in the States wouldn't you

Hey !

Great News dear...

Thanks

Yeah, bit hard to participate in a record when June 17 is almost over here and there's still no download link.

Yeah, bit hard to participate in a record when June 17 is almost over here and there's still no download link.

Bah! What would you expect? You show up at the box office 10–15 hours before the civilized world is up and about.

cheers,

gary

Hmmm, not that impressed at having to enter my master password several times for every tab requiring authentication instead of just once at browser startup.

I don't like the zoom/text-increase function. Much preferred the last one.

This is like Opera and IE7.

But I guess they did it for a reason......

I'm not a fan of zooms either but it least it doesn't continue on out to the right and create a scrollbar like it does in IE7.

Aye, now it's useless for testing sites, but handy for enlarging small pictures to show people who are too far away from the screen

Is there a way of running FF2 and FF3 on the same machine?

Reinstall 2 into a separate folder.

I'm going to have to hit up google and find a way to put my safari bookmarks into FF3. I kinda like it a lot.

Umm. Edit. LOL

Found it. I have to export from safari and then import to firefox. I must be mac spoiled because it didn't do it for me automatically. :rolleyes:

Hmm. No. I don't like the fonts on Firefox. I change them to the same fonts I use in safari and they're just harder to read. I'm going to stick with Safari.

http://imaginekitty.com/external/pictures/fonts.safari.ff.gif

Is it just me? What happened to the back/forward buttons? They were there in FF3rc2, but not in 3. (in Vista; I haven't upgraded in Linux) Screen dump attd.

cheers,

gary

Strange. They show on mine. Can you find them in View -> Toolbars -> Customize...?

Yeah, I had to add them back in myself.

Thanks, guys. That's where it was hiding out. I'd've never thought of that. I'd never think that was even an option! No back button? By default?

cheers,

gary

You think that's something? FF3 doesn't even start on Mac OS 10.3.9! I guess it's finally time to upgrade.

Moving over to Debian Gnu/Linux, then?

cheers,

gary

Is 10.3.9 not freeBSD then? FF3 installed and runs luvely on my 10.4.10

Is freeBSD/OS X not equal to Debian? yet with a gui frontend that kills all others, still don't think much of KDE.

Looks like I just missed the boat.

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/system-requirements.html

That's a bummer, 10.4 was a watershed type version number marking out those that are cool from those that are just well backward

I shouldn't talk though really, I just missed the boat on Intel mac processors, having bought the box just a few months too early or did I just not realise the difference, can't remember.

I'm still running my 1.25GHz eMac G4.

I'm sure the only reason I use Vista as much as I do is because it's running on a 2.1GHz core2 duo. The 1.25GHz G4 keeps up with it very handily though.

I really wish Apple would have stuck with the power PC chips because they did more at the same processor speed, ran cooler and the used less power so laptops could be used all day without recharging.

Motorola just couldn't keep up with the demand though.

The PPC, to my limited knowledge, is/was an excellent processor, but the OS probably has more to do with the effective speeds. I've noticed that my PIII 733MHz Debian box runs as fast as Vista on my Core2-duo 2.3GHz +4GB. Well, it did 'til I figured out how to shut down that Aero crap. What an improvement that made. Now Vista on the 2.3GHz machine is noticeably quicker than Linux on a memory-impaired slow box. But, that's about to change. I'm downloading the image[1] for Debian's AMD64 dist. Instead of a 32bit Vista OS, I'll have a 64bit Linux kernel and (mostly) 64bit applications that utilize both processors.

Life is good. Now need to decide whether to install Vista in a VM under Linux, or install IE under WINE, and strip down the PIII to work strictly as a server.

cheers,

gary

[1] 19GB in 18000+ files to burn 5 DVDs. 19 or so hours + about 5 hours for latency. I have to reload DVD2 as there was an error. There goes another 5 hours for 4,588,910KB.

//edit: Never mind the last. Jigdo fixed it when I reran for DVD2.

Apparently its not, at least sort of not - and that goes for all versions of OSX. The OSX kernel consists of three main components, Mach, BSD & I/O Kit. The BSD part sits on top of the Mach part and provides the interface that an app expects from a POSIX style OS, read more (pdf) . However, I think it would be a bigger problem that Carbon/Cocoa isn't X Windows, but that you might get away with the FreeBSD version if you've installed X11 for OSX.

Wasn't it, couldn't keep up with Intel and couldn't get the heat down ... and that IBM was more interested in the PS3.

Maybe its Vista that's the dog. My 2GHz C2D runs Firefox under OSX and Firefox under XP quickly enough - simultaneously!
(I suspect it would do FF/OSX, FF/Win XP, FF/Linux & FF/Solaris all quickly enough simultaneously, but that would just be showing off )

Wasn't it, couldn't keep up with Intel and couldn't get the heat down ... and that IBM was more interested in the PS3.

Yeah, probably.

I think Steve Jobs made a demand and they tried to tell him no.

Apparently its not, at least sort of not -

Hmm so OSX is more complicated than I realised interesting pdf read

Aero is one of the biggest problems in terms of speed and shutting it off is an excellent choice; it simply throttles the system to a crawl.
Apparently people have found that replacing memory with something like the OZ? matched pairs tuned for Vista helps a lot it seems vista is very temperamental where memory choice is concerned.

We're running Debian on a Xeon box which provides network routing and secondary DNS caching for two virtual networks, it also provides a VMware server that has a rebuilt 64bit Win 2003 server running as a VM which is used as our development server, once I had it tuned for memory allocation and resource use it simply blazes along, and has been stable for 5-ish month now.

I would go with a a VM running Vista or at least see how Vista performs as a VM, but DON'T go with VMware ( if I could change anything I wouldn't have let the network engineer use VMware, as it has drawbacks and oddly he agrees. We could do with the workstation verion but aren't prepared to pay for that. go with virtualbox I have it running on my machine and like it much and our network engineer agrees that it's one of the top offerings now in virtualization software.

After thought:

All this talk of OS installs minds me of a neat approach for those willing to dable.

MS have something known as 'Developers Action Packs' (name might be incorrect) which is something that as a business you can sign up to and if accepted you will receive every single bit of highend (and lo) software MS produce we received a pack that I guestimated to be worth around £10,000 retail we have all versions of MS servers 32 & 64, Exchange, MSsql server, XP pro, vista, SBS, Office, to name a tiny fraction, all legit to use in a development environment (that's us!) we can now play around to our hearts content, and every two or three months we get a whole heap more through the post.

If accepted? What does that mean?

Fwiw, details can be found here - https://partner.microsoft.com/40016455 - at $300 per year it seems very reasonable, more so than being an MSDN member (OS Level) which is $700 to join and $500/year to renew.

Also, quite a bit of MS software is available in short term (3-6 months) trial versions for free, which is handy for VMs. Mostly it seems you can get subsequent trial versions.

PS. When visiting these fancy M$ sites, use IE or Opera. FF2 can't cope with the .NET menuing systems.

:? well it means that you have sold your soul doesn't it? one is further damned for all eternity :shrug:

Yes sorry that is the link I should have supplied

Essentially we have every bit of major software MS produces and enough licences to cover our small development team and can play to our hearts content, we - as far as I can gather - can use these for internal dev purposes unhindered just not in a commercial environment; so for £199 it is a pretty good deal, The server software is mostly marked 'R2' but we have been running it problem free for a while now. We have used 2003 ×2, SBS, Exchange, and MSsql which probably would have been around £2000 or more to purchase and have made use of various XP/Vista upgrades. I'm looking at having a play with 2008 64bit server soon, time permitting.

I have to agree, I don't like the text/zoom, but I still have that ability in Safari. I also have a portable firefox 2 for testing. The only issue I have is I can't run FF3 and my portable FF2 at the same time.

Oh well.