Firefox 3.5 brings the world's second-most popular browser up to speed with current browsing technology and trends, and perhaps nudges it just a bit ahead of the competition. However, it is by no means the leap ahead that its predecessor Firefox 3 was, and it's clear that the competition isn't going away anytime soon.
Available for Windows, Windows Portable, Mac, or Linux, Firefox 3.5 nevertheless represents the best Firefox we've yet seen from Mozilla. This comes as no surprise, and with a testing process that involved four beta builds, three release candidates, and a version change to reflect what Mozilla described as the originally-unintended breadth of the improvements being made, most of the new features are no surprise, either.
Private Browsing, known to IE users as InPrivate, Chrome users as Incognito, and Safari users as, well, Private Browsing, finally comes to a public version of Firefox. It's been available to the 800,000 or so beta testers since December 2008. If you're not familiar with it, users can toggle on or off the browser's history, cookies, and other browsing traces at will via the Tools menu or CTRL+SHFT+P. A new window will open. Among its other uses that serve as fodder for second-rate comedians, it's an excellent tool for avoiding leaving tracks on publicly-used computers and its about time that Firefox finally got it. In fact, Firefox has had it in various stages of development for four years.
I'm not sure how connected Firefox's development of Private Browsing is to this next feature, but I can see far more users gaining traction from having the fine, granular control of browsing tracks that's now available in v3.5. The Clear Private Data window has been replaced by a Clear Recent History option, using the same hot key combo and in the same place in the Tools menu.
Under the Clear Recent History window, you can delete your entire recent browsing history over the past hour, two hours, four hours, today, or all content in your history. From its Details drop-down menu, you can tailor the data purge to Browsing and Download history, Form and Search history, Cookies, Cache, Active Logins, Site Preferences, and Saved Sessions. From within the History window, you can also right-click on a site to Forget this Site, which will remove all instances of that site from your history records. Because your Most Recent Sites folder pulls from your history, you gain this level of control there, too.
Another excellent improvement in v3.5 that pushes Firefox ahead of its competitors is aggressive developer support. This may not sound impressive to most users, and if you're not a developer, I can see why its hard to get worked up about support for CSS media tags, HTML5 local storage, downloadable fonts, Web worker thread, and native JSON support, or SVG transforms--it all sounds a bit too much like alphabet soup.
Firefox 3.5 comes with geo-locating turned on, so it always knows where you are (with your permission.)
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)However, embedded ICC profiles, and support for Ogg Vorbis and Theora video and audio means that image colors will look better and closer to how they were intended, and no plug-in will be required for properly-encoded multimedia. Since Vorbis is open-source, this will lend those formats a huge boost while rendering those pages more stable. Here's an example video from Firefox that offers a tour of the new browser, or you can check out this sample from Daily Motion. Non-Firefox users will either see the Flash version (as on Daily Motion), or be directed to download the OGV file.
The "awesome bar" that debuted in Firefox 3 has become one of my favorite features. I've personalized my browser to eliminate the search bar, and now I use the location bar for all my searching. In v3.5, Mozilla has improved the search functionality so that you can show only bookmarks, by using an asterisk after a query such as "cnet *", or show only tags by using a plus "cnet +".
You can also tear off tabs as you can in the Webkit-based browsers Chrome, Safari, and IE, although unlike those browsers, Firefox's tabs are not sandboxed. This means that, if the browser crashes, you're still hosed, although Mozilla says this feature--known in development as Electrolysis--is being worked on.
In the meantime, Mozilla has imported better session control that users could only get before from add-ons like Session Manager. Now, if Firefox crashes, you get the option to choose which tabs to revive. If a Flash-based or heavy JavaScript site was the cause of that crash, you don't need to bring back that particular tab and risk getting caught in a crash-and-restart cycle of frustration.
Firefox 3.5 natively supports HTML5 and embedded Ogg video content.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)Mozilla abandoned development of its own geolocating technology in Firefox, but that doesn't mean that Firefox 3.5 doesn't possess the ability to know where you are. Using Google's tech, Firefox can pinpoint where you are so that in search queries, for example, you'll get the most locally relevant results first. Turning this off isn't difficult, either. Under about:config, search for "geo.enabled" and change True to False by double-clicking on it.
Performance has always been one of the keys to browser popularity, and much of Google's success with Chrome can be attributed to its fast JavaScript rendering marks. The resurgent interest in Safari also comes from its JavaScript benchmarks and Apple's claim that Safari is the fastest browser on the market with its Nitro JavaScript engine. Firefox 3.5 doesn't beat them on the JavaScript front, but it's within shooting range.
On a Lenovo T400 laptop with a Core 2 Duo T9400 processor running at 2.53 GHz, with 3 GB of RAM and Windows 7 RC 7100, I ran the SunSpider JavaScript test and Dromaeo's subset of JavaScript tests on Firefox 3.0.11, Firefox 3.5, Internet Explorer 8, Chrome 2, and Safari 4. As much as I like Opera as an all-in-one browser, I left it out because Opera 9.6 hasn't stood up well to the improvements that the field has made in the past year, and Opera 10 beta isn't ready to be compared to public releases at this point. Remember that for SunSpider the lower number is better, while the opposite is true of Dromaeo.
Firefox users can now rip tabs off into new windows, or drag them back into the old one. Still no sandboxing, though.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)Firefox 3.0.11 completed SunSpider in 2695.4 milliseconds, and 44.22 runs per second, while Firefox 3.5 notched 1319.6 ms on SunSpider and 91.18 runs/s. This falls in line with Mozilla's published benchmarks of 3669 ms for Firefox 3 versus 1524 ms for Firefox 3.5. In both "official" numbers and in my own tests, Firefox 3.5 comes out around twice as fast for JavaScript.
Meanwhile, Chrome 2 hit 322.1 runs/s on Dromaeo and 712.2 ms on SunSpider. Either way, Chrome is significantly faster than Firefox for JavaScript, one-third faster judging by SunSpider and twice as fast by Dromaeo. Safari 4 scored 915.6 on SunSpider and 239.02 runs/s on Dromaeo, slightly slower than the its Webkit cousin Chrome but still faster than Firefox. Internet Explorer marked 4434.6 ms in SunSpider, but crashed on Dromaeo while testing base 64 encoding and decoding.
Firefox 3.5 is around twice as fast as Firefox 3. Chrome and Safari are faster with JavaScript, though.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)It's important to note that speed is not the only criterion for judging a decent browser. Each browser only had open two tabs, the results of its Dromaeo test and the results of its Safari test. Safari consumed nearly 135 MB of RAM, IE saw 104 MB, Firefox 3.5 hit 66 MB, and Chrome logged 46.5 MB. These results will fluctuate depending on your computer and any other tasks your browser is running at the time, but they give a decent idea of how each browser is performing during these tests.
Other useful tests look at Web standards rendering, like the Acid3, and deeper analysis of the SunSpider results. Chrome and Safari both reach 100/100 on the Acid3 test, while Firefox makes it to 93/100. Official release notes for Firefox 3.5 can be read here.
Firefox 3.5 is a much-needed improvement to the world's most popular alternative browser. At the time of writing, Mozilla was about to log the 2 millionth download after only 7 1/2 hours. While some of the improvements, such as the HTML5 and other developer enhancements will continue to make the browser their first choice, many of the other changes merely keep it in-line with the competition. For now, Firefox will continue to rely on its vast base of developers and users who value their customizations over superlative claims, so long as Mozilla keeps its browser close enough to its competitors. Now that Firefox has kicked open the door against Internet Explorer, it'd be foolish to expect that they'd be the only ones to rush through it.
Updated, June 17: The sandboxing of plug-ins, such as Flash, in Safari 4 will be limited to users running Mac OS X 10.6, which will be available this fall. The feature is currently not available, nor will it be available to Windows users. Windows users should also note that changing the default search provider is limited to either Google or Yahoo.
The public version of Safari 4 was released Monday amid all the iPhone noise at WWDC, and Apple confirmed what those who played around with the beta version already knew: Safari is now a serious browser for serious Windows users, and its position on Macs has been bolstered.
You can download Safari 4 for Windows and Mac from CNET Download.com.
If you're unfamiliar with Safari 4, I strongly recommend checking out Stephen Shankland's analysis of the Safari beta version that was released in January. The biggest overall changes are the graphics improvements, including the new interface and the new JavaScript engine called Nitro, but since the beta little else is dramatically different.
Users of Safari 3 will be hard-pressed to not notice that the interface is completely new, with a look and feel much more in line with the other major Webkit-based browser, Google Chrome. The browser launches with the menu bar, tab bar, and status bar all hidden, presenting you with the location bar, bookmark bar, and the slick Top Sites interface. Top Sites is essentially Opera's Speed Dial feature, presenting your most commonly visited Web sites, with a Cover Flow-style skin. The black background, curvature, and reflective window bottom make this the most professional-looking Web browser around. A blue star and an upturned corner indicate that a site has been updated since your last visit to it. Tap the Edit button in the bottom left corner to remove a site or pin a site permanently to Top Sites.
One major change to the interface from the beta involves tabs. In the beta, Apple experimented with a Chrome-style "tabs-on-top" that it has abandoned in the public release. The font for the tabs was often hard to read, and made Safari look excessively like Chrome. The new tab style now looks much like the old tab style.
Safari's visual speed dial is one of the new browser's best features--if your system is new enough.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)Cover Flow is now available as a graphic way to browse your bookmarks and history, however, if you've got a somewhat older computer you still won't be able to use any of these graphics improvements.
Another new change for Mac users in Snow Leopard will be the sandboxing of browser crashes caused by plug-ins such as Flash and Shockwave. The page that they're on will continue to function, and you can reactivate the plug-in by reloading the page.
Safari 4 is also the first nonbeta browser to fully complete the Acid3 Web standards compliance test.
The URL bar does feature "smart" surfing, but only for including your history and bookmarks--much like Internet Explorer. Chrome and Firefox remain the only browsers to default to Google's "feeling lucky" style of searching from the location bar.
Cover Flow in Safari gives your Bookmarks and History a graphics lesson.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)Apple's big claim with Safari is that it's the fastest browser on the market, and Apple just might be right on that count. On an Intel Core Duo T400 ThinkPad, with 3GB of RAM and a 2.53GHz processor, I ran both Webkit's SunSpider JavaScript test and Mozilla's Dromaeo test on Firefox 3.5 Preview, Google Chrome 2, and Safari 4. Safari came out on top in Dromaeo by a long shot, but Chrome eked by in SunSpider.
For the SunSpider test, Chrome hit 597.0 milliseconds, while Safari scored 620.4 ms and Firefox comparatively chugged along at 952.2 ms. On Dromaeo, Safari reached 175.06 runs per second, Chrome managed 67.92 runs/s, and Firefox came in last again at 48.48 runs/s. However, Chrome only led in two categories, and it tied both with Safari. Safari definitively led in 36 tests, and Firefox led in 12.
Keeping in mind that although these tests are affected by background computer processes, your hardware, and other factors, Safari is definitely one of the fastest browsers out there. However, it still lacks extensions, and for many Firefox users that's enough to keep them from switching. Even Internet Explorer supports some form of extensibility with its Web Slices and Accelerators.
Like many other browsers, Safari's location bar offers suggested sites.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)Safari is still a RAM-devouring beast, too. With two tabs open, one to Dromaeo and one to SunSpider, it was using a shocking amount of RAM--more than 500MB after running both tests. Google Chrome consumed about 75MB of RAM across the same two sites under the same circumstances, while Firefox required 120MB.
With about 8.5 percent of the browser market, it's clear that Apple is positioning Safari as more than a developer's tool on Windows, and that its successes at building a faster JavaScript engine should be taken seriously even with its other drawbacks.
Yesterday's introduction of Chrome version 2.0.172.28 was touted by Google as being up to 30 percent faster for handling JavaScript. After using the update to the stable release extensively for the past day and running it through two JavaScript tests on two computers, it's conclusively faster than the previous stable version of Chrome.
In addition to being faster, the new Chrome now has a full screen mode.
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)The two computers I used were a Windows Vista Service Pack 1 desktop with a Pentium 4 processor running at 3.00 GHz and 2 GB of RAM, and a Windows XP Pro Service Pack 3 laptop with a Core Duo T9400 processor running at 2.53 GHz and 3 GB of RAM. Chrome was benchmarked by the Webkit test, SunSpider, and the JavaScript-only sections of the Mozilla test Dromaeo. Chrome was tested with no other tabs open and no other programs running on the computer.
When testing SunSpider, Chrome v1.0.154.65 scored 919.2ms on the laptop, and 1864.2ms on the desktop. Chrome v2.0.172.28 scored 583.6ms on the laptop, and 1323.4ms on the desktop. The laptop score was 36.6 percent faster, and the desktop was 29 percent faster.
Running both versions of Chrome through Dromaeo came up with similar results. Keeping in mind that the higher number is better for Dromaeo's tests, the older Chrome scored an overall 113.25 runs/s on the laptop. The newer one hit 139.90 runs/s, an improvement of 23.5 percent. The desktop results were the inverse of the laptop's.
Where the SunSpider results showed greater gains for the new Chrome on the laptop, the Dromaeo desktop tests showed an improvement of 33.8 percent. Chrome v1.0.154.65 hit 146.63 runs/s while v2.0.172.28 scored 196.29 runs/s.
Also new: Users can set forms to autofill in the Options menu (foreground, right), and selectively remove thumbnails on the New Tab landing page (background, left).
(Credit: Screenshot by Seth Rosenblatt/CNET)Actual results will vary based on your hardware and other program running simultaneously, but it's irrefutable that the new version of Chrome, with its updates to the WebKit rendering engine and Google's V8 JavaScript engine, is significantly faster than its predecessor. I strongly recommend that you upgrade if you've been using Chrome for script-intensive Web apps.
Also new in this version of Chrome is the F11 hot key to toggle full screen mode, which drops all hints of the browser frame except for the scroll bars--but only if they're appearing on that site in standard mode. There's also a new form autofill under Options in the Tools menu, and users can selectively remove thumbnails from the New Tab landing page.
Google's latest version of Chrome has claimed the lead in my JavaScript speed tests, but Apple's new Safari 4 beta is the first browser to challenge it on Google's own performance benchmark.
JavaScript is a programming language that powers not just innumerable ordinary Web sites, but also many Web-based applications such as Google Docs. With the computing industry's major push to cloud computing, Web application performance is increasingly important, and there's a race on to see who's got the best JavaScript engine. JavaScript engines even have become a named feature, with Chrome's V8, Firefox's TraceMonkey, Opera's Futhark and upcoming Carakan, and now the Safari's newly branded Nitro, which is Apple's version of WebKit's Squirrelfish.
On the SunSpider test, the new Safari 4 beta scored third place.
(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET News)
Google's Chrome now is only a smidgen slower than Mozilla's Firefox on the SunSpider test of JavaScript.
(Credit: CNET News)On Tuesday, Mozilla released Firefox 3.1 beta 2 and Google released Chrome 0.4.154.33, so it's time for the latest installment of JavaScript performance testing.
Here's the highlight: Though Firefox remains the leader on the SunSpider test, with a score of 2,110, Chrome edged very close with 2,140. A lower score is better; because of some variation in results, the numbers I quoted are an average of several runs.
Firefox and Chrome aren't the only browsers out there, but they're interesting to compare for a few reasons. First, they're both open-source projects launched to shake up the establishment with new ideas about the browsing experience. Second, given that philosophical alignment, they're likely to appeal to the same early-adopter crowd. Finally, both have new JavaScript engines, Chrome's V8 and Mozilla's TraceMonkey, which in the new beta is switched on by default.
JavaScript is used to build sophisticated Web sites such as Gmail or Google Docs, but it's also widely used for more ordinary operations, so faster JavaScript performance is desirable. One interesting possibility Google has raised for Web applications though is to bypass JavaScript altogether and use Google's new Native Client software, a research project that lets Web-based software run closer to the speeds of regular software on a computer.
Chrome is making steady gains in Google's JavaScript test; Firefox is much slower and has a mixed record.
(Credit: CNET News)SunSpider is only one test, though; Google has its own JavaScript benchmark on which Chrome wins hands-down. A glitch in the first Firefox beta kept me from testing it on Google's benchmarks, but the new beta runs again, yielding a score of 182. That's lower than the earlier Firefox 3.1 beta's 235 score, so perhaps something is still amiss. Either way, it's a far cry from Chrome 0.4.154.33's score of 2,635.
The usual caveats: your mileage may vary; I ran these tests on a dual-core Lenovo T61 laptop with 3GB of memory and Windows XP. JavaScript is only one aspect of Web browsing performance, and indeed of browsers overall. Also, this software is still in beta, Chrome in particular a developer beta. Finally, I apologize to those who've been asking, but time constraints have kept me from trying the latest WebKit builds and Opera.
According to Mark Larson, Google's Chrome program manager, Chrome 0.4.154.33 fixes a crash when opening the Options dialog box on 64-bit Windows and some issues using Hotmail. "Hotmail still does not properly recognize Google Chrome," though, Larson said in his announcement of the new version, though it can be fooled into thinking it's using a more mainstream browser. For details, check the instructions on the release notes.
The SunSpider test shows Tracemonkey-enabled Firefox leading the newest Chrome build in JavaScript performance--for now at least. Test results reported in seconds, so smaller is better.
(Credit: CNET News)Correction 12:00 p.m. PDT: This report has been updated to reflect Firefox performance with the TraceMonkey JavaScript engine enabled, in which case Firefox is fastest at the SunSpider test.
With new beta versions out for Firefox and Google Chrome, I thought I'd see how things have changed when it comes to testing the speed of JavaScript, the programming language that powers many cutting-edge Web applications such as Gmail and Google Docs. The answer: both browsers made big strides, but Firefox still beats Chrome on one widely-used performance test.
When Chrome was released, I ran Google's JavaScript speed test on Firefox 3.0.1, the initial Chrome beta, Internet Explorer 7 and 8 beta 2, and Safari 3.1.2. Chrome led the speed test with an overall score of 1,851 and Firefox in second place at 205. A bigger score is better on this test.
Running the same test on the latest developer version of Chrome, 0.3.154.3, boosted the browser's score to 2,265--a 22 percent increase. And Firefox jumped 15 percent to 235. Firefox 3.1 beta 1. However, that test measures Firefox without its new TraceMonkey JavaScript engine enabled; a bug in TraceMonkey trips up the test by invoking a print dialog box. (There aren't any new versions of Safari or IE to test, though Safari likely will see a boost from its earlier score of 170 from the SquirrelFish Extreme JavaScript engine.)
In September, Firefox backer Mozilla countered Google's benchmark suite, spotlighting Firefox's superior results using the SunSpider speed test. Here, TraceMonkey works, and Firefox maintains its lead over Chrome and the others.
The newest Chrome beta is 22 percent faster on Google's own JavaScript benchmark. Firefox's performance score increased 15 percent--but that doesn't factor in TraceMonkey, because a bug breaks this test.
(Credit: CNET News)I couldn't run SunSpider when Chrome was released because the site was out of commission that day, but it's up and running again now, so here's the latest results for the four browsers--and bear in mind here that a smaller score is best for SunSpider: TraceMonkey-enabled Firefox led with a score of 2,257; Chrome was second at 2,904; Firefox 3.1 beta 1 with no TraceMonkey next with 4,233; Safari 3.1.2 followed at 6,351; and IE 8 beta brought up the rear with 9,025.
Mozilla's Mike Shaver said the bug that impairs the Google JavaScript test--one reason TraceMonkey isn't enabled by default--should be fixed "soon." For those who want to try the their own tests, Tech-Recipes has useful instructions on how to enable TraceMonkey.
Why you should care
Why does all this matter? A few reasons.
First of all, JavaScript is widely used in innumerable ordinary Web sites, and Internet companies have found that even small improvements in Web page responsiveness increases user interaction with their sites. A snappier response is better for everyone.
Second, for the more avant garde, JavaScript powers many sophisticated Web sites and Web-based applications, endowing them with features such as drag-and-drop, pop-up dialog boxes. Faster JavaScript means companies such as Zoho, Google, and Yahoo can build more features into the Web applications and that users will find those applications easier to use. And these more interfaces are spreading to mainstream sites, too.
Last, on the programming front, JavaScript is vying with other technologies for building rich Internet applications. Microsoft steers developers to Silverlight, Adobe Systems continues to improve its Flash and Flex technology, HTML itself is getting more powerful. And of course there's the larger competition between Web-based applications and those that run directly on the PC, such as Microsoft Office.
A final note: The same benchmark caveats apply this time around, too. Your mileage may vary--my tests were on a dual-core Lenovo T61 with Windows XP. There are other performance attributes that affect Web browsing besides JavaScript performance. And even in the narrower realm of JavaScript, benchmarks like these don't necessarily represent the workloads that will have you pining for a faster machine.
Mozilla fought back on Wednesday with some performance results to show a forthcoming version of Firefox outpacing Google's new Web browser, Chrome.
During a launch event Tuesday, Google was eager to toot its horn about Chrome's performance running JavaScript, a programming language used to power many sophisticated Web applications such as Google Docs, Yahoo's Zimbra e-mail site, and Zoho's online application suite. Google showed performance results using its own collection of five JavaScript benchmarks and V8, Chrome's JavaScript engine, but Mozilla countered with a different test called SunSpider.
Mozilla's speed test shows a future Firefox outpacing Google's Chrome for JavaScript programs.
(Credit: Mozilla)"We're very much in the game and moving fast--'reports of our death are greatly exaggerated,'" JavaScript pioneer and TraceMonkey coder Brendan Eich said in a blog. And noting Firefox's higher score, he said, "Maybe we should rename TraceMonkey 'V10' ;-)"
Firefox 3.1, which Mozilla hopes to release by the end of the year, comes with JavaScript acceleration technology called TraceMonkey. In Mozilla's test that pitted TraceMonkey-enhanced Firefox against the Chrome beta, Google's browser was 28 percent slower on Windows XP and 16 percent slower on Windows Vista.
One caveat is that Mozilla programmers have been talking about SunSpider's obsolescence. I'd like to see TraceMonkey-enhanced Firefox's score on Google's benchmarks, or at least some Mozilla commentary about the quality of Google's benchmark suite. And of course, bear in mind that JavaScript, while important, is only one element of overall browsing performance.
Update 8:16 a.m. PDT: Mozilla's Chris Blizzard directed my attention to this post by John Resig with a broader collection of JavaScript benchmarks. It shows much more balanced results overall, but also shows TraceMonkey faring worse than the current Firefox on Google's tests.
However, Eich said in his post that the TraceMonkey team is addressing the particular issue that hobbled TraceMonkey compared to Chrome.
"(One) graph does show V8 cleaning our clock on a couple of recursion-heavy tests. We have a plan, to trace recursion," he said on the blog. "We simply haven't had enough hours in the day to get to it, but it's 'next.'"
Two of the four major browsers have undergone some big changes in the past two weeks. Firefox 3 is, of course, the big news of the week, pulling down eight million or so downloads in its first 24 hours in the wild. However, the Opera browser updated to its much-awaited version 9.5 last week. Since both of them have got game but for different reasons, let's take a look at how they match up.
Empirically, the two most-cited complaints about browsers are speed and memory. Now, I'm a big fan of Firefox because it's so easy to customize, so despite concerns I had about placing both browsers on "equal footing," it would be misleading to test Firefox devoid of extensions, so I left in my cadre of add-ons, and ran both with fifteen tabs open--a more or less standard browsing session for me.
Opera's browsing Notes.
(Credit: CNET Networks)Using the SunSpider JavaScript test, Firefox 3 scored around 5500 microseconds to process the tested scripts, with a margin of error at around three percent. Opera 9.5 scored about 7280 milliseconds on the same test, with a margin of error around 1.5 percent, making it nearly one and a third times as slow as Firefox 3. This isn't surprising, given how long Opera's been using the same rendering engine. Assuming they get to Opera 10 before Mozilla puts out Firefox 4, it would be interesting to go back and re-compare them.
Firefox used approximately 127 MB RAM with the 15 tabs open, while Opera used around 117 MB. This was a little bit surprising, since Opera is definitely running on the older code. It might be attributable to the various extensions I use in Firefox, but it's more likely that despite the claimed 15,000 fixes deployed in Firefox 3, there's still quite a bit of room to plug those memory leaks.
Firefox 3's "Awesome bar".
(Credit: CNET Networks)There's more to browsing than just benchmarks, of course. Users who browse by cell phone and like to keep all their personal settings synchronized are sure to look favorably at Opera, which has made a name for itself breaking into that market. Opera also bakes in a lot of excellent features, from its location bar--most likely the inspiration for Firefox's new "awesome bar"--to speed dialing, password management to resumable downloads, an icon-based sidebar to a synchronizable notepad.
Firefox, of course, has its plug-ins, and that level of user innovation and customization built on an open-source foundation clearly has been a winning combo for Mozilla. Many of the newest features in Opera 9.5, like the ability to see if a password works before saving it, are also part of Firefox 3. Pausable downloads, session management, and searchable bookmarks are also available in both.
Choosing between these two alternative has more to do with personal preference and browsing style than either one sporting a killer feature. With Mozilla claiming more than 20 percent of the browser market between Firefox 2 and 3, though, it's obvious there's only one alterna-juggernaut.
UPDATED: Corrected "microseconds" to milliseconds.
- prev
- 1
- next
