Besides the ugly new theme, the convoluted “too-cool” first-run website, and the myriad of half-baked features that Firefox 2.0 brings to the scene, there’s a couple of not-so-welcome policy changes in Firefox 2.0 that make us wonder what’s going on at Mozilla. Basically, these changes go against everything that the Firefox team has been doing for the past couple of years, and make it look like Firefox wasn’t run by an open-source community so much as a big corporation with nothing but money on its mind.
When Firefox 2.0 came out, we didn’t really care to review it – after all, there were plenty of reviews already out there from the Beta and RC stages. But now, a month into the RTM release of Firefox 2.0, we find a re-cap being called for.
The “New & Improved” Theme?
We’re not going to delve into this too deeply, suffice to say that when we first said Firefox’s excellent theming engine’s only shortcoming was the lack of a decent default theme we didn’t think they’d actually change anything. What we really didn’t expect was some washed-out toolbar icons that looked like they came from Internet Explorer 4 with some “Web 2.0” shading (gamma circles) applied. They just don’t fit Firefox!
Ugly, New First-Run Website?
Since the release of Firefox 2.0, the first-run homepage has undergone several iterations – all of which are absolutely appalling compared to the original “Welcome to Firefox” page that used to display in the old 1.5 series. To tell the truth, it looks like someone handed a 3–year-old a bunch of vector-drawing tools, and told him to ‘go Picasso’ – without the slightest idea regarding color theory, aesthetics, or knowledge of the generally-accepted location for body parts – except it didn’t come out quite as nice as Picasso’s work did.
Who blends orange and blue? It turns a ghastly shade of green, and especially when you add to it the improperly done “wave lines” it’s just a complete eye-sore to be showing around to someone turning on Firefox for the first time. Compare that to the default Internet Explorer 7 page: clean, aesthetic, and simple! But the problem is, that start page was changed several times since 2.0 was released, yet it still looks appalling.
Lack-Luster RSS?
Firefox was one of the first browsers to take RSS to the next level, and is largely responsible for the ubiquity of feeds today. But for some reason, Firefox has serious issues implementing a decent RSS reader into the browser. Before 2.0 you could view the headlines for RSS feeds and click-the-link to view the rest. Firefox 2.0 has an “improved” RSS reader that finally displays full-text articles for feeds. But it still lacks the ability to filter out entries based on categories and tags, nor dynamic searching of feed entries.
So true!!
I didn’t even bother to install Firefox 2.0 RTM. When I realized the RC was how RTM was going to look and feel, with the same bugs and crap layout, I had enough.
I uninstalled FF 2.0 RC and installed Opera 9.02 – and I haven’t looked back since. I might try IE7 too later, but for now, Opera 9 provides all the (unbloated) functionality I need, doesn’t require stupid extensions for base functionality, is more secure, doesn’t have stupid developer elitism (subscribed to their developer blog now, much more down-to-earth people than the rowdy FF devs), and it just works. Period.
Bullshit.
Firefox is still the best open-source browser out there!
Brilliant deduction, Mark!
No really. “best open-source browser…”
Just out of curiosity, what are you comparing it to? Konqueror? Safari? Or one of the Firefox branches? IceWeasel or Ephiphany maybe?
Gimme a break. Sure, it’s the best Open Source browser, but it’s utter crap alongside the likes of Opera 9, and even Internet Explorer 7. Microsoft totally owns Fx 2.0 – sorry, but that’s the way it is.
However, both IE7 and Fx2 fail when it comes to Opera. That browser is, hands down, no competition, the very very best.
I agree about opera, I’ve been using it since v5, and its great, the little extras I need extentions for in firefox (mouse gestures is my main one) works and does not feel like a tacked on extra (which to be fair, in firefox, it is, I just wish it did not feel like it). And it is much nicer getting things fixed/getting feed back from the devs, I guess there is no holy wars going on behind the scenes. In reply to mark m, I dont care if it is open source or not, oss, i feel is about trust, and I trust opera (And they make opera for every platform I need and want (win/nix/ds/symbian/pocket pc/ – and my new wii!! wooo, so no porting worries for me) I just dont see what the big deal with firefox is any more, it seems slow, bloated, picky and the devs annoy me.
Actually I find Firefox new theme quite pleasant to the eyes (less bright colors, good when working for longer time). And first-run website is normal and down to business. Cant say anything on RSS feeds though, because i don’t use them.
Folks get religious about open source to the point of imagining it can do no wrong. Alas, Firefox 2.0 reminds us that open source projects also can become victims of their own success.
The problem seems to be that as an open source project gets larger and more successful, power concentrates in a relatively small community of existing developers. Unless those developers have great philosophical self-discipline the results can be unchecked featuritis, neglect of unglamorous but necessary refinements, and a careless disregard of external standards and norms.
Regrettably, the chief goal of the Firefox establishment seems to be proving that they’re smarter than everyone else. And folks who think like that never know when to stop…
The only thing I can agree with here is the third party cookie option. But other than that I happen to like the new theme and toolbar buttons, I think they are nice and clean looking.
And what the hell, why are you ranting on about the install page, seriously. I see no problem with it.
While I can’t say I’m too familiar with the Firefox Dev team’s personalities, or that I’m all that fond of the new first run page, or website redesign (what the hell is with that motorcycle) I must say that I think your criticism is a little over zealous.
I personally think that FF 2.0 is a vast improvement on 1.5, it feels faster and is definitely more stable. I like the new default theme… in fact I haven’t even bothered to switch to a custom theme.
I can understand and accept the love of opera, I used to use it religiously, and while it is an amazing product I personally prefer FF. I find it to be more intuitive, more aesthetically pleasing and most importantly more customizable… Most of big Mozilla/Firefox fans are fans of the extensibility, which both IE7 and Opera lack.
Those who claim there is no bloat in Opera however are lying to themselves.
Opera is the Mozilla Suite / Sea Monkey… hell they’ve even added desktop widgets to the mix. Opera is a great product in the midst of an identity crisis.
IE7 on the other hand is a piece of crap and I can not understand any of the praise being lumped upon it. sure its better than IE6… but Lynx is better than IE6
In my experience IE7 has proven to be slow, buggy, and amazingly unstable…
More websites work with FF now than IE, IE’s handling of RSS is confusing and inconvenient, a standalone RSS reader such as RSS Owl or FF plus Sage make a much better platform for managing lots of feeds.
and worst of all IE7 is the ugliest application I have ever seen…
IE7’s RSS parser is actually the award-winning MSXML Parser 6.0 with a new “Web 2.0” look to it.
It’s actually rather good, very aesthetically pleasing and simple, but fully functional and has support for dynamic searching by category, tag, or subject.
I really don’t know what your bitch is. The colors on the first run website are innovative and good looking. The IE7 website looks like everything else Microsoft does. Probably the color of Bill Gates bedroom when he was a kid. Though Firefox does seem a bit slower I have no problem with it. The RSS newsfeeds work fine for me. I am an average user and the program is great. FF 1.5 used to cause me problems. None since I upgraded.
Sure, you can bitch and complain about the new theme and the welcome page… But that’s not really a valid argument.
Like the old theme? Fine, spend the whole 120 seconds getting the original theme repacked for Firefox 2.0.
And the welcome page? You see it once. And then you never have to see it again.
The RSS reader I have to agree with you on though, it “works” but there is nothing really revolutionary about it. No searching. Just viewing.
i couldn’t disagree more with this review. maybe i’m too much of a gentoo user, but the thing i love the most about firefox is that it gives me a good base with the possibility of endless customization. if you want rss, use an extension such as sage. if you don’t like the default theme, theres plenty to add later if you like. firefox will be dead to me the day it gives me a bunch of default functionality that i will never use and do nothing but slow down the browser.
I don’t mind the new Firefox browser theme, and the first-run Web site seems fine to me. These are rather small, petty issues to be talking about anyway. It’s functionality that I mainly care about.
I love the fact that Firefox gives me the option to choose among so many plugins. The extensions are so easy to install and to uninstall. I can customize my browser to do exactly what I want it to do. I absolutely love Firefox — it does everything I want it to do. It makes browsing the Web a pleasure.
I tried Opera several years ago — I believe it was Opera 5.0 — and finally abandoned it precisely because it DIDN’T “just work.” It was the first to have the great tabbed browsing, but it crashed all the time and didn’t do some things I found very important.
As for Internet 7, how could anyone reward Microsoft, which defended its destruction of Netscape on the basis of its “right to innovate” and then proceeded to sit idle for years, doing absolutely NOTHING to improve Explorer!
Good job delivering a totally biased one sided review. There are tons of choices in the firefox options and I am sure you would complain that they had too many if they included the ones you mention. Firefox is still the best browser because of how extendable it is. I tried Opera and went back to FF because Opera didn’t have several of the abilities I had become accustomed to in FF using extentions.
As for RSS, have you searched for any extentions to get the abilities you want? I don’t use RSS so I can’t recomend any but I am sure they have dozens of options. If it bugs you that much you could even write one for others to use.
Is there a portable Opera? If so I might try it again.
Maybe I just missed something, but I’m fairly certain that when I upgraded to 2.0 Firefox asked me if I wanted to make Firefox my default browser. In fact, I just got a new computer, and when I installed Firefox i do remember clicking yes…unless I’m missing your point?
In response to the ugly first run page, honestly, you just see it once or twice, and it’s not THAT bad.
As someone else said, I do agree with the third party cookie option thing.
There is such a thing as learning from your mistakes. We spoke and interviewed the Internet Explorer 7 team throughout the entire beta process, and the one thing they kept repeating was “We’re not going to make the same mistake again.”
Anyway, try Opera 9 now, it’s much better and slicker looking too.
@a: In the betas and RC builds, yes. But then with RTM Mozilla just “happened” to change their minds and removed that warning. We installed Firefox on a new install in VMware just to make sure before writing this article.
Oh puh-leeze!
This is nothing more than the same sort of one-sided troll fodder that gets you hits and fills up your pocketbooks with ad revenue! Your complaints are so minor and subjective that I find no reason to take you, your site, or your comments seriously.
Give us some actual useful commentary when you end up on /. and digg.
Firefox is fine …
Stop the moaning,
Try to remember that Opera, whilst a great browser,
Wasn’t free until Firefox became available.
If you like Opera better, fine.
But remember you get it free because Firefox finally delivered a better browser for nothing …
Cheers !
@ Computer Guru: my issue with IE7’s handling off the actual feed but its implimentation.
It treats it no differently than a web page.
you save it in your favorites, click it and it renders in your browser… nothing FF doesn’t do… even if its actual parser is better. There is no import or export of OPML files (unless I’m missing something), opening feeds in a static sidebar is a 3 step process (click star, click feeds, click Pin Favorites center) no 3 pane view… now FF doesn’t do this by default either, but at least I can fix it with Sage or Wizz RSS with IE7 I’m simply left with a basic feed reader that doesn’t really satisfy my RSS addiction.
Not too mention that the Drop down style of live bookmarks in FF is a perfect accompaniment for Del.icio.us, just dump the feeds for the tags in to your bookmark tool bar and presto! instant synchronized bookmarks.
The blue and orange colors that you despise on the first-run home page are the extension of Firefox Logo colors. Blue and orange are complementary colors so I don’t see why you are accusing FF designers are not knowing their color theory.
I personally like the new Firefox Look & Feel and their new website. I think it’s brilliant, and regarding the IE oh please! IE has always been the flagship of UGLY which is a very Microsoft thing to be. The IE 7 and it’s first-run home page are not exemptions.
and between you and I … next time write a real review will you? This one sounded so naive 🙂 and your reference to Picasso?s work didn’t help making you sound any more design literate.
I can’t say much on the other topics, but I do agree that I don’t like, and have never liked, FireFox’s hiding of options from users. I switched from Netscape 4 to Mozilla 0.7, and have liked it ever since. I was sad when FireFox started getting all the attention, but happy that it’s still being worked on with the SeaMonkey project. New features, same old comforting Netscape 4 interface.
I haven’t used Opera in a long time, but I looked at the screenshots that were linked and I’ve got to say… that is one fugly browser, easily the least attractive of the three. I would say IE7 is the best looking, but still needs a little baking, Firefox is average looking (2.0 is much better than the plain-jane 1.5) and Opera looks like it was developed by amateurs.
Also… who gives a shit about the first run page… it’s a dumb idea and a nuisance I click away from as fast as possible anyway.
Similarly, who gives a shit about RSS handling, studies have shown that nobody but geeks even uses RSS, and all the geeks have a dedicated feed reading solution in place.
Your criticisms of FF are lame in the extreme. Opera is a feature-pig that nobody uses, and is ugly as hell. IE7 is good looking, but a little underpowered, FF is the best overall compromise.
I think this review is a little silly.
Usually, you want to lead with your best argument. Whining about inherently subjective things like aesthetics is not a good way to get people on board with you, especially when it is totally ignorable.
And–the worst sin you can cite is actually that they changed the location of a setting? They didn’t remove it–they moved it. Well, gee whiz Beaver, I think that might just be something we’ll have to engage our brains to deal with. As for the “default browser” thing, that’s a fairly standard query by many programs. I don’t think it’s really all that bad. Check once and it’s gone.
If you’re saying you prefer Firefox 1.5, fine. Say that. Don’t pull near-comical arguments out of your ass to try and do it. And seriously, it it still far superior to IE, and it renders more pages (including this very one) without problems than Safari. Opera isn’t supported widely enough for day-to-day uses, which is a shame because it really started the counter-IE movement.
I think there’s a chance this might be M$ concern-trolling.
I’ve actually started using Firefox 3.0a1 for most of my daily browsing. 2.0 is a bit ugly and really slow compared to the 3.0 alpha.
I don’t agree with this article.
I have compared it with IE7 and Firefox 2.0 is simply better.
Firefox 2.0 is also better than 1.5.
This article really sucks!!!
I am seeing 1-2 crashes per day with Firefox 2.0. If this continues, I will downgrading within 30 days. Who needs a browser that can only run for 30 mins before crashing ?? This is the most unreliable browser I have EVER used …
oh by the by… just did a fresh install of FF 2.0 on a new install of XP
it asked me if I wanted to make it my default browser, didn’t just hijack my setting.
ran IE7 set default back to IE, then ran Firefox again and it asked if I wanted to use Firefox as my default… so I have no idea what you’re talking about on this one.
I think the average user will not be so concerned as to how cool the icons look. They want something that is that most people will use (easier to get help), works on as many sites as possible, and give them some useful functions that make them more effective with stuff on the web.
In that aspect, IE, FF, and Opera all do fine. None of them are exactly in the ‘disastrous’ category. For those who are too spooked by the viruses that IE browsers let in, FF and Opera are likely alternatives. FF has more product mindshare than Opera, although Opera admittedly works on more platforms, esp in the mobile area.
In Singapore there are more FF users than Opera. For a new user wanting an alternative browser, that is the safest route to take. It works well, runs decently fast, and it’s easy to get help. That’s what the average user needs as a priority.
There’s really no point figuring out which browser is the best, as long as they play well on the standards and don’t give the users grief.
My biggest problem with Firefox is the ridiculous amount of memory it uses when you get a few (hundred) tabs open. Sure, Opera’s better on that score, and deals with cached pages better, but it also has one of the most awful unwieldy and awkward user interfaces I’ve ever seen. Internet Explorer 3 looked better than most browsers nowadays. At least Firefox can be improved- the only interface button you should ever need to see is the back button, for easy of browsing back through redirects.
Short of Konqueror, (the latest version of) Firefox is still the best browser there is right now.
This “review” is full of inconsistencies, and really is just a “rant”. Firefox 2 is different yes, but you don’t have to choose it, you can stick with 1.5 if you want to. I found FF2 better and really enjoy some of the new features (like spell check in the text boxes).
It’s low quality blogs like this that make the world a worse place. Why don’t you learn how to write an essay properly.
Some of your arguments are laughable — the welcome page sucks? Maybe telnet with a custom background would do it for you. Who cares! Your statement on browser theft is wrong — might want to recheck that. FF2 is a bit faster, more stable and, overall, better than 1.5. I don’t like the default theme either, but at least i can tweak the living crap out of it or just simply change it. FF is the king of hackability and that’s a major attraction for many. How’s the ad-blocking, advanced cookie functionality and advanced JS functionality comming along with IE and Opera? With just a few extensions FF is a powerhouse. Your cookie complaints are handled by a few prefs in about:config and the cookie handling is more advanced than it ever was.
Both Opera and FF are really good browsers, but they serve different kinds of people; FF for the configurability nuts and Opera for the ‘all-in-one’ crowd.
Why is this review revolving around things like First Run Website? What does that got to do with the browser anyway? The review has all the telltale sings of a FUD.
You talk about the RSS feed capabilities, but did you take a minute to understand the purpose behind Livemarks? If you need a full features integrated RSS feed, try some of many different addons to FF2.
Yes, Firefox 2.0 has its issues, but what you have stated above is not anything that concerns the browser.
Your arguments are laughable. First, you can’t say a piece of software is bad based on aesthetics. I personally think the IE7 first-run page is horrendous. The idea of themes is that you can change them. The default theme is there to provide functionality, not make you think your screen looks pretty.
Having used IE, Firefox (from 1.0 up), Safari, Opera and Konqueror over the years – including their most recent iterations, I find firefox to be not only the most flexible browser, but also the most secure and the best-looking. It works better for me than the others do, and that’s all that matters.
Which browser you use is a personal choice (though if you choose IE, you’re an idiot). What works for me may not work for you, so don’t find pathetic flaws like first-run pages to back up an argument with as many holes as IE6.
“who blends orange and blue”
looks fine to me, ass.
lets start complaining about things that matter rather than being insane. The new welcome page looks f-ing fine , retard.
it takes more memory, and the tabs growing in size (making the “X” button move) might be valid complaints, but the rest of the said stuff is crap.
The article appeared in Shashdot, after reading that I came here expecting an indepth criticism of Firefox *polcies*. The first paragraph of the article also claims the same.
But these small set of examples do not represent what firefox 2.0 has to offer. Morever these examples are more about visual aspects, where it is not always possible to please everyone. On the other hand I like the new default theme very much, and you always have the option of installing themes. What about dictionary feature and all, which comes very handy in the Web 2.0 era where users generate lots of content.
What I don’t understand is, what your disliking some visual aspect or features have to do with the *policy changes in Firefox 2.0*.
Just to point out my 2 cents worth…
I prefer Opera to Firefox because it helps a great deal in increasing my productivity by providing essential short cut features in particular. I’ve blogged about it at http://aadil.mu/2006/08/26/161 – albeit this being a comparison between Firefox 1.5.x and Opera 9.x.
Cheers.
p.s I think your article lacks more consistency or weight
In a nutshell,
2.0 loads pages slower then 1.5 for me.
Speed is why I like Firefox.
I mostly disapprove of this article. It is written very subjectively and appears as if the author simply did not like the product and decided to trash it. This article did not help me to form an opinion of Firefox 2.0 and now I will have to evaluate it myself or I have to go read someone else’s reviews.
The only worthwhile information I got from this article is the 3rd-Party cookie problem, the rest is just the rantings of some loon trying to break down the work of other people.
In the future, please write something worthwhile to read.
Strangely, nobody seems to care about the infiltration of all the Google stuff in FF2, which is the reason that me uninstall it in the first place. There are just so many hooks to Google in there by now, they might jsut replace the “Mozilla” for “Google”. Which is a very, very sad thing.
What a terrible article. You lead with the fact that you don’t like the theme and the first-run page? Oh boo hoo hoo. You don’t see me writing an article saying “FIREFOX 2.0: BEST BROWSER EVER” just because I like the theme. It’s far too subjective, and has nothing to do with the functionality.
I don’t have too many problems with RSS, but then again, I’m not a power user and still use an aggregator for my feeds. And as far as bugs are concerned, I’m actually pretty happy that some of the worst ones have been fixed. Sure, some are still there, but let’s not pretend the devs just sit around playing games all day. Some of the new features are mind-blowing.
In conclusion, Firefox 2.0 isn’t the great leap forward that 1.5 was, but it’s still the best browser out there (although Opera is hot on it’s heels) and that’s a fine thing to say about the open source community.
This review is nonsense. Page 2 has some issues (browser theft, hidded 3rd party cookies) which are debatable, but page 1? First you nag about the graphics etc. … I guess you have never learned the line “De gustibus (et coloribus) non est disputandum”? Either you like it or you don’t. If you don’t like the default theme then I think Firefox offers enough options and freedom to change it.
When Firefox 2.0 was released Slashdot featured an interview with … euhm … forgot his name, but one of the guys responsible for Firefox. It was a deliberate choice not to integrate a fully fledged RSS reader. I am 100% happy with the way Firefox offers RSS feeds now, and I use Liferea if I want more RSS functionality. Enough other software out there right?
If you dislike Firefox for whatever reason switch to Opera, Flock, IE, … Whatever suits you. But don’t try to be wise and unleash a so called expert review about Firefox filled with stupid arguments about graphics on the welcome page etc.
I have no idea what you’re all talking about. I’m just browsing the web – and that works just like it always did. And useless complaints about color schemes that you don’t need to look at are the entire first half of this article, in a way as if the authors personal feelings about design are “absolute”, or as if this were important. For me, the webpages I look at are important, not the browser itself as long as it works and is easy to use – which FF2 is (like all others). You’re like those many Linux desktop fans (KDE, Gnome) who worry *a lot* about how the desktop looks – I never SEE my desktop, I run APPLICATIONS! And the only way I use it is to START those apps! Same with a web browser. Some people should get a life and not worry so much about the things themselves bout about what they are used for!
And I would agree that MS IE 7 works too (but I could not say “better” since it too simply displays web pages and what else would I want), except that since I’m doing some webdevelopment for an open project of mine right now I found so many stupid bugs in IE 7 compared to FF2 that I really could not agree less. For example, when I open a menu drop (<ul> based) IE7 immediately after displaying it resizes it! Too fast for the eye, but very annoying for me – (just for fun!) I had created a drop shadow for that menu, using a JS function that calculates an objects size and creating an appropriate shadow DIV under it. Now with IE7 that DIV always comes out too small because of that resizing stupidity. When I try to add a div.onresize event handler to it to work around this issue by recalculating the shadow’s size IE7 HANGS! Now what? (even if someone would find my code to be faulty, which I doubt since this is just one easy to understand line) that’s no reason for a browser to HANG).
I did not find a SINGLE issue with FF2 so far. Not saying there aren’t any, I’m sure if I’d look at bugzilla I could easily find and reproduce a dozen – what I’m saying is that during development I encountered at least 4-5 bugs as described above in IE7, and non ein FF2, so my anecdotal evidence points to IE7 being the worse browser by order of a magnitude.
Terrence writes…
“Those who claim there is no bloat in Opera however are lying to themselves.”
Surely, you jest. Opera is a smaller download than Firefox, and just about all extras are hidden by default:
firefox-2.0.tar.gz 9397 KB
opera-9.02.tar.gz 7115 KB
“Opera is the Mozilla Suite / Sea Monkey? hell they?ve even added desktop widgets to the mix. Opera is a great product in the midst of an identity crisis.”
Opera has always been more than just a browser, and despite this, it is still smaller and faster than Firefox.
fireFan writes…
“How?s the ad-blocking, advanced cookie functionality and advanced JS functionality comming along with IE and Opera?”
Ad blocking since 9.0, advanced cookie/JS since forever.
As a Web developer, I have no problem changing from FF 1.5 to 2.0.
I think its a little unstable compared to 1.5, but its faster 😀
About Opera, I have a personal tear about him. Opera 6.0 was a total crap and I have never used it since them…
I think the thing that makes FF so special is the plugin system, its the best thing anyone have ever made for a browser. If you compare it to Active X *cough*, for a example, you will understand me 😉
Stop bitching about the first-run firefox homepage and use the time so you can redesign your own website. *g*. If you don’t like it, don’t use it.
I’ve been using 2.0 since it was released. To be honest, I thought it was an evolution, rather than sea change from 1.5. A few nice new features, nothing revolutionary. I was really happy with it.
Thanks to this review, I now realise what a complete disaster Firefox 2.0 is, and how totally, radically different to 1.5. Firefox 2.0 is now my pet gripe.
How could I have been so blind?!!
The review is half baked and does not talk about any of the features of Firefox. I personally think that the new theme is pretty clean and good and I see no problem with the color combinations in the first run site.
I don’t really mind the theme.
I also don’t mind the startup screen.
I don’t even mind some bugs not fixed … yet.
I REALLY MIND that many existing extensions all fail to work!
I just tried it for like a few minutes and immediately uninstalled and restored to 1.5.0.8.
I also have xubuntu on dual-boot, but it comes with FF2.0 … so I’m not using it as much … thanks, but no thanks to the lack of support for older extensions! *bummer*