Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Applications > Best Browser?

Best Browser? (Page 2)
Thread Tools
King Bob On The Cob
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2004, 06:19 PM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
Why not actually learn how to spell? That's a better solution that helps prevent laziness. Yes, it would be nice if Firefox had spellchecking like Safari does, but I don't think it's that big an issue.
And I suppose professional coders should learn to code as well (What was it, every 25 lines or so of fresh written code, on average, there is an error that will either cause the program to fail or give unexpected results.)
And I do know how to spell but sometimes I won't be paying attention when I type and the little red squiggles will let me know that I when I miss a finger or two. It's alot easier than rereading the entire thing for one or two typing mistakes.
     
DekuDekuplex
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2004, 07:22 PM
 
Originally posted by Mr Mushroom:
I get my new Powerbook on Friday (My first Mac), and I am wondering - what is the best internet browser to use?

I hear that the built in browser is very good, but are there any other options that are better?

Any advice, as always is much appreciated
Check out the site Macintosh Web Browsers: Past and Present.

Maintained by Darrel E. Knutson and updated regularly, this site lists all "publicly available browsers that work on Apple Macintosh hardware running any version of any Macintosh operating system." However, he adds that "This page does not yet currently list all browsers that may or may not run in Apple's X11 or XFree86/fink environments on Mac OS X." He qualifies his comments by noting that "The comments for each browser reflect my own personal opinions and assessments."

As of Thursday, July 29, 2004, this site currently lists sixty-two browser families, and covers the following latest browser versions (the creator names are followed by their browser names):
Personally, since I haven't yet upgraded from Jaguar to Panther, my current favorites are Camino 0.7+ (Dave Haas's upgraded version of 0.7, although reports state that 0.8 is excellent) and Safari 1.0.

However, Safari initially crashed very often because of an incompatibility with a Speech Preferences setting, and still occasionally crashes without warning (for example, much to my chagrin, it just crashed when I tried to undo a typo just before I could post this posting). (Please see my other posting, Safari 1.0 Crashes Because of Speech Recognition Incompatibility Issue, on how I finally resolved the Speech Preferences incompatibility.)

Both Camino and Safari sport native Aqua interfaces, tabbed browsing, popup window blocking, a built-in Google search field just to the right of the address bar, and intuitive bookmark management.

I also use Mozilla 1.6 (again, I haven't yet had the opportunity to upgrade to 1.7.1), which is relatively slow but compatible with most site features, and very stable. Personally, though, I just can't stomach it for my main browser because it is too slow and doesn't have native Aqua look-and-feel--it reminds me too much of Linux. It makes me feel as if I'm using Yellow Dog Linux (not that there's anything wrong with that OS--it is reportedly a stellar OS--but it's just not Mac OS X).

Although I'm not saying this out of any intention to bash Microsoft, I must add that my least favorite browser is Internet Explorer 5.2, mainly because it lacks tabbed browsing and popup window blocking, and feels cumbersome to edit e-mail messages in. In particular, editing e-mail messages in it somehow feels distinctly more cumbersome that in its Windows counterpart. I just keep it around for compatibility with some banking sites.

-- DekuDekuplex
PowerBook® 17-inch [Rev. A] @ 1 GHz
512 MB RAM, 60 GB HD, AEBS, APP/PB
"Furuike ya, kawazu tobikomu mizu no oto."
-- Matsuo Basho
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 29, 2004, 07:24 PM
 
Originally posted by clarkgoble:
But overall it seems like there isn't anything FireFox does that Safari doesn't and a lot Safari does that FireFox doesn't. On XP where FireFox is my browser I'm *constantly* wishing for Safari features and UI.
I guess you haven't actually been reading my posts. Firefox has extensions. Safari has (almost) no extensions.

Why is this important? Safari has Pithhelmet for free now, but it looks like that is about to change. Firefox has the open source (and therefore eternally free) Adblock extension. There's also the excellent Web Developer toolbar extension, mouse gestures, and innumerable others out there. Does Safari have themes? No. Does it have the same level of cookie management? No, but you can choose to accept cookies as you are presented with them in Firefox. Can you add additional search engines to the search bar in Safari? No, but there are hundreds available for Firefox.

Firefox also has superior text encoding detection. It has find-as-you-type, which is absolutely indispensable. It lets you whitelist sites to allow popup windows. It lets you disable specific JavaScript behaviors. There are probably hundreds more features that I don't even know about that are accessible from about:config.

There is no way you can honestly claim that Safari has more capabilities or features than Firefox. And new ones are being added constantly through extensions. With Safari you are almost entirely at Apple's whim with regards to features.
     
King Bob On The Cob
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 01:29 AM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
I guess you haven't actually been reading my posts. Firefox has extensions. Safari has (almost) no extensions.

Why is this important? Safari has Pithhelmet for free now, but it looks like that is about to change. Firefox has the open source (and therefore eternally free) Adblock extension. There's also the excellent Web Developer toolbar extension, mouse gestures, and innumerable others out there. Does Safari have themes? No. Does it have the same level of cookie management? No, but you can choose to accept cookies as you are presented with them in Firefox. Can you add additional search engines to the search bar in Safari? No, but there are hundreds available for Firefox.

Firefox also has superior text encoding detection. It has find-as-you-type, which is absolutely indispensable. It lets you whitelist sites to allow popup windows. It lets you disable specific JavaScript behaviors. There are probably hundreds more features that I don't even know about that are accessible from about:config.

There is no way you can honestly claim that Safari has more capabilities or features than Firefox. And new ones are being added constantly through extensions. With Safari you are almost entirely at Apple's whim with regards to features.
Here's something... use OmniWeb...

But yes, Safari has themes, SafarIcon.
Cookie Management? SafariCookieCutter
Web Developer? Debug menu along with the activity window tends to work well enough for my needs...
Additional Search Engines? Not as easily as say OmniWeb (Which includes all these features anyways), but search MacFixIt, you can change it pretty easily.

But I still say use OmniWeb if you need features of a Power Surfer.
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 02:01 AM
 
Originally posted by King Bob On The Cob:
Here's something... use OmniWeb...

But yes, Safari has themes, SafarIcon.
Cookie Management? SafariCookieCutter
Web Developer? Debug menu along with the activity window tends to work well enough for my needs...
Additional Search Engines? Not as easily as say OmniWeb (Which includes all these features anyways), but search MacFixIt, you can change it pretty easily.

But I still say use OmniWeb if you need features of a Power Surfer.
SafarIcon is a 3rd party hack that could become incompatible at any minute. Plus it's gotten terrible reviews, and, correct me if I'm wrong (I couldn't find any screen shots) isn't it just buttons and Aqua vs. brushed metal? That is hardly the same thing as full themeing.

SafariCookieCutter doesn't even do what I was talking about, which was allowing you to accept or reject cookies as they are requested by websites.

Firefox has both themeing and superior cookie control built into the app itself, meaning you don't even need to bother with these extraneous 3rd party apps. And the debug menu doesn't have half the things available in the Web Developer toolbar.

OmniWeb? Why in the world would I pay for a browser when I can have all of these featuers and more for free in Firefox? This is just getting silly.
( Last edited by wataru; Jul 30, 2004 at 02:10 AM. )
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 02:47 AM
 
Problems with non-native FireFox UI:

1. Lack of the spell-check feature (yes, for many of us this is a big deal)

2. Lack of basic Mac OS X text services (for example, Ctrl-E and Ctrl-A to skip to the end and beginning of a line do not work in FireFox, disrupting my typing, while Cocoa apps get it for free)

3. Little UI inconsistencies like default buttons not pulsating, the toolbar config panel not coming out as a sheet, command-option-clicking the toolbar button not showing config panel, control-clicking on the toolbar not showing the configure option if you control-click on a text field in the toolbar, etc. Not a big deal, but annoying and kind of messes up that sense you get when you're running a really Mac-like program.

4. Not scriptable. With most Mac OS X apps, you can use AppleScript GUI scripting to control all elements of the interface, even if the program itself isn't scriptable. Some macro programs actually use this functionality to implement their macros (I believe iKey does this, and it is a better way to do it than by patching code à la QuicKeys!). However, good luck telling a script to push a button when that button isn't even real; it's an approximation. Same goes for toolbar items, text fields, etc.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 02:53 AM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
OmniWeb? Why in the world would I pay for a browser when I can have all of these featuers and more for free in Firefox? This is just getting silly.
Does FireFox have:

1. the ability to make toolbar search keywords that can enter POST data (so you can search sites like, say, MacNN)?

2. anything like OmniWeb's workspace feature?

3. AppleScript support?

4. site-specific settings?

5. updated/dead bookmark checking?

OmniWeb has the competition beat, hands down, in features. If it were faster and more stable, I'd still be using it as my primary browser...

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
King Bob On The Cob
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 02:59 AM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
SafarIcon is a 3rd party hack that could become incompatible at any minute. Plus it's gotten terrible reviews, and, correct me if I'm wrong (I couldn't find any screen shots) isn't it just buttons and Aqua vs. brushed metal? That is hardly the same thing as full themeing.

SafariCookieCutter doesn't even do what I was talking about, which was allowing you to accept or reject cookies as they are requested by websites.

Firefox has both themeing and superior cookie control built into the app itself, meaning you don't even need to bother with these extraneous 3rd party apps. And the debug menu doesn't have half the things available in the Web Developer toolbar.

OmniWeb? Why in the world would I pay for a browser when I can have all of these featuers and more for free in Firefox? This is just getting silly.
To each his own I suppose. You pay for OmniWeb for other feature that aren't in FireFox. Try it (You'll have a 30 day trial that resets with every beta.)
Things like A totally Native UI, Speech Navigation, Site by Site Preferences, more control over rendering, bookmark management, complete control over autofill, built in really easy to control Search shortcut, a nice built in HTML editor, full use of ColorSync, and the best ad blocking I've found.

Bust as I said, if it's not worth it to you, it's not worth it to you.
And yes, don't bother correcting me, I'm a hard headed OmniZealot.
     
bookofjames
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Singapore
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 03:31 AM
 
sometimes i find Firefox a bit sluggish (anyone here have that experience too?). Thunderbird also hangs on me sometimes (both in windows and in mac) and is especially slow on the mac.

I would say for speed and performance I prefer Safari or Camino.

Just out of curiosity, anyone knows why thunderbird seems to be slower on the mac than in windows?
book-of-james.com

12" Rev B PwBk (Oct2003)
1GHz | 60GB HDD (4200rpm) | 1.25 GB RAM
     
pliny
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: under about 12 feet of ash from Mt. Vesuvius
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 07:35 AM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
The startup problems have been fixed. This is beta software, after all. Some bugs are to be expected. I've never had "bookmark eating" problems either. If you're referring to the effects of some shoddily-coded extensions, the "disappearance" is completely temporary, and everything goes back to normal when you remove the offending extension.
Well lucky for you you've never had your bookmarks eaten by Firefox!As you say it's an open soruce beta, and them roe browsers the better, but it is no Safari.

Actually you're dead wrong on the "XP icon design." The Mac theme, Pinstripe, was designed specially for the Mac version of Firefox. It is so good that a modified version, dubbed "Winstripe" was made for the Windows version. From there, a mere 4 icons were changed in Pinstripe to achieve better cross-platform unity. So in this case, the Windows version was inspired by the Mac version, not the other way around.
The pinstripe theme is alright, but Firefox on the Mac is the evil stepsister to Friefox on the PC, which is far better, and not all themes work. Not all Firefox fucntionswork well either, like cusotmizing the toolbar. And then for me there have always been startup problems, either the dispapearing app startup problem ,or thel nog startup, who needs this when there are excellent alternatives?! Havign saidthat, if coders wnat to improve it, byall means go ahead.

And what are you talking about with the "apply radio button crap?" I honestly have no idea.
Oh this was back from the early days, when it was a messy sexy PC port.

Why not actually learn how to spell? That's a better solution that helps prevent laziness. Yes, it would be nice if Firefox had spellchecking like Safari does, but I don't think it's that big an issue. And the lack of spellchecking has nothing to do with the rendering engine being Gecko.
True aobut the Gecko part, but alot of ppl need help spellning when typing on comptuers, so a spell check is a good thing, esp in them ornings.


The miniscule differences that do exist are completely immaterial to Firefox's worth as a web browser or its "worthiness" as an OS X app.
Yes, it does have autofill. It just doesn't draw from the Address Book or Keychain.
I'm glad that firefox is aorund I suppose, becasue I like messing withsoftware, I just don't ever use it, because there are mroe feature rich and polished broiwsers available on the Mac. Alot of ppl seem comfrotahble with it becasue htey use it on their PCs--goody forthese ppl.
i look in your general direction
     
leperkuhn
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 09:00 AM
 
Originally posted by clarkgoble:

But overall it seems like there isn't anything FireFox does that Safari doesn't and a lot Safari does that FireFox doesn't. On XP where FireFox is my browser I'm *constantly* wishing for Safari features and UI.
sir, you must not use firefox ever. how about a customizable search bar, themes, huge extentions that can add numerous great features like a web developer bar (that can do almost anything a developer could want), and in my opinion, a way better bookmark manager.

I use firefox at work and safari at home, and I'm getting somewhat unimpressed with safari.
     
Horsepoo!!!
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 09:37 AM
 
pliny...I hope those typos and spelling mistakes were jokes.
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 11:41 AM
 
People have given some good examples of features that OmniWeb has that Firefox doesn't. I guess it all boils down to whether those extra features are worth your money. They aren't by a long shot for me, but to each his own.
     
Horsepoo!!!
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 12:11 PM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
People have given some good examples of features that OmniWeb has that Firefox doesn't. I guess it all boils down to whether those extra features are worth your money. They aren't by a long shot for me, but to each his own.
Firefox features aren't really compelling to me. I like the Safari because it's not bloated with features I don't use...such as themeing.
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 01:30 PM
 
Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
Firefox features aren't really compelling to me. I like the Safari because it's not bloated with features I don't use...such as themeing.
The mere existence of themeing is not bloat. It's bloat if it drags down the performance of the app or inflates its size. Please find evidence that themeing is a significant source of either of these problems before you call it bloat.
     
Horsepoo!!!
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 01:49 PM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
The mere existence of themeing is not bloat. It's bloat if it drags down the performance of the app or inflates its size. Please find evidence that themeing is a significant source of either of these problems before you call it bloat.
No...there is a thing called feature bloat. When a feature does not pertain to the core purpose of the app, it is 'feature bloat.' You might want to revise your definition by adding what I just said.
     
elfer
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 02:15 PM
 
That's easy.

1) Camino (really fast in rendering)
2) Safari (full featured, but slower)

These are the two I use, daily.

elfer




Originally posted by Mr Mushroom:
I get my new Powerbook on Friday (My first Mac), and I am wondering - what is the best internet browser to use?

I hear that the built in browser is very good, but are there any other options that are better?

Any advice, as always is much appreciated
     
mrmister
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 02:42 PM
 
No, but OSX is good looking, and functional. I prefer native apps myself whenever I can--which is why I use Camino.
     
pliny
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: under about 12 feet of ash from Mt. Vesuvius
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 03:01 PM
 
Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
No...there is a thing called feature bloat. When a feature does not pertain to the core purpose of the app, it is 'feature bloat.' Y
I suppose this is debatable as it pertians to browsers becasue some ppl like to think of them as just web browsers while others use them for browsing various itnernet, mediums and then you can have news, mail, irc, which will bloat the app, but not necessarily drag down the speed, becasue the latets mozillas for instance are very very fast and the mac nightliesare better than the pc nightlies.

luckily for us there are many good browsers for the platform, even opera has cleaned up its act if you can believe it
i look in your general direction
     
crford
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 03:23 PM
 
Lynx.
     
uhanna
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Troy, MI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 03:33 PM
 
1. Safari
2.Omniweb (best looking one other than Safari)
2.Camino
3.Firefox

I don't touch IE.
Good idea to activate the "Debug" menu in Safari.
     
adamschneider
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 04:56 PM
 
Apparently I'm the only one who prefers the "bloated" Mozilla to Firefox.

And it's mainly for a single reason: I couldn't live without the ability to search Google from the location bar (type your search query and hit the down arrow, then return). In Firefox, they've put searching in a separate box, and that drives me nuts.
     
york28
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 05:00 PM
 
Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
...Java apps, XML skinned apps, shoddy carbon ports...these all behave or look different and therefore are not exemplary apps. If people continue to accept these apps, OS X will become another Windows or *gasp* Linux...
I don't think so. One thing that I think you might be missing is the fact that a very large percentage of professional applications use a somewhat or completely non-standard interface. Apple's pro apps. Audio software. 3d programs like Maya. And there are more.

So let's look at Firefox as a professional app. Compared to Safari, I think it qualifies. In such a case, you aren't using it's advanced features and as such would rather use a simpler interface. This is fine. But it does not make pro apps that many people use inherently bad. In fact, many use the Mac because of these apps.

I'm not afraid to say it, I HATE non-native apps and with good reasons.

I don't care how featureful an app is...if it doesn't come with an easy-to-use and familiar interface, it goes into the mesh trash can.
So we agree.

No...there is a thing called feature bloat. When a feature does not pertain to the core purpose of the app, it is 'feature bloat.'
But a cross-platform interface IS a core purpose of Firefox. And because you find no use for something doesn't mean that it has no use to anyone else.

My favorite browsers:

1. Firefox
2. Safari
3. Camino

I say use Safari if you just want to browse, and try Firefox or Omniweb if you want more features.
We need less Democrats and Republicans, and more people that think for themselves.

infinite expanse
     
GeeYouEye
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 06:40 PM
 
OmniWeb is, IMO, the best browser by far and away, especially 5.0rc2. Workspaces are nice, the tab implementation takes some getting used to (and I really wish they'd add an option to put the tab drawer on the bottom - it would make it easier on 1024x resolution of iBooks and 12" PowerBooks), but now they're indispensable. Shortcuts - the feature of OW that I miss most in other browsers, I can just type "sd" into the location bar, hit return, and go to Slashdot; "mail" and I get mail.yahoo.com. The other half is the ability to search from the location bar with shortcuts; just type "google something I'm looking for", or "vt SomeApp" and I'm searching Google for "something I'm looking for", or VersionTracker for "SomeApp". And you can add search engines so long as they use a predictable URL, including site-based search engines. Shortcuts alone are worth the price in my book. Page marking is useful, but I don't use it that often... it's a big help when I do need it though. Site specific preferences are absolutely indispensable. Ad-blocking works perfectly, although the "Block images that match the standard sizes for ads" preset is missing the big banner ad size that a lot of Google ads are (though I personally don't mind those anyway). The ability to save the state of any open windows and tabs is a godsend. the bookmark implementation is very nice and includes smart groups for bookmarks. There's also bookmark synchronization, a built-in HTML editor, and a button on textareas that brings up a new window that you can resize so you can see the entirety of what you're posting.

It's not without a few quirks though: first, it's using an older WebCore and JavaScriptCore than Safari, so some Javascript stuff (such as the pop-up menus on vBulletin 3-based forums) doesn't work. Bringing it up to spec is the first thing on OmniGroup's agenda for 5.1 though. Animated gifs occasionally have issues too, and Gmail doesn't like it much. Still, it's a very solid browser and I love it.

Second to OmniWeb is Shiira. It's an open-source WebKit-based browser which looks a bit like an aqua version of Safari. It's got a nice bookmarks/history/downloads drawer, and has the ability to add search engines like OmniWeb, but you can't use them from the address bar, only from the search box. It's also a bit of a processor hog. It's still in beta, but it has great potential.

Safari is third. Apple's web browser, it does an overall very good job, but it's got few special features. It's not very customizable. What it does have is SnapBack, a single page version of OmniWeb's Page Marking (technically, OW is a multipage version of SnapBack), Pop-up blocking (but it's all or nothing; no way to enable it for certain pages), a pretty good bookmark system, and no-nonsense interface. It's also about the fastest Mac browser and the least processor intensive. It's got the best JavaScript support of the WebCore/Kit browsers, and supports, Gmail.

Camino takes fourth. It's the best of the Gecko browsers by virtue of the Cocoa interface. It's decently customizable and reasonably fast. Seems to actually work best with Cocoa gestures.

Mozilla/FireFox - it's Gecko. I personally can't stand the way Gecko renders pages, and the interface, while skin-able, sucks, IMO. They're not Cocoa, and I use them only for page testing. They are fast however, and they're the best on Linux and Windows.

Opera - a browser I only use for testing pages. I don't like it much.

iCab - it's got potential, but definitely not there yet.

IE - good for banking and other sites that are badly coded, but other than that... I don't even use it for testing.
I bring order to chaos. You are in chaos windows, you are the contradiction, a bug wishing to be an OS.
     
Mojo-ike
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: portland, or, us
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 06:56 PM
 
for those that complain about the lack of spell checker in firefox (and mozilla) you should use this:
http://exchangecode.com/spellbound/

and for those that complain about the lack of in-line spell checker in thunderbird you should use this:
http://www.supportware.net/mozilla/#ext8

i have tried all the browsers and email programs that i can find, and these are the two that i keep coming back to. yes, they arent as pretty as some, but if you do any multi-platform work you will really appreciate the consistency. for some it may be simpler to use the all-in-one mozilla (rather than firefox and thunderbird).

yes, adblock for firefox/mozilla is a thing of greatness:
http://adblock.mozdev.org/

pithhelmet for safari is well done, but for those that arent up on regular expressions, its a bit daunting.
http://culater.net/software/PithHelmet/PithHelmet.php

and yes, the engine the drives camino is the same as the one that drives firefox and mozilla, but it is missing support for extensions - especially the critically essential adblock.

by the way, for those looking for a calendar to go with firefox/thunderbird/mozilla that is iCal compatible, try this:
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/
it can be added as a plugin or used on its own. though at the moment it is less mature than the other mozilla applications.

and even though the mozilla applications are free, they can always use some help:
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/donate.html
     
zepkin
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 08:09 PM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
How's that? It's stable, fast, and feature-rich. What more could you want?
I would like for it to be able to scroll text smoothly for one. It is horribly clunky when it comes to text scrolling. Also, I would like for it to work like a Mac application.

The only advantage I see that Firefox has over Camino are the extensions. Other than that, Camino is a much nicer browser.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 08:40 PM
 
Originally posted by adamschneider:
Apparently I'm the only one who prefers the "bloated" Mozilla to Firefox.

And it's mainly for a single reason: I couldn't live without the ability to search Google from the location bar (type your search query and hit the down arrow, then return). In Firefox, they've put searching in a separate box, and that drives me nuts.
Huh? Toolbar shortcuts work fine in FireFox. You can define "g" as a keyword for Google, then type "g mozilla" in the location bar, and it will do a Google search for Mozilla.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
adamschneider
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 08:53 PM
 
Originally posted by CharlesS:
Huh? Toolbar shortcuts work fine in FireFox. You can define "g" as a keyword for Google, then type "g mozilla" in the location bar, and it will do a Google search for Mozilla.
Say what?? How, pray tell, would one set up something like this?
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 10:31 PM
 
Originally posted by adamschneider:
Say what?? How, pray tell, would one set up something like this?
Go to Bookmarks -> Quick Searches -> Using FireFox Quick Searches and it will tell you all about it.

In fact, there's already one set up for Google by default. However, the keyword assigned to it is "google" which I find to be too long. I like to change it to just "g", which is easy enough to do.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
clarkgoble
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Provo, UT
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 30, 2004, 10:42 PM
 
The spellchecker plugin for Firefox isn't inline - I'm not very impressed with it.

Most of the extra developer features for Firefox don't impress me much either. If I'm developing I almost always have an HTML editor open. I really don't need my browser to become a web editor through the addition of a half dozen plug ins.

Most of the plug ins that people *use* can be found, to varying degrees, in 3rd party plug ins or applications. (IMO)

Theming is pretty minor, if not useless. If you like it, that's fine. More power to you. But it really doesn't *do* anything. And there are limited themers for Safari.
     
tigas
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jan 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 12:40 AM
 
As I read the thread, I was consistently amazed that almost *every* advantage claimed to one browser (as opposed to other), is already in Opera and probably got there first (not on the Mac, though, because until recently Mac Opera was one version behind Win Opera).

Opera is now doing more things than the Mozilla Suite (except HTML composition) in a quarter of the code. It's very fast at loading pages, slick to navigate, saves "sessions", and has all kinds of customizing options built-in and tested, instead of needing plug-ins.

Of course, it's very complex and has an identity crisis in the interface (it still has Windows quirks), but with great power comes great responsibility.
     
King Bob On The Cob
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 03:17 AM
 
#1 best OmniWeb feature. After a hasty quit (or a crash), if you selected Auto-save while browsing, It will return you right where you were, and will fill in the forms you were typing. (I just tried a force quit, and this message popped right back in after I restarted it.)
     
pat++
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 08:50 AM
 
Stick with Safari. It's free, super fast and has popup-blocking and Tabs support.
ALL other browsers are dog slow compared to Safari. And believe me, there is a HUGE
difference on my old 500mhz iBook. The only browser which is usabe in terms of speed
is Safari (and IE, but it's too old now, crappy, and unsupported).
     
Salsa
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Aisle 7, with chips and dips
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 10:31 AM
 
My favorite daily browser is Firefox. Safari is similar, but it would freeze on me. I think the problem was a memory leak when you leave a page open that has animated gifs.

Originally posted by Turias:
... Are there really any sites out there that don't work with Mozilla?...
Yes, I go to a couple sites that don't work with Mozilla nor Safari, so I have to fire up MSIE. Citibank on-line, for example. Also, sometimes I come across some Javascript on a page that doesn't work with Mozilla nor Safari. Just this week, I was on a shopping site and the Javascript that converts the prices from Euros to American or Canadian dollars only worked in MSIE.

Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
Why couldn't someone learn how to spell AS WELL as have spellchecking handy to catch spelling mistakes or typos...
If you're serious about spell checking, you should have a system-wide spell checker anyway. I use SpellCatcher. It works the same in every app, plus I get to keep all my modifications to the dictionary after only entering them in one app.

Originally posted by clarkgoble:
...I'm typically not looking at what I'm typing. It is *very* nice to have my typos underlined...
SpellCatcher gives an audio alert to a typo too, so that I don't even have to look. Then, the suggested words show up in a box on the screen. I just hit cmd-1 to replace the misspelled word with the first suggestion, cmd-2 for the second suggestion, etc. So, I don't even have to take my hands off of the keyboard. It's very nice.
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 11:22 AM
 
Originally posted by pat++:
Stick with Safari. It's free, super fast and has popup-blocking and Tabs support.
ALL other browsers are dog slow compared to Safari. And believe me, there is a HUGE
difference on my old 500mhz iBook. The only browser which is usabe in terms of speed
is Safari (and IE, but it's too old now, crappy, and unsupported).
That is absolutely untrue. Firefox may be slower to load, but once it has loaded it is faster at rendering than Safari.
     
macnews
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Idaho
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 12:34 PM
 
Originally posted by Salsa:
Yes, I go to a couple sites that don't work with Mozilla nor Safari, so I have to fire up MSIE. Citibank on-line, for example. Also, sometimes I come across some Javascript on a page that doesn't work with Mozilla nor Safari. Just this week, I was on a shopping site and the Javascript that converts the prices from Euros to American or Canadian dollars only worked in MSIE.
This is why I use Camino v0.7. It works with Citibank and ALL my banking/online pay sites. Safari didn't work last i checked, but I haven't checked the most recent version. I haven't tried Camino v0.8 for banking but do like the many new features.

Some of the things people have mentiond on here in terms of features are things I may not use much. It sounds like alot of the replies are from web programmers. A web programmer may need more featuress than just the average person. I think easy bookmarking with folders, tab browsing, pop-up blocking, compatibility and stability are more important than some of the others in general. Workspaces sounds intersting as does saving where you last browsed - but then again if it is compatible and stable not as important.

Last thing I wanted to know is some people have mentioned the pop-up blocking with Pith in Safari - is that the default pop-up blocker? Oh, Camino also offers pop-up blocking as well. I would like to know what makes one pop-up blocker better than another? If two different ones block all pop-up ads is there much difference? Personally, both Safari and Camino have been blocking all pop-up ads I have ever encountered. Camino v0.8 also allows you to add site specific exceptions.
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 01:31 PM
 
Originally posted by macnews:
Last thing I wanted to know is some people have mentioned the pop-up blocking with Pith in Safari - is that the default pop-up blocker? Oh, Camino also offers pop-up blocking as well. I would like to know what makes one pop-up blocker better than another? If two different ones block all pop-up ads is there much difference? Personally, both Safari and Camino have been blocking all pop-up ads I have ever encountered. Camino v0.8 also allows you to add site specific exceptions.
PithHelmet is an ad blocker, which is completely different from a popup blocker. All of the browsers mentioned in this thread (except for IE, lynx, and maybe some other primitive ones) have popup blocking. An ad blocker will block annoying banner ad images, Flash animations, and scripts based on user-definable rules. But not all browsers have ad blocking. Safari has PithHelmet, but I find that it slows Safari down a lot, and it looks like PithHelmet's author will soon start charging money for it. Firefox and Mozilla have the Adblock extension, which is and always will be free. Camino, unfortunately, can't use extensions, which is why I like Firefox better.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 01:56 PM
 
Overall the best browser for Macintosh is Mozilla. It is ultra compatible, much faster than Safari and has all the options you'd want in a web-browser. Flaws include: no services, no standard Mac theme included (even if you can download one from a third party) and it has some text selections bugs.

There are some that complain that Mozilla is 'bloated' but that is just bullcrap. Mozilla runs and loads pages as fast as the 'leaner' Firefox but has all the features in the world, as well as being ultra compatible. Any G4 machine or better runs Mozilla so fast you don't see the point in Firefox. The processor speed in Macs caught up with the size of the software before the software engineers had finished their "leaning" of Mozilla, effectively making the whole Firefox project redundant IMO.

Firefox will probably be a fine successor to Mozilla *when it is ready* - today it is far from ready, so let's not talk about that thing until then.

Safari is the no 2 browser and *almost* catches up with Mozilla in it's current shape. It has the user interface of Mac OS X, it has the services, spell checking, relatively fast rendering and a great bookmarking system. It is quite buggy and crashy, has some strange memory leaks and slows down with long term use [Safari 1.2 (v125.1)]. I use Safari the most of all browsers, but I recognize that it isn't overall better than Mozilla.

Internet Explorer 5.2 for OS X is a discontinued product and never was any good. IE 5 for OS 9 was without question the best browser for OS 9, but it didn't really survive the conversion to OS X. Sucks beyond belief and should be avoided at all costs. Mozilla is a better ultra compatible browser and is still supported.

OMNIWeb is somewhat of a mystery to me, there are people who love it so much that they pay for it even in this world of free web-browsers, but I've never liked it.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
wataru
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 02:13 PM
 
Originally posted by voodoo:
Firefox will probably be a fine successor to Mozilla *when it is ready* - today it is far from ready, so let's not talk about that thing until then.
I disagree entirely. I have been using it as my primary browser, as have many others, for about a year. *It is ready.*
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 02:17 PM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
I disagree entirely. I have been using it as my primary browser, as have many others, for about a year. *It is ready.*
I know you disagree, but I have higher standards I guess for browsers that are to be considered *ready*. I can accept Mozilla's shortcomings because it is so incredibly feature rich and compatible, but Firefox has IMO more cons than pros. Hope that will change with time.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
King Bob On The Cob
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Illinois
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 03:00 PM
 
How many people are going to change their minds when Safari 1.3 comes out with much improved rendering (speed and accuracy)?
     
macnews
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Idaho
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 03:34 PM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
PithHelmet is an ad blocker, which is completely different from a popup blocker. All of the browsers mentioned in this thread (except for IE, lynx, and maybe some other primitive ones) have popup blocking. An ad blocker will block annoying banner ad images, Flash animations, and scripts based on user-definable rules. But not all browsers have ad blocking. Safari has PithHelmet, but I find that it slows Safari down a lot, and it looks like PithHelmet's author will soon start charging money for it. Firefox and Mozilla have the Adblock extension, which is and always will be free. Camino, unfortunately, can't use extensions, which is why I like Firefox better.
Thank you for the info. I guess if I had applied some common sense I would have understood the difference between the two! To me, however, blocking banner ads is not as critical as pop-ups - at this point in time. So far, I have only run across one yahoo self-promo banner ad (made in flash) that slowed down the browsing experience I stayed off yahoo for a while. In the future I can see this changing and ad blocking becoming more important.

I am suprised to see no mention, so far, about which browsers support current html standards. I am guessing all mentioned so far provide more true support to those standards than MSIE. I hate MS and IE primarily for their bastardizing of the browsing experience by not adhereing to the true standards and encouraging customization of websites, divating from standards, to run better in IE. Any browser that adheres to the standards is better in my opinion. The web should be open, sites should be designed to standards so ANYONE can access it via any standard compliant web browser.

But that is just my two cents.
     
stryfe
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 04:04 PM
 
Originally posted by King Bob On The Cob:
Ever hear of why people like Cocoa apps? (Built in Spell checking for forms, Services, ect..) That's why I stay away from Gecko browsers
Actually there is work on using Native Cocoa Fields in FireFox in a future version. It's a bug on bugzilla and it is being worked on. I'd hold my horses.
     
h00ligan
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 05:47 PM
 
at this point i'd say firefox.

mostly due to the extensions it has available, like adblocker and a few others.

It's leading the way.. it's secure, it's under major constant development ensuring you always get fast bug fixes and compatability problems resolved. It's just about as fast as safari and has a LOT more features.
-= H00ligan =-

1.33 GHz 12" | 60 gig 7200 rpm drive | 1.25 Gigs of ram
amd 64 3000+ eMachines m6805 (arima lappy) | 60 gig | 512 megs | almost 3400 3dMark03 and it was only $1250 :)
     
adamschneider
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 31, 2004, 06:14 PM
 
Originally posted by CharlesS:
Go to Bookmarks -> Quick Searches -> Using FireFox Quick Searches and it will tell you all about it.
There's nothing in my Bookmarks menu about Quick Searches. I eventually figured it out by searching for "quick searches firefox" in Google, but boy, they couldn't have buried this much deeper if they'd tried...
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2004, 09:49 AM
 
Originally posted by GeeYouEye:
Mozilla/FireFox - it's Gecko. I personally can't stand the way Gecko renders pages, and the interface, while skin-able, sucks, IMO. They're not Cocoa, and I use them only for page testing. They are fast however, and they're the best on Linux and Windows.
I won't go into the Cocoa-zealotry issue here, but as an honest question, what don't you like about the way Gecko renders pages?
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
Vsx1
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2004, 12:11 PM
 
I use Netscape 7.1 (7.2 coming soon). Looks and feels very similar to Mozilla. The integraton of AOLs Instant Messenger (AIM) into Netscape I find very useful. I use Netscape for email as well, Mail.app doesn't render some of my email messages correctly. The sidebar feature comes in quite handy as well (similar to that of IE); it can contain bookmarks, AIM buddy list, History, Google search and much more. They also have the best itteration of tabbed browsing of any browser (you can drag links to the tab bar and it'll open a new tab, and load in the background without altering your current window or tab). Many other browsers require using a keyboard key (or right-click) in addition to the mouse.

My 2 cents.
Vsx1
[email protected]
[email protected]
http://www.appleisp.net/~vsxone
     
pat++
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Earth
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2004, 12:36 PM
 
Originally posted by wataru:
That is absolutely untrue. Firefox may be slower to load, but once it has loaded it is faster at rendering than Safari.
Safari is 10 times faster for page scrolling. Firefox or Camino are dog slow in comparison.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2004, 02:03 PM
 
Originally posted by adamschneider:
There's nothing in my Bookmarks menu about Quick Searches. I eventually figured it out by searching for "quick searches firefox" in Google, but boy, they couldn't have buried this much deeper if they'd tried...
Huh? It works exactly the same as it does in Mozilla, Camino, etc. There's a Keyword field in the bookmark editor. And since you use Mozilla primarily and use this feature in it, it really confuses me why you think it's "buried" in FireFox.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
drainyoo
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Ny,Ny,USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 1, 2004, 09:14 PM
 
Originally posted by FL!PNEUS:
A native Mac OS X interface.
Exactly.
i hate project managers.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:41 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,