Why are people happy when Firefox gets delayed, but at the same time these people are mad when Vista gets delayed?!!!!

coz 1.5 is good enough.
also, im not mad with Vista's delay, im tired of system update already, unless it offer me for free.

I don't care about either of them being delayed.

As Orizng said, 1.5.1 is a good enough browser (with tabbed browsing extension)... and Windows XP SP2 is a good enough OS. (Of Microsoft's anyway... I'm still a linux fan ^_^)

wow, i didn't think anyone was even still getting mad that Vista got delayed? For me, MS lost it, when they removed the only feature that meant soemthign to me.. the new file system (they've been promising since 1994)...

I'm sure ENIAC was "good enough" back in the day. Didn't stop progress from being possible and desirable.

It's sad when people settle for "good enough."

I couldn't believe it when they said WinFS would not be shipped with Vista. Is it even going to be available one day?

Nope. WinFS was canceled entirely a few weeks back. It's dead, Jim.

I'm sure someone will post that WinFS will eventually make it into this MS product or that MS product but the simple fact is it's dead as a dodo in Vista. And mainly for that reason I will not use Vista because there's no advantage in my doing so until support for XP ceases and I have no choice.

Classic OS's were only computing. It is not so any more. It is a power game. Big companies get together ("Birds of the same feather fly together"). The bigger the master, the slaver the slave.

It's dead as a dodo, period. The entire project is canceled. It will never make it into any Windows OS, because work on it has totally and completely ceased.

Windows continues to stagnate, even while attempting to change.

I thought people quit getting mad at Vista Delays a year and half ago. Maybe I was mistaken.

I'll gladly wait for the release. Firefox offers what I personally like in a browser. A basic browser to which I can add exactly what I want through extensions. I don't have functions I neither want nor need and I do have extensions I've used for a long time and appreciate having. I just prefer that over a "one browser fits all" approach. Likewise, I appreciate having a browser that looks familiar to me, no matter which O/S I'm using.

Opera's appearance is exactly the same regardless of OS.

You did not address the extension issue. That's one of the most appealing things about Firefox. Opera having that would increase its popularity, though there would be more security issues.

Firefox is a textbook example of how to do software well. Is it perfect? No. It's had its share of bugs like any non-trivial software. In fact, one of the reasons that drove me to the 2.0 beta was frustration with certain performance issues in 1.5 (which seem to be much better in 2). There are real issues with Firefox, but that doesn't keep it from being one of the most useful, and most used, pieces of software I run. Having it on OSX, Linux and Windows, all of which I use regularly makes it even better.

The software package's development has been driven by what people actually want: functionality. It does good stuff and it does it well. It doesn't try to be everything to everyone like so many products do, and they eventually succumb to their own bloatedness, becoming difficult or impossible for the casual user and a nightmare to maintain or configure (*cough*Office*cough*).

I've been using Firefox since it was called Pheonix, and I can't even remember what it was like to put up with the issues of IE6, including absuive ads, frequent crashes or lockups, Web pages practcally taking control of my browser...

That IE7 even exists is a testament to Firefox's success. Microsoft has no interest in providing value, they are only concerned with maintaining their monopoly... any new value that comes out of Microsoft is a happy coincidence for their customers. They demonstrate it in all their products, which force lock-in, and which favor tick-marks on a marketer's list rather than features that actually matter to most users, and which seem to expand until every application is its own massive software development tool (and a vector for security compromises).

The speed of development, the fast response time to security bugs, the openness that allows dozens (or even hundreds) of useful add-ons, all show that the project has done a lot of things right, things that other companies, some of which could throw 10 figures into development but can't pull off the nimbleness and effectiveness of the Mozilla projects.

I agree with you 100% on this. The fact that Microsoft put their Internet Explorer team back together after being on hiatus for multiple years (can't remember the exact number) is a true example of how good a job Firefox has done.

Obviously it's not perfect, but it does exactly what I need it to do, thanks in part to its robust extension functionality.

In a weird way, i'm glad Mozilla delayed the launch date. That just shows how committed they are to working out as many bugs as they can. I have no problem waiting for something that you know the developers are giving their full efforts to.

I await Beta 2 in one week.

MS delays, "OMG they suck".

Moz delays. "See MS, this is how it should be done".

Hypocrites.

Side note: More abusive ads are caused by those who rob people by blocking them causing them to create more abusive ads. Leech.

But who said ConceptJunkie said MS sucks? On the same note, I also praised MS for delaying Vista. It all depends so quit being ignorant.

It's just because Mozilla doesn't delay as often (or to the same degree) as Microsoft, and when Mozilla delays, their extra time spent usually results in a much higher quality end product, while Microsoft will eventually release a product that, more often than not, will be bugtastic.

In regards to the ads: We'll block those, too.

Exactly.

I didn't say he said it. It is from not being ignorant that I know it is the general response from MS opposition, and while it was not directly typed out, it was still in plain text. Fanboys with blinders are the ones who are ignorant to it.

finally someone that knows what their talking about.

I need a translator for your side note. Please explain? :P

I agree... if I remember correctly there was only one abusive ad before the advent of ad blockers.

Great post ConceptJunkie... there does seem to be a difference in a product designed in response to the user rather than the competition.

So if A blames Microsoft for delay, and B praise Mozilla for them, they're both hypocrite ?
That's a bit far fetched.

After the mad updating of software I used to do in the past, continually installing unstable software for the merest hint of a new version number, I'm happy with what I have now.

My machine never crashes these days, and when FF 2.0 does come out I'll be happy to install it too, as long as it's of similar stability to the newer implentations of FF1.5.

The customisability (real word? probably only in the US ;-) ) of Firefox ensures that whilst a friend of mine may use it also, they have it setup how *they* want to use it, and not necessarily how I would configure it on my own machine. :-)

If FF didn't exist, IE7 would have even less new features than it has now - so you really should keep that bitterness in check. You'll give yourself an ulcer. ;-)

In my opinion, the only thing FF is missiing is an email client built in. Thunderbird is fine, but it would be nice to have it as a (un)installable modual to FF rather then a seperate program.

Abusive ads such as those that steal my mouse or play sound... they should be banned. I don't have flash installed for that very reason.

Try school? :P

Moz can't sell it's s**t without slandering a competing app, I know who is bitter.

Slander:

1 : the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation

2 : a false and defamatory oral statement about a person

Now that we have defined slander for you, please point out one instance where anyone from Mozilla has slandered a competing app.

THZGryphon is another dip wad heard from.

Uh... what?

They used to do this. It was called Mozilla Suite, now Seamonkey. It sucked. That's why Firefox, Thunderbird, and Sunbird are all separate programs now.

Get Opera or Seamonkey if you want that sort of integration.

Mozilla wrote a browser that is feature rich and little bit more secure on a shoestring budget.

Microsoft is a HUGE company that is 2 years late at delivering Longhorn/Vista.

Either way software can be a pain in the a** to finish.

Actually the only slandering that has been going on is coming from the users, Firefox, IE and Opera alike.