Firefox Or IE (New Version): Which One Is Better? Which one is better?

[Transcendum 0]

You know, this is exactly what I love about Xisto's forums... the people here are mature enough to have their own opinions, and not simply follow what others say and swim with the tide.

 

In another forum, the same question was asked, but in a different way... the thread subject was "What Makes FireFox SO MUCH Better Than IE?"...

 

Well, at first, I ignored the thread completely, seeing that everyone was simply on a crusade of bashing Microsoft. Don't get me wrong, I think Microsoft deserves every bit of bashing anyone can master... but if you don't know what you're bashing about, then that's stupid.

 

Finally, I got fed up with all the nonesensical, zero-value posts, and decides to throw in my 2 cents... I'll copy what I wrote there since it's very closely related to this thread, and it'll show my basic opinion about this subject...

 

 

 

Actually, I think the thread started with a presumtuous question in the first place. I mean, when the subject of this thread reads "What Makes FireFox so much better than IE?", the poster is already stating that FireFox is a quantum-leap better than IE. And here is where I beg to differ...

 

There's no doubt FireFox is MUCH safer than IE, in terms of security, spyware protection, and (to some extent) stability. And the Tabbed Browsing, RSS Feeds built-in support, and extensions put way ahead of IE when it comes to features. BUT...

 

FireFox has many problems as well. It's been repeatedly reported that tabbed browsing can crash FireFox... it's actually a big discussion subject on CNet right now. Plus, FireFox is a total memory hog. After only 15 minutes of running on my computer, I find it takes about 40-60 MB of RAM. That's A LOT, considering IE only takes 20 at most.

 

Add to that the fact that FireFox takes normally around 16 seconds to start up in the first place, AND that it tends to dramatically slow down if it runs for a while without restarting it.

 

So does that mean FireFox is worse than IE? Well, I don't think so. I think FireFox is a great browser, with tons of potential. But at its current state, it needs a significant amount of work, before I can honestly say that it's (and I quote from the original thread starter) so much better than IE.

 

And with the upcoming IE7, I believe the competition might get a little more heated. Yes, Microsoft's product have mostly been behind many other products in terms of security, and the word goes that IE7 has its major problems even in its BETA stage. But until Mozilla gets to work on the downfalls of FireFox, I cannot say with a clear conscience that IE is out of the competition.

 

I didn't mention any of the other promising browsers (e.g. Opera, Avant, etc.) because this thread seems to focus on FireFox and IE, and I didn't want to go off-topic.

 

 

Cheers.

[miCRoSCoPiC^eaRthLinG 0]

FireFox has many problems as well. It's been repeatedly reported that tabbed browsing can crash FireFox... it's actually a big discussion subject on CNet right now. Plus, FireFox is a total memory hog. After only 15 minutes of running on my computer, I find it takes about 40-60 MB of RAM. That's A LOT, considering IE only takes 20 at most.

 

This is something that I'd directly relate to the amount of RAM you have. When I had 512MB - I used to go through the same problems. Too many tabs would freeze up firefox or simply make the tab-switching action extremely slow and unresponsive. But once I got 1.5GB - aha, well.. entirely different scenario. I could have about a bizillion tabs open together without even discernably slowing down firefox.. That's the situation I enjoy now - and I enjoy every single bit of it, thoroughly..

 

Add to that the fact that FireFox takes normally around 16 seconds to start up in the first place, AND that it tends to dramatically slow down if it runs for a while without restarting it.

 

There once again we come upon a totally unavoidable problem. Actually, firefox loads much faster than that in the barebones (without any extensions) mode. As you keep adding more and more extensions the load time increases. But even otherwise, it would be extremely difficult or close to impossible to make the firefox startup time anywhere near IE - coz, as I mentioned earlier, most of the IE code is already loaded when you boot into Windows. What you see when you click on the IE icon - is just the GUI frontend. The rendering engine and all other associated function libraries are already nicely cached in the RAM way before that. Firefox can never get to do this, unless MS in a freakish turn of events decided to release their core API library as opensource...

[Transcendum 0]

But once I got 1.5GB - aha, well.. entirely different scenario. I could have about a bizillion tabs open together without even discernably slowing down firefox.. That's the situation I enjoy now - and I enjoy every single bit of it, thoroughly..

Ugghhh.... Come on, m^e, you don't have to rub it in my face... lol.

 

But I suppose you're right. This is probably a RAM-related issue. And admittedly, the add-ons and extensions have a role to play in this. But I don't think this is a totally bad thing... it's just a start. Sooner or later, I hope, these issues can be solved, possibly by over-the-board standardization between Mozilla and the extension-creators.

 

 

But even otherwise, it would be extremely difficult or close to impossible to make the firefox startup time anywhere near IE - coz, as I mentioned earlier, most of the IE code is already loaded when you boot into Windows. What you see when you click on the IE icon - is just the GUI frontend. The rendering engine and all other associated function libraries are already nicely cached in the RAM way before that.

Absolutely true. But no matter what the cause of this situation is, the bottom line is that IE has a definite edge over FireFox, as long as we're talking about Windows OSes.

 

 

Firefox can never get to do this, unless MS in a freakish turn of events decided to release their core API library as opensource...

loooool... yeah right... that seems very likely .

 

 

Cheers.

[cherri 0]

I say Firefox...It much much safer.... and I like the intergrated search bar, the plugin search everything even the new layouts...... I just stick to firefox...I don't just switch to IE beacuse they have tabbed browsing... I am happy with it all.... ,cherri

[dhanesh1405241511 0]

lol .. I aint posting no opinion on any browsers after readin M^e's post .. unless m shure of what i say .. apart from that .. i love FireFox .. tho i hate microsoft for not giving FF the support it should get on its Live Mail beta .. but slowly things have started to change and FF is widely comming to the picture. Just hope that someday everyone will start using FF .. cause due to different browser software, it becomes hard for web developers to decide on how precise the code should be .. For example, there is a transparent code/plugin .. duno what to call it, i used it recently with a CMS skin, and it worked fine on FF with no problem .. but when opened in IE .. the transparency never was shown and the table alignment went weird. Hope microsoft really takes customer feedback seriousely in vista.RegardsDhanesh.

[wutske 0]

Relatively, IE and FF are about the same when it comes to safety, the only difference is that most of the 'dudes' are focusing on IE (tough there has been a shift).When it comes to compatibility, IE has an extra point, but at cost of HTML-code quality (it renders faults correctly).Usability is for FF, plug-ins are handy and FF has more to offer than IE (IE7 is roughly just IE6 with tabs and a search bar), but it lacks at least mouse gestures.FF is the winner, but my preference is in the Opera camp, and it'll be there forever...

[WEEE!! 0]

If you are one of the people that have 256 RAM, you would probably choose IE (like me ) IE is so much faster in loading and a bit faster in downloading. So my list goes1. Internet Explorer2. Opera3. FireFox

[kgd2006 0]

Firefox have many cool features that is not as buggy as IE, but it also limits some of the design code that can only be viewed in IE. The new IE does seems to have potential in competing with firefox because it seems like they are completely making over IE and making it similar to firefox. We will just have to wait to see how IE will turn on when its finished and out of beta version to really rate the two browsers. But I believe for now that firefox is the better browser in terms of security and efficiency...

[xip 0]

I prefer Firefox at all. There are a lot of new features of IE that are only a copy of the Firefox original ones.Microsoft always claims about their innovation, but really the only thing they do is to plagiarize...Also Firefox is more stable and secure !

[CaptainRon 0]

For those who believe IE preloads during startup...Well, speaking factually, IE code does not load during startup.Firstly you must be clear about the COM+ application principles, and since IE module is a COM+ app, it loads seperately for different client apps. Windows Explorer uses an instance of it, not a preloaded code. COM+ apps have different modes of execution, when compiled as EXE, they can serve in distributed environments. Hence, if the IE module was ever a EXE, then I wouldn't have challenged your claim. But IE module is basically a COM+ DLL, and there is no way that a DLL runs independantly without being in shared mode. The DLL loads in the memory space of the corresponding calling EXE application. In case of Windows Explorer, it loads in the mem space of explorer.exeIn case of IE webbrowser, it gets onto the mem space of iexplore.exe .There are some sites which claim that MS deliberately uses Hidden API's, and its on that popular belief that this theory propagates. It may be true but as of now it isn't proved to be so. If at all there are hidden API's then I suppose the finders must have decompiled the application and got the raw API call. And incase they did get the raw API call, why dont they make it public so that everyone can use the so called hidden API's?Also if at all preloading on startup is beneficial, why doesn't FireFox has a preload on startup option? I mean, Windows doesn't stop anyone from placing startup applications... Even OpenOffice.org has a common startup component placed inthe registry for quick startup.Well the answer is, the Web Browser architecture isn't at all worthy of having a common startup. Going by Object Oriented principles, every instance of the web browser (be it new tab or a new window) are new instances of the Webbrowser class.Although yes, opening tabs is faster than opening new windows (but that was not the point here).So what FireFox can do is, start a single instance of the FireFox.exe in the memory, and never terminate it, just put it on invisible mode when some one closes it. There had been a debate on this strategy by the FireFox developers themselves, and they came to the conclusion that this shall not be done. Since only one instance of FireFox.exe means that you cannot start a fresh copy of it. So incase of a error/bug (which firefox had loads of initially), the user would continue to face the bug throughout the session of windows (until he restarts) and come under impression that FireFox is buggy, and switch back to IE.May be the next versions of FF will have this option. Believe me FF would appear to load and run extremely fast with that done.The best part about FF is that its OpenSource. The best part about the whole of Open source is that its legit to view/modify their source code.Hence I vote for FF until IE becomes OpenSource. :-)

[Dagoth Nereviar 0]

IE.I don't know why, but I never liked Firefox. It's safer and less buggy, but it just feels a bit "clogged" to me. And IE seems to be plain and simple.

[ewwink 0]

IE is still Slow.............IE is Trash

[Celt 0]

FF for me. I like the tabbed windows and the extensions and pluggins. My IE is full of popups and other spyware I cant get rid off no matter how many adware removal programs I try.Only complaint about FF is it crahses ALOT. Like I'll just be writing a reply just like this and I'll get a pop up saying "Firefox.exe needs to close" or something like that even though I havnt noticed any problems. Apart from that FF is sooo much better than IE. It has a much more smoother feel to it than FF. FF 2.0 should be interesting, will probably give IE 7 a chance too

[TavoxPeru 0]

FF for me. I like the tabbed windows and the extensions and pluggins.
My IE is full of popups and other spyware I cant get rid off no matter how many adware removal programs I try.

Only complaint about FF is it crahses ALOT. Like I'll just be writing a reply just like this and I'll get a pop up saying "Firefox.exe needs to close" or something like that even though I havnt noticed any problems.

Apart from that FF is sooo much better than IE. It has a much more smoother feel to it than FF. FF 2.0 should be interesting, will probably give IE 7 a chance too

Tabbed windows was the first thing that i like very much and got my complete attention about FF, then i discovered the FF extensions and plugins and all the diferent ways to customize and extend FF and i loved it too, but nothing is perfect and never will be, and this start to complicate my experience with FF because many are buggy and make FF crashes a lot :-(.

When it happens i discover the MSN Search Toolbar for IE, and my surprise after download and install it in my PC was that this toolbar adds to IE the FF tabbed windows functionality and happily it works very fine :-).

Other additions of this toolbar are: pop-up blocker, option to search directly from the toolbar, option to highlight your search terms in the same window or in a separate window, buttons to access directly to your hotmail inbox and to your msn messenger.

So, if you wanna try it go to MSN Search Toolbar

BTW, CAPTAINRON, thanks for sharing your excellent information.

Best regards,

[Termin-X-man 0]

Internet Explorer 7.0 was a huge rip-off of Firefox in my opinion, and it seemed to load pages slower for me. And also, it screwed up my Steam games and I had a very hard time getting rid of it.