On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Jason Messerschmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Justin Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On AD 2008 July 02 Wednesday 02:20:30 PM -0400, doki_pen wrote: >> > +2 on firefox3. Faster, doesn't slow down after long use. I really see >> > the difference with javascript. The engine is much faster. Just try a >> > js >> > heavy page(like google apps). I haven't had any crashes. Only >> > complaint >> > is that flash blocker(or maybe flash itself) doesn't always work. I >> > have >> > to reload a couple of times to get youtube to work. Also, some plugins >> > haven't been ported yet. I compiled it, and here are my use flags: >> >> I've been using FF3 for about 2 months, and although many things have >> improved during the beta phase it is generally about as memory and CPU >> heavy as FF2. The only real improvement I've observed as far as >> performance is concerned is javascript. I wish there were a light >> version available. I've tried galeon and epiphany, but both lacked >> features that I really like in FF and now that there is a great amount >> of extensions available it is harder to justify using another browser. >> Maybe it's time to switch back to konqueror. >> >> > > I've noticed an odd visual glitch with blogspot pages- it superimposes my > desktop on some pages. It's a bit hard to explain so here's a pic. As far as > I know it's only this page, but might be good fodder for some of you > troubleshooters out there. > >
Lots of glitches with rendering some pages, its probably the webmaster's fault, but FF2 works with them, so I switched back. Also it is a little less memory and CPU hungry, but not that much. And, in my EEE PC I use a LOT of extensions that make my life easier, and like 50% of them do not work on FF3. I'll switch when FF3 is as good (for my personal use) as FF2. -- Daniel da Veiga -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
