Firefox 3.0 versus Firefox 2.0
By dlnieto
@dlnieto (60)
United States
September 17, 2008 12:16pm CST
I like Firefox, have used it over a year instead of Microtrash IE.
Then, along comes Firefox 3.0 and I find that what worked in Firefox 2.0 - no longer works!
I ask, "How come?"
I was under the mistaken impressions that 3.0 was an improvement over 2.0.
WRONG!
It seems that the HTML that works exceedingly well in 2.0 was being incorrectly "interpreted" and 3.0 is doing a better job.
Meaning, it doesn't and won't work anymore.
Isn't progress great?
And now here comes Firefox 3.1, I wonder what things it will be doing "better" that make prior versions seem to be less effective.
1 response
@IsisGreen (554)
•
17 Sep 08
My view is that 3.0 is an overall improvement.
Some of the add ons failing to update to be compatible is frustrating. But I think with time the ones worth having will catch up, and if not you can invariably find a good replacement to do the same thing in 3.0.
@dlnieto (60)
• United States
28 Sep 08
In a sense I agree with you, but the HTML is NOT AN ADDON, it's just plain old HTML that Firefox 2 I'm told was interpreting incorrectly and now Firefox 3 is interpreting correctly. With the correct interpreting the result of the HTML is that it doesn't do what it did in FF2.
From my naive point of view, that means FF3 is not an upgrade, but instead a retrograde. I don't understand why FF3 can't interpret things the same whether it is code it was interpreting wrongly or correctly.
