Not Crap. I'm using it to post this.

Repeated issues involving spyware, malware and browser hijacking courtesy of Internet Explorer forced me to switch.

The world is a much better place now. On my machine (older) Firefox is faster and runs more quietly than Explorer ever did.

stewie wrote:I also don't want my taskbar so big that it wastes precious desktop space - as I said, I need a lot of windows open all the time and the less things I have wasting space, the better.

This is an operating system-interface design flaw, one of many poor design decisions that the developers of Windows (and in turn, most free Unix desktop systems) made. Drives me completely fucking batty.

mb

matthewbarnhart wrote:This is an operating system-interface design flaw, one of many poor design decisions that the developers of Windows (and in turn, most free Unix desktop systems) made. Drives me completely fucking batty.

mb

Not sure why you are trying to bash "free Unix desktop systems" (from which I can only think that you are talking about most Linux distros).

Every version of linux that I've ever used has included a version of Mozilla or Netscape. Mozilla has had multi-tab browsing for quite some time now. It was available in mozilla a few weeks, if not days, after Opera, I believe, featured it. Hell, even Konqueror (the default browser on KDE desktops) has had the ability to do multi-tab browsing for quite a few years now.

It sounds to me like you have something against Linux that I can't understand, becuase you also bash Windows in the same sentence.

Oh wait.... You're a Mac zealot, right?

Congratu-fucking-lations.

russ wrote:Not sure why you are trying to bash "free Unix desktop systems" (from which I can only think that you are talking about most Linux distros).

No. When I said "free Unix desktop systems", I meant "free Unix desktop systems". At this point in time this means KDE and Gnome, which run on several different Unix-style operating systems, from Linux to the BSD's to Solaris and so on.

I'm not exactly "bashing" them, just pointing out that their GUI design decisions more often than not are descended from Windows, which is a very poor model.

It sounds to me like you have something against Linux that I can't understand, becuase you also bash Windows in the same sentence.

Oh wait.... You're a Mac zealot, right?

Nope, I'm a computer jockey who has to manage a bunch of different systems every day. As a result, I'm a Unix snob.

I could go on for hours about why I think most of the 20 zillion Linux-based operating systems (or "distributions" in Linux parlance) are pieces of crap, but that has to do with operating system design, implementation, and maintenance, and nothing to do with GUI's, web browsers, or much anything that most people here could care about.

I like Mac OS X, but I'm no zealot. I just know a superior GUI design when I see it.

mb

matthewbarnhart wrote:No. When I said "free Unix desktop systems", I meant "free Unix desktop systems". At this point in time this means KDE and Gnome, which run on several different Unix-style operating systems, from Linux to the BSD's to Solaris and so on.

You don't need to explain to me the difference. I'm having a hard time biting my tongue here.

matthewbarnhart wrote:I'm not exactly "bashing" them, just pointing out that their GUI design decisions more often than not are descended from Windows, which is a very poor model.

You're starting to sound like DeLorean. You're trying to bash something that was made for free by a community of people who have worked really hard to give each other what the other one wants. So what if it resembles Windows more than OS X (which is a relatively new interface, btw)? It was obviously done for a reason. My guess would be that more Windows users were fed up with things other than the windowing interface, so when they were helping make decisions on Gnome or KDE they kept some of the same features of Windows (ie. a bottom left 'Start' menu, program boxes in a bottom panel, etc.) but also took advantage of the X windowing system as well (ie. desktop switcher, easily switchable themes and layouts).

It's not a "poor model" if it works.

matthewbarnhart wrote:I'm a computer jockey who has to manage a bunch of different systems every day. As a result, I'm a Unix snob.

What the hell are you talking about? What kind of Unix snob are you if you don't like Gnome or KDE? The only thing I can figure out is that this must be some sort of backhanded reference to your uber-1337ness on OS X. Because even linux users who have ditched Gnome or KDE for Blackbox or whatever, would still admit that Gnome and KDE aren't that bad. Especially when compared to whatever it is that Microsoft has to offer.

matthewbarnhart wrote:I could go on for hours about why I think most of the 20 zillion Linux-based operating systems (or "distributions" in Linux parlance) are pieces of crap, but that has to do with operating system design, implementation, and maintenance, and nothing to do with GUI's, web browsers, or much anything that most people here could care about.

Than why the initial blast at linux? You're contradicting yourself. And who is better at the other stuff?

matthewbarnhart wrote:I like Mac OS X, but I'm no zealot. I just know a superior GUI design when I see it.

Stevie Wonder could tell you that OS X has a nice interface. It still won't run on the majority of computers out there. And let's not forget that you're talking about $129 OS plus the cost of the proprietary system to run it on vs. an OS that will run on practically any computer and costs NOTHING.

russ

For the sake of humanity, I have taken this to PM.

mb

matthewbarnhart wrote:For the sake of humanity, I have taken this to PM.

mb

aw, WTF?!?! i was really getting into this! i actually don't give two shits about the browser, or even the details of OS's y'all are discussing for that matter, cause i'm all die-hard ignant MS user and all that. but my interest was fully piqued just cause i can picture the both of you having this discussion in a room, possibly a bar, possibly a coffee house, and i'm not gonna say who, but i think i know which one of you would bust out the brass knuckles and which one uses throwing stars. i just wanna see how that pans out e-lec-tronically. will you guys at least report back as to who bleeds the most?

i would really like to give this a shot, but does anyone know if it effects other users on the computer? i have windows xp. thanks.

ing curtis wrote:i would really like to give this a shot, but does anyone know if it effects other users on the computer? i have windows xp. thanks.

On your first run of Firefox, after installing it on Windows, you'll be asked if you want to make it your default browser. I recommend that you answer, "No". This way, you'll not disrupt the functionality of the other users (if they are using the same login) while you try out Firefox. Then, once you have everyone in love with Firefox, you can tell it to be your default browser and it will integrate with other programs even more.

I also will take this time to recommend that all you Outlook users should try the Mozilla based email client, Thunderbird.

HTH,
russ

russ wrote:I also will take this time to recommend that all you Outlook users should try the Mozilla based email client, Thunderbird.

Oh shite, yeah - I forgot about Thunderbird. Heavily seconded!

I too would like to see the Linux/GUI debate in a public forum - I enjoy these kind of discussions a great deal