The latest (re)incarnation of the Mozilla project:
(Now has the name Firefox)
The unofficial homepage, with themes extensions and customisation tips
The FireBird discussion forums
FireBird is a nice browser, although quite basic in terms of functionality unless one installs extensions (I use TheProxomitron, so it's blocking functions are useless to me). Gesture, Tab and several other extensions[1] are essential to me before the browser becomes really functional. Memory usage is now almost the same as Opera 7 (kudos to the developers for the accomplishment of streamlining XUL so well!), although startup time is longer. A good browser, but i still find Opera superior in many respects.
I am quite disappointed on a conceptual level however, because I think something so stripped down does not challenge a novice user to be adventurous with new features. The fact that extensions are available does NOT mean most people will ever use them (possible ~= probable). Sadly users have become accustomed to a poor user-interface through IE, and don't realise there is so much more that can help researching and navigating the web. Opera's approach is the reverse - include rich functionality and then let users remove what they don't need (see RemovingMail for an example). A friend who used mouse gestures in Opera LOVED them, but if my friend had used Firebird, she wouldn't have ever known what they were in the first place. Opera provides a streamlined and highly integrated core set of useful functions, that new users get to use from the beginning - they can be easily turned off if not needed.
The fact that the Opera executable is 2X smaller[2] than FireBird when it packs the functionality of a great many different extensions highlights the relative nature of FireBird's "lean'n'mean" credentials (unless you are refering to Opera's 'bloat' on the metaphysical plane? :). Don't get me wrong, Gecko is really great, and FireBird is vastly more accomplished than IE; but it is going in the wrong direction in trying the lowest common denominator in my opinion. It seems to be slowly turning Mozilla into merely an extensible IE clone...
The very BEST thing about Firebird for me is the transparency of the program due to it being open-source. Every bug is fully viewable and anyone can contribute to their resolution. I don't think open-source is 'always' better than closed source, and I actually think that Netscape suffered the fatal blow in it's competition against IE in part because Netscape 5/6 took such a long time to develop (and was so bad when it finally emerged 2.5 years later, the 'from scratch' Opera 7 took ~1.5 years from start to finish), lots of devoted Netscape users jumped ship to IE5/6 during Netscape's bold open-source experiment. Neverthless, it now means there is a product (with small market share), that allows any user to contribute to it.
The other thing that is great is XUL from a tweakers perspective. It is again a large double-edged sword for Mozilla (and the now defunct Netscape), because it was XUL that caused the greatest problems when Netscape unleashed their 'new' browser. It has now been almost 6 years since this bold experiment, and we have got to the stage of Mozilla scrapping its application! and again recoding a 'new' browser (Firebird), that is still unfinished in many areas (e.g. sidebar (people use sidebars?)). The up-side is that, unlike in ANY other browser, if I take the time to learn XUL, CSS and javascript, I can reprogram any part of the browser I choose. And that potential is brilliant.
[1] The mouse gestures extension are currently clearly inferior to Opera functionality (see WhyOpera), but the tab browser extensions are brilliant!, having lots of options that Opera lacks. The tab preference settings UI is very dense and somewhat confusing, but packs a serious tweaking punch. I find TTLO extensions essential to regain client-side MIME editing (and easy access to HTTP/1.1 settings), and Preferential for better config editing (although it is quite buggy). I use the niceQuick Prefs V1.0 to replace the excellent F12 in Opera. QuickNotes I've installed, although still very basic compared to Opera's Notes panel. And paste and go V0.2 which mimics another Opera feature works, but I can't get it to bind the key that I want. I've also got Image zoomer V0.1 to compensate for Firebirds lack of this ability, although it is currently still quite clunky (only half/double size). I've installed Contextmenu thinking it would do an Opera "User CSS" thang, but it cannot toggle style-sheets on/off. Lots of stuff in there though.
[2] As has been pointed out, Opera compress their executable and FireBird don't (Opera.exe is therefore 5X smaller in the default installed configuration), the 2X value comes from comparing compressed EXEs. Firebird still has 6X greater additional DLL/EXEs than Opera. I don't want to descend into mere number counting, but because many users consider Firebird to be less 'bloated' than Opera, it is at least worth highlighting. By the logic of 'bloat', Firebird is much more bloated than IE and Opera because it contains features IE and Opera do not? :)
Not my experience David, Opera 7 on a P166 takes about 12 seconds, and FireBird about 20 seconds. I suppose it depends on operating system and available memory too. I was impressed that it's memory usage was tight and comparable to Opera 7 though, nice work from the developers to get XUL so slim memory wise! But the user interface lags noticably slower on the P166 than Opera 7 (which lags slower than Opera 6!)
NonTroppo (2003-09-01 12:50:07)
I hadn't tested them with a stopwatch until now. I think I was struck by the noticable difference in loading times. On my system, both 7.11 and 7.2b8 take about 12 seconds to load the first time, and about 9 if they've been previously loaded. FireBird takes about 26 seconds for an initial load, and around 15 if it's already been loaded once. On the P100, Opera 7 took about 25 seconds.
FireBird isn't the pig I was afraid it would be, and the Gecko engine is quite nice, but
compared to Opera, FB is neither lean nor mean.
DavidHarden (2003-09-02 17:27:15)
Memory use in FireBird is now completely competitive with Opera (12\15Mb on first load), amazing considering that XUL is more powerful in comparison to the opera customised UI (although embarrasing when you consider Opera packs so many more other features into that same memory space). As the number of tabs goes up, Opera seems somewhat more efficient, with about 50 tabs loaded I got Opera using about 2Mb less than FireBird.
NonTroppo (2003-09-04 21:57:14)
Firebird's .exe is about 2x as large as Opera's--not 5x--because Opera is packed. When MozillaFirebird?.exe is packed with UPX, it's roughly 2.7 MB. UPX throws a "NotCompressibleException?" while trying to compress opera.exe with "upx --best --force opera.exe". Opera.exe is about 1.34 MB, which means Firebird is about 2x larger. Still, this ratio should be < = 1 by the time Firebird's 1.0. =D
66-117-144-189.lmi.net (2003-09-22 02:32:49)
Ashitaka (66-117-144-189.lmi.net): I certainly wouldn't stop you from posting here, but general wiki etiquette would suggest you don't alter words that I have put my signature to. Comments are brilliant, and add the the content signing your own name, but don't change words that are attributed to someone else. I've amended that section myself and removed your edits only because of this.
NonTroppo (2003-09-22 16:58:40)
Oh, and I'm with you on hoping they cut Firebird's size down, but because of XUL, it would be an amazing feat if they get it lower than Opera's! Anyway a good challenge for the Firebird developers!
NonTroppo (2003-09-22 17:12:08)
Could you turn the discussion of FB's copies of Opera's features into links to the actual extensions perhaps? I find the site quite irritating to browse.
--Jor
proxy2.hva.nl (2003-09-26 08:04:25)
OK Jor? :)
NonTroppo (2003-09-26 14:11:55)
Did some fixing of the page's formating. I hope you don't mind troppo?
If you don't like it, feel free to get rid of it.
ppp211.dyn16.pacific.net.hk (2003-09-27 15:33:59)
Makes it consistent with the rest of the site, no probs!
NonTroppo (2003-09-27 15:43:24)
Thanks NT :)
And I meant I found the Bloatzilla sites irritating, this WIKI is good webdesign :)
node1f22.a2000.nl (2003-10-02 11:44:24)
I find firebird pretty cool (considering I hated all versions of Netscape I have used) but the comment:
Mozilla Firebird 0.6.1 - A Lean, Mean Browsing Machine
is pretty crappy considering the installer of Opera is around half of Firebird and Opera has a news/mail client inbuilt and firebird needs extensions for most of the stuff Opera does without any outside help.
202.89.68.2 (2003-10-07 23:24:56)
They've changed the name again - it's not Firefox 0.8. What's more, if I'm reading the release notes correctly, installing it requires disabling all
extensions or creating a new profile - as users who want to keep using their etensions will have to hunt down newer versions that are compatible with Firefox 0.8.
Oh, here's what they think the hardware requirements will look like.
For Windows and Linux: minimum P233, P500+ recommended; minimum 64 MB RAM, 128+ MB recommended; 52 MB HD space.
For Mac: minimum 604e at 266 mHz, G4 at 667+ mHz recommended; minimum 64 MB RAM, 256+ MB recommended; 72 MB HD space.
They're still calling it "small". Humpty-Dumpty would be proud.
DavidHarden (2004-02-10 04:12:09)
I preferred Opera, and didn't really use Firefox much at all until perhaps mid-2008 on linux.
I still love Opera, but I must say that Firefox caught up well - with many add-ons that give Opera's functionality with few exceptions.
firegestures now is about as smooth as Opera's gestures, Tab-switching is better, with the option to simply roll the mousewheel over the tabs - I now find it a bother to have to hold down the right mouse button to roll through tabs!
Of course, the downloadhelper extension makes YouTube? a real dream to use in Firefox, and the webmail extension - opening mail in new tabs - is rather better than Operamail.
I still use Opera often, however, but think that it's heyday is over now that Firefox came up with the excellent business plan that should ensure it maintains a good level of development whilst remaining Open Source.
I think it's a shame that Opera can't join the FOSS club. It's one good reason that so many linux users will stick with Firefox. Opera just doesn't quite fit in to the gnome or kde desktops...
124.121.223.249 (2009-05-26 06:56:09)
Smack-dab what I was loikong for-ty!
141.89.68.49 (2011-07-27 19:41:21)
freelance writer
31.184.236.63 (2012-01-03 10:56:45)
pM9MDd I do`t see a feedback or the other coordinates from the blog administration!....
193.105.210.170 (2012-02-10 23:23:34)
It appears to take about same time to load on a P166 as Opera 7 did on the P100 I used
to use.
DavidHarden (2003-08-22 15:16:30)