Firefox 4 Goes Beta, Looks Like Chrome

Firefox 4 Goes Beta, Looks Like Chrome

There's a new beta browser in town, and its name is Firefox 4. Previously available in "Candidate" form, this latest release is a bit more polished and ready for anyone comfortable playing with beta software, which may or may not prove stable (been running fine for us so far).

If Firefox 4 looks eerily familiar, then you must have logged some time with Google's Chrome browser. Mozilla appears to have taken a few design cues from Chrome, with Firefox 4's UI now sporting tabs at the top, a new Firefox button that replaces the menu bar, and the merging of the stop and reload buttons, to name a few.


Underneath the browser's hood sits a few architectural upgrades, like better HTML5 handling, full WebGL support, native support for WebM video, an experimental Direct2D rendering backend, crash protection, CSS Transitions, and plenty more. Get the full rundown in the release notes here.
0
+ -

Gonna have to give this a try. I switched from Firefox to Palemoon since FF gave me periodic 100% cpu spikes that I could not fix, and I don't get them with Palemoon. I liked Chrome, but the lack of support for NoScript turned me off.

0
+ -

That's odd. I've definitely noticed Firefox is slower on Windows PCs, which I am assuming the Pale Moon project tries to fix, but I'm running Ubuntu and even though Firefox is supposedly optimized for Linux, I've gotten the worst slowdowns and crashes on that version. I guess I'll try both Firefox 4 and Chrome side-by-side to see which one turns out better; they "look" the same, after all!

0
+ -

Nethersprite, only difference is that this is rocking the netscape engine and the fastest Javascript engine around!

twistedfate. Any browser that loads fast is considered a placebo effect. While Firefox does consume a lot of memory for a browser, It works well for my system. Why are we fighting over something as pointless as browser speed, you people should be focusing on the fact that there the minefield menu is on the top left replacing the title or that we can't browse through individual windows with Aero Previews like we could with Firefox 3.7.

0
+ -

Nethersprite, I don't notice any speed improvements between Firefox and Palemoon like the ones claimed by the group (I think they said 25% improvement??). But Palemoon takes away the CPU usage spikes that Firefox had for me. I know it's got something to do with my pc because FF only does it on my piece of crap laptop, but not on my desktop (currently stuck with said laptop, so I had to find an alternative to FF).

0
+ -

I've been using Firefox for a while and lately I've found it getting slower than past versions. I would switch to Chrome if I could configure it like Firefox.

0
+ -

Call me crazy, but i'm happy with IE :-)

0
+ -

I'm still using an 3.0.x of FF; I never did like the newer 3.x.x versions.

0
+ -

@ acarzt - You're crazy!

Well you said...

I haven't really noticed any slow down between older versions of FF and 3.x.  Grabbing 4b is on the top of my things to do when I manage to find some free time.

I'm with Slugbug though.  Part of the appeal of FF to me is the ability to configure the browser but I would switch over to Chrome if the same options were available.

0
+ -

lol... sometimes I think I really am man lol

i've never been big on customizing stuff... I guess that's why i'm a fan of IE.

I do the boring kind of customizing that other people don't like to do.

Like editing the registry and fooling around with services, etc. lol

0
+ -

Yes, now Firefox will try to looks like Chrome to beet the popularity of chrome. 

 

0
+ -

Lol sackyhack I noticed the entire opposite Palemoon did not work all that great for me I don't know why. I just wanted original Firefox back, of course mine is pretty heavily modded, which may be it. I uninstalled Pale re-installed FF and have had no issues. I have heard some say FF uses a lot of resources, but f it does my system has more than it needs.

0
+ -

Artificial benchmarks

Chrome's speed is a placebo effect on any modern machine during normal browsing. The only speed gain I saw when I compared it to Firefox was the startup time on a cold boot. Afterwards, they were pretty much exactly the same with nothing noticeable to me. Chrome's a good browser in its own right (and is very good for low-end PCs, but that's where Opera comes into play as well), but comparing browser speeds on any modern machine is pissing in the wind.

0
+ -

Here's what I think about browser speeds: past a certain point, you don't really notice speed. You notice if a page loads slowly, but when it's a few milliseconds difference it doesn't matter. Besides, most computers perform eons faster than any network connection, so the bottleneck is how fast your Internet connection is, how many tabs you have open, how much you're downloading, that sort of thing.

@Taylor What? It's missing the Aero tabs? Now that sucks...although Opera still has them, at least the newest version did when I last checked.

0
+ -

Actually it looks nothing like Chrome. It looks almost entirely like Opera. The new orange Firefox menu is exactly where the red Opera menu is. The tabs look just like Opera's above the address bar. The "Home" icon looks exactly like Opera's as well.

My first thoughts when I saw Firefox 4.0b1 was that it was Opera 10.60.

0
+ -

Imitation is the best form of flattery.

0
+ -

lonewolf:

Imitation is the best form of flattery.

It's not required you know, they have an option to uncheck the "tabs on top" option that restores Firefox to it's old "Address bar on top, tabs on bottom" routine.

Login or Register to Comment
Post a Comment
Username:   Password: