Requirements:
-Must be Vista compatible (64-bit)
-Must include AIM support
-Must be pretty user-friendly
-That's it, pretty much.
Also, since I'm asking for recommendations...
Now's as good a time as ever to get caught up on what's what in the world of Firefox addons. What are some I absolutely need and cannot browse without? What are some pretty cool ones that I might like?
No requirements for Firefox addons.
Thanks guys!
It runs out of your browser, and you can log onto yahoo, aim and msn all in one spot.
All you'll ever need.
As for Firefox: Damnati fucked around with this message on 09-07-2009 at 11:05 PM.
All-Glass
Tab Mix Plus
Locationbar²
Hide Menubar
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java the thoughts aquire speed, the teeth acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
http://www.pidgin.im/
chrome is like firefox but not stupid too Kegwen fucked around with this message on 09-07-2009 at 11:26 PM.
Chrome is also awesome but it doesn't have plugins and none of it's other features are anywhere near as compelling as adblock or bugmenot.
quote:
Peanut butter ass Shaq Gadani booooze lime pole over bench lick:
Now's as good a time as ever to get caught up on what's what in the world of Firefox addons. What are some I absolutely need and cannot browse without? What are some pretty cool ones that I might like?
Bugmenot
Logs you into sites that have mandatory registration using a voluntarily collected pool of public logins. No longer will you have to log in to IGN just to see a trailer, or sign up for a goddamn New York Times Online account just to get a fucking recipe for fried onion straws jesus christ
Adblock
Banner advertisements are excised entirely from pages. Talking, singing, buzzing taser-the-gnome games, all gone, entirely. I thought PA's new layout looked strangely disassociated and incomplete, until I looked at it in MSIE and realized that the holes were filled with banner ads. You can also selectively un-block sites, of course, just in case you want to support those assholes.
Linkification.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/190
^^If you had linkification, that would be a clickable link. Indispensable for 4channing. Maradon! fucked around with this message on 09-08-2009 at 06:15 PM.
Still, it doesn't have the really good ones that FF has.
[edit: Oh, wow, I guess chrome requires you to go through some sort of arcane voodoo with the command prompt to install plugins? All the addons are greasemonkey scripts? It's not like google to make something so... shoddy Maradon! fucked around with this message on 09-08-2009 at 06:53 PM.
quote:
Maradon! was naked while typing this:
Oh, I guess chrome does have a measly little collection of plugins. I haven't used it since an earlier beta where it had no support for addons of any kind.Still, it doesn't have the really good ones that FF has.
[edit: Oh, wow, I guess chrome requires you to go through some sort of arcane voodoo with the command prompt to install plugins? All the addons are greasemonkey scripts? It's not like google to make something so... shoddy
Plugins aren't productized for Chrome yet. The greasemonkey-esque frankenfeature that they have right now is firmly in the camp of "shut up, we have plug in support. Let us move on to things that more then 5% of the population will care about." Because honestly not that many people know or care about plugins for Firefox, most of them are just noisy power users.
Doesn't seem like a trivial power-user thing to me, really, especially given that almost all the other differences between the browsers are considerably less profound.
Believe me, I'm no fanboy and I'd love to dump FF - it keeps forgetting to terminate the process after I close a window, and it won't let me open a new one until I kill it in task manager, among other fuckups - but those trivial power-user-only features represent a boost to my quality of life that, while objectively so minor it's almost not worth discussing, is a great deal more than Chrome offers me. Maradon! fucked around with this message on 09-09-2009 at 12:11 AM.
Point is, I want to run an exe have it extract itself and get browsing goodness. I don't want to run an exe then spend 2 hours futzing with it and third party plugins to make it be better, especially where better is marginally subjective. If you prefer the second way, you are a power user at least in this particular sense. A normal user wants it to work, that's why they take IE as it is the default and generally works, except when it doesn't which may drive them to one of the other options. That's why I use Chrome, because IE has an annoying habit of not doing what it is supposed to do. Chrome is pain free 99% of the time. You install it and forget, it renders HTML and executes javascript like it's going out of style.
It's amazing.
quote:
If I had a nickle for every time Bricktop said:
I use internet explorer because it opens when I click on the icon and takes me to a web address when I input it into the web address bar.It's amazing.
You are an idiot and should die.
quote:
Blindy wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
You are an idiot and should die.
No, I just don't use the internet enough to care about any features other than if it opens when I click on the icon and goes to a web address when I input the web address into the web address bar.
I use Firefox at work even though 3.5.2 is an unstable pile of shit because I need Firebug and Web Developer.
I don't particularly like Chrome. You have to mouse over a tab to see the full page title, and it cuts off long URLs when you mouse over links. If it weren't for those two things, it'd be perfect.
I'd go back to IE, but it's slow as hell.
Maybe it's time to try Opera or Safari.
quote:
Bricktop stopped lurking long enough to say:
No, I just don't use the internet enough to care about any features other than if it opens when I click on the icon and goes to a web address when I input the web address into the web address bar.
If that is all you care about then you should care that both chrome and firefox do both those things better and more securely.
They both turn on when I turn them on and get to where I tell them to and that's the only thing I care about so they are the same for me.
quote:
Bent over the coffee table, Bricktop squealed:
Someone needs a nap.
No kidding. Anyone who gets emotional over web browsers is, as I heard on the radio this morning, "crazy as a box of frogs."
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Blindy was listening to Cher while typing:
Deflection go go go
There's nothing to deflect. I don't give a shit what my web browser can do because all I use it for is to read CNN, Sports Illustrated, Elitist Jerks, and this place.
You're up in arms that someone would dare not revolve their life's choices around what web browser they use and it's hilarious. Bricktop fucked around with this message on 09-11-2009 at 06:12 PM.
quote:
x--BlindyO-('-'Q) :
Guys I can't see the difference between a Tata and a mclaren F1.They both turn on when I turn them on and get to where I tell them to and that's the only thing I care about so they are the same for me.
If you never drove over a mile in a day, or if you don't have much money, or if you don't have a place to park and you need a car that you can slip into your briefcase, then you would probably consider the Tata vastly preferable.
The very fact that the little Tata car exists and is bought by people illustrates the point that you're missing.
quote:
How.... Blindy..... uughhhhhh:
You have got to be kidding me.
I know. It's amazing that people can continue living their lives without one click bookmarking and automatic password remembering and INCOGNITO MODE and DYNAMIC TABS and application shortcuts.
quote:
nem-x's opinion of themself must be pretty good:
firefox/chrome do load pages a lot faster than ie though so
this.
I don't know how more clearly I could have picked an analogy.
Hey look, a very slow car.
Hey look, a super fast car.
Yes, both get you where you want to go. One just gets you there a billion times faster. Saying you cannot see the difference between the two is simply dumb. Who cares about the extra features? Blindy. fucked around with this message on 09-12-2009 at 12:12 AM.
tortoise/hare argument itt
quote:
x--Blindy.O-('-'Q) :
this.I don't know how more clearly I could have picked an analogy.
Hey look, a very slow car.
Hey look, a super fast car.
Yes, both get you where you want to go. One just gets you there a billion times faster. Saying you cannot see the difference between the two is simply dumb. Who cares about the extra features?
You're acting like there's absolutely no reason anybody would ever want to drive the "slow" car, when that simply isn't the case.
The things that you value in a web browser, like loading pages 0.02 seconds faster or keeping shit out of your computer while you browse porn and warez sites, just aren't important to everybody. In fact, they aren't even important to MOST people.
quote:
If only Maradon! hadn't said this:
You're acting like there's absolutely no reason anybody would ever want to drive the "slow" car, when that simply isn't the case.The things that you value in a web browser, like loading pages 0.02 seconds faster or keeping shit out of your computer while you browse porn and warez sites, just aren't important to everybody. In fact, they aren't even important to MOST people.
That is an idiotic argument. If you are given a choice between a slow car and a fast car, and both cars are free, and everything else is equal, you are making a mistake to pick the slow car. There are no two ways about it. Simply because most people are stupid and make that mistake doesn't mean it's a mistake that people should make.
quote:
Blindy. had this to say about John Romero:
That is an idiotic argument. If you are given a choice between a slow car and a fast car, and both cars are free, and everything else is equal, you are making a mistake to pick the slow car. There are no two ways about it. Simply because most people are stupid and make that mistake doesn't mean it's a mistake that people should make.
But the argument about your cars doesn't really apply to web browsers. Like Maradon said, it loads a page a couple tenths of a second faster, at best.
A more accurate "fast car/slow car" analogy would be this: Someone has a car with a maximum speed of 100 miles per hour. This person already has this car. If he wanted to, he could drive to the next city over and obtain a car (for free) whose maximum speed is 100.1 miles per hour. Why would he do that when he already has the 100 mph car? Most people just aren't interested in that extra 0.1 miles per hour.
