"Don" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message news:haumhk$1oe...@digitalmars.com... > Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> Jeremie Pelletier" <jerem...@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:hats2b$as...@digitalmars.com... >>> It has pros and cons, Firefox too has the native look and feel without >>> using the native controls, so it saves on the overhead of tons of GDI >>> handles and can render the entire GUI in cairo. >> >> I use FF a lot and umm...no it doesn't. Not remotely. It's always stood >> out as every bit of a blatant GTK app as GAIM, GIMP, or Thunderbird. As >> soon as I can find a browser with equivilents too all my essential hacks >> (*cough* extensions) and *real* controls (which rules out IE and Opera. >> And Chrome/Safari... AH HA HA HA!), then I'm ditching this garbage. > > Are you talking about FF 3.5? It's a really poor product. Crashes all the > time, has some terrible UI misfeatures. I'm really amazed they shipped it > in that condition.
Never touched FF3.5, I tried FF3 and it was such a worthless POS I went back to FF2, which is still a total POS, or course, but at least this way I have separate back/forward dropdowns, winestripe actually works, and I have no awfulbar *without* needing an anti-awfulbar addon (mozilla's standard strategy: force idiotic ill-conceived changes on everyone and rely on third-party add-on hacks for anyone who wants it fixed).
