4 ms·
It's too bad Firefox gets a lot of flack for it, though. I think it's because of 2 reasons: 1) Firefox users are used to a certain way of having their favorite
by nextparadigms 15y ago
It's too bad Firefox gets a lot of flack for it, though. I think it's because of 2 reasons:
1) Firefox users are used to a certain way of having their favorite browser work
2) Firefox still "promotes" version numbers, and this makes them a good target for jokes about moving so fast from version 11 to version 12, or whatever, while at this point Chrome users don't even care so much about the version anymore
- ismarc 15y agoFireFox gets a lot of flack for it because of plugin support. We use GWT for an internal webapp and the developer plugin is not compatible every time they do a release of FireFox (it really is, but packaging makes it not). New machine? Grab off of a mailing list. Tired of daily prompts to upgrade? Hit cancel when it isn't listed as compatible. This happens often enough and is annoying enough that the GWT developer plugin is the only one I use now. Chrome, on the otherhand, really does have seamless upgrades. I know FireFox has a more robust plugin architecture and half the time is the plugin developers' fault and FireFox has been working on a new plugin system for a while, but it's the same problems FireFox had with upgrades for years, they just happen more frequently, exacerbating the problems.
- drivebyacct2 15y agoI assume you mean "extension" everywhere you've written "plugin".
- ismarc 15y agoPotentially, I just remember from having fought with this late last week with the GWT Developer one, which was called the "GWT Developer Tools Plugin", and I can't ever remember what Firefox calls a Plugin vs. Extension vs. Add-On.