Firefox 3.0 or Firefox 2.0? Which 1 better?

**youngyew** · #41 22-03-2008

That's really weird. Flock is good if you do a lot of social networking like facebook, flickr etc; but otherwise it's a bloated version of Firefox. So I don't really think it runs faster than Firefox under normal circumstances.

Netscape was bought by AOL but its development has been discontinued since a month or so ago.

qedx · #42 22-03-2008

That's weird, cause flock used to make my box crawl back in the day. Haven't used it again since then though so things might have changed. Regularly I use Firefox + various extensions, but I'm playing around with epiphany browser these days. Seems pretty fast if you run gnome

**vseehua** · #43 22-03-2008

The problem might lie in the contents of his/her firefox profiles. You might want to erase your profiles completely and start anew...

The other problem might be virus/trojan/spyware inhibiting firefox from fulfilling it's full potential. I've seen malwares blocking firefox completely from running properly, so this might just be an subtle version of it...

Herlene · #44 22-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by vseehua

The problem might lie in the contents of his/her firefox profiles. You might want to erase your profiles completely and start anew...

The other problem might be virus/trojan/spyware inhibiting firefox from fulfilling it's full potential. I've seen malwares blocking firefox completely from running properly, so this might just be an subtle version of it...

Emm...can you teach me how to do it?

**vseehua** · #45 22-03-2008

just delete the folder. You will need to enable the viewing of hidden folders to access it

Code:

C:\Documents and Settings\Casper Jen\Application Data\Mozilla

Herlene · #46 22-03-2008

Do I need to reinstall Firefox?

*capablanca* · #47 22-03-2008

Sure, just reinstall it. Won't take too long.

**vseehua** · #48 22-03-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by capablanca

Sure, just reinstall it. Won't take too long.

nope, reinstall is not needed...

tanyijing2007 · #49 08-05-2008

firefox 3.0 is not recommended coz it does not support most of the add-ons.
firefox 2.0.0.14 is much better, fast and efficient

**youngyew** · #50 08-05-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanyijing2007

firefox 3.0 is not recommended coz it does not support most of the add-ons.
firefox 2.0.0.14 is much better, fast and efficient

Quoting my earlier post in this thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngyew

The people at Portableapps have put together a portable version of Firefox 3 Beta 1! You can install it on a thumb drive or even on your harddisk, and you would have both firefox 2 and 3 at the same machine without worrying about corrupted bookmarks or settings.

Go try it out!

http://portableapps.com/apps/interne..._portable/test

p/s: For the extension compatibility issue, just go to about:config, create a new Boolean value called extensions.checkCompatibility, set it to false, then restart Firefox. You will then skip the compatibility check and be able to install older extensions.

You might want to be extra careful about enabling old extensions though, some might cause the browser to crash or corrupt data. So do this only if you know what you are doing.

qedx Slightly Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 991	#42 22-03-2008 That's weird, cause flock used to make my box crawl back in the day. Haven't used it again since then though so things might have changed. Regularly I use Firefox + various extensions, but I'm playing around with epiphany browser these days. Seems pretty fast if you run gnome

Herlene Less Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 99	#46 22-03-2008 Do I need to reinstall Firefox?

capablanca Laziest Forum Moderator Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 1,743	#47 22-03-2008 Sure, just reinstall it. Won't take too long. __________________ Need donations.

tanyijing2007 Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 353	#49 08-05-2008 firefox 3.0 is not recommended coz it does not support most of the add-ons. firefox 2.0.0.14 is much better, fast and efficient