Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Browser utopia

Surfing the web is not a one-size-fits-all experiences Different computers see things differently, and different browsers have different strengths and weaknesses when it comes to interpreting web pages.

Surfing the web is not a one-size-fits-all experiences Different computers see things differently, and different browsers have different strengths and weaknesses when it comes to interpreting web pages. People who use the web a lot also appreciate features like tabbed searches, easy to use bookmarks, and other plug-ins and gadgets that vary from browser to browser.

While most people just use the browser that comes with their computer, Internet Explorer for PCs and Safari for Macs, a growing number of people are looking for third-party browsers to support their needs and provide added security while surfing the web.

In the second quarter of 2008, about 74 per cent of visitors to a select group of websites used Microsoft Internet Explorer, compared to about 18 per cent Firefox, six per cent Safari, and less than one per cent Opera. There are literally a dozen options out there, but some barely register.

Those usage numbers are about to change, given the surging popularity of Firefox and the fact that Opera — a little known browser previously — produced the first browser to score perfectly on the Acid 3 test, which basically means that it read a website that contains every format, web programming language and plug-in (e.g. Flash, Shockwave) on the planet.

Adding to the excitement, Firefox 3.0 (www.firefox.com) was released last week with a strangely huge amount of media attention an more than eight million downloads in the first 24 hours, while Opera 9.5 (www.opera.com) was released the week before with more mainstream recognition than ever before.

I’ve never used Opera, but decided to see what all the ruckus is and downloaded it last Thursday.

According to a benchmarking test at Cnet.com (www.cnet.com) using the SunSpider JavaScript application, Firefox processed the scripts at 5,500 microseconds with a margin of error of three per cent, while Opera scored 7,280 microseconds with a margin of error of 1.5 per cent?

Firefox used about 127 MB of memory with 12 tabs open, while Opera used about 117 MB.

Opera worked better for people that use search on their cell phones but want to keep all of their computer settings and bookmarks. The new location bar also got favourable reviews, as well as their magic wand password management feature, resumable downloads feature, and an icon-based sidebar, and synchronizable notepad.

Firefox’s strength continues to be its speed and the level of customization available with plug-ins, sidebars, and icons. The plug-ins I use the most are the Wesabe uploader (www.wesabe.com), StumbleUpon (www.stumbleupon.com) and a feature called Read It Later that is available through the Firefox add-on portal, and that has become indispensable to me.

Firefox’s new “awesome bar” — possibly modeled on Opera’s bar — is also attracting a lot of attention. Basically, if you visit a site you can bookmark it, add the RSS feed, or click on an icon to Read It Later right on the navigation bar. There’s also an arrow you can click to look at the previous sites you’ve visited in your browsing section.

Opera also has a nice clean look compared to Firefox, despite the fact that Firefox spent more time and effort to match the look and feel with operating systems. And while I don’t typically have problems downloading the websites I use, I can bet that a lot of people are impressed by Opera’s performance in the Acid 3 test.

It’s also important to consider that Opera 9.5 is an incremental improvement rather than a next generation browser like Firefox 3.0. Opera 10 will be even sleeker in its next iteration, and may even be able to give Firefox a run for its money.

As for what browser to pick, I’m sticking with Firefox — if only because it’s already set up the way I like and I rely on the plug-ins almost every day. Some things, like bookmarks, can be easily shifted to Opera from Firefox, but right now there’s little to gain by doing that.

However, if you’re not as married to your setup, switching from IE or Safari, then give Opera a try — it’s really very good, and you’ll get to start with a clean slate.

 

Copyright Act copied wrong?

Last week the federal government released the draft of a new Copyright Act, which will replace and update the last Copyright Act of 1985 and get rid of the grey areas around copying music, movies and other digital files.

The new Act is essentially a list of things you can’t do, unless the copyright holder specifies otherwise — and they never do.

The worst part of Bill C-61 is the definition of what a lock really is. Some types of media are locked to prevent copying or too much copying, or time coded to expire, or to prevent play in various jurisdictions. As long as some kind of lock is in place, functional or not, if you copy you’re breaking the law. That includes copying clips from DVDs or CDs for any reason, or doing what you normally do by copying CDs to your computer and MP3 player. The law also calls for a reduced limit of fines, which means the law won’t be challenged — a family will pay $500 if their child downloads a song illegally, but would take a $10,000 bill to court, perhaps setting a precedent in the process.

This is a bad law and never considers the intent of the offender or makes allowances for fair use. For the music and entertainment industry it will be like shooting fish in a barrel to find offenders, but lucky for offenders it’s a pretty big barrel — it’s safest on the bottom.