Firefox 3.7 Pre-Alpha: Aye, There Be Glass Here

Cool, downloading it now, thanks.

Ok, I get the idea to get rid of outmoded menus, but there's still a wealth of options that need to be obviously accessible. IE7 and 8 include all of the previously available menu options under the Page/Safety (in IE8 only)/Tools buttons, aside from options that are already available via discrete buttons, so everything is there. Where is that stuff in Firefox though? I have the same qualms about Google Chrome (aside from privacy issues of Google, that is). Opera already tackled this in the latest version by going with a method that is instantly obvious to anyone that has used Office 2007/2010 before: the "O menu" in the upper left presents every menu option not already available via a discrete button in the UI. FWIW: I think Opera's UI is probably the best out there, but still, I don't need another browser. I think Opera has a product that can stand on their own, but they need to market it without having to resort to cry-baby tactics with the EC. I think if Opera Inc. could put as much effort and polish into an OS as they put into their browser, then they could probably gain a respectable market share over Microsoft. I just don't see a web browser as being a supplemental option in an OS - it should be a baseline requirement because that's the future of OS's. Isn't that what you keep saying about cloud computing, Paul? Isn't that what you want in Chromium after all?

I think what most people watching this dual between Firefox vs Chrome or why people ignore Opera is asking the following questions? 1. Stability. Firefox 3.6 was buggy as hell. Lots of crashing even on non Flash or Java sites. That's part of the reason many people abandoned Firefox for Chrome lately. The bloat & the speed reductions was part of a bigger concern that Firefox was losing it's steam. It just seems like Mozilla hasn't refocused the development & make more of a compelling case for it's browser. 2. Security. It didn't help Opera that when 10.50 came out, it had a major critical flaw in it. That pretty much made Opera's whining about IE, a MOOT point. Why choose Opera if it still can compromise your system right out of the gate? Opera really has not proven that it's really any better. Benchmark wise, Chrome & Firefox beat it. Also, which browser wasn't even touched or attempted at PWN 2 OWN 2010? Chrome. A lot of my friends were saying, that Chrome has bad security & privacy issues. However, flaws in any browser constitute a breach of privacy. Google's shown some nimbleness in updating Chrome compared to the snail pace of Microsoft's IE team & Mozilla. We need to know how well Firefox 3.7 bounces back from a Flash or Java crash? We need to know if Mozilla can help reign in how plugins like Java & Flash from taking down the entire browser? Or if Mozilla can add enough security features to prevent a complete takeover of the OS? 3. Real word features. The Acid test is a decent benchmark, but it's not the end all, be all standard for web browsers. The extensions or add on's are the real features that matter. What people use day in and out is what's going to matter. How stable are these features from new version to to new version? The only thing I'm grateful for is that with so many browsers to choose, we are getting some major revamps of all the browsers. It just boils down to which one really gives you the most bang for the install?

Have installed it on my x64 Windows 7 PC and so far OK for an early build. Had issues with a couple of add-ons. I agree with subzero that stability needs to improve.

Why bother when Chrome and Safari are superior browsers? This includes superiority over IE7 & IE8

@sub: Opera was patched quickly. Yes, they had a bug out of the gate, but it was patched in almost record time. 10.51 includes that patch. Also, you're right about Acid3. Opera 10.51 scores 100/100 on it, but I agree with what you say: the W3C hasn't said that CSS has to be presented in any particular way. They do allow some flexibility in the rendering engines of web browsers. What they talk about is just interoperability guidelines, but are far from being any set of requirements. In fact, the W3C recommendations don't include requirements on how a web browser can interpret their recommendations. The fact that Microsoft took a different approach with IE6 is evident of that. Now, you can say that it affects end users, but there is no "correct" way in interpreting all of the W3C recommendations. Also, saying that Chrome is "secure" because of the results of P2O is just absurd. Chrome wasn't the primary target. It's another case of security through obscurity, I'm afraid. Chrome has had major security flaws before, even despite their sandbox measures. The winners of P2O have always targetted *released* platforms that are in wide demand. If and when Chromium becomes an accepted platform, they'll likely target it, but for now, Apple and Windows were the primary targets because of their popularity. Chrome is an afterthought, as it is with consumers.

I don't like how it handles multiple tabs, often it's confusing. Shift+Click for a new window or even a new tab does not work.