fire fox 3

[esa193]

http://www.computerworld.com/action...ticleBasic&articleId=9029727&intsrc=news_list

not bad will block sites that have malware on them
good for the regular consumer who knows nothing about computers

 

[Thelis]

Well, the biggest problem is that the malware blocker relies on Google Inc, which is the mother company for Google. I do not trust them to make a good decision on what is malware and what isn't.

I like 2.0, and until somebody proves 3.0 (or minesweeper as it is called) is better, I am sticking with 2.0.

 

[esa193]

im sure u can disable it
just like popup blocked
if deff will
torrent and warze sites might give me some probs

 

[Fisher]

so no porn for firefox 3 users then.

 

[spywarebanisher]

so no porn for firefox 3 users then.

lol im sure u can turn it off and allow sites.

 

[compguy91]

Well, the biggest problem is that the malware blocker relies on Google Inc, which is the mother company for Google. I do not trust them to make a good decision on what is malware and what isn't.

I like 2.0, and until somebody proves 3.0 (or minesweeper as it is called) is better, I am sticking with 2.0.

Same here. 2.0 is the best version so far IMO. I don't like to rush to things after their first released anyways. I'd rather let it prove itself worthy and then download it. It can't be too bad though, I know it won't be as bad as safari for PC so at least there's some good news so far

 

[muz]

I dunno , what is wrong with FF 2 anyway that needs a whole remake , i mean if it aint broke dont try and fix it IMO

 

[yayarg]

Thats the way the world is muz, gotta keep changing things, gotta make em different, even if they are not made better.

 

[Thelis]

I dunno , what is wrong with FF 2 anyway that needs a whole remake , i mean if it aint broke dont try and fix it IMO

No dude, if it ain't broke, then it does not have enough modifications yet.

 

[Celegorm]

No dude, if it ain't broke, then it does not have enough modifications yet.

You forgot, it's not a bug, it's a feature.