<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>iMediaPress - Latest Comments in Firefox 3.1 Beta 1 Released (and it gives Beta a bad name)</title><link>http://imediapress.disqus.com/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 02:11:42 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Firefox 3.1 Beta 1 Released (and it gives Beta a bad name)</title><link>http://www.imediapress.com/supa/2008/10/19/firefox-31-beta-1-released-and-it-gives-beta-a-bad-name/#comment-3165700</link><description>I tried the beta 1 with the TraceMonkey javascript engine. It's like the firefox I know in the past but on steroids! Awsome. Speed improvements. Way to go. It's beta. Just give it time. I think it's going to rock.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">krumby</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 02:11:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Firefox 3.1 Beta 1 Released (and it gives Beta a bad name)</title><link>http://www.imediapress.com/supa/2008/10/19/firefox-31-beta-1-released-and-it-gives-beta-a-bad-name/#comment-3164083</link><description>Safari is great if you don't rely on shortcuts via plugins. However, it is about time they put a major upgrade. Incidentally, Safari 4 is going to have SquirrelFish JavaScript interpret and ability to save webpages as applications. That must make it competitive with speed of FF3.1 and Chrome. Where is IE?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">supa</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:31:56 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Firefox 3.1 Beta 1 Released (and it gives Beta a bad name)</title><link>http://www.imediapress.com/supa/2008/10/19/firefox-31-beta-1-released-and-it-gives-beta-a-bad-name/#comment-3164047</link><description>It is improved after disabling everything but it is pain to live life like that :-( Hope Mozilla could release Beta 2 soon.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">supa</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:28:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Firefox 3.1 Beta 1 Released (and it gives Beta a bad name)</title><link>http://www.imediapress.com/supa/2008/10/19/firefox-31-beta-1-released-and-it-gives-beta-a-bad-name/#comment-3162460</link><description>Looks like you have plugins which are enabled.  Have you tried turning them off?  I'm on the Mac as well and my FF 3.1 install has been flawless so far, no issues at all.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">StephenD</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:18:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Firefox 3.1 Beta 1 Released (and it gives Beta a bad name)</title><link>http://www.imediapress.com/supa/2008/10/19/firefox-31-beta-1-released-and-it-gives-beta-a-bad-name/#comment-3162365</link><description>Frankly 3.0 has been a bit disappointing for me as well. There are times the browser just stops talking to the network. However, I think I am still going to keep using it. Better than IE ( I have had a computer become unusable with the tons of malwre that come thru IE ), Chrome ( Never quite understood why it was needed. no ad block ), opera ( don't like the clunky interface , though like the speed ). Maybe time to give safari a spin.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">berrylover</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:04:28 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>