chob wrote:I'm also still for UI to be able to change your cache size. It's a personal thing really. If you can afford the HD space then you will want a larger cache to speed up your browsing. If you want to conserve space you'll set it slow.
Nobody has a computer where 50mb is a realistic limitation on hard disk space. It's doubtful that a larger cache noticeably increases browsing speed, given that a larger cache leads to a longer retrieval time anyway. In either case, no normal person is going to need to change this. Not now, not ever. Just like every other relatively unhelpful option, it should be relegated to about:config. If there's a case for changing it to a different value, it should be investigated and the default should change.
The only time people currently need such an option (that I can think of) is to increase response times and increase the lifespan with their USB memory stick installations. Anyone going that far should either be able to switch the preferences themselves or use a tool that does it for them.
chob wrote:I'm sure people will start lauding one list over another once the feature gets more use. But I think the primary reason to allow different companies to provide anti-phishing lists is to stop ppl crying that google is taking over firefox, or firefox is no longer impartial or other stuff like that. If yahoo wanted to make a distro of firefox but couldn't change the anit-phishing list from google they wouldn't do it. But since it can be changed easily, it keeps firefox as a 'fair' browser.
I'm not objecting to the lists. I just don't see why the user should have to choose between locally stored lists. Ideally, if multiple phishing site lists are available, they should
all be used.
However, it's only really viable (in terms of trust and likely response times and suchlike) to check one single list online. I have no problem with that drop-down. But again, I don't understand how the user can make an educated choice on this issue.
Personally, I think the online-lookup is a flawed idea. It should be scrapped and the local list(s) should be updated periodically alongside standard Mozilla updates. That way:
1) The user gets up-to-date lists from multiple vendors
2) There is no added network overhead / time involved in checking the sites visited
3) No privacy issue - you're downloading lists of untrusted sites, not checking each site you visit against a remote lis
4) The user isn't forced into making a choice that they probably don't want to and probably aren't qualified for.