Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Firefox Mozilla News

Firefox 9.0 Beta Available 291

Posted by Soulskill
from the like-clockwork dept.
An anonymous reader tips news that, right on schedule after Tuesday's Firefox 8.0 launch, Mozilla has rolled out the beta of Firefox 9.0. This update brings a significant boost to JavaScript performance, UI improvements for the OS X Lion version, and Do Not Track opt-out detection for developers. 9.0 beta also "supports chunking for XHR requests so websites can receive data that’s part of a large XHR download in progress. This helps developers make websites and Web apps faster, especially those that download large sets of data or via AJAX."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Firefox 9.0 Beta Available

Comments Filter:
  • by microbee (682094) on Friday November 11, 2011 @06:55PM (#38030386)

    It's too expensive now.

  • by lsolano (398432) on Friday November 11, 2011 @06:57PM (#38030412)

    I do not know if I want to test FF9 now, that my day is coming to an end here at work, or well, just wait to come home and test FF10.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      This has stopped being funny after FF5. It's the same comment over and over again, who mods this up?

      And yet Chrome is all right by you people. Look next FF is getting silent updates. Get fucking over it.

      • > It's the same comment over and over again, who mods this up?

        The same people that submits this story over and over again.

      • by pigsflew (1104021)

        The reason why it's ok for chrome and not for FF is because in Chrome, the version number Ian't part of the branding. People don't know what version of chrome they have, it's just chrome. Websites don't support Chrome 12 or whatever, just chrome. With Chrome, you don't need admin access to install or update, so even at work, people update. When was the last time you saw a Chrome version presser anywhere on the internet?

        FF is changing versions like they don't matter, but treating them like they still do.

      • And yet Chrome is all right by you people.

        This was my first thought too. People getting all pissy about Firefox getting rapid releases and switching to Chrome in response. Do any of them realize that Google were the pioneers of rapid release? Google started out with quarterly releases, which they then cut to six weeks, which was then adopted by Mozilla as their release schedule as Google seemed to have made a compelling argument for it [chromium.org].

        So feel free to criticize Mozilla for rapid releases if you like, but give Google some credit too. It was their id

    • by Twinbee (767046)

      Don't panic - it's pretty simple if you want to convert from the advertised version to the real version. This is the formula I use for Firefox:

      realFireFoxVersion(x) = 5 - 4.5/x + x/1000

      Works for me every time.

  • Please stop.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Synerg1y (2169962) on Friday November 11, 2011 @06:58PM (#38030416)

    Releasing new versions of firefox and fix the version you have, I'd appreciate 5.1 greatly, I'd also appreciate my browser not freezing randomly at times for 30 second intervals on the most random of things. I like firefox and I know a lot about its structure, but I have chrome installed now because some stuff just won't work as I want it to in ff. Kind of feels like I threw my chips in and now the project is heading completely downhill, I don't like IE UI & I don't know much about chrome, but holy shit, I'm about done w ff. Anybody from mozilla read forums to get user feedback or anything? Guys?

    • Re:Please stop.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by jlebar (1904578) on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:39PM (#38030776) Homepage

      Please stop releasing new versions of firefox and fix the version you have

      You do understand that the new releases have bug fixes, right? Probably the majority of patches going into any given release are bugfixes.

      The main cause of random freezes should be fixed in the latest release, Firefox 8. If you're still seeing freezes, please file a bug and cc me (jlebar) and I'll follow up.

      http://blog.bonardo.net/2011/09/30/is-your-firefor-freezing-at-regular-intervals [bonardo.net]
      http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ [mozilla.org]

      • +1 to you sir. I am very curious, is there an effort to focus on speeding up the UI, or decoupling UI responsiveness from the pages/plugins active at the time? I'd say that is the biggest source of speed issues users notice directly.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Darinbob (1142669)

        Why not have bug fix patches for older releases? The problem isn't that these new releases are mostly just bug fixes, but that they're the ONLY release that's supported. FF8 is out now, which means no more patches to FF7. You are either forced to upgrade or you do without bug and security fixes. The reason Mozilla is getting a lot of pushback is because customers don't like being told what to do.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Billly Gates (198444)

      You know there are alternatives to Chrome. You may hate IE 6 like 90% of us slashdotters, but newer versions are shockingly better [blogspot.com]. As in hell freezes over better from that link!

      I quit FF last March shortly after 4.0 and never looked back. Seriously it is the bottom of all modern web browsers. It is great that FF 7 and 8 are much lighter and load as quick as Chrome, but they have over 6000 bugs! FF is the new IE 6 of the 2010s and it pains me to say this as I have been using it since it was called phoenix a

      • by Grishnakh (216268)

        IE doesn't work in Linux, so that alone makes it usable for me. I switched to Chromium a month or so ago, and I'm pretty happy with it so far. It does use more memory than FF, but the UI responsiveness is much better. I don't see how FF can fix that until they finally switch to one-process-per-tab like Chrome does things.

        • On Linux I prefer Chrome too. Mozilla uses the intel compiler and my old laptop is an AMD turrion and it shows whenever I hit a page with heavy javascript or multimedia. It could be because intel's compiler breaks IEEE standards and uses old i387 techniques for FPU but I am not a computer science major so I can't comment on that.

          Do you use AMD processors on your Linux install? Still Chrome is not too bad and certainly is usable. FF also is behind on its Linux and MacOSX ports compared to Chrome. Does it eve

    • by Spacejock (727523)
      I have Firefox set up to purge all cookies on exit, except for a long list of whitelisted sites. I'd like Firefox stop trashing my permissions.sqlite file from time to time, deleting all these settings. (Seemed to happen on the 6 -> 7 upgrade, and again on 7 -> 8.)
    • Re:Please stop.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by McDutchie (151611) on Friday November 11, 2011 @11:45PM (#38032406) Homepage
      You know, if only you could get rid of your fixation on the version number and just keep up with the latest version, it would be so easy to make yourself happy because the latest release has all those bugfixes you're looking for. What is it with this silly fixation that some people have on the silly versioning scheme? Yes, I know the new versioning scheme is silly, but it's just a fucking versioning scheme. Get over it already.
      • Re:Please stop.... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Jiro (131519) on Saturday November 12, 2011 @01:10AM (#38032756)

        -- Along with the versioning scheme comes lack of support for older versions
        -- The version scheme is a pain in the neck for add-ons, which depend on versions
        -- Normal version numbers give the user information; the version number tells us whether it has had major features, bug fixes, etc. Firefox's versioning has the effect of concealing this information from the user.

      • Re:Please stop.... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by flimflammer (956759) on Saturday November 12, 2011 @01:28AM (#38032838)

        When the rapid version changes stops interfering with addons and other such things, then people will stop caring. Chrome gets away with it because they designed Chrome to be version independent from the start regarding interface and addons. Firefox hasn't gotten that part yet, so these will continue to be annoying.

  • by youn (1516637) on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:03PM (#38030454) Homepage

    it certainly seems like it from recent increased version numbers pace

    • by Mashiki (184564)

      Oh don't worry, at the rate they're going at. We'll be at Firefox 121212 just in time for the end of the world.

  • by ElusiveJoe (1716808) on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:04PM (#38030458)

    Counting all the times I've heard about JavaScript boosts, everything written in that language must be faster than quantum computing now.

  • How many times can you "boost" Javascript performance?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by PCM2 (4486)

      How many times can you "boost" Javascript performance?

      Infinite times. See: Zeno's paradoxes.

  • Since Firefox 7, it has been locking up periodically when on YouTube, this was supposed to have been fixed with version 8, and nope it is still locking up when closing a flash enabled page.

    Seriously thinking of going back to IE, or finishing the migration to Chrome.

    • by couchslug (175151)

      I view Youtube with Chrome, but download Youtube vids using Firefox.

      Easy enough to have multiple browsers open on any modern PC.

      • If you want, you can have multiple operating systems open on any modern PC. Seems that is like strapping a Honda trailbike on to your Chevy Volt which is bolted on to the bed of an F350 Pickup. At some point you have to ask yourself why.

      • You might take a look at YouTube Downloader [google.com] for Chrome. Adds a handy menu below any youtube video for downloading the video in various resolutions. The only time I need to use Firefox for this now are other places like Dailymotion the extension doesn't support.
  • by murphyje (965004)
    I stopped using Firefox in favor of Chrome, years ago, when I saw Chrome had bookmark syncing and incognito Windows. Firefox has, since, tried to replicate these behaviors only to be way off the mark. When I want access to my bookmarks it's because I'm /not/ at my computer. Also, putting the entire browser into private mode, is not what I need, only a single window for when I'm browsing sites I'd rather not keep cache & history of. Now, Firefox continues to chase after Chrome like some weird kid brother
    • by Darinbob (1142669)

      But Firefox is just replicating the same stupid release management of Chrome; ie, rapid releases without supporting older versions. The numbering itself is irrelevant, what's important is that there is only one supported release at a time and that it changes often. If you don't mind rapid releases and updating a lot then either FF or Chrome is ok. But if you do not like this breakneck speed and want support for a stable version then neither FF nor Chrome is acceptable.

  • by PCM2 (4486) on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:15PM (#38030582) Homepage

    Are they addressing the outstanding bugs that came with the new features in version 8? I think there should be a few rounds of point releases to tighten up the code with any major new feature roll-out.

    Example: I'm not sure my Twitter searches are coming up with the right results.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:23PM (#38030650)

    and Do Not Track opt-out detection for developers

    1. Why the hell would that not be hard-coded to "Hell no, do not ever track me!".
    2. Why the hell would any of those soulless bastards who use tracking in the first place suddenly grow a conscience and care about that feature?

    1. If you believe "Do Not Track" works, you also believe that clicking on "unsubscribe" links in mails as well as DRM works.
    2. If you are a person who cares about offending and not ripping off people, why do you track them in sneaky crooked ways the first place?

    • by jlebar (1904578) on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:46PM (#38030822) Homepage

      1. Why the hell would that not be hard-coded to "Hell no, do not ever track me!".

      See http://blog.mozilla.com/privacy/2011/11/09/dnt-cannot-be-default/ [mozilla.com]

    • Why the hell would that not be hard-coded to "Hell no, do not ever track me!"

      Because then noone would obey the DNT setting.

      1. If you believe "Do Not Track" works, you also believe that clicking on "unsubscribe" links in mails as well as DRM works.

      Aside from the huge fallacy at the end of that statement (seriously, wtf), unsubscribe DOES work for most "legitimate" spam-- which used to make up the vast majority of my inbox (microsoft newsletters, sales offers from cisco, sonicwall, hp, etc), until I unsubscribed.

      Heres why it works, and why DNT will work-- if people DONT respect that, then they get blocked in a much harsher way globally-- for email, spam filters would no longer let Microsoft or Cisco newsle

  • A ploy (Score:4, Funny)

    by enter to exit (1049190) on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:29PM (#38030704)
    This is a ploy by Mozilla to bankrupt MS one cake at a time.
  • Sounds invasive to me. if i opt out of something why is my browser still squealing on me about doing it?

    Or did i misunderstand what was being described?

  • until we can finally say that Firefox's version is...

    OVER 9000!!!!

  • Javascript boosts (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bigsexyjoe (581721) on Friday November 11, 2011 @07:51PM (#38030868)
    We always hear about Javascript speed boosts with all the new browsers. Is there any info for JavaScript developers on how to maximize the benefits? I.E. do the changes mean you should think of a particular coding style to optimize your code speed on a particular browser?
  • Let it die (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Billly Gates (198444) on Friday November 11, 2011 @08:11PM (#38031056) Journal

    I was a FF user since it was called Phoenix, and then Firebird when it was a set of patches for Mozilla. I have been advocating its use since 2004 and switched many computers and friends over. It was a great browser at one time. Unfortunately, its time is coming to an end unless drastic things improve.

    To me FF in the 2010s is more similiar to the IE 6 of the 2000s I ran away from. Its rapid release schedule increased the popularity of IE [statcounter.com]in the US from users and corporations not liking FF anymore. Chrome according to that site is about tied with FF worldwide and will soon overtake it for #2.

    The saddest thing for me is not the current state of FF. It is the fact that I am using IE more and more and preferring IE 9 over FF. IE 10 will give FF a run for its money [blogspot.com] and even Chrome next March when it is released. It is complete opposite of 2005 now and it is amazing it happened in such a very short period of time.

    Fix your bugs Mozilla and I may come back like I did with IE. Until then I recommend everyone use Chrome or IE. FF is just too unreliable.

    • by cbhacking (979169)

      You know, those results would have made an interesting /. article in their own right. I'm amused that IE exactly brackets Firefox (158 more fails from FF8 to IE9, 158 fewer from Firefox to IE10). It's also interesting - and concerning - that Firefox's score doesn't seem to be improving. According to a commenter, even Firefox 10 nightlies still get the same score as Firefox 8. Meanwhile, Opera is racing from behind and will probably claim either first or second place. Of course, IE10 isn't even out yet - not

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Billly Gates (198444)

        I should submit that as a story but I am afraid I will be flamed to death as this is slashdot after all.

        IE 10 is in beta I thought and is scheduled for release in March for Windows 7. A commentor in Ars Technica mentioned MS wants a yearly release of IE and March seems to be the month they prefer. My dream would be if MS would make a Windows 7 OEM CD with SP2 that came with IE 10 akin to IE 8 coming with winXP SP 3 cd, so that way we can start transitioning to HTML 5.

        IE 8 is the only thing holding the deskt

  • by mrmeval (662166) <mrmeval@nOspam.gmail.com> on Friday November 11, 2011 @08:20PM (#38031128) Journal

    I just need to wait a couple of months for ver13! Then I wait every two months for 15, 19, 27, 38, 64, 129, 300, 1025 .....

    Hell I think I'll wait for V 1025, maybe they'll have fixed the memory leaks and quit shitting on extensions and plugins by then.

    • maybe they'll have fixed the memory leaks and quit shitting on extensions and plugins by then.

      That is the most puzzling statement about Firefox I have ever seen. You have a browser with better extension support in mind?

  • If they would only just adopt Native Client like Google has, then we wouldn't have this terrible Javascript lock in. Let me use whatever language I like.

  • It used to be every time I ran firefox it would download and install a security fix.

    Now every time I run firefox it installs whole new versions.

    Seriously settle down guys or at least reweight your versioning system so it seems less scary. Your frightening a lot of people who assume you have all gone batshit.

  • ... 7.0 started locking up (consistently, 100% of the time) within 2 minutes on a workplace VirtualBox VM (under the same distribution I run at home). And I need a browser with a pop-up window due to the way our workplace allows access to the outside world.

    8.0 didn't fix the lockup and started rendering text-fields in black so I've had to remove that from home.

    My partner said she hated the black text fields so I took us back to the 6.0 still archived in /usr/lib. In the workplace VM I went back to 3.6.2
  • well maybe not.. but us bleeding edger's are on 11 boys and girls.

  • by sqrt(2) (786011) on Friday November 11, 2011 @09:36PM (#38031668) Journal

    These version numbers are getting ridiculous. They'll be up to 2x.0 by next year at this rate. And every time they manage to break something.

    I switched to Chrome a while ago, but now I'm using Safari because I like the OS X Lion integration that it seems only Apple is interested in or capable of providing. Native gestures (which FF now has, apparently), integrated dictionary lookup, autocorrect built into the spell checker. And it just feels faster, even when FF has no add-ons enabled.

    If FF can do all that I'll switch back.

  • 9.0? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by flimflammer (956759) on Saturday November 12, 2011 @01:42AM (#38032902)

    Why do they add a minor version when they know they're never going to use them?

    • Re:9.0? (Score:4, Informative)

      by BZ (40346) on Saturday November 12, 2011 @05:16AM (#38033518)

      The versioning setup is that N.0.0 is the next scheduled release. N.0.x is a critical security update that does not break compatibility with add-ons. N.x.0 is for critical security updates that DO break compatibility with add-ons.

      Now obviously these last are avoided at all costs, which is why there haven't been any yet. But the option needs to be there... The other possibility would be bumping the major version number for that critical security update, which would be pretty odd...

APL is a write-only language. I can write programs in APL, but I can't read any of them. -- Roy Keir

Working...