Mozilla To Release Firefox 4 Next Month 266
Neil writes "Damon Sicore, Senior Director of Platform Engineering at Mozilla, has announced that the company is almost ready to ship Firefox 4. On its mailing list, Mozilla has revealed it has around 160 hard blockers to fix, before proceeding to Release Candidate stage. Both the RC and the final version would arrive in February, according to Sicore. Mozilla was originally planning on having Firefox 4 out by the end of last year, but it had to delay the release till 2011. Last month, Firefox 4 Beta 8 was released for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux 32-bit/64-bit, with support for 57 languages. Mozilla's roadmap says it still wants to release a Beta 9, a Beta 10, and at least one Release Candidate build before the final version."
Is this important yet? (Score:2)
Wake me up when the final build comes out.
meh (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:meh (Score:5, Interesting)
And for some reason they always put find at the bottom of the page ...
I always looked at that as a nod to vi. In addition to putting the "search this page" on the
bottom you can activate it by hitting the / key, just like doing a find in a vi buffer. As a
long time vi user I actually appreciate this and find myself missing it now that I use Chrome
more often.
For really hard core vi users their is also this for FireFox: Vimperator [vimperator.org].
For me it was a little too hard core and I never got used to it but never the less I
appreciate the effort put into it!
Re: (Score:3)
I always looked at that as a nod to vi. In addition to putting the "search this page" on the bottom you can activate it by hitting the / key, just like doing a find in a vi buffer.
Didn't realize that. What a cute little feature. Thanks.
Slashdot - even better than Man pages!
Re: (Score:2)
I never knew about the "/" shortcut. This is really quite nice to know, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Vimperator is the only way to use a browser. Learn vim first though.
Re: (Score:2)
ooh, crap. that looks neat. i'm going to try it, and probably fuck my brain up for a month.
Re: (Score:3)
I never use the /. I mean the '/'. I use /. like a filipino houseboy.
Mixing vi into a context where most commands are windows-normal just causes mechanical dysfunction in the part of my brain that's been trained to non-think in vi when using an xterm. If I hit that /, I expect that esc, hjkl, etc. will also work, and I can make painful errors when they don't. There are edit windows that permanently delete the text you entered when you hit esc. I really don't want to accidentally train myself to do that
Re:meh - Status Bar (Score:3)
There are a couple of status bar add-ons you can pick up, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/235283/ worked for me.
Re: (Score:3)
Yup. They've screwed the pooch with the status-bar move. 99% of webpages that you want to preview the URI on you can't tell anything significant because it no longer has its own space and has to fit in address-bar space your current page's URI isn't using.
There's also the issue of buttons that appear and disappear, generally buttons you configured onto the toolbar for a reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Although the lack of status bar is a real irritant (if that's Mozilla's idea of innovation, they need some new thinking caps), the extreme memory leaks in the betas of FF4 on OS X are troubling. I'll often leave FF4 open overnight and come back to find it's taken up another 500MB of real memory. If they don't fix this, I may have to finally migrate away. A bloated, leaky browser at this point is just unacceptable. I do like the history-search-in-url-field feature though; that's quite useful. But taking away
Re: (Score:3)
The JavaScript on 64 bit Linux never got the tracing interpreter everyone else got in 3.5. They went from the 3.0 javascript engine straight to method JIT/tracing JIT in this release.
That's a change from "OMG slow" to "Zing!" on my platform of choice...
Since Firefox and it's extensions are also written in JavaScript, it's quite an improvement..
This didn't release yet? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:This didn't release yet? (Score:5, Insightful)
For a while, I maintained that I would switch back to Firefox once it matched the speed and minimalist interface that Chrome had, as I didn't like using a browser from Google.
You know there ARE more than 2 choices, right?
Did you consider Opera?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, and neither did anyone else. Move on, already.
Re: (Score:2)
"You know there ARE more than 2 choices, right?"
That, and they can all run at once. I run Epiphany (meh, but it's fast), Opera, Firefox (my main browser because of the add-ons), and Chrome on my Ubuntu box. Try em all. Disk space and memory are stoopid cheap.
I run a 32-bit kernel with PAE, and like the fact that limits Firefox runaway to only 4GB RAM. :)
Re: (Score:2)
I run a 32-bit kernel with PAE, and like the fact that limits Firefox runaway to only 4GB RAM. :)
How do you get it to do that -- a million tabs? The most memory I've ever seen my computer use without playing an MMO is ~700 MB (64 bit Arch).
Re: (Score:2)
I have FF, Safari, Opera, Chrome, and IE on my desktop. If something doesn't open or operate right in one, it will often just be a matter of changing to another and voila! the page looks just like the dev intended (the fucking dolt).
Re: (Score:2)
For a while, I maintained that I would switch back to Firefox once it matched the speed and minimalist interface that Chrome had, as I didn't like using a browser from Google.
You know there ARE more than 2 choices, right?
Did you consider Opera?
Don't forget Internet Explorer 6!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm even looking into WineTools just so I don't miss the Internet Explorer 6 experience while at home!
Re: (Score:2)
I use Opera on my Nexus One, because the default browser just doesn't fucking listen sometimes.
But Opera's rendering is incomplete, and sometimes just plain bizarro.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but if thats your only qualification, I might point you towards
http://code.google.com/p/arora/ [google.com]
or
http://kmeleon.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
over Firefox or Chrome. I personally don't like Firefox because of the bloat, and like the OP, I get a little wary of Google gaining full vertical control of my web browsing. First a search engine, then a Web Browser, next an OS, and they're starting their own ISP. Its a little scary.
Anyways, maybe check those guys out.
Re: (Score:2)
I liked using Chrome, but I still stick with Firefox. I'm always rather wary about how seriously a company whose revenue stream comes from mining your activities for advertising will take your privacy.
Re:This didn't release yet? (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't think Firefox was ever meant to be 'minimalist'. I always saw Firefox as the add-on and feature platform.
Sure the line is getting blurry now... but I don't use FF because it opens 15 seconds faster. Just because it has features I find useful. Like the synch, and panorama and stuff...
Re: (Score:2)
And this is the reason I use both FF and Chrome. However copy-paste doesn't always work with Chrome, especially with Slashdot.
Re:This didn't release yet? (Score:4, Informative)
FireFox was created to be the "lighweight" version of Mozilla, a browser which had a built-in email, IRC and News client.
But in ANY case, if your apps are taking 15 seconds to load, you need to buy an SSD STAT!! Disk IO on mechanical disks is pitiful. I can't imagine having to go back to waiting on apps to start.
Re:This didn't release yet? (Score:4, Insightful)
Wasn't this supposed to be the answer to Chrome - yet Chrome has shipped several iterations in the time it took them to get from 3 to 4?
Version numbers mean absolutely nothing; they only determine important milestones... or, in Chrome's case, pure marketing by making several "releases" painted as milestones, when in reality they're all quite minor updates. Firefox has a much more stable (and less confusing) version numbering system.
Re: (Score:2)
I switched back to Firefox today from Chrome.
The two dealbreakers for me on Chrome where:
1) Inability to fix resolution scaling. Chrome is broken as a browser on my MediaTV with large DPI settings.
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=679 [google.com]
2) The removal of "Quick search/keyword" functionality of bookmarks that Firefox has. For example I like to type "imdb [moviename]" or "ud [urban dictionary term]" in the URL bar, and the browser then looks stuff up for me without having to navigate a landing p
Re: (Score:2)
Dumbed down (Score:3, Insightful)
It's slower to use now because quick options and quick information have been removed. Also, hovering over URLs now squeezes the URL to be visited into the URL box with the current URL, unreadable light coloured fonts have been chosen and for most URLs you can barely read a fraction of the URL - It's dreadful. Plus right-click -> block image has been removed.
What next? Quit trying to copy Chrome and IE if I wanted to use those corporate straitjackets I would be.
Re: (Score:2)
Double click blank space for a new tab is gone, right-click -> new tab is gone
middle mouse button is friend. using it on a link will bring it up in a new tab; using it on the blank space will bring up a new tab; using it on a tab removes that tab. Almost the same functionality only better.
hovering over URLs now squeezes the URL to be visited into the URL box with the current URL, unreadable light coloured fonts have been chosen and for most URLs you can barely read a fraction of the URL - It's dreadful
Its a lovely feature, but they do need to sort out the colours.
I am a little sick of accusations of copying when in reality I think they are moving in the same direction. Internet Explorer is looking more like Firefox daily. Firefox's interface changes very little over 3 major versions. have a lo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And how do you know if a page is partially or badly encrypted without clicking something and digging deep and being a SSL expert? - seriously, who wants to have to manually check every time - a notice should stand out if a page is not encrypted right.
FF hangs on startup (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No clue what's causing it, but see what plugins are being loaded? HP added a bunch of crap to my installation that brought it to a crawl.
If that doesn't work, may I suggest bugzilla [mozilla.org]?
Re: (Score:2)
And it's only Flash, Silverlight, Java and Acrobat. MS and Adobe certainly are capable of craptastic programming, but you'd think if some of those essential plugins produced something like this it would get noticed.
I tried bugzilla a couple of times and never had a good experience with them. With a lot of OSS software (SMplayer had a similar problem) I'd just hit the logs, but FF subscribes to the "It just works or you're fucked" c
Re: (Score:2)
Try Chrome. Seriously. I had the same sort of issue. I run MANY windows and when I would start it up it would hang forever. Chroime meanwhile pops content on there so fast it's stunning. I do not miss FF much...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Missing menu bar? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Missing menu bar? (Score:4, Informative)
By default on Windows, it's replaced by the Firefox Menu. Just right-click anywhere on the UI (besides the page) and turn the menu bar back on. You can also do this from the preferences menu inside the Firefox Menu itself.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, I don't see how that argument is either weak or disingenuous. I mean, you can disagree with it, but that doesn't make it deceitful. I don't -- I disable the status bar on all my browsers to recover those pixels because...I don't use that. Except for prospective URLs, which browsers do in a different way now anyway.
Mozilla to Users: You're Dumber than a 7 Year Old (Score:2)
, and disingenuous (nobody uses it!).
Oh, for Pete's sake - just yesterday my daughter (age 7) was wondering why pbskids.org was taking so long to come up, and I showed her how to read the status bar. So now she does and doesn't ask me that question anymore.
"release candidate" means... (Score:2)
"Release candidate" means "release this version if it's good enough, otherwise produce another RC", not "something random to put out before a deadline".
It's enough to make me miss IE5. Sleek, simple, didn't have any notion of the unnecessary Web2.0 shit. Optimising the browsing of a web of information was always a lofty goal for a web browser, I guess.
No Status Bar = FAIL (Score:4, Insightful)
I know you can get an add-on to replace it.
But that requires each and every user to look for and install something that should already be there!
For the developers to take the status bar completely out... that's just ridiculous.
At the very least, put a little check box in the options page to turn it back on.
Re:No Status Bar = FAIL (Score:4, Informative)
Not really a fail. What they've done is split the functionality of the existing status bar in two. One part displays the URL you hover over; that has been moved to the URL bar instead. The other part is the add-on icons, and that's been moved to a distinct add-on toolbar, which can be shown or hidden easily as the user prefers. Each and every user will not be installing a status bar extension, because each and every user doesn't want or need a dedicated status bar. IMHO they've implemented the needed functionality in a better way.
The whole point of FF is it will look like and behave like whatever you want it to, more or less. Changing the way it works by default doesn't change that.
If you want to help.... (Score:2)
I made a big blog post about using Firefox 4 and a bunch of other things you can do to help make it better. Most of you in this crowd can skip to Item 3, I wrote it for users who are not technical.
http://bryanquigley.com/uncategorized/try-the-new-firefox-beta [bryanquigley.com]
Or in just one sentence, turn on the surveys to automatically submit, and install/run Grafx Bot - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/200733/ [mozilla.org].
And in related news, I also would love to see Duck Duck Go [duckduckgo.com] be included as one of the search engin
Looking Forward to This (Score:2)
This version removes Gopher support (Score:3)
Fortunately the overbite [floodgap.com] addon exists, but does not seem compatible with recent Beta versions.
Re: (Score:2)
Gopher is still around? I can't remember the last time I used it, but it's probably been around 15 years. That's some seriously obscure backwards compatibility you want.
Status bar (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Bring back the god damn status bar. Change for change's sake is never a good idea.
Have you looked at how they've implemented the status bar functionality yet? They didn't just get rid of the status bar without implementing the functions it provides. I think they did a good job with it.
Sorry FF, I gave up! (Score:2)
Multiple crashes a day, error reporting that seldom worked, and it turns out really slow which I realized when I switched to Chrome. I tried, I really really did, to stick with it. But when it took forever to restart and would just keep happening I finally gave Chrome a shot at the urging of a friend. I have something like 25 windows and 100+ tabs open in Chrome and not a single crash. It's been running well over a week now with no issues. My crash logs for FF showed daily crashes, sometimes hourly, and whe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm doing it differently than you - that's not necessarily wrong.
I am interested in MANY things. I have a single normal page with all of the news, email, and tech sites I read to include status of eBay auctions and NetFlix queue. This stays open always. When I research an interest be it HTPC topics, storage solutions, or odd stuff found on sites like Slashdot I often open a new window. Each tab in that new window - often starting with Google, is a different site. If i get pulled away or it';s something
Status of the status bar (Score:2)
Strange how so many comments here say the same thing:
* Where's the status bar?!
* Eh, I'm switching to Chrome
And yet Chrome also lacks a status bar!
Re:Status of the status bar (Score:5, Informative)
Chrome lacks a status bar only when the status bar would be empty. As soon as there is something to put in it, it appears.
Mouse-over a link, and it shows you the target. Click a link, and it tells you what the progress is, until it's finished. Then the status bar disappears again.
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome lacks a status bar only when the status bar would be empty. As soon as there is something to put in it, it appears.
Mouse-over a link, and it shows you the target. Click a link, and it tells you what the progress is, until it's finished. Then the status bar disappears again.
Firefox has implemented it differently, but that's basically what they've done as well.
Where's the bloody status bar? (Score:2)
For the love of all that is holy... why are we no longer allowed to know what we are hovering and what we are loading?
What a lovely "addition" and quite "progressive"... i'm all for progress, but come on people....
--ToO
Why is this news? (Score:2)
They didn't release an RC and there have been several beta releases already. I don't see any real new information here. Announcing that there will be a release announcement sometime in the future seems like they are just trying to get publicity. Seriously, they didn't even commit to a release date. It makes me so annoyed, I don't even want to discuss it. Oh wait, ooops.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I just went back to FF from Chrome. Reasons: significant closing of the performance gap and about:config. I really, really like about:config.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With all the talk about NoScript like functionality being in Chrome, when I reformated my system I decided to make the switch to Chrome. However after searching the internet for about an hour the best I came up with is either it doesn't actually work (still executes JavaScript just hides it) or is a cludge at best.
Been running FF4 ever since, it's fast and does everything i want. I guess I'll switch to Chrome when they give me a reason, being almost as good isn't a reason.
If someone can prove me wrong on
Re:I sure hope... (Score:4, Insightful)
With "Panorama" aka "Tab Candy" aka "Bolted on tab management feature that only power users need", I'm not so sure. :-(
Re: (Score:2)
I kinda like Tab Candy. I use it at work to keep work related and other browsing activities cleanly seperated. What I don't like is the lack of statusbar: I have been looking in the statusbar to look where a link leads since the nineties and now they move it to the addressbar of all places. That addressbar is now a jumble of functions: showing the address, page load indicator, status area, etc. They even moved the reload button in there. It's a mess.
Re:I sure hope... (Score:4, Insightful)
but once they got a good market share and user appreciation, it became bloatware.
Some people call it "bloat", other people call it features that they asked for and find useful.
Seriously, if you want a stripped down / light-weight browser, there are other options.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want a stripped down/light-weight browser, FireFox out of the box is just fine. Just don't install any skins or extensions.
HTH!
The extensions I use in order of most-used to least-used:
AdBlock Plus (the auto-playing video ads finally prompted me to start using it - until then I was willing to put up with ads in exchange for "free" content)
Tab Mix Plus
Google Toolbar
QuickRestart (on Windows only, for dealing with firefox sucking 100% CPU when flash or other plugins go awry)
Web Developer
Firebug
Cooliris
Qu
Re: (Score:2)
Then why not implement these features as add-ons? That way users can uninstall them, do choose the custom install options and not install them at all. The awesomebar would have been better implemented as a core add-on as would have these fancy tab management ideas.
Re: (Score:2)
No. If FF4 as of beta 8 is any indication, they broke parts of it entirely. Bits of it are slicker, but it has mechanical issues and memory leaks.
Otherwise, it's not really that much different from a GUI standpoint. The guts are no doubt rearranged, but outside of a few code freaks not many people will really know.
Re: (Score:2)
No. If FF4 as of beta 8 is any indication, they broke parts of it entirely. Bits of it are slicker, but it has mechanical issues and memory leaks.
Sir, what version of FF have you been using? As far as I know, it has ALWAYS had "mechanical issues and memory leaks", that's not a new feature in FF4.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought FF3 was a lot better in terms of ergonomics.
The status bar and toolbar-button screwups in FF4 are a step backwards.
And FF3 didn't ramp my memory usage up over 70%, ever. FF4 gets there after a couple of tabs are open, and grows.
Re:I sure hope... (Score:5, Insightful)
Its NOT the seamonkey model; unlike opera, mozilla, seamonkey etc, it doesnt have built in mail, torrent, ftp (at least not worth mentioning), an HTTP server (opera...), newsreader, etc.
Its JUST a browser, like its always been.
And I raise a motion that all complaining that 3.0 is too slow and bloaty, should be forced to use version 1.0 or 1.5 or 2.0, and see just how slow they really are when used with modern expectations of heavy duty JS, 30 some tabs, and zillions of extensions. I seem to recall an AWFUL lot of complaining from days of yore about 1.0 and 1.5's memory usage and bloat.
What is it they say, "the grass is always greener..."?
Re:I sure hope... (Score:4, Informative)
I was forced to use 2.0 on certain machines until a few months ago, and frankly it can't handle the modern Internet.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the latest Beta runs a lot worse, slower, unstable than the latest 3.6.13, so unless things change quickly .....
Re: (Score:2)
Its a Beta. Its also much much much faster when its not crashing; Ive been on minefield for several months and its easily every bit as speedy as chrome dev.
Re: (Score:2)
Just use Lynx if that's what you want. Meanwhile, the rest of us will appreciate most features that Mozilla put into their browsers because most of the time they are useful.
Insightful? (Score:2)
Tell me this, what would you remove from FF3 that you consider to be bloated -- or did you just want to get a comment in early so you could be modded up?
I dare any of you who modded the parent Insightful to benchmark FF2 versus the current build of FF3.6 versus FF4 beta9 in startup speed, memory usage, page loading time and javascript. I'll let you in an a little secret: it's gotten progressively faster across the board over time.
Re: (Score:2)
Agree. FF2 was really terribly slow. FF3 was big improvement.
Re: (Score:2)
Addons cant really do anything that some clever JS cant do, unless im mistaken. Addons dont really compromise security that much, unless theyre plugin-style addons.
Re:how (Score:5, Informative)
You'll have to get addons for both. They want to phase out the status bar, and they figured not providing that functionality was for the best. The titlebar is part of an ongoing WONTFIX, because they think Tabs on Top deserves more love. Thankfully, tired of people's complaints, they whipped together this addon that does the trick: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/221514/ [mozilla.org] (Vista+)
Re: (Score:3)
How about they just admit they're trying to copy Chrome and just make it an option instead of forcing it on people?
Thanks Mozilla.
Re: (Score:2)
Providing 2 UIs sounds like a worse option than either copying chrome or rolling their own; you really want them making firefox MORE complex?
This is what themes and addons are for.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:how (Score:5, Insightful)
They want to phase out the status bar, and they figured not providing that functionality was for the best
Wow, that's simply awful. The status bar is there for a reason. Do they really want people following links with even less information than they have now? If my browser is stalling out trying to load a page, how will I know what domain to block?
Looks like Mozilla is continuing to dumb down its user interface. Is there a browser around that targets the geek market? One for those of us who want more information and more control?
Re: (Score:3)
I hate that... I rely on the status bar all the time. I disable the javascript setting that lets sites change the status bar text, so I see only what I'm supposed to. (and I run my browser maximized)
In Firefox 4.x, when you hover over URLs it DOES show part of it up top, near the address bar but it's truncated. You can see the domain you are about to connect to, but often not much more than that. It's important to see the entire URL.
That's a show stopper for me. I also dislike the new user interface.
I'm cur
Re:how (Score:4, Informative)
That's a show stopper for me.
Same here for quite a while - fortunately Status-4-Evar plugin [mozilla.org] showed up to remedy that particular ill.
Re: (Score:3)
That's a show stopper for me.
Same here for quite a while - fortunately Status-4-Evar plugin [mozilla.org] showed up to remedy that particular ill.
Yeah what's the bet the motherfuckers start blocking extensions when people decide they are standard? Ever since they took away the option to revert from Awfulbar and it started requiring an extension, I don't trust them. They've gone off the rails!
Re: (Score:2)
It still shows the url on hover, however now it does it in the address bar. Takes a bit of cramming to fit it up there though, so it isn't ideal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Mozilla, like all market centric organisations, does not care about technical features, usefulness, usability or technical competence. Like all such companies, they care about only one thing--the latest fad. They will follow this fad, be it graphical, academic, ergonomic and they will follow it regardless of its effect, positive or negative, on their overall product.
Mostly, these fads are graphical: Moving menus and status bars, button redesign, interface overhaul, theme redesign and countless other feature
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's called SeaMonkey. However, it's slowly turning into the project of the SeaMonkey Council leader instead of the community's.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You get the url of link on right side of the your top url bar.
I'm already using the right side of my top URL bar. Why not leave the status bar where it is? It's not hurting anything. I have plenty of vertical resolution for it. What about my noscript icon, and the SSL icon?
If they really want to save some vertical space, they should get rid of the find bar. Bring back the find window from 2.x.
Also now it tells you whenever it's connecting or downloading to/from the server on the actual tab so it's act
Re: (Score:3)
Tabs on top are fun, but work better in chrome.
I tried the RC, and the tabs aren't truly on top. So, if the window is maximized, I can't just toss my mouse cursor to the top of the screen and have it sitting amongst all the tabs.
Instead, they put a little 'Firefox' dropdown at the top. The dropdown should be somewhere else-- the tabs need to be on top so they are a 'million pixels high'.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)