Firefox 21 Arrives 246
An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla on Tuesday officially launched Firefox 21 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. Improvements include the addition of multiple social providers on the desktop as well as open source fonts on Android. In the changelog, the company included an interesting point that's worth elaborating on: 'Preliminary implementation of Firefox Health Report.' Mozilla has revealed that FHR so far logs 'basic health information' about Firefox: time to start up, total running time, and number of crashes. Mozilla says the initial report is pretty simple but will grow 'in the coming months.' You can get it now from Mozilla."
Oookkkaaayyy.... (Score:2, Insightful)
You know, I feel like I only just upgraded to Firefox 20. In fact, there hasn't even been a 20.1 yet. I really like Firefox, I do. Some of the new web development tools (which I've only just discovered) are really nice. But, to be frank, apart from those, I can't tell the difference between 18, and 20. And looking at the changelog, I can't see anything that says, "I'm a major new version that breaks compatibility with previous versions".
So, I want to ask again (and I'm beating a horse that is not only dead,
Re: (Score:2)
The point was supposed to be that one of the three version numbers wasn't really being used - the first number changed maybe twice, while major updates were just bumping up the second digit over and over.
However, as you've pointed out, now they've started ignoring the second digit, going straight from 20.0.1 to 21.0.0. So nothing's really changed at all.
Re: (Score:3)
The first number says "I'm incompatible with previous versions", which in Firefox's case, probably should mean with regards to plugins and extensions. So, if there's no need to increase it, don't! The second number, that's for additional functionality, and various changes that don't break compatibility, and the third number is for patches (bug fixes).
It's also plausible to upgrade the first number for major rewrites, or other major changes in the software's life cycle. A change from a SGML/XML based render
Re:Oookkkaaayyy.... (Score:4, Informative)
FF20 added that horrendous download box, for starters...
Of course, you can revert it back to the more sane old download list by setting browser.download.useToolkitUI to TRUE.
It isn't that hard to miss in FF20. Not sure what UI breakage they did in 21, though.
Re: (Score:2)
The old download window was horrendous too. People actually use that? I usually download files with wget, but I never use a copy of Firefox without the Download Statusbar extension. As far as I can tell, they replaced a shit interface with another shit interface; they didn't really improve anything.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't get why all the hate for something as inane as a download box.
Now removing the protocol from URLs, that is downright irresponsible though it like many other regressions can thankfully be reversed in about:config (TrimURLs=false in this case).
Other regressions are not so easily fixed; the braindead decision to remove the status bar for example needs an extension (status4evar) to fix.
Re:Oookkkaaayyy.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Thanks for the "browser.download.useToolkitUI" tip! The new download box was truly horrendous.
What good is a browser that makes you use about:config to undo all the "improvements"?
Re:Oookkkaaayyy.... (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, you're absolutely right. I'm swearing off Firefox. Which browser did you say was as user-configurable as Firefox again?
Until Mozilla's douchebaggery rises to the level of anyone else's, we're all going to sit right here and take the ass-fuckings Moz keeps handing out every few months.
Re: (Score:2)
What good is a browser that makes you use about:config to undo all the "improvements"?
It's better than a browser that doesn't give you a way to undo all the "improvements".
I don't expect any browser to ever match exactly what I want, short of rolling my own. However, it's rare to find something with Firefox that can't be changed via a simple plugin or even just a setting in about:config. While Firefox may not be exactly what I want right out of the box, its configuration options allow me to turn it into exactly what I want (or pretty darn close).
Re: (Score:3)
There's one that's been bugging me since 14 or 15 though - autocomplete no longer autocompletes deep URLs - it only goes up to the domain. Which is annoying if you have a particularly favorite long URL (like a search), or access a server on another port (no, it doesn't autocomplete ports, either). Sure, the one you want is there - just down arrow enter, but that's annoying.
Have
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox used to have the kitchen sink of preference windows. You could tweak to your heart's content.
Course back then it was called the Mozilla Suite.
Re: (Score:2)
I am taking the debian approach to it. Apparently, I am using firefox 10.0.12
And you know what, I so much do not care which firefox I am using...
Re:Oookkkaaayyy.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
gstreamer support has been there (but disabled by default) since fedora 14. on gentoo you just add gstreamer to your use flags and you can watch h.264.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, works great so far too. Now I can finally drop all the other crap. No more transcoding all the videos to three different formats! YAY
Re: (Score:2)
I can't tell the difference between 18, and 20...what's the point of these fast track updates?
Many small updates allows them to keep adding features without causing huge breaking changes. It gives everyone enough time to implement the new ways before the old ways are dropped.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You should consider installing the ESR version if you don't want to deal with the rapid upgrades. It is currently version 17.0.6. The "ESR channel" gets only security patches, no new features, until it reaches end of life after about a year, at which point you upgrade to the next ESR (Extended Support Release). Firefox version 3, 10, 17 (and future 24) are ESRs.
See http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/faq
Re: (Score:2)
So, I want to ask again (and I'm beating a horse that is not only dead, but buried, and decomposed, with only a few bones and other hard items left), what's the point of these fast track updates?
It's a number-counting game with Google--that's pretty much it. They seem to be trying to play a game of "who can count to a hundred and need a new version system and/or product name the fastest."
Re: (Score:2)
According to what a Firefox dev told me in a previous /. thread, it is technically impossible for them to release the same set of patches as anything other than a major-version upgrade. The build process and the version numbering are tied together such that they literally can not package and release a new version of the software without giving it a new major version number. The build process is incapable of supporting minor version numbers, patch levels, and milestones. I don't buy it, but that's one excuse that they've used.
What a load of shit. Why is there a version 3.6.23? They never had a problem with minor version numbers for the entire history of Firefox. Now all of a sudden they have a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The firefox PDF reader is horrible!
Re: (Score:2)
I was happy when Firefox 19 added its own PDF reader like Chrome did long ago. Now Firefox is the default PDF reader on my machine -- I uninstalled Adobe Reader.
I'd be happy if Firefox's PDF reader actually worked. On 90% of the PDFs I open, I get a message saying some parts of the document may not display properly. Sometimes it actually displays right, sometimes it doesn't, but it's always dog-slow compared even to Adobe Reader (hardly a speed demon). Writing a PDF reader in JavaScript was a terrible id
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox is a web browser, in my opinion the built-in PDF reader is completely unnecessary bloat. That update automatically changed *my* preferences without my permission, requiring me to dick around in the preferences for a minute or so to switch the default PDF viewer back to Evince.
On Windows, what is the point in using Adobe Reader anyway (unless you really want to deal with the bloat and security holes)? Okay, so these days FoxIt Reader also sucks so it's probably also out of the question, but what's
Does anyone honestly care? (Score:3, Insightful)
That was what, 2 years ago now I think? And so now we've since had 17 new "versions", it maybe deserves to be 3, at best. My point here?
They come out too frequently, with too few changes, and frankly very few people honestly care at this point.
Re: Does anyone honestly care? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My point here? /., we don't need an article every time a new version is released. ... frankly very few people honestly care at this point.
Of course very few people actually care: Only Nerds like me care about news like this. Who the hell do you think makes content for these platforms? Web Fairies?!
VortexCortex quit: [Off to make stuff that matters!]
Social what on the what now? (Score:2)
Improvements include the addition of multiple social providers on the desktop
On the desktop? Don't you mean "on the side of the Firefox window"?
Still no support for TLS 1.1 / 1.2 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
( Clippit shows up)
Clippit : It seems you are trying to use an enterprise feature of the Web.
Mozilla has stated that the enterprise is not there target audience.
You should use Chrome which supports TLS 1.2 with graceful fail to TLS 1.1.
(Note: Just don't tell anybody that Chrome tracks your ass like it owns it)
Version 21 (Score:5, Funny)
Finally allowed to get drunk.
Re: (Score:2)
The signs of impairment were present at 4. I suspect the abuse has been chronic since then.
Firefox, caught between two worlds (Score:3)
One world is to implement Chrome like versioning.
The other world is to implement a Microsoft like need for making a grand entrance.
It's just a web browser, nobody gives a rat's ass what it does, that is why Google updates silently in the background without fuss.
It's the 21st century, web browsers do not need press releases anymore just like you don't need someone on the street corner announcing every hour of the day.
Firefox 100 by next year? (Score:2)
So it is going to be Firefox 100 by next year then?
Now I feel old (Score:3)
To think, Firefox has come seven times farther now! Amazing!
On a more serious note, what the fuck is a "social provider on the desktop"? A philanthropist that runs in the root window?
Developer Changelog (Score:3)
As usual, most of the important changes are only listed in the Developer changelog: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Releases/21 [mozilla.org]
Highlights include:
element support
scoped attribute support for (allows a stylesheet to only apply to a particular element and it's children)
No more E4X
improvements
Re: (Score:2)
Ug... <main> element support
and <input type="time"> improvements.
And what about the plugins? (Score:2)
Recently I needed to find a plugin for a certain feature and remembered one for FF4 I used a while back. When to down load it on this new computer to find out the developer had stopped updating the plugin. The reason: these frequent updates didn't leave him enough time to continuously test and make sure it still worked with each version every few weeks. I searched for similar plugins and everyone I saw the author pretty much said the same thing. They had all discontinued development for FireFox because
Oooh! Must download! (Score:2)
New major version, no real worthwhile features worth mentioning. Say, hasn't that mostly been the case for the last 15 or so versions now?
20.4 was a bust for me. (Score:2)
I had to quit using firefox for the first time in years because it kept locking up in a very ugly way in 20.4
I have been waiting for the upgrade so I can browse without locking every 6 seconds.
Safari isn't as intuitive for me since I am used to how firefox was and I don't have a chromium based browser on my system anymore.
Opera is a nice browser, but it really does have to do with how used to something one is.
How many add-ons broken this time? (Score:2)
I gave up on Firefox a years ago (Score:2)
Still on Firefox 8... (Score:2)
Since Firefox has started their crazy version numbering, I've given up on upgrading. I use 27 different addons and perfectly configured to make my web browser do what I want. It is near impossible to do an upgrade without spending hours reconfiguring the addons, some of which need to be manually downloaded and have their "MaxVersion" incremented so they will install. Maybe in 6 more months when we reach Firefox 50 I'll give it a try, but until then. Firefox 8 all the way!
Application: Firefox 8.0 (2011110416
HTML 5 MAIN Element? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Not really, since the same functionality is built into Chrome.
Re:Firebug is awesome (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
A bit moot, but in general, web developers need to be familiar with the debug tools provided by all of the browsers. If you use Firebug mainly, there are times when you'll need to use CDT (Chrome Dev Tools) instead, or the incredibly feature rich and UI-tastic IE debugging stuff.
So yeah, not only did we get stuck having to support various browsers on the front-end; in order to do so, we are forced to learn multiple development platforms as well.
I mainly use CDT, but I will attest that IE's debug tools are
Re: (Score:2)
The IE10 ones are a bit less shit but still shit. I think he was being sarcastic.
Re: (Score:3)
If your development involves working with cookies, Firebug totally beats the Chrome development tools. With Firebug, I can edit a cookie with a click, filter them, set breakpoints on the cookie so you can see when it is modified. Chrome pretty much lets me view them and delete them individually and that's it. Chrome development tools are still very useful, but I think Firebug totally outclasses it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Firebug does things Chrome's inspector doesn't do, and vice versa. It's worth having both tools to test with, especially if you work on a variety of projects. It's hardly worth getting "religious" about it, because both environments are free. But I suppose if you MUST pretend one is better than the other, go ahead.
Re: (Score:2)
And safari as well.
Re:Firebug is awesome (Score:5, Insightful)
Every time this topic comes up, someone like you mentions how you can disable every single "spying" thing... but fail to provide specific details about how/where to do so. Occasionally, they'll tell you to "google it" or "look it up yourself." I find that very curious.
'somebody's a badass' (Score:5, Insightful)
See, this isn't a response...and it sure as siht isn't a 'zinger' or a 'witty retort'
so the hell what, Cromium exists? That does not answer parent's point at all...
in fact, it actually proves you wrong and him right, if anything, b/c the link was to a Google product's homepage. exactly the kind of useless information the parent was bemoaning...
jeez way to prove his point for him
Re: (Score:2)
Another great reason to use Firefox during development is it's the only one (at least among FF, Safari, and Chrome) that can shrink down all the way to 320px (and narrower), which is important for Responsive Design/Mobile... everything else seems to stop at 400px.
It also has Responsive Design View, which is a godsend for precise info & control of viewport dimensions.
I used to love Firebug and hated Chrome Inspector, but am now the complete opposite. ;)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Meh (Score:5, Funny)
He's passionately apathetic.
Re: (Score:3)
You might consider starting, since FF's 20% market share is approximately equal to the combined share of Safari and Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
You might consider starting, since FF's 20% market share is approximately equal to the combined share of Safari and Chrome.
What website is this with these numbers??
Re: (Score:2)
Not according to my website stats, which is all I really care about.
1. Internet Explorer 9.0 18.40%
2. Chrome 26.0.1410.64 13.07%
3. Internet Explorer 8.0 10.79%
4. Safari 6.0 10.13%
5. Internet Explorer 10.0 9.79%
6. Firefox 20.0 7.53%
7. Android Browser 4.0 3.58%
8. Safari (in-app) (not set) 1.51%
9. Firefox 16.0.1 1.50%
10. Internet Explorer 7.0 1.46%
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And here I thought it was caused by clueless people spouting hot air.
Re: (Score:3)
What auto-update? it only updates when I type apt-get upgrade, and it does so silently.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I updated after reading this, and I have no idea what a "social provider on the desktop" means. I see no change in Firefox.
Re:multiple social providers on the desktop (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't have any social features in my firefox. What? Do you just install every plugin every website you visit suggests to you?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have any social features in my firefox. What?
The Firefox release notes say you're wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Sort of? It looks like it's automatically supported plug-ins you have to activate from the relevant web-page. You wouldn't see them unless you said "activate it" or whatever dumb link exists on the page.
Re: (Score:3)
Firefox just comes with the Social API, as with addon APIs, you have to install something, otherwise it's just potential.
Re:multiple social providers on the desktop (Score:4, Insightful)
Firefox just comes with the Social API, as with addon APIs, you have to install something, otherwise it's just potential.
There you go again, bringing logic and reason to an emotional argument. Won't somebody think of the delusional paranoids!
Re:multiple social providers on the desktop (Score:5, Insightful)
I miss that too.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You know what idiotic thing they did? They combined Download and Web History. So since FF20, when you clear one, they both go. The reason they give is because Options such as that are hard to maintain. BS. Not to mention that silly, huge, Download dialog. Are they trying to scare people away or what?.
Re: (Score:3)
> They combined Download and Web History. So since FF20, when you clear one, they both go.
Really? Mine doesn't do that. I've cleared my download history many times and still have >6 months of web history.
Re: (Score:3)
I just cleared my download history from Firefox 21. My browser history is still there.
Revert to old download window (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when Firefox used to be a web browser? I liked it when it was a web browser.
Isn't that kind of bloat what happened to Netscape?
Re:multiple social providers on the desktop (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason I'm running an 8.01 at the moment of is because I couldn't be bothered to track down a 5.0 version at the time of the installation.
Which still works just fine on my old box.
Re: (Score:2)
Pffft 8.x. Firefox 3.6 with TabKit rocks! (Well, it's pretty slow executing javascript and manipulating large DOM trees, but the side-tabs with grouping, indenting, coloring, bookmarking, searching are priceless.)
Re: (Score:2)
You can update and keep TabKit:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tabkit-2nd-edition/ [mozilla.org]
(If that is what was holding you back; the original dev disappeared so someone forked it and has kept it current)
Re: (Score:2)
If anyone ever asks "why do people still run IE 6", I would like to present Exhibit A.
Re: (Score:2)
What are your concerns with Firefox 21 versus 17?
Is it the social api? That was introduced in 17 so you already have it. And it can be disabled in about:config, just search for "social.enabled".
Is it the health report? You can disable that as well either through the advanced tab under preferences or through about.config, just search for "healthreport".
Re: (Score:3)
Why should one have to disable these things? Why are they not turned off by default? Isn't that the mantra of the FOSS community, "Let me decide!"?
Or are we giving the Mozilla group a pass despite their continuing plunge into bloat and unnecessary cruft because they're Mozilla?
Re: (Score:2)
Why should one have to disable these things? Why are they not turned off by default? Isn't that the mantra of the FOSS community, "Let me decide!"?
If you can disable them, how are you not given a choice?
Your disagreeing with their default state is not equivalent to not having a choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, it's not the mantra of FOSS community. FOSS is about software licenses not "Let me decide!".
Re:No. .Just No. (Score:4, Insightful)
> What are your concerns with Firefox 21 versus 17?
> Is it the social api? Is it the health report?
I don't think it's anything this sensible, I think it's just the version number. I don't really understand what issue people have with it, but that seems to be what's exciting most people. If they just versioned the new releases as point releases there wouldn't be half as many comments to this story. I think having mostly small incremental changes in new full version numbers has really upset some people's sense of normal software conventions and their brains have melted.
Re: (Score:2)
I just tried Firefox again after a year + on Chrome. I genuinely wanted Firefox to be better but it wasn't. In two days it corrupted its cache 3 times, forcing me to manually clear it. It choked on all of my google cookies and wouldn't allow me to login to gmail until I googled the answer (manually clearing all of my cookies as well as cache). On top of that the sync barfed all over the place when I added a third machine and and somehow the plugins I had loaded, specifically lastpass, ended up taking a shit
Re: (Score:2)
I agree actually, but I guess you could always try SeaMonkey. It supports a lot of Firefox extensions, and it still seems to have some sanity. I just can't go back to the older Netscape/Mozilla-style preferences window, but it's certainly not a bad browser. IMO Firefox should have been forked by the end of the 2.x series, or 3.6.x series at the latest. Firefox and Mozilla itself have been on a steady, sharp decline in sanity for years now.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it the health report? You can disable that as well either through the advanced tab under preferences or through about.config, just search for "healthreport".
The "Enable Firefox Health Report" only en/disables uploading the data to Mozilla. To disable data collection, set the config setting "datareporting.healthreport.service.enabled" to false. To clear already recorded data, delete the "healthreport.sqlite" file under your profile folder.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:We need an alternative/fork (Score:5, Informative)
I am seriously tired of all the new crap that they keep adding to FF. On new installations I must spend a good amount of time turning stuff off. Most of the features I turn off would be better in an extension or at leasr off by default.
That's the irony of Firefox. They remove features that people actually find useful, forcing people to create extensions to get the feature back, while at the same time add new useless features that should be implemented as extensions.
Re: (Score:2)
Such as?
Re: (Score:2)
As for potentially unwanted features that they added, it's stuff like the "switch to tab" feature of the address bar. If I wanted to switch to a tab, I would just click on the damn tab.
Re: (Score:2)
PDF reader?
it gets worse.... (Score:2)
... forcing people to create extensions to get the feature back
And then proceed to break extensions with every single release. I haven't gotten some extensions to work for several updates ... fire gestures and/or all-in-one, printedit, download helper. I know they don't purposely break them, but I don't understand why they just stop working and never work again. Is it because I'm on Linux? Not to mention that it has become quite a memory hog and seems to have issues releasing memory and shutting down gracefully. I don't really like any of the alternatives as much
Re:furst (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're not. Especially when the first "improvement" to be mentioned is "the addition of multiple social providers."
I read that as "multiple social diseases" and now it makes more sense to me.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the old-fashioned philosophy that the user controls the computer, instead of the new-fangled Microsoft philosophy of "We Tell You What You Do Now"
Plus I have a few things here and there that don't work after certain things get updated, etc. Some things are never updated, and when they are more important than a browser update that breaks compatibility with the aforementioned mission-critical-dinosa
Re: (Score:2)
They should just retire the version numbers, and just number them by the date and time they release it.
I'm running Firefox 20130514154005!