Printable View
O.k. Just a couple of months after the release of FF5 Mozilla have released FF6.0 and it looks like Mozilla have done the opposite of the Star Trek movies and made the best releases in the odd numbers as this for me is terrible. It still has the offline cache bug but has added much much more in terms of bugs and taken away in functionality. Do not download the update. It's awful.
What's the most annoying is that every time they release a new version, some of your add-ons don't work anymore. At work I use f.ex. the password login add-on (profile password), which is not supported anymore now in v6. Very annoying.
I still don't have stuff working from the last update...very annoying
You do realize that for them to work it's a matter of changing a single key in about:config or downloading an add-on, right? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Cleaner
All of the add-ons work perfectly even in the newest FF9 alpha (unless they're very old, from FF3 era for example), they simply need a single bump from the authors to make them notice a new version of FF came out.
Apparently they want to be on at least FF7 by the end of the year. I think I'll stick to FF5 for the foreseeable future.
Oh hi, I'm a mac and I downloaded and installed the new FF without asking. That cool? K bye.
Stupid machine
Although we have discussed it in the FF5 thread, this whole FF version numbering is really starting to bug me. Already from 4 to 6 in less than 6 months is mad. And as discussed in the press, corporations can take a couple of years assessing a new product before actually rolling it out network wide across their businesses, so this is really messing things up for them. Bring back the point release numbering!
Guess it's time for you guys to switch to a different browser, because Mozilla is obviously trying to kill Firefox with their constant updates and those ridiculous number changes, don't they? :D
Oh, you guys are silly :P
BTW: I'm already on FF9 x64 and it's awesome :)
We're not silly they turned a good product into a shit one. It used to fast and function packed now it's slow, lacking functions and can't render websites properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoonay
Dunno about the slowness, I'm on a 6-year old computah and it is a killer. ;)
Lacking in functions? You know that some minor functions you never use are hidden if you turn the menu bar off?
Tell you what you ditch ff9 or whatever it is you have and try 6.0. It can't render This forum properly for a start and takes about 3 times as long to load what it can. Once you've tried FF6 Then you can comment on how stupid we all are.
But I did try number 6. Multiple versions, before even 5 reached beta.
Ever since FF4 was announced I tried EVERY alpha of that, used betas months before the release of stable 4, then used the final release and moved on. Same thing for 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9. As soon as some new feature gets announced I'm, checking it.
The stable version, no matter if it's 4, 5 or 6 don't cause any problems for me. Now I'm using alpha #9 because it's the newest x64 version of FF out there, but I have FF6 x86 installed and don't have any problems with rendering or long loading times. The problem might be with some of your addons or something with offline cache, or you have hardware acceleration turned off for some reason, dunno.
I never said anything about anyone being stupid BTW ;)
From what I saw here and there people are outraged because of the new numbering system, this is what I'm calling silly, like it's a matter of life and death if an update that corrected a few hundred bugs is called 4.1 and 4.2 instead of 5 and 6 ;)
No speed or rendering issues for me with FF6 at all. Seems exactly the same as FF5 in terms of everything to me.
Too many versions :unsure:. I'd barely got used to version 2. Not that it makes much difference since I use Opera. I seem to have Iceweasel 3.5 here on my Debian system for the rare occaision when a site doesn't work with Opera.
Opera is guilty of even more updates than FF from what I've experienced. I also hate the way Opera just automatically takes over the updating unless you go out of your way to stop it. It is so annoying if you just want to quickly look something up online, fire up Opera and get greeted with a message saying a new version of Opera is available and it needs to install before you can use it. Not good.
I've noticed that on Windows, it keeps downloading and installing updates when you least want it to.
But then, if memory serves, I'm pretty sure Firefox does that as well.
Here on Linux, when Opera checks for an update, it may notify you, but it just recommends updating via the system's update mechanism. Probably because it doesn't know if it was installed through its own installer, or from the package manager :).
Yeah, I think FF auto updates too no matter if you have the stable release or the nightly build - in which case it updates almost every day.
FireFox 7 has been released for a few days now and I've been giving a chance but it is still just as crap and slow on my PC. Absolutely nothing new in it except poorer performance (certainly for me). I think it's back to 5 again.
Wait for Firefox 8 then, it will not take long I guess. :p
You can always tweak its performance with the gui:config addon.
2 bad releases in a row means I've ditched FF for Chrome now and whilst I don't like Chrome it at least has some speed to it.
I update FF whenever it alerts me to a new version and I'm currently running FF7 without any issues. Seems the same as 4,5 and 6 really, although maybe a little faster. Everything seems to work well for me.
Regarding Chrome, I hate it as a desktop browser, but love the native browser in Android, which I assume is based on the same technology? In Android it makes perfect sense and works really well. For mobile browsers I've been a fan of Opera Mini/mobile for some time now, but I have both installed on my Xperia Play and the main built in browser actually seems faster and is easier and less cumbersome to use. I big contrast to my Nokia smartphone I was using before where Opera worked 100% better than the built in browser. The one thing I do still like about Opera mini is how it auto formats a column of text to the best reading width for the device automatically, so if I'm reading for say the BBC F1 site I can quickly read the articles, whereas with the main Android browser it still insists on rendering the page as intended for a big browser and so the need to scroll sideways as you read.
For those of us who use Opera on our computers, Opera on other devices is a good choice too due to a feature called Opera Link that arrived a version or two ago. It syncs your bookmarks, browsing history, usernames and passwords, and a few other things between your platforms. You can choose what exactly should be synced when you start using it. Very handy to be able to browse a site at home, leave for the bus or train and just continue where you left off on your mobile for example.
All I want to know why they keep updating numbers so fast...and how my Mac downloads it without asking...:ninja:
It's a Mac. It does lots of secret things that you don't know about, such as being constantly in communication with Apple reporting your activity, and relaying everything piece of media you play back to iTunes.
What is it about Chrome that you don't like? I've been using it for quite a while now, and quite like it.
1. It doesn't install where I want it to.
2. It downloads it's own updates and stores every single version on HD
3. Adblock is much worse compared to the one in Firefox
4. Few minor extensions are nonexistent/not working as I'm used to, etc.
For me, on a mobile device Chrome makes perfect sense because of its minimal interface and simple fast design. However on a full desktop system I want a bit more feedback about what is happening and more control over things, and for me FF gives me that much more compared to most others. I also still like Opera on a desktop system too, and have it as my second browser, because when developing anything online I like to work in FF when building something, but also have it loaded into Opera to load it into a separate environment for testing. I do however think Chrome might now be giving Opera a run for its money in terms of page rendering speed.
Has anyone tried the Chrome OS yet? I read all the release press and reviews and was put off by them. Seems to minimalist for my liking. Definitely has taken the browser as the OS concept idea directly which is interesting, and probably works well for internet only use, and could be good for internet cafes.
Is this just in iTunes or also in google etc?Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrison
Just iTunes AFAIK, but I'm sure the main OS probably has some other things built in too.
Google are also guilty of logged everything you do, that is true, and whilst I didn't like that on PCs, I do find it more useful on Android as everything can be linked into your central Google account, making it much easier to close link and access data. I also like in Android how a lot of Apps/software allow you to log in using your Facebook account or google account, rather than having to sign up loads of individual accounts. Removes the need to register, but also means you only have one central login. And if you need to change it you only need to change it in one place. Good for mobile devices if they get stolen or lost.