Firefox To Get a Nag Screen For Upgrades 565
ruphus13 writes "Firefox has been pushing version 3.0 very aggressively, and firmly believes that it is a solid product. The Download Day was just one of their ways to drum up user support for the new release. Now, Firefox is going to 'gently nudge' users of Firefox 2.0 to upgrade. Some users may have been waiting for their add-ons to get upgraded, but now Mozilla is planning to apply a little nudge. Sometime within the next week, people using Firefox 2.0.0.16 will see a request to upgrade and though you'll have the option to decline, it's likely Firefox will ask again anyway. Users will most likely be offered a second chance to upgrade after several weeks. (Mozilla will stop supporting version 2 in December.) It will be interesting to see if this speeds up the rate of upgrade by users, as well as upgrades of the add-ons."
Re:Why not earlier? (Score:5, Informative)
Because Firefox 3's rendering engine is not identical to firefox 2's, and there could be some intranet software that still needs to be adapted to be functional. This is also the same reason why MS can't simply push IE7 to everyone.
Can't. (Score:3, Informative)
Firefox 3 requires too many libraries that I don't have on my Mandrake 10.2 box.
Re:I don't like this (Score:5, Informative)
Fact of the matter is that you don't always need to upgrade software, nor should you always.
When it comes to software that is as crucial to the security of your computer as the browser, yes, you should always upgrade if not upgrading means that you're no longer getting security updates.
Also disturbing is that they are apparently adding this "function" to existing Firefox 2.x browsers. How are they doing this? Did they ask for consent? Are they installing something without permission? If Mozilla can do this sort of thing, doesn't that SCREAM spyware/trojan vulnerability?
Nope, it doesn't scream vulnerability. There are lots of ways for them to do it securely. Most likely, the new "feature" will be pushed as part of a normal security update. And since FF2 security updates are stopping in a few months, it arguably IS a security feature.
Re:just like vista (Score:3, Informative)
Great, now will have more little reminders and popups. Soon everything will be like Vista.
Wrong. Vista is based on everything else. The constant nagging for upgrading and reminders can been seen in Java 1.3 and higher, every MMO before WoW, QuickTime before it became infused with iTunes, Real Player, any software from the 90s that "reminded" you to register, Winamp (once bought by AOL), Mplayer, BonziBuddy, and DirectX when you attempted to play a game at a later version.
Where have you been?
Re:Actually a good idea (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Firefox 3 doesn't run on Windows 9x (Score:5, Informative)
Re:IT Locks computers (Score:5, Informative)
Firefox portable. [portableapps.com]
Re:I'll upgrade when... (Score:4, Informative)
Some websites just shouldn't be kept in the history, if you ask me...
use the Distrust addon [mozilla.org]. One click, visit sites, click again, history for just those sites erased.
Re:just like vista (Score:4, Informative)
Only certain add-ons do that, and it is the code of the add-on to load that page, not in Firefox.
Re:My browser doesn't need to be awesome (Score:4, Informative)
Earlier versions did have an about:config option to switch. They removed it. I can't think of a legitimate reason for them to do that; feature removal is generally the province of marketing and politics.
Well... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why not earlier? (Score:5, Informative)
This is also the same reason why MS can't simply push IE7 to everyone.
Huh? Microsoft did push IE7 to everyone.
Except for the very few people who know that there is a way to permanently decline updates (which requires you to examine the updates and pick which ones you want, which most people don't—and shouldn't—do), it was installed automatically by Windows Update. For most people, it's better to tell them "let Windows Update keep your machine up to date" instead of explaining to them how to decide what is and isn't important.
Also, although it is now considered an "Update Rollup", when first released into Windows Update, it was listed as either a "Critical" or "Security" update, which made it appear more important to install than it really was.
Re:Actually a good idea (Score:1, Informative)
*Mozilla* is still about choice. They renamed the base "mozilla" browser seamonkey (and, fervently swear that seamonkey is not mozilla, even though it totally is.) Basically, seamokey is like firefox without all the attempts to clone and then outdo IE -- you'll have the modern mozilla/firefox rendering engine, Javascript (with of course option to turn off), etc., but not the "bad site" warnings, plugin auto-upgrade checks, the little warning bar that drops down from the top to tell you things, auto-completion URL doohickey, etc. Since seamonkey has probably >90% the same code as firefox, every plugin I've used works in both. I just use firefox now, but if this stuff bothers you I would use seamonkey.
Re:Actually a good idea (Score:1, Informative)
As long as they are not too annoying(5 minute Windows reboot nag screen) like a screen every 2 weeks, I don't see a problem with this.
Fix for the Automatic Updates reboot nag:
From the command line (or Start > Run)
net stop "automatic updates"
This stops the AU service, which will kill the nag, allowing you to continue doing whatever you are doing and reboot at your leisure. Note, that automatic updates won't be automatically downloaded/installed without the service running. But a reboot (or manually restarting the service
net start "automatic updates"
) will return you to normal. And of course, if you are in a corporate environment, you may not have the appropriate permissions to stop/start services.
I agree...this nag is highly annoying... especially whenever you are typing, and it pops up without you realizing it, and you hit the key that triggers the reboot (!!)
Re:Why not earlier? (Score:3, Informative)
Corporations will use some sort of managed upgrade procedure anyway, as users do not have permissions to install updates.
This is absolutely not true as far as Firefox is concerned.
You can install it into "My Documents" (or any directory in your profile) and it will work just fine (at least on Windows XP).
Re:Where's the web developer add-on? (Score:3, Informative)
Erm.
Web Developer extension bacame FF3 compatible on May 19, 2008.
See here [chrispederick.com].
Private Browsing (Score:3, Informative)
This is a feature of Safari that... um.. a "friend" of mine likes. Choose > Private Browsing and sites that you visit are not added to the browser's history until you turn Private Browsing off. So you open a tab, switch to PB, do your... um... gift shopping, and then close that tab and your mom/significant other/spouse need never know that you were looking at... tableware.
I'd love to see this in FF
Re:I'll upgrade when... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Options for unsupported OSX? (Score:3, Informative)
Don't get me wrong... I say this as a regular Mac user and fan.
But IMHO, a big part of why OS X seems "cheaper" than Windows to people is because they don't take into account Apple's more aggressive upgrade schedules on their products.
I think basically with Apple and OS X, you really don't want to get more than 1 OS version behind the "current shipping" one. That means you're going to be buying the new one every 2 years or so. (That still probably compares well with what the typical user spent to get XP Pro on a PC, and now to move to Vista.)
I was helping some of my friend get older "vintage" Macs going (a G4 Cube, for example), and even on those machines, getting 10.4 Tiger on them was and all-around "smart choice". We tried 10.3 for a while, but even a lot of shareware and freeware out there needed libraries not included until 10.4. Each OS X revision has added a lot of "under the surface" enhancement in the way of "core" architecture (Core Audio, Core Video, Core Animation, etc.) - so it can make an upgrade worthwhile, even if you don't think you need any of the new GUI features they touted to try to "make the sale" to the general public.
Re:Annoying for me however... (Score:3, Informative)
My answer--my honest, sincere answer--is that if you want to be able to use a Linux distro with strong upgradability, then you should install a different distro.
I recommend Ubuntu. 8.04.1 has Firefox 3 and a new version of the disto is released every 6 months. Security and bugfix updates are released constantly for all applications (Firefox 1.5 is still supported in Ubuntu 6.06 for example) and in October when 8.10 is released, you can upgrade directly from 8.04 to 8.10, which will allow you to continue to receive more up-to-date software on a regular basis, without having to bother with manual installs.
There are, of course, other distros that support upgrades from one version to another, but I can vouch for Ubuntu personally.