Firefox 3 RC1 Out Now 473
Jay writes "Firefox 3 Release Candidate 1 is out now. If yours didn't auto-update, then get it while it's hot! The release came a bit early, with Computer World noting: 'As recently as last Saturday, Mozilla's chief engineer said that although the company had locked down RC1's code, it was planning to publicly launch the build in "late May."'" My copy just downloaded — restarting after I save this story. God I hope it's better than the last beta.
Comment from story (Score:5, Funny)
This is offensive. I am a grandmother, and a C programmer.
Re: (Score:2)
</joke_no_one_will_get>
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
"I'm a grandmother programming C, you insensitive clod!"
Re: Memes (Score:4, Funny)
I, for one, welcome my C-Coding grandmotherly overlords.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Comment from story (Score:5, Funny)
by a C++ Programmer
eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
What was wrong with Beta 5?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Though I am using a lot of addins, so don't know exactly who to blame.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:eh? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There's still some stability issues on Linux outside of Flash, however. Sometimes FF will spontaneously maximize it's window for no reason. Rendering certain animated images also seems to be a big problem on Linux (it will hog the cpu just to display an animated gif sometimes etc.)
It's certainly not unusable. I use FF on Linux every day and usually don't
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Running on? (Score:5, Insightful)
I call them the "Well, its raining HERE" comments.
You need to identify the (OS::distro) and plugins in use for these "Release [ ] suxx0rs!!!" posts to have any meaning.
I generally find that if that question is answered, it's some guy running the L33tware distro in 24MB of RAM on a Transmeta Crusoe who is enraged that his opensource software crashes, and no, he hasn't logged a bug because God told him that it is destiny to always have bugless software AND will be Lord of Faerun in time.
(No offense to parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:eh? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
If a website crashes the browser it is always the browser's problem. NO EXCEPTIONS. Nothing a website can do should crash the browser. If it does the browser is broken.
If a website doesn't work correctly, then it could be either the browser or the website's fault, depending on the website's code.
Re:eh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:eh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What was wrong with Beta 5?
My first contact to the FF 3 beta 5 was with Ubuntu 8.04. I didn't have any plugins or flash player installed and still the browsing experience was slow. The browser would freeze for few seconds in seemingly random fashion and scrolling would halt for few seconds without any obvious reason regardless of the contents or length of the page. With the same setup the FF 2 is much faster and doesn't have any issues with exact same web pages. I don't know if the real reason is the Ubuntu 8.04 or the FF 3, but aft
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Changelog compared to beta5? (Score:2)
Re:Changelog compared to beta5? (Score:5, Informative)
Stalled window bug dealt with yet? (Score:5, Informative)
I can understand some websites may make a Firefox tab crap out but it shouldn't affect the rest.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can understand some websites may make a Firefox tab crap out but it shouldn't affect the rest.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
> I can understand some websites may make a Firefox tab crap out but it shouldn't affect the rest.
Did you file a bug report?
My understanding is that it's not a bug, but an intentional design limitation, ie: "it was too hard
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For me, it becomes completely unresponsive until that tab is done. This has happened on every machine I've used (which is several) in FF for y
Re:Stalled window bug dealt with yet? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sure they'd appreciate it, though, if no-one spammed this bug. It's closed for valid (or at least not-invalid) technical/philosophical reasons- threads are evil (you can find links supporting that assertion from the bug's comments). You can also follow it to its successor meta-bug: Bug 384323 - UI responsiveness - core/platform - meta bug [mozilla.org] and its quasi-sister: Bug 91351 - UI/App responsiveness issues [mozilla.org].
Re:Stalled window bug dealt with yet? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Open a new Tab
Go to www.ebay.com
Do a search and go into about a half dozen auctions, navigating back and going into the next one
Sooner or later it will slow right down and any other tabs will start experiencing the same thing
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=434180 [mozilla.org] (and it seems by a
It's not one I've encountered since I don't routinely open lots of tabs in one go. If no one files a bug, it won't get fixed! And until now no one had. now it's on bugzilla, hopefully it'll be fixed in time for the next release.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
1) it's not multithreaded correctly, so you can have one tab freezing which freeze the whole browser (this is may be linked to its user interface being coded in XUL).
2) by default, a crash of Flash will bring down the browser, it should put its plugin in a different process, to avoid this.
I've switched to Opera for these reasons..
The only remaining problem with Opera is that sometime, it can use 100% CPU, and there's no way to know which tab cause this (multiple tab is nice, b
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Test Results (Score:5, Informative)
The Acid3 test is also a bit controversial in its own right. Acid1 and Acid2 addressed broad compatibility with several core web standards, without regard for any particular browser. In contrast, Acid3 covers an odd mix of quirks chosen to intentionally highlight bugs in different browsers. Acid3 also includes a random mix of features from things like SMIL and SVG, which are enormously complex standards not supported in their entirety by any major browser. That also means that Acid3 can be gamed by simply implementing just enough of a feature to pass the test, but not enough to be genuinely useful in practice.
Simply put, Acid3 is a much less useful test than the previous versions. I have no doubt that Mozilla will eventually pass, but they won't delay the Firefox 3.0 release and have made it clear that they won't play the partial implementation game to beat the test.
Re:Test Results (Score:5, Interesting)
ACID 3 passes should come naturally, there shouldn't be the webkit style rush to pass because its only improved the browser as a side-effect instead of passing the test as a side-effect.Its like learning the answer's to a test instead of actually learning the material, sure you'll pass the test but when you go out to do some real world work/browsing, it wont of helped.
This all combined with the fact that ACID doesn't test standards compliance, as a firefox user I'm glad they're not wasting their time on it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, correct error handling is part of being standard compliant.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a good example of how useless ACID3 is:
http://blog.codedread.com/archives/2008/03/26/webkit-nightly-not-smiling/ [codedread.com]
Webkit gets 100/100 on ACID3, which includes SVG tests, yet webkit only gets 5/116 on SVG animation compliance.
Implementing the bare minimum to pass acid3 is a disservice to everyone.
Eric Meyer also has a bunch to say on how acid3 is a "missed opportunity"
http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2008/03/27/acid-redux/ [meyerweb.com]
Not so awesome (Score:2)
No?
Not interested.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No?
Not interested.
Try this:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Browser.urlbar.richResults [mozillazine.org]
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
* Mozilla Firefox (nightly builds from 2007-11-29 to 2007-12-17)
Eventually it's better to look here: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6227 [mozilla.org]
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Change "browser.urlbar.maxRichResults" to 0
OT - Firefox 3 was regression for me (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I know they are planning an extension for that, but I wanted to use it now (I have Ubuntu) and I would like to note - try to find extension using google which will list links on page.
Why is there such movement in OSS lately that thinks that removal of features will be an improvement for users? It's strikingly similar to Wikipedia's deletionist movement. Organization of features/information, not removal, is the key.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Way Better (Score:5, Interesting)
Although I am running a Q6600 with 4GB. But Beta 5 used to crash on me every 2 hours.
Now to business,
Firebug Official for FF3 Please
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Firebug Official for FF3 Please
Err... firebug 1.1 supports FF3 just fine. No need to hack around with it like so many other addons require...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Thanks Firefox! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
However, things have really changed drastically, and I couldn't be happier with my Pidgin installation on both my Linux and Windows installs. Pidgin supports a whole slew of protocols, including MSN. It's the only real alternative for users running a
Had problems on OS X until I cleared my prefs... (Score:3, Interesting)
In any case if you have any problems on OSX you might want to try moving all your prefs and addons/extensions/etc anything mozilla or firefox and starting up FF3 RC1 as a brand new install.
I only use FF to test websites (love safari) and occasionally to do some rigorous script debugging with firebug. So I don't have any bookmarks or other settings I care about. You may want to find out how to save those things for re-import later if you use it daily.
Stability (Score:3, Informative)
I'm surprised at the number of people with stability problems. I tried 3.0a1 and I had instant crashes in AJAX web apps, so I decided to wait until b1 which turned out to be a good decision, because it was much more stable. Each beta has been increasingly better. I still get a couple crashes here and there but I am betting it's due to Flash or an add-on I'm using.
On Linux I use Swiftfox [getswiftfox.com], which is a recompiled Firefox optimized for individual processors so it can be even a little faster than Firefox 3. Only problem is they occasionally push out a nightly build over their update package source thingy (I tend to prefer the public beta releases) but nothing that has been unstable yet.
If you're having stability problems, you really have no right to complain until you at least TRY to fix it since Firefox gives you the tools to do so. To use another car analogy, it's like complaining your car doesn't slow down fast enough so you need a different one but you haven't even tried using the brakes yet. Well not exactly but I needed to use a car analogy. Anyways here's some things you should try:
If you still have problems it's likely a problem with Firefox, in which case I suppose you could complain, but it would be more productive to file a bug report [mozilla.org] to increase the chances of it being fixed. To quote GLaDOS, "Thank you for helping us help you help us all."
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I really feel that the Ubuntu people are losing it, and the failure of their project will be a major black eye for Linux. It's a good
Re:Stability (Score:4, Interesting)
Installed extensions:
- Popup ALT attribute (for web comics)
- Chatzilla (for grabbing XBMC binaries)
- Greasemonkey (for added functionality on my Digg and Facebook)
- Smoothwheel (for sexyness, the built-in smooth scroll is not as nice)
- Ubuntu Firefox Mods (for great justice? this came pre-installed)
Almost makes me wonder, are the people having trouble running with ATI or nVidia graphics cards? Firefox can be kinda tough on the drivers..
Re:Stability (Score:4, Informative)
Your firefox will be likely dying inside some library, and once you figure out which library that is (based on the backtrace) you can download it's -dbg package and repeat the process to isolate the specific function causing the crash.
This is basically what apport tries to do after the fact, but it's often works better if gdb is attached right from the start.
On a related note, I just looked in synaptec and firefox-3 itself does not have a -dbg package, only firefox-2 does.. I'm hoping this means they've left debug symbols in the binary itself.
FireFox 2 on Eee PC /Xandros (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
If people have been having people's they really should be filling bug reports, there's no way its going to magically improve without being told what's wrong
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Informative)
Unfortunately, this isn't a Firefox problem, but a problem with the Flash plugin. The workaround I found (thanks to other Slashdot users) was to install the addon Flashblock [mozdev.org]. Now, instead of having the Flash content sitting and waiting, it's replaced by a little clickable object to load it. Since installing it, I have not experienced the CPU spike behavior, when it used to be a daily issue. Hope this helps folks.
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't read that way. I'd say he implies that people should accept beta software is buggy and that using beta software and filling bugs against it it's the best way for such a software to become as buggy-free as possible when launched as stable.
"Why should I use something that causes aggravation with the most simple task? I think it's ridiculous that canonical should have used such a cheesy piece of crap for a browser in the first place"
That's quite a different assumption from the grandparent's poster and I have to say I do agree with both of them: specially when talking about open source software, betatesting and filling bugs is the best way to improve software quality for a non-developer but it's ridiculous and misleading shipping a quoted-to-be stable and "production-ready" OS release full of beta-quality software. Still, too many Linux distributions follow the featuritis trend instead of following strong engineering advices. Just as an example, I feel OK for Fedora to be released with beta-quality software (Fedora is aimed to be a "technology-preview" and enthusiast testing field) while I don't feel the same to be OK for Ubuntu which is told to be a production-ready, non-technical user-friendly one.
But then, I think Linux distributions not to be so different to any other "market" products: it is the consumer responsibility (within legal requirements) to practice their own "due-diligence" and see how good the *product*, not the marketroid speech, stands against their requirements.
What problems? (Score:2)
Were there other problems? Because apart from the above, I used the last beta every day on Ubuntu, MS Windows, and OS X and had no problems.
Re:What problems? (Score:4, Informative)
Were there other problems? Because apart from the above, I used the last beta every day on Ubuntu, MS Windows, and OS X and had no problems.
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
The behavior I've seen is this:
1. Go to a site with lots of links - such as a news site or RSS aggregator.
2. Start middle-clicking on links to open them in tabs.
Inevitably one of the early ones just doesn't load - it sits and looks like it is loading and does nothing for a minute or two. All subsequent tabs do the same thing. As soon as the first one actually does load and render the others instantly load and rendor. Obviously something is blocking the loading/rendering in all open tabs when this is happening.
Everything works just fine in konqueror, so that is what I tend to use all the time. I'd actually prefer firefox for its plugins/etc, but it just isn't reliable for me. Now the only time I use it on linux is when a page doesn't render correctly in konqueror.
I'd also like to comment that I'm very concerned with the keep-piling-on-features mentality in Firefox. I want a web browser - not an OS/desktop-in-a-window. The whole reason that firefox was born was that everybody was tired of Mozilla having 47 huge features that nobody needed. Let's stick to the basics and do them right. If they want to come out with a few other apps that can tightly integrate with firefox, that's great - but let's let the stand-alone browser be a stand-alone browser...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Trust (Score:3, Interesting)
I think about "Trust Grids". It's about who has what agenda.
On one corner, I was late to understand, but I watched enough of MS's tricks unfold live to absolutely distrust everything they do.
My verdict is out on Apple.
Some of the famous OSS icons have their special situations, but I feel that their mistakes are somewhat easier to both see through and counteract afterward.
Because I have no programming skill at all, I have to trust someone; I currently trust the independent coders as a cohesive whole to produ
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm surprised to h
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:4, Insightful)
I just don't see an incentive for a bunch of developers to get together who have that kind of very industry specific understanding to write these big, complex pieces of software just for the fun of it. I love my job because the work environment is great and so is the money but if I were given a choice of writing any piece of software I wouldn't choose writing stuff for this industry. It's not that I don't like it, it just wouldn't be my first or second choice if I could do anything and get paid just as well as I'm paid doing this and have the kind of job security that I have.
I get enjoyment from my work, but the real enjoyment comes when we close a huge deal and I cash a huge check.
Re: Industrial Software (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, high end commercial packages will be here for a while.
What the OSS movement has done well is to provide alternatives to commodity software so that the ancillaries don't smoke your budget. OSS can also provide add-ons that the mainline vendor has not built into their official package releases.
Applying what I have learned through this site, I have completely replaced IE as a browser, and because MS-Office 7 is so silly, *almost* replaced that with Open Office (the 3.0 betas are out, and can handle
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless, you send all of your information over the network - even your e-mail address! - despite not being able to see the code on the other end?
Fact of the matter is, you should trust Opera more than any web site. Breaking into a poorly-maintained server (or even a well-maintained server with a 0-day exploit) is often not as hard as you'd think. Once you're in, it's a trivial matter to dump the database, or even just modify the code to redirect information.
Do you really know who's behind every website you visit? Not 100%, not all the time. But you know who's behind Opera, and you can track where it tries to connect and how. That's more reassuring than anything.
Any 'closed-source is the boogeyman' individuals should honestly stop and think about things like the recent exploit in the Thai (?) language pack for Firefox, or the huge SSL bug that Debian developer introduced way back when. Just because many eyes *can* look at it doesn't mean they will.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't see how you don't understand that all else being equal, an open source program is going to be more screened for this stuff.
As for trusting it, well, I'd rather trust the thing I could verify, even if all I had time to check was random subsets of it, than the thing I couldn't...
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Insightful)
In my case I prefer to use some software that has been working perfectly fine for years and has been extensively copied in almost all features by others.
And by copied, I don't mean perfect copies. Mouse gestures in FF still sucks after you have used Opera mouse gestures for more than a week. And middle-button scrolling. All others have middle-button scrolling, but I just can't have pixel perfect accuracy with FF as I can with Opera. You see, you talk about hypothetic stuff (but valid, nonetheless) and I talk about actual experience (because all else is not really equal).
Having said that, I expect that FF copies Opera excellent SVG support as soon as possible.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I would be using this RC1 if I were you.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:4, Informative)
To GP, in my experience Firefox3 is much more stable than FF2 on Linux, I'm using Kubuntu 8.l04 KDE4 edition.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Stability on Linux? (Score:5, Informative)
Flashblock and noscript sorts most of that out and makes the internet usable again to boot.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Changes since Beta 5? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Changes since Beta 5? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Coding like a ... (car commercial slogan) (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd opine that it is more important; promoting "alternative" software to the management types requires a tricky blend of eye-candy and stability. Most of my discussions went easier when you can say "This software does _____"
I'm seeing a lot of remarks about flash, and if a particular important reference site you you just happens to have that magic combination of elements to take you down, it's a tough ini
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This license does not grant you any right to use the trademarks, service marks or logos of Mozilla or its licensors.
This is the key line. The source is fully open, but the mozilla icon is protected by trademark and only offical builds can use it. I think it's always been there, it's why debian started the whole iceweasel thing (security team wouldn't be bound by upstream + doubts if it was DFSG-free). A lot of applications have that "you can fork us but don't use our name and logo" but few have formalized it like Mozilla. I don't know if the others have any legal claim to their name anyway, or if that's just a common co
Re:Respect (Score:5, Funny)
Plus, it wasn't directed at your god anyway, it was meant for the God of Opensource.