Firefox Download Day To Start At 1 p.m. EST 1080
boustrophedon writes "Starting at midnight in their local timezones, downloaders have been asking when Firefox 3 will be ready for Firefox Download Day, June 17, 2008. Mary announced on the Spread Firefox Forum that downloads will commence at 10 AM PST." That means 1 p.m. East Coast time, and, in Justin Mason's view, some pretty annoying times of day for many parts of the world.
Reader CorinneI supplies a link to PC Magazine's (very positive) overview of the new version's features, which praises the "speedy performance, thrifty memory usage, and, in particular, the address bar that now predicts where you want to go when you start typing (what Mozilla insiders refer to as the Awesome Bar)." FF3, even in Beta and RC form, and even with the extension incompatibilities I've run into, has quickly replaced FF2 as my preferred browser — for me, the improved drop-down autocomplete behavior alone is enough to justify the switch.
Download (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Download (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Download (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Download (Score:5, Insightful)
"There were problems checking for, downloading or installing this update. Firefox could not be updatd because: AUS: No data was received (Please try again)"
Same for mozilla.org, spreadfirefox.com. Yes, I know I can wait. I've already waited for the damn thing to start.
I hope this stunt gets them to concentrate on the product rather than the publicity. The success of Firefox was not because of advertising, it was a good product spread by WOM and email.
Re:Download (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Download (Score:5, Informative)
1) Make sure the server offering actual file is light httpd (Cocoatech does it)
2) Use truly huge thing like Amazon S3 which can stand whatever you can imagine
Funny, I wonder what does Amaazon S3 PR guys do with all the wages they get? Can you imagine the missed PR/Image opportunity? Same goes for cachefly etc. like dedicated services. Lets not forget Akamai too!
Re:Download (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Download (Score:5, Informative)
ftp://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/3.0/ [mozilla.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's, what, an hour and a quarter to go? Don't download the bloody thing yet! Wait until it counts! If you haven't already got the beta you can wait another seventy-five minutes, right?
Re:Download (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Download (Score:4, Informative)
It's also impossible at this point. just tried (1:08 PM EDT, so it's past the 10:00 AM Pacific start time, and the servers are totally hosed.
Re:Download (Score:5, Interesting)
Firefox is, without a doubt, the pet browser of Slashdot and for good reason. It rises from the ashes of the once great Netscape. As you may recall, Netscape was pounded into smush market share-wise by the integration of IE and Windows (which in turn caused Windows to be about the most insecure operating system on the planet).
The gecko engine came about and Phoenix was created, then renamed Firebird, then onto Firefox, with a Netscape branded browser using the same engine.
Firefox remains fairly standards compliant and open source, free as in freedom. Slashdot is a huge proponent of such things, so of course Firefox gets free advertising -- as in freedom and as in beer.
Re:Download (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Download (Score:5, Informative)
http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.0&os=win&lang=en-US [mozilla.org]
You select your version with the GET variables. So, for other OS's:
Re:Download (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Download (Score:4, Insightful)
I will not.... (Score:5, Funny)
IE 5 is good enough for me!
Re:I will not.... (Score:5, Funny)
I know, but did you have to advertise it? I had just finished owning your computer; now all the other slashdotters will get on and kick me off with their own kits!
Re:I will not.... (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, that's a lie - I'll definitely install it and try it out, though unless it's particularly awesome I doubt I'll be using it much.
EDIT: fanboy tirade about unjest treatment of Opera on slashdot and why you should try Opera follows. I could delete the following section, but I'll leave it up to the moderators to mod me fanboy or troll.
Is the "awesome bar" really as awesome as Opera's full history search from the title bar that lets you search for any phrase in any page in the cache... for instance, I could find slashdot again by typing "anonymous coward" if I forgot the url or title, or maybe just something from the post I was reading like "firefox download".
Also, though Opera still lacks extensions, it does seem to have caught up with regard to add blocking, and it's had really easy options to disable sound, plugins (like flash), java or javascript, identify as other browsers, change encoding, full zoom on all page elements, etc. for ages.
Even if you think the fact Opera being closed source is shit, it's pretty impressive that it's so packed with features whilst still being small and fast. Firefox 2 always felt a bit clunky to me, though I've heard 3 is a lot better, so that's something I'm looking forward to testing.
I'm only posting this because I'm a bit annoyed that the post about the release of Opera 9.5, which is a pretty major Opera release got attached to a fucking post announcing the release of Firefox 3 this Tuesday after there have already been tons of posts about betas and mozilla marketting schemes. I know not as many people use Opera as use FF, but it is a nice piece of free software which easily competes with FF on many levels and should be of interest to many
Re:I will not.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I will not.... (Score:5, Funny)
wtf is Firefox?
Re:I will not.... (Score:4, Funny)
You can pay for it and get a version without the ads. And I hear Opera 7 will have a Bork [opera.com] edition!
Re:I will not.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I will not.... (Score:4, Insightful)
They don't have to. Only a small percentage actually have to audit the code, and that benefits everyone. The code still has to be open to allow this though.
Download DAY, Justin (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Download DAY, Justin (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Download DAY, Justin (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In fact, the organisers are probably relying on the fact that we won't. If a record-breaking number of downloads for a 24 hour period occurred all starting within a few minutes of each other, I don't think even mozilla.org's servers would survive for long.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Download DAY, Justin (Score:5, Informative)
Which to SOME people is the 18th of June, yes there is a world out side of the US shock/horror.
If you are going to have a world wide "DAY" then you should either start at 00:00 UTC OR specify the start time in UTC OR Have a count down time so people can work out when it starts.
The main agro from all this is that:
a) They said the 17th but never specifed the Time zone
b) The Never specified a time (so people logically thought midnight)
c) They never specified a Timezone full stop.
TBPFH I am rather annoyed, As I assumed the start would be at 00:00 UTC and was looking forward to the massive rush to download it being over and me being able to download it @ 0930 in work.
Instead after much fafing about I finally discover ON THE FORUMS the time is 1000 PST, IT WASN'T EVEN NOTED ON THE FRONT PAGE!
Don't get me wrong I love FF but after this I wouldn't trust mozilla to organize a piss up in a brewery!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Don't you mean 1pm EDT? (Score:5, Insightful)
I hate the awesome bar (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I hate the awesome bar (Score:5, Informative)
Seems like the awesome bar is something that people either love or hate. Personally, I don't like it. I prefer my URL bar to do straight autocompletion, rather than search through my history and bookmarks for matches. I use the URL bar to type in URLs, and while the awesome bar adds some nifty functionality it breaks that basic feature.
Re:I hate the awesome bar (Score:5, Informative)
Note that the underlying autocomplete algorithm is the Firefox 3 algorithm, not the Firefox 2 algorithm. oldbar only affects the presentation of the results.
Oldbar, while nice, only changes appearance, not functionality.
Im with you guys, though. I despise the awesome bar, and dont understand why there isnt an easier/obvious way to get the old, URL based behavior. A URL bar that works based on URLs?! Blasphemy!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Here are the list of problems I've found:
1) It searches your bookmarks. If I wanted to go to a bookmark, I'd have clicked on one. That's what they're for.
2) It searches the middle of words. When you type in "s" for slashdot it's going to bring up every page with an s in any word in the title, and an s in any loc
Re:I hate the awesome bar (Score:4, Informative)
Can anyone suggest how you might go about tweaking the SQL it passes to SQL Lite to only search URLs (not necessarily only typed ones, but not page titles) and without the leading wildcard?
Re:I hate the awesome bar (Score:5, Informative)
If you set the value of this to "2", you will get what you're looking for. Sort of... This will cause Firefox's "awesome" bar to match "LIKE 'foo%'". However, it will still look at page titles, not strictly URL. Still, this is the closest Ive been able to come to replicating old behavior.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I will disable that piece of crap as soon as I get my hands on it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate the awesome bar too.
In the version of FF I'm running (3.0), I don't have a boolean browser.urlbar.richResults, I have a browser.urlbar.maxRichResults, which is an integer.
Here's a summary of what I've been able to figure out about how to get rid of the awesome bar:
Correction to the GPs post (Score:5, Informative)
As of FireFox 3.0b3 browser.urlbar.richResults no longer works [google.com]. The ability to chose your own search results style was removed by the Mozilla developers as part of bug #407836 [mozilla.org]. They're illogical viewpoint is explained in bug #403159 [mozilla.org].
And, for the record, Oldbar does not fix the problem. It does not disable the searching style introduced by FF 3.0. It only makes the results look a little more like 2.0.
According to this [zacgarrett.com] article browser.urlbar.matchOnlyTyped no longer works either. The value of browser.urlbar.matchOnlyTyped is now ignored.
It's not the GP's fault either. Dozens of articles have been published in the past few months that have old, outdated information. Even Redhat put it in their Knowledgebase [redhat.com] on 6/4. The sheer number of articles attempting to help people disable the "awesome bar" should make the developers realize that this is not a "feature" that everyone wants. I agree with the GP. I too HATE the awesome bar. It's a shame too because I would love to have the fixes for the memory leaks in FF 2.0 that don't exist but FF 3.0 addresses anyway.
Re:Correction to the GPs post (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Correction to the GPs post (Score:5, Insightful)
Essentially what we are debating here is a fundamental change in what the location bar is for, from purely a widget for directly entering URLs, to being a local search engine for content you have seen on the Web (which happens to also display URLs).
Re:I hate the awesome bar (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd just like to point out that it adaptively learns how to sort the results, so you shouldn't discard it on first use. Give it some time to come up with the most relevant URLs (for you) on top.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Firefox Download Day (Score:5, Informative)
for most software downloads in a 24-hour period. Check it here:
http://www.spreadfirefox.com/worldrecord/ [spreadfirefox.com]
Everybody is asked to participate by downloading one single copy of
Firefox 3.0 today, June 17th!
ONLY FULL DOWNLOADS ARE CONSIDERED!
So, go to the Firefox site and get one FULL COPY!
http://www.getfirefox.com/ [getfirefox.com]
Re:Firefox Download Day (Score:4, Funny)
Uh oh.
I don't think they're going to meet their goal (Score:5, Informative)
The connection was reset
The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
And this was with FF 2.0.0.14, so they can't blame my client.
I hope they have an MSI version for windows (Score:5, Insightful)
Why MSI?
-it's a corp standard.(STD switches, behavior)
-It's customizable without changing the original package
-It is designed from the ground up to run unattended or silent regardless if it's an upgrade or a new install.
And Frontmotion (www.frontmotion.com/) != Mozilla
It's a trust issue. Corps want "warm and fuzzies" and not what they will view as a hack.
If Mozilla doesn't want to make an MSI package but still wants to entice the Corps to switch, host Frontmotion's MSI from the Mozilla site.
Having GPO support or preinstalled Addons are gravy at this point.
Re:I hope they have an MSI version for windows (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I hope they have an MSI version for windows (Score:4, Informative)
Cookies/Forms (Score:3, Interesting)
Memory handling doesn't seem to be much better - it's up to 220Mb already and I've only been using it 10 minutes. It's definitely faster though! The javascript engine seems WAY quicker on my own sites at least.
17th started at GMT (Score:5, Insightful)
Timezone (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Timezone (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Timezone (Score:4, Insightful)
Bullshit. We all (at least us here at
But if you use the shortname of a specific timezone, the info is only understandable to people who know the difference between their local timezone and the named timezone.
You could just as well measure time in inches...
Re:Timezone (Score:5, Insightful)
Ramble:
The metric system may not be widely accepted among the general public in the US, but scientists use it, and so do many manufacturers and government agencies are supposed to as well. The standardized systems are there; the general public just refuses to use them, and signage/label makers aren't exactly helping things along.
I like to drive people nuts by routinely using metric measurements and 24-hour time; I've had people scratch their heads at my car's dashboard because it gives time in those weird military units and happily will tell you the outside temperature in Celsius. (Thank you, VW, for leaving the worldwide preference menus in the US version of the GTI!). Soon I plan to acclimatize myself to metric fuel consumption readings; which is the standard used outside the US? I have several choices, such as km/L or L/100 km. Which one should I select?
I got used to the metric system by just using it. Surely, the rest of us can do the same. It really is easier using base-10 instead of the crazy and arcane system that's "standard" here. I've already long since given up on weights and volumes when at the grocery store and just look at the metric equivalent on the label.
Has Mozilla managed to fix PDF yet? (Score:4, Interesting)
I have had to go into my task manage and kill the Acrobat plugin in order to save my browser session many times. This problem has been present in Firefox all the way back to its Netscape days, and on every computer and installation of Adobe I've ever used. It has never been present in IE.
How is it that even with PDF becoming an ISO standard, the dev team _still_ can't make their browser play nice with Acrobat?
Re:Has Mozilla managed to fix PDF yet? (Score:5, Insightful)
You might want to consider using a PDF reader that sucks less. Foxit is pretty decent for Windows.
Hmmm (Score:5, Funny)
Yo'all Better Hope... (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I'm going to wait for a few days just to ensure that no reported problems surface.
1:04pm (Score:5, Funny)
The servers, the servers, the servers are on fire.
We don't need to download let the motherf***ers burn.
Burn motherf***ers, burn.
DDOS world record (Score:5, Funny)
Well, what the hell, lets help bury their servers
Slashdotted (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Slashdotted (Score:5, Insightful)
Hoax! (Score:5, Funny)
Okay Everyone ... (Score:5, Funny)
1:46PM and still no download (Score:5, Insightful)
Passive Interest (Score:5, Interesting)
Because I'm using Linux (Ubuntu) it's more convenient for me to wait until the most recent version is in the repositories, I'm not going to sit around and hope their download page starts working.
My bad - (Score:5, Funny)
Boy is my face red.
Firefox 3 Coming Soon! (Score:5, Informative)
FireFox successfully D.O.S. attacked themselves (Score:5, Funny)
Re:My findings... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:My findings... (Score:5, Insightful)
Images, html, css, content, media.. all of that takes up space. Firefox has to hold it in memory so it can display it quickly when you click on the tab.
How much would you be complaining if you had to wait 5 seconds every time you switched tabs so it could swap in from disk?
Re:My findings... (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess, what's ultimate is a program that can scale its memory usage depending on availability. But I don't have any problems, so I won't complain.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And do you want one app with some nasty leaks using ALL of it?
No?
I didn't think so. That's why the memory footprint is being made a big deal of...
Did you forget to enable High Memory support in your kernel?
Processor type and features --->
High Memory Support (on) --->
(X) 4GB
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It was indeed "High Memory Support". I just assumed it was those people trying to squeeze the most out of their 32 bit system (and having like 4GB of ram). I'll read about it later, but thanks for that.
Re:My findings... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't understand this obsession of ram usage, and this is from someone with a laptop with 512MB's, and primary computer of 844MB (as reported by the OS, but 1GB in the official specs). But, I want my RAM to be used (if it's going to make performance better). That's why I have it.
The product I make displays documents of tens of thousands of pages with color content at 600 DPI, flips pages practically instantly, and uses less than 20 megabytes of RAM while doing so.
Crappy code is no excuse.
Re:My findings... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:My findings... (Score:4, Interesting)
From sluggish behavior on some sites, to full crashes, to DEP violations - it just doesn't feel like a release product.
There is no reason a vanilla install without flash should flip a DEP consistently on some sites, no matterhow badly the sites are coded. (Testing occured across several test machines, and hard core FF fanbois in our tech team. DHTML ads seemed to be at the heart of some crashes, as when a specific ad was loaded, the browser would pop Vista/XP's DEP protection.)
Performance also did hold up to Opera or even IE8 Beta1, which is a bit alarming.
The performance and stability differences got a lot worse with flash, but that is almost expected in the FF world, although flash doesn't have the same level of causing instability or loss of performance on IE7/IE8 for whatever reason.
FF3 is faster and more reliable than FF2, and it is faster than IE7, but not more reliable. IE8 for an early beta outperforming FF3 is sad and a bit scary, and may be the return of MS picking up marketshare, especially with the extra protected modes on Vista.
If you are running IE7 or FF2, I say go grab FF3, the speed is worth it, even with the occasional crashes.
Re:My findings... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:My findings... (Score:4, Insightful)
Interesting you ask, as I just read an article that came away with an initial impression not unlike our own testing.
http://www.crn.com/software/208403208?cid=microsoftFeed [crn.com]
As for IE8 performance... I mean (Load Time, Page Load Times. high content performance on the page, RAM usage, responsiviness, etc.) The difference between IE7 and IE8 is significant, and IE7 wasn't so bad... (IE8 has rewritten everything from script handling, to page composition, etc.) If it wasn't from MS, it would be a browser people would be proud of in terms of performance gains.
You once again falsely state that IE rides on the coat tails of explorer.exe, this myth needs to die, as this has not been the case since IE6, especially on Vista, where explorer.exe and iexplorer.exe share NOTHING, so it doesn't get a footprint break as many assume because of IE4 Win98's shared process model where Explorer.exe and IE literally shared processes.
In fact even IE6 only marginally shared DLLs with Explorer.exe on XP, and still kept them in their own memory space, consuming just as much RAM as if explorer.exe was involved. (Test yourself, kill explorer.exe, iexplorer.exe doesn't die, and RAM for IE don't change and hasn't since Win98.) (NT doesn't even technically allow for what Win98/IE4/IE5 was doing.)
IE7/IE8 run are not tied to anything, and get no 'shared' benefits. Even in Vista, HTML rendering in folders is not an option, nor Active Desktop (the original desktop WIdgets from Win98). The HTML rendering frameworkis a 'callable' part of Windows, but if these threads/process call it, they get the RAM load, etc, and this not shared, just as if another application used the Mozilla engine, it would still have to load it in its own application space.
So people still claiming that 'IE has advantages' because of 'shared' resources/RAM with Explorer.exe/OS are just spreading a very old myth that needs to finally die, starting here.
Check out the link above, even though it doesn't seem to be a comprehensive test, it hits were are initial reactions are too.
Re:My findings... (Score:4, Interesting)
And why is good performance "alarming"?
Re:My findings... (Score:5, Funny)
Where the hell did you buy that monitor?
Re:ubuntu linux? (Score:5, Informative)
sudo apt-get install firefox-3.0
Ubuntu Hardy has it as the default Firefox browser.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:And unofficially... (Score:4, Informative)
Now, everyone on slashdot will have downloaded it before the official 24 hour download period even starts.
Well done.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:And unofficially... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:And unofficially... (Score:4, Informative)
and, as many other posters have pointed out, all should have used demarcations of time that are not mostly US specific.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What is this in Euros? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Time Zones (Score:5, Funny)
Sure, I can see lining up at my daughter's GameStop store at midnight, considering that whatever game they want may be sold out quickly.
But a download? Who cares what time of day it's available? If it's available at 1:00 AM your time, then just start the download when you wake up, or when you get home from work.
They're not going to run out of Firefoxes, you know. Relax.
Re:Time Zones (Score:4, Informative)
"Spring forward. Fall back"
I agree that for a world wide product such as Firefox, UTC would have been the proper time frame to use.
Re:When will their servers die? 1:02pm? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'll pick it up (Score:5, Informative)
HTH,
Re:I'll pick it up (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It would have been much easier all-round to give the time as 17:00 GMT (UTC). Or just use a 48-hour period, that way everyone's idea of the 17th would count.
Downloading from their FTP server won't count (Score:5, Informative)