Mozilla Firefox 1.02 Released

akadruid writes "Mozilla has begun rolling the Firefox 1.02 security update. It has appeared with the little fanfare and without the staggered rollout of 1.01 - have Mozilla sorted their distribution worries?"

Comments

Cool

[Anonymous Coward]

Now if only they'd get going on Sunbird. I need a good calendar app.

Re:Cool

[PolyDwarf]

I always have to wonder, when I see comments like this, why? I'm being serious for a minute, not sarcastic.

Why would it be "very nice" to have a Mozilla-based IM client? What would a Mozilla-based IM client offer over any one of the other third-party IM clients (gaim, trillian, etc)?

Last I looked, I use Mozilla for web browsing, not chatting with friends. I looked at their email client, but found myself saying "ho hum, another email client" and then going back to Outlook. Yes, sue me, I'm a windows user for my desktop.

I take my car to the mechanic, but I sure as hell wouldn't take my heart attack to him. As old Rosie put it, a place for everything, and everything in its place. Maybe Mozilla should concentrate on finding and patching more holes... They obviously have a few.

PS - Before I invoke the wrath of Slashdot, I do, in fact, use Firefox for web browsing, not IE.

Re:Cool

[mrchaotica]

Maybe I want one based on XUL, as part of a XUL-based desktop?

Re:Cool

[xigxag]

What would a Mozilla-based IM client offer over any one of the other third-party IM clients (gaim, trillian, etc)?

If you're trying to convince your organization to switch to open-source offerings, it's easier to bring up an integrated solution such as, "We can switch to the Mozilla Suite" than to have to sell three or four different projects like, "We can switch to K-Meleon for browsing, Trillian for IM, Thunderbird for email," etc.

Re:Cool

[chrispyman]

And this is exactly one of the big reasons many dislike the discontinuation of the Mozilla Suite. Until Firefox, Thunderbird, and the rest start integrating better (act more like a single app with optional components), there really isn't any other apps out there that make up a nice "Internet Suite."

Update?

[Transcendent]

How it is an update when it acts as a total re-install?

I love how firefox/thunderbird keep filling up my Add/Remove Programs list in XP everytime there is an "update".

Not trying to flame, but shouldn't there be a better way?

Re:Update?

[Bauguss]

to all those saying how to change your registry or those saying uninstall first.

This is moronic. We are talking about a program that is getting a lot of attention from a lot of people. Hell, my grandparents even use it.

That said, my grandparents SHOULD NOT have to uninstall and then reinstall. It won't make sense to them because it is retarded. An update function should be just that. It shouldn't ask all the same questions it did back when you first installed it. It shouldn't ask if you want firefox as your home page. Those things have already been done. I think when you click update it should just do it. It should download, install, and then pop up a window saying it needs to restart the browser. It should then close the browser, and reopen it. (preferably back to the same url you were at when you got the update message)

Now that I've said that, thanks for the registry edit info. I needed to know that. (the update for Google's Picasa did the same thing)

Autodebug

[Doc Ruby]

With Bugzilla and the community, their backend that addresses security bugs is pretty tight. But why is the desktop end limited by the archaic announcement/download/install scenario? I'd prefer to accept subscription to the security bugfix channel, RSS polled every few hours or hundred pages. If it authenticated the patches, I'd get a nonmodal notification message, with "More Info" and "Always Autoapply" buttons in the window. That would make their rapid responses worthwhile. If they could upgrade in the background without slowing down my surfing, with on-demand rollbacks, I'd probably just autoupdate, looking for upgrade notices in my email.

then why bother with autoupdate at all ?

[Anonymous Coward]

You should be uninstalling the old version before you install the new one.

which bit of autoupdate don't they get ?

i shouldnt be doing anything other than clicking an update icon,everything should be taken care of
does Microsoft say "to install SP2 you must uninstall SP1" ? so why do i have to in mozilla ?

never mind me having to disappear into advanced settings to check updates manually when in IE its on the tools menu, easy to get at if i want to check

at the moment the word to describe their update process is rubbish

Memory leak

[Wolfier]

Have they fixed the memory leaks in 1.0 yet?
Having an idle browser leaking 300 MB of memory per day is like a self-inflicted DOS attack.

Re:Mirrors

[psi42]

And if you're not running firefox with root/administrator privileges, how is that thing supposed to work?

Re:Big bucks, no whammies, no Slashdot bias.. Beeo

[lachlan76]

"Open source software can react far faster to new threats than any closed source development model."

Well the story IS about an update.

Those other comments you show that were modded offtopic are *bug reports*. This isn't where you go to file bug reports.