Slashdot Mirror


Firefox 2.0 'Beta Candidate 1' Released

Krishna Dagli writes to mention that a Firefox 2.0 Beta Candidate has been released to the public. Ars Technica looks at some of the included features such as tab scrolling, anti-phishing measures, and an integrated spellchecker. From the article: "There is an option to search for updates for any extensions that have been broken, but it was not able to update any of the extensions I had installed. Fortunately, Firefox has been integrating many useful extensions (like the ability to drag and drop tabs to new locations) along its development, so this is not as big of a problem as it might seem. The browser seemed quite fast and stable, although I did not perform any benchmarking tests. I found one really obscure bug, where if the user clicks on a help link when a preferences dialog box is open, a new copy of Firefox will load without the user being able to switch back to the original either through Alt-Tab or the Windows task bar."

12 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. PLEASE DO NOT DOWNLOAD THESE BUILDS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Copied & pasted from the arstechnica forum:

    PLEASE DO NOT DOWNLOAD THESE BUILDS

    Unlike the real Beta 1 release, the RCs for it are only intended for internal use, and are not mirrored. Thus widespread distribution of these links stands a good chance of DDOSing the poor Mozilla servers, which are only hosting these for internal testing.

    Furthermore, we're already in the process of spinning RC2 builds with a half-dozen fixes.

    We're hoping to get Beta 1 out this week; until then please just be patient and wait a few days longer, or else grab nightly releases if you must have something up-to-date.

    Note that these release candidates will NOT properly auto-update to anything in the future.

  2. Its up to RC3 by DuncanE · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article links to RC1.

    You can aleady get release candidate 3

    Or you could wait a few days an get the actual beta.

  3. Extensions! by MarkByers · · Score: 5, Funny

    "What features would you like in your next generation browser?"

    Extensions!

    "Does Firefox 2.0 meet your needs?"

    Yes!

    "What would you like to see improved?"

    Opera.

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
  4. On related news ... by rabalde · · Score: 5, Informative
  5. Beta candidate? by johansalk · · Score: 5, Funny

    As if alpha, beta, and RC weren't enough?

  6. Once they integrate enough extensions by also-rr · · Score: 5, Funny

    They can rename it the Mozilla Suite and then some people can come along and release a lightweight browser with none of the cruft called Firefox.

    1. Re:Once they integrate enough extensions by TheFlyingGoat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whoever marked this as a troll is a tool. It's pretty funny, but also kind of true in the eyes of a lot of people. The reason I switched to Firefox wasn't because of the neat features, it was because it used less memory and was significantly faster than IE. With every release Firefox has gotten more and more bloated, to the point that it is taking 42mb of RAM to display only this thread on Slashdot. IE is taking 22mb to do the exact same thing. That's just rediculous.

      I really wish Firefox would go back to the lightweight browser it once was. The power was the ability to have extensions to do anything you wanted, but it was my choice which ones I wanted using my system resources.

      --
      You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
  7. Re:What features would you like in your browser? by Reverend528 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    didn't consume vast amounts of my precious system memory

    I could live with a browser that consumes vast amounts of memory if it would bother to periodically return that memory to the system. I'm likely to be modded down for saying this, but the real (and perhaps only) problem with firefox the memory leak which has pretty much always plagued it.

    And before you respond by saying "read article X and change Y in about:config", I suggest you try a simple experiment: Open up a firefox window and start Gmail, leave the window open for several days and monitor how much memory is used each day. The memory will increase over time. Apply the "memory fixes" and run the same experiment. While these hacks can reduce the amount of memory used, they can't fix the memory leak.

  8. SVG by pubjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has the SVG support improved? For the more complex stuff - animation and interactivity?

    I've alway liked the idea of SVG overtaking Flash as the format of choice for more complex multimedia online, but nobody seems to use it very much. Any ideas why not? Why isn't the OSS community promoting SVG more?

  9. Feature creep, leaving huge bugs unfixed by Theovon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually, I'm not opposed to all these nice new features they've added, although it might be nice to have some optional for smaller systems. Also, I am aware that Firefox developers fix bugs all the time. They're just not going after the REALLY BIG ones.

    My biggest beef with Firefox is that it still crashes frequently and has massive memory leaks that require me to quit and restart the browser on a daily basis. It doesn't take much to get Firefox to grow to 1GB in memory footprint and start causing my system to thrash. A fundamental flaw is that it does not release memory back to the OS, so when you close tabs and windows, the process doesn't shrink. While this isn't directly Firefox's fault, there are lots of ways around this that they refuse to implement. On the other hand, the true memory leaks ARE their fault.

    I once suggested a solution to their problems. The basic philosophy is that they want to fix the crashes. But at this rate, they never will, so it's better to find ways to limit the damage done by crashes. The best solution, IMHO, is to stop using threads. Instead, fork a separate process for each document and one more for the UI, and use IPC for them to communicate. This way, when a web page or plugin inevitably causes the browser to crash or even just grow too big, killing that one window or tab won't bring down the whole browser, and the memory it used will be returned to the OS. This will have the side-effect of making the browser much more responsive, because you're not kept from switching tabs while a DNS lookup hangs the browser for one document. Naturally, they didn't like my solution.

    I think stability isn't really all that important to them, at least not proactively; if you're just reactive to bugs, you're never going to get a solid product.

  10. Re:What features would you like in your browser? by ThePhilips · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There was requirement about "native interface". Only when Opera will learn that double-click used to select text (not to open pop-up menus). When drag'n'drop will finally start working (try to drag URL from location bar to create link, try to drop link to open in new window/tab). When UI will be drawn using host OS (menus are always too thin - provided the amount crap in the menus - they are barely readable, controls don't use system font, etc etc etc) When tabs will be closing in the order they are on screen - not some random order. When tabs would be simply switching by Ctrl-Tab. And finally when about box will be what it is meant to be - dialog box.

    Until then, tradition of Opera to break UI rules with every new release, does no good. Opera can called anything - but "native application." Unstandard keyboard shortcuts (easy to mistype), unstandard behavious (always confusing with other applications), etc. "Native application" doesn't mean "picture looks like everything else". Opera's "nativity" - is skin deep only. For definition of what native application I can only direct you (and hopefully Opera's devels) to sources: MS Guidelines for UI development & Apple's HIG & GNOME HIG. Read that before reinventing square wheels. Send that to Opera - probably they do not know about the guidelines.

    Mozilla people spend lot of time making sure that people used to various OSs and various UI standards will feel themself comfortable. Specifically goal of Firefox was good integration with host OS - Windows or Linux - even Mac OS X support now improved greately. Br... Somebody stop me. I'm flaming.

    --
    All hope abandon ye who enter here.
  11. Re:What features would you like in your browser? by bit01 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    • More reliable. It's pretty good already but I use it regularly and I would like it to be even better.
    • More testing for race conditions. Firefox is most unreliable when actions occur quickly or simultaneously such as multiple tabs being repainted and/or menu items being activated and/or windows being resized.
    • A working bug/crash reporting mechanism. And a guarantee not to publish the reporting email address on a web site indexable by a spammer.
    • Better behaviour in the presence of external failures of any sort. Not enough testing has been done for this.
    • Not have the user interface lock up when the DNS server is delayed/unavailable. Currently it can lock up for seconds at a time.
    • Not have the user interface lock up when a website is delayed/unavailable. Lockups can occur when website elements are delayed.
    • Not have the user interface lock up when a plugin is initializing/downloading content.
    • Not have the user interface lock up and fail to highlight correctly when keyboard autorepeat is being used to highlight a block of text in a form.
    • Faster startup and user interface would be nice. Test it on a slower machine.
    • Clearer handling of extension installation both for a single user and machine wide. Currently it's not clear how to install extensions machine wide or to avoid repeated downloads for repeated installations.

    Mostly, I'd just like existing behaviour to be more robust. The only new functionality I'd like to see is much more sophisticated bookmark handling and the ability to export/export a full set of configuration settings, including extensions and bookmarks, between different firefox installations, including up-version. Kudos to the team.