Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firefox Beta Touts Advanced Engine, Solves 8 Flaws

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the more-is-better-right dept.

nandemoari writes "Mozilla may be this year's winner in the 'browser battles' as they ready the next beta version of their tour-de-force, Firefox 3.1. Mozilla is resolving eight critical vulnerabilities found in the current version of Firefox — a move sure to garner applause from devoted Firefox users. As this year's crop of new browsers emerges, enhanced features are becoming secondary to one thing: speed. Mozilla is nearly ready to release the next beta version of Firefox 3.1 to the public for testing, and insiders predict that it will outpace even Safari 4, which has been the fastest browser in wide release since its beta began last week." It looks like they also will be upping the next major release to v3.5 to better show the significance of the release.

35 of 493 comments (clear)

  1. I hope they fix a couple of things by Nursie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Right-click is a nightmare on linux platforms (don't know if it affects others, I'm exclusively a linux shop these days).

    It randomly follows an action rather than bringing up the menu about one time in ten. Opening up email programs, choosing a new window, bringing up link properties... needs fixing, badly. (Workaround for fellow sufferers - install mouse gestures add-on)

    Also it seems really really processor-hungry on one of my machines. Wish I knew why.

    1. Re:I hope they fix a couple of things by 1stvamp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have you considered using a mouse that doesn't suck?

      --
      Wes
    2. Re:I hope they fix a couple of things by myxiplx · · Score: 3, Informative

      Nope, it's definately a Linux Firefox issue. I have exactly the same problem.

      I've found that the workaround is to hold down the mouse button, and only release the button once I've selected something from the list. That works reliably every time. Right-clicking once sometimes brings up the menu, sometimes fires off the last action, and sometimes fires off a completely random action.

    3. Re:I hope they fix a couple of things by electrosoccertux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't even bother with Firefox on Linux anymore. It's dog slow, and clear that the work goes into the Windows version.

      A year or so ago I thought I'd try something out...if it's so slow in Linux native, what if I tried browsing in Firefox under Wine? Surprise! Wine+Firefox is _much_ faster than native Firefox. Sure enough, this was confirmed a month or two ago on /. The AwesomeBar, in particular, is SLOW in Linux; this is coming from someone running a 3.4Ghz Core 2 Duo chip.

      Not sure why it's this way, but it's pretty clear the work goes into the Windows version and hardly any goes into the native version.

      As a matter of fact, the lack of an alternative decent browser (no please not Opera) on Linux is one of the major reasons why I don't bother with it at all, currently. Yes, I've tried about 7 others (insert your favorite one here); about the only alternative I would be OK with using is Chrome but that's not available for Linux.

      So, I'll just check Linux out again when Chrome comes out for it.

    4. Re:I hope they fix a couple of things by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 4, Informative

      Minefield and the 3.1 betas branched a long time ago.
      IIRC, You want to test Shiretoko.

    5. Re:I hope they fix a couple of things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You can speed up firefox especially with the super bar by using tmpfs to put the firefox profile in your ram. A guide can be found at http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-717117.html

    6. Re:I hope they fix a couple of things by Rhapsody+Scarlet · · Score: 5, Informative

      The reason for this is that the Windows compile is compiled with some kind of compiler optimisation. Don't really know what that optimisation was, however it had nothing to do with Windows.

      IIRC, that was profile-guided optimization, which gives Firefox a 15-20% speed boost. It was enabled on Windows nightly builds at the time but not Linux nightly builds due to various reasons. It's now enabled on both, and surprise surprise! The performance gap is gone.

      We're still seeing this cited and modded up despite being busted on this very site (in the comments for that story) though, which I guess just goes to prove the old adage that a lie can get around the world before the truth manages to tie its shoes.

    7. Re:I hope they fix a couple of things by PitaBred · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Try Swiftweasel. The native Linux firefox versions are all compiled completely unoptimized. Swiftweasel just enables some of the i686 and -O2 optimizations and it's still Firefox, all my plugins work, but it doesn't dog down like Firefox proper (I still have it installed, I've compared the two).

      --
      My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
  2. RAM usage by nmg196 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't really care about the speed. It's already fast enough. I just wish they'd sort out the RAM consumption issue and all the memory leaks. My firefox process is currently using 1.1GB of RAM and I have to restart it about twice a day just to free up some RAM. I've only got about 4 extensions installed and I've tried disabling each of them in turn to ensure the problem didn't lie in an extension.

    1. Re:RAM usage by nmg196 · · Score: 5, Funny

      > You must be doing something wrong (seriously)

      If "by doing something wrong" you mean "you're a web developer" then you're probably right - I am. :)

    2. Re:RAM usage by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't really care about the speed. It's already fast enough. I just wish they'd sort out the RAM consumption issue and all the memory leaks.

      Firefox 3 is the best performing browser memory-wise according to all independent tests that I have seen. It barely ever creeps beyond 200 MB RAM usage for me over days of usage. In comparison, Safari 4 Beta and IE 8 easily grows to 300-400 MB after a bunch of tabs browsed. It doesn't even take much effort to get those there.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    3. Re:RAM usage by EvilIdler · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yikes! Opera peaks at 250MB, and stays there. They really need to work on the memory issues. Even though I don't even touch computers with less than 4GB RAM, it's pretty sick to see 25% of that eaten by a web browser.

  3. Preferential treatment? by McFadden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Mozilla is resolving eight critical vulnerabilities found in the current version of Firefox

    Interesting how stories spin out differently depending on the browser in question. If it were an IE story, there would be howls of derision that the vulnerabilities existed in the first place and questions about why Microsoft didn't fix them more quickly.

    1. Re:Preferential treatment? by moderatorrater · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, but Firefox has a faster turnaround time as it is. Microsoft only patches once a month, often misses critical patches and then didn't update their browser for years. Mozilla was the first true competition that IE had, has a fast turnaround time, and patches vulnerabilities fast, often within days of being made aware of them. Sometimes they don't do as well as they could, but when they're able to put out 3 major versions of their browser, 2 .5 versions and many smaller ones within the time that IE's able to put out 2 new versions, they deserve praise instead of scorn.

    2. Re:Preferential treatment? by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know. Check out this discussion I had with my neighbor Bob the other day.
      me: Hey Bob, was that your mom just leaving?
      Bob: Yeah, she came over to hang out this afternoon.
      me:Oh - little hypocritical Bob?
      Bob: What do you mean?
      me: Well when that homeless guy that tried to rape and kill your wife came by the other day you called the cops. But you just let your mom right on in and hang out.

      I've decided people are just like that - that can't seem to be impartial. They have some crazy desire to take past actions and relationships into account. Weird.

      --
      It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    3. Re:Preferential treatment? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

      me: Well when that homeless guy that tried to rape and kill your wife came by the other day you called the cops. But you just let your mom right on in and hang out.

      So you're equating Microsoft to a psychotic rapist and Mozilla to your mom....

      Have you discussed this with your therapist?

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  4. Re:ACID3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because Acid3 only tests a small part of CSS compliance. Giving fanboys pretty number to shout about should not be a priority. Also, please don't reply to posts that you are actually not replying to. Replying to the first post is obvious attention seeking.

  5. Dear Adobe by HockeyPuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please fix your flash plugin. Seems that once a day if I go to a page with considerable flash (which is most pages these days), the browser will crash and when I examine the crashfile, it's *gasp* always you. I've reinstalled flash and FF 3.0.6.....

    1. Re:Dear Adobe by LordKaT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While you're at it, Adobe, could you also consider fixing the streaming video issues in Firefox? There's no reason on this planet why Firefox's version of flash has to take up 99% CPU on a quad-core system to play video, while the IE version takes a measly 2% to play the same video.

      Oh, and if you could do something - anything - about your 64bit linux support, that would be fantastic. Kill it if you must, or open source it, because your engineers are simply not talented enough to make it work.

    2. Re:Dear Adobe by JCSoRocks · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh ugh, yeah, Adobe + 64bit = Fail. Which is rather ironic considering how much many of their products would benefit from it. I suppose they're too busy adding new DRM and activation schemes to add working 64bit support. 'Cause, you know, those have really stopped people from pirating their software - What a waste of time.

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    3. Re:Dear Adobe by Thelasko · · Score: 4, Informative

      Please fix your flash plugin. Seems that once a day if I go to a page with considerable flash (which is most pages these days), the browser will crash and when I examine the crashfile, it's *gasp* always you. I've reinstalled flash and FF 3.0.6.....

      This is Slashdot, not Adobe's bug reporting system. Please fix your bookmarks. They won't fix the problem if you don't post it where they will read it.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
  6. Re:And yet by 1stvamp · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ooooooooooooor you could just go to about:config and set browser.urlbar.maxRichResults to 0.

    But you know, if aimlessly bitching is your thing, please continue.

    --
    Wes
  7. Multithreading by owlnation · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This article sounds like empty hype to me.

    I still use Firefox, and will continue to do so for the time being. The reason being adblock and flashblock, exclusively. I am not as happy with Firefox as I was when I first used the 0.8 something version. I feel Mozilla have lost their way. Too much bloat like the awesome bar -- which frankly just does not work for me at all, it's an hindrance, not a help.

    I want to use chrome, because of the multithreading. Firefox absolutely needs to have multithreading to compete. It can be a true dog to use if you have tabs that reload in the background.

    The second that there is some sort of adblock and flashblock for Chrome I'm gone. No more Firefox for me.

    I'm sorry to have to do that. I actually bought the firefox T-Shirt. I was active in the GetFirefox campaign. But now, I use it only because of the extensions.

    Please, Mozilla get your act together. Now more useless features that should really be extensions, and get multithreading sorted. I want to be a Firefox fan again.

    1. Re:Multithreading by BenoitRen · · Score: 3, Informative

      Did you know that there are other Mozilla Gecko-based web browsers that you can install Adblock Plus and Flashblock into? They're SeaMonkey (cross-platform as well) and K-Meleon (Windows only). Try them.

      By the way, Chrome doesn't do multi-threading. It has a multi-process architecture.

    2. Re:Multithreading by Renegade88 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree, although I had Opera ranked over FF for casual browsing. I only used FF for it's web developer tools and firebug. Now I have made the move to Chrome for casual browsing, so now FF is in 3rd place.

      Where Chrome is really better than opera is closing down. I can have 20 tabs open in Chrome and when I close the application, I recover all the memory pretty much instantly. Opera needs about 2-3 minutes where it actually takes more memory (e.g. jumps from 170MB to 210MB ram) before finally closing down internally. As I mentioned elsewhere, FF in windows normally just crashes upon closing, taking 100% CPU usage and requiring killing from the task manager. Therefore I use it as little as possible.

      Adblock is not a dealbreaker. I have it installed in FF but it's normally off. The sites I visit don't require blocking ads. I won't visit a site so obnoxious that it would require adblocking to be functional.

  8. Re:And yet by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I loved it from the first time I saw it.

    Maybe, just maybe, not everyone hates it. Maybe it's just a vocal minority that hates it. Maybe the 'community' -is- getting input and the problem is that you are going against the community, not them.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
  9. Re:And yet by LordKaT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I love the "awesome bar" myself, and I'm willing to bet that the majority of the community in this community project gave Mozilla similar feedback.

    I'll admit, the bar hasn't helped me find the really odd or obscure site I havn't visited in a while, but that's what bookmarks are for.

  10. Re:And yet by HockeyPuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's your beef with the awesome bar? I actually *like* how it searches through my bookmarks as I type in keywords. No more having to go through multiple levels of bookmark folders. I pretty much just click the yellow star to bookmark a page, then add a few custom tags to it. I got rid of the "I feel lucky" google search behavior, but I've been doing that since firefox 1.x...

  11. Re:ACID3 by BenoitRen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The ACID3 test is not important. It tests for unimportant small rendering bugs, and CSS3, which isn't even a standard yet.

  12. Re:And yet by BenoitRen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You shouldn't have to dig in about:config to disable a prominent feature.

  13. when you read by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Microsoft is resolving eight critical vulnerabilities found in the current version of IE -- a move sure to garner applause from devoted IE users."

    slashdot users laugh at the propaganda

    but when a firefox shill says

    "Mozilla is resolving eight critical vulnerabilities found in the current version of Firefox -- a move sure to garner applause from devoted Firefox users."

    slashdot puts it in the story summary reverently

    propaganda is propaganda is propaganda. no matter the source, even if you love the source. just say "firefox fixed some bugs." and leave the sleazy ad copy out of it please

    what next?

    "the exploit found in firefox is a feature, not a bug" maybe?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  14. You can fix the scroll ball by name_already_taken · · Score: 5, Informative

    I concur - the Mighty Mouse is not so mighty, Apple's worst product in a long time. I have the problem you describe in Safari 3 and 4 beta. Plus scrolling down has worn out somehow.

    Right clicking on the Mighty Mouse appears to have been designed by someone who only used one-button mice before. You have to pretty much take your fingers off of the mouse and only click on the right side of the mouse. It would have made much more sense to make it signal a right click if the right "button" area of the mouse was being touched, regardless of what's happening on the left. It sucks, and they really should fix it (probably could be done with a firmware update).

    As for the scroll ball, I have used the "turn the mouse upside down and run the scroll ball around on your pants leg" method with some success. It only works until you get something inside the scroll ball that won't come out. My primary Mighty Mouse (I have four, two are bluetooth and on the same desk) would not scroll right, and even throwing it at the floor and wall didn't work, so I decided to break the damned thing open.

    It's actually not hard to crack the mouse open, if you don't mind breaking that little collar that runs around the bottom of the mouse. There are two flexible connections that you have to disconnect, but you can remove the scroll ball mechanism with a small phillips screwdriver, disassemble it, clean it out, and reassemble it. I did it a month ago with no further problems. There is an order to reassembling the mouse and not having one of the flexible connections pull out, but it's not hard to trial and error your way through.

    --
    Putting moderation advice in your .sig lowers your karma!
  15. Re:ACID3 by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought that replying to the first post was a sign of horrible UI decisions. Anyone else notice the number of replies to the first post skyrocketed when the new design rolled out?

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  16. Re:fast is a matter of perspective by Spliffster · · Score: 4, Informative

    As an Add-On and Web developer i'd say: disable firebug when you don't need it. Firebug is a ressource hog.

    Constantly running a debugger must slow down your browser.

    -S

  17. Factually wrong headline, misleading summary by Arancaytar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Whoever cleared this for the front page?

    If a free software team announced "our current stable version is insecure, but if you install our test version, you'll be safe", there would be serious hell. If you have security holes in your current stable branch, you bloody well fix them immediately instead of asking users to download a beta version. (Well, unless you're Google, in which case the whole universe is in beta.)

    Just to be sure this wasn't the case, I traced the source through this poorly researched blog entry on infopackets.com back to CNet, and lo and behold:

    Firefox 3.0.7 targets security issues
    Mozilla on Wednesday released an update to the Firefox Web browser that its developers said fixes eight security issues found in Firefox 3.0.6

    Nope, no mention of a beta. Yes, a beta of 3.1 was released at the same time as a stable 3.0.7, and yes, 3.1 has an advanced JS engine that will boost performance. I'll even wager that if the 3.0.6 bugs were also in the 3.1 branch, then this beta fixed them as well.

    But no, users do not have to download a beta version to ensure security, and to mislead them otherwise is pretty irresponsible as there is already enough FUD going on about Mozilla.