Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mozilla Mulls Dropping Firefox For Win2K, Early XP

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the upgrade-or-die dept.

CWmike writes "Mozilla is pondering dropping support for Windows 2000 and Windows XP without Service Pack 3 when it ships the follow-up to Firefox 3.5 in 2010, show discussions on the mozilla.dev.planning forum by developers and Mozilla executives, including the company's chief engineer and its director of Firefox. 'Raise the minimum requirements on Gecko 1.9.2 (and any versions of Firefox built on 1.9.2) for Windows builds to require Windows XP Service Pack 3 or higher,' said Michael Conner, one of the company's software engineers, to start the discussion. Mozilla is currently working on Gecko 1.9.1, the engine that powers Firefox 3.5, the still-in-development browser the company hopes to release at some point in the second quarter. Gecko 1.9.2, and the successor to Firefox 3.5 built on it — dubbed 'Firefox.next' and code named 'Namoroka' — are slated to wrap up in 'early-to-mid 2010,' according to Mozilla."

10 of 455 comments (clear)

  1. forcing users to upgrade by rossdee · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did Mozilla get taken over by Microsoft or something?

    1. Re:forcing users to upgrade by Eunuchswear · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can build using GCC 3.3 for PowerPC and GCC 4 for Intel, but who wants to be stuck using GCC 3.3?

      $ gcc -v
      Reading specs from /u/local/lib/gcc-lib/i686-UnixWare7.1.1-sysv5/2.95.2/specs
      gcc version 2.95.2 19991024 (release)

      Pah, novelty junkies.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
  2. Re:Firefox.neXt? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Is this a joke? Making firefox run on neXt and dropping OS X compatibility?

    That seems like something only @pple would do!

  3. Re:Sorry- but by WaXHeLL · · Score: 4, Funny

    What's this web interface you're talking about? Real system admins don't even use the command line -- they go in there and start writing/manipulating machine code.

    --
    The troll with karma.
  4. Re:Sorry- but by NeoRete · · Score: 3, Funny

    Excuse me, but real sysadmins (or programmers) use butterflies. (Obligatory)

    --
    30 characters are fine for a s
  5. Re:Because by Ortega-Starfire · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm user #4, you insensitive clod!

    --
    ---- Liquid was a patriot ----
  6. Re:I feel their pain by Tumbleweed · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hate developing using old tools.

    I hate developing for old fools.

  7. Re:Sorry- but by Larryish · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hey! Don't make me get out my tiny platter-writing magnetic diddle sticks!

  8. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    then use one from early 2010.

  9. Re:Sorry- but by houstonbofh · · Score: 5, Funny

    It is never necessary to have Windows on a server. Of course, it seems to be on a few...