Slashdot Mirror


Firefox 3.7 Dropped In Favor of Feature Updates

Barence sends in a report from pcpro.co.uk that says "Under its original plans, Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009, each bringing minor improvements to the browser. However, a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable, forcing Mozilla to rethink its release. As a result, Firefox 3.7 has been dropped and will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updates. This should free up the team to work on the next major release, Firefox 4, slated for the last quarter of 2010, which is expected to follow the same development process." Updated 20100116 00:54 GMT by timothy: Alexander Limi, from Firefox User Experience, says that the PC Pro article linked above misinterprets the situation, and that 3.7 is still on the roadmap before 4.0. The confusion stems from a schedule realignment: the out-of-process plugins feature, originally slated to land in 3.7, will instead ship as a minor update in Firefox's 3.6 series. According to Limi, CNET gets it right."

17 of 252 comments (clear)

  1. Gecko 1.9.3 and SVG animation by compro01 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I wonder what effect this is going to have on the implementation of SVG animation, which is part of gecko 1.9.3, which was to be used in 3.7. Is it going to be slotted into 3.6 sometime or will it get pushed to 4?

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    1. Re:Gecko 1.9.3 and SVG animation by BZ · · Score: 3, Funny

      > I just tried it using 3.5.7.

      > I figured since 3 through 7 didn't match up

      Interesting. Tests 3 through 7 all match up here in Firefox 3.5.7. On Window, Linux, and Mac, on several different hardware and VM configurations. What's special about your setup?

      > I should point out that proper font rendering is required for EVERY test.

      Sure. That's not the same thing as SVG Fonts, which are a font format for defining font data in SVG instead of using the fonts installed on your system. Whether SVG fonts are important is up for debate in the working group at the moment, in fact. ;)

      > the composition test fails, gradient tests fail, fill tests fail, event handling and
      > scripting is pointless in firefox

      If you mean the one feComposite test for "the composition test", I can confirm that this fails. The gradient and fill tests pass fine for me. The event tests that are testing stuff that deals with the Core DOM pass fine. The ones that are testing stuff like onfocusin that SVG made up aren't implemented by pretty much anyone last I checked and are slated to be dropped from the SVG spec. The struct-dom tests pass fine over here.

      > structured image placement, text selection doesn't work, inheritance is broken,

      Not sure which tests you're looking at here.

      > text alignment is broken beyond belief.

      A lot of that looks unimplemented, yes.

      > Gecko hasn't passed any tests,

      Again, I'd like to know what's special about your system (or your profile, or your exact Firefox binary) here. If you're willing to take the time, can you run your Firefox in safe mode and see whether it's still failing tests 3-7? If so, where did you download your Firefox from?

      And just to make sure, is "svg.enabled" set to true in your about:config?

  2. Minefield by killmenow · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm using it already as my predominant web browser of choice. Works like a champ so far. I know it's not even pre-release blah blah. It works for me.

    1. Re:Minefield by megamerican · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just like when running through actual minefields, others may not be as lucky as you.

      --
      If you have something that you dont want anyone to know, maybe you shouldnt be doing it in the first place -Eric Schmidt
  3. Where's the meat? by girlintraining · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What purpose does it serve to skip version numbers, except for some political or media-relations reason? The Linux kernel and many other open source projects have release cycles of "it's done when it's done" -- and a predictable version numbering system. What next, Mozilla Firefox 2010 Professional Edition? Delays are inevitable in any software development project.

    Also, Slashdot -- this news post was like saying "X replaced by Y. Z reported jealous, but A and B are looking forward to bringing C onboard soon." Numbers should not be used in place of content. $WITTY_COMMENT. $RETORT. $TROLL. $VAGUE_REFERENCE_TO_SEXUALITY.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Where's the meat? by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

      WPF user interfaces use XML. ECMAScript itself is no worse than Python; in fact, several people have called ECMAScript "Lisp with C syntax". (In that way, ECMAScript could be thought of as an M-expression language.) A lot of the public griping about JavaScript relates to different web browsers' interpretations of the HTML DOM spec. But if Mozilla controls both the XUL/XBL DOM and the script that goes along with it, that becomes not an issue.

  4. Combining security and feature updates, bad idea by Paradigm_Complex · · Score: 3, Insightful

    will be replaced with feature updates for Firefox 3.6 that will be rolled out with security updates

    This seems to be a horrible idea to me, unless I'm misinterpreting it. I can see this being implemented in two ways:

    One, Mozilla withholds security updates until there is a feature ready to go, which is just stupid - don't leave a hole if you've got a fix ready. One of the arguments in favor Firefox over IE is the more rapid security updates.

    Two, Mozilla withholds features until a security update is necessary. I can't see any advantage to doing this, but there's a few obvious downsides (like withholding a perfectly good feature until someone finds something we're supposed to be hoping is not there).

    Unless I'm missing something?

    --
    "A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
  5. Et tu, Mozilla? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Security updates should never be combined with feature updates. Anyone who doesn't want the feature update is then in the unfortunate position to decide whether they'll get the unwanted features or keep the unwanted vulnerabilities. Bad Mozilla.

  6. Re:Multithreading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    It doesn't?

    No it doesn't. Straight from the author's mouths.

    Chrome does not yet allow extensions to prevent page elements from being fetched, just to hide them.

  7. Re:So much for Windows 7 support by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Really? That one, relatively useless piece of eyecandy is the only thing holding you back from using Firefox.

    Uhuh.

  8. Re:Firefox Needs to Be Dropped, Period by HouseOfMisterE · · Score: 3, Informative

    Maybe I'm lucky (conversely, maybe you are unlucky), but 32-bit Firefox 3.5x is 100%* rock-solid stable on my PCs. I can't compare this to IE's stability, as I never, ever, use IE. Granted, I only have 4 add-ons installed (ColorfulTabs, Flashblock, ForecastFox, and Oldbar), but Firefox simply works.

    *Actually, I can remember 1 time that Firefox locked up on me, months ago, so its stability is 100% minus one_event.

  9. Re:So much for Windows 7 support by yakumo.unr · · Score: 4, Informative

    Last I saw tab previews in the taskbar was the default for Firefox 3.6, I had to disable it any time I did a clean install.

    browser.taskbar.previews.enable in about:config

    IMO it entirely defeat the point of having tabs in ONE program, so only one app wastes taskbar space, even preview space

  10. Quick date calculations by dark_panda · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Mozilla would roll out Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 over the course of 2009, each bringing minor improvements to the browser. However, a steady stream of delays to Firefox 3.6 has rendered that goal unobtainable."

    [jay@gobstopper ~]% date
    Fri 15 Jan 2010 12:32:18 EST

    ... ... Okay guys, looks like this math checks out. It seems that releasing Firefox 3.6 and 3.7 in 2009 is an unobtainable goal at this point in time. You know, in 2010.

  11. You do want corporate support, don't you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Small feature updates are not conducive to getting corporate support. With large updates, a company can say, "We support Firefox 3.5+", and they can be reasonably confident that they don't need to fully test every minor release of Firefox 3.5. With small updates they have to say, "We support Firefox 3.6.7", and can't be sure that they will actually be able to support 3.6.8 without fully testing it. If you want corporate support, you have to have feature freezes, or support stops being worth the testing time.

  12. Re:Firefox development is poorly managed, apparent by Jesus_666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's true that my Fx has crashed seven times in the last three months. However, I can trace two of them to a faulty extension. The rest may very well come from the Flash plugin, which isn't entirely stable on Snow Leopard and hasn't been fixed in ages. Offhand I can't remember a single crash not directly related to Flash (excepting the extension, of course).

    I'm willing to bet that a fair part of the stability issues people have actually comes from badly-written extensions and plugins. Remember that most other applications don't execute code written by Adobe (and yes, I see that as an argument as to why they're more stable).

    --
    USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  13. Re:Firefox development is poorly managed, apparent by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Informative

    Have you seen $200 million worth of development in Firefox?

    http://planet.mozilla.org/

    Spend a little time reading this on a regular basis, and you'll soon discover how many projects Mozilla handles, and all the developers they're paying.

    The big projects include:

    Firefox, Bugzilla, Camino, Fennec, Lightning, Sunbird, Seamonkey, and Thunderbird.

    These are major multi-platform projects.

    Mozilla has several projects for first-party add-ons for all of the above such as Firebug, Chromebug, . Then they have tons of major projects that most people never hear about. At the moment they're working on:

    Jetpack
    Raindrop
    Bespin
    Concept
    Personas
    Prism
    Snowl
    Test Pilot
    Ubiquity
    Weave
    Electrolysis

    A tool recently said the KDE code based purely on lines of code should have cost $175 million to develop, and that wasn't counting Koffice, and anything outside the main KDE trunk.

    Mozilla also doesn't just do code projects, they do tons of community management and outreach projects like Mozilla Education, which costs even more money.

    They also help support outside developers using Mozilla and Xulrunner for other apps such as Kompozer, Songbird, etc.

    I don't know where all their money goes, but Mozilla does *A LOT*. To suggest they're not doing much development is ignorance or lies.

    Firefox experiences a LOT of crashes and memory hogging, and has for years.

    Firefox does crash for me from time to time, on Windows and Linux. I tend to use a lot of extensions, and the most common thing I hear is that extensions are the largest source of memory and stability issues. Do I get daily crashes, or 10 crashes a day? No. And I run daily snapshot builds. I maybe get 1 crash a week, if that.

    As a Systems Engineer, I troubleshoot and support some big money apps that crash fairly often. Large software projects are going to have bugs. However, I wager if you run without extensions, you'll find that Firefox is pretty damned stable for such a massive multi-platform app.

    Memory issues are all but lies these days. Memory usage has improved so much over the past few years. Firefox is actually better with memory usage than Chrome in many ways. The core app doesn't take too much memory on first load. It doesn't have memory leaks.

    There are some intentional features which cause Firefox to eat up some memory that you can turn off, such as Firefox keeping fully rendered pages in memory, so that when you hit the back button, they just display immediately without having to re-render. When you close a tab, it still keeps that full session in memory for some time, so that you can reopen the closed tab with full rendered pages and history if you want.

    If you don't like these features, turn them off. Not to mention, these are set to use dynamic chunks of memory which is preportional to your total memory. If you have a desktop with 8 gigs of memory that you're not using, why get upset that Firefox is using 300-400 megs of memory?

    Unused memory isn't doing you any good.

    Stop with the FUD. Real geeks know better and see right through BS and lies.

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
  14. I want multithreading! by thue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The far and away priority one feature should be Multithreading. Each tab and each plugin should have its own process and its own memory space, so that a crash of one tab/plugin, or one tab/plugin using loads of CPU power, should have practically no effect on my other tabs/plugins on my 4-core CPU.

    So I don't care about copying Chrome's GUI. But copying Chrome's sandboxing and multithreading architecture I very much care about!

    There is a Mozilla project to implement this, but the project page hasn't been updated in months, as far as I can tell.