Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla Firefox 3.6 Released

Shining Celebi writes "Mozilla has released Firefox 3.6 today, which adds support for Personas, lightweight themes that can be installed without restarting the browser, and adds further performance improvements to the new Tracemonkey Javascript engine. One of the major goals of the release was to improve startup time and general UI responsiveness, especially the Awesomebar. You can read the full set of release notes here."

23 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. Switch Proxy Tool by wbav · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you have the Switch Proxy Tool, I strongly suggest you disable it. Caused all sort of issues when upgrading. If you've already upgraded, right click on the shortcut and run in safe mode, there you can disable it. YMMV.

    --

    =================
    Unix is very user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are.
    1. Re:Switch Proxy Tool by ottothecow · · Score: 4, Funny
      I used someones firefox with these persona things already installed...it was awful, I couldn't see which tab was what.

      It was like giving myspace page designers control over your browser

      --
      Bottles.
    2. Re:Switch Proxy Tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It was like giving myspace page designers control over your browser

      See? This is what happens when the Mozilla people come up with their own ideas instead of just implementing the features from the previous version of Opera.

      I keed, I keed!

  2. Pretty neat. by jayminer · · Score: 4, Informative

    Tried on Windows, performance improvements are immediately noticeable. Wastes less screen space by default. For those who are used to the old look-and-feel can feel a little awkward at first.

    Set extensions.checkCompatibility to false and you're good to go.

  3. The competition is heating up!! by igadget78 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Microsoft's patch vs. Mozilla's release. I can't wait. The Excitement is almost too much.

  4. Re:Javascript performance by Skratchez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's an improvement. That's what counts, some of us don't want to trade our lovely open-source browser for a product from Google or Apple, or MS for that matter. I can wait on javascript performance, TYVM.

  5. Re:Speed Kills (play it safe - buy a Chevy) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Firefox 3.6 does beat the newest Chrome on some Javascript benchmarks (and Chrome beats Firefox on others). I think it's safe to say they're in the same ballpark. http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/17199/1/

  6. Personas, lightweight themes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Proof that Firefox is heading for doom. Stop wasting time on making the browser look different than the fucking OS you idiots.

  7. Re:Speed Kills (play it safe - buy a Chevy) by Cheburator-2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just downloaded it - it's just as fast as Chrome or even faster. Typing this from shiny new browser.

  8. GPU accelerated Firefox? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the goals mentioned in the article was to improve garbage collection performance to make pauses shorter and animations smoother. Why not just use the video card to accelerate the graphical operations (plus any other GPGPU operations)? Flash and PDF readers have already done it. For that matter, Windows Vista or later UIs have already do the same. This will give performance edges over contemporary browsers.

  9. It's extensions.checkCompatibility.3.6 by wiredog · · Score: 4, Informative

    Seethis for details.

  10. Scrolling by Majix · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems the mouse wheel scrolling has been changed in 3.6. It's moving a much larger distance with each "click" of the wheel than before and if you scroll continuously it seems to accelerate even faster. My first impression is that I don't like it at all. It feels a lot more like Chrome, which isn't a good thing in my opinion, the annoying jumpy scrolling is one of the primary reasons I prefer not to use Chrome.

    1. Re:Scrolling by ddegirmenci · · Score: 5, Informative

      about:config
      set mousewheel.withnokey.sysnumlines to false
      set mousewheel.withnokey.numlines to 3

      As good as new... Wait a second.

  11. Open Link in New Tab changed by bughunter · · Score: 4, Informative

    The new tab now appears to the right of the current tab when you right click on a link and select "Open Link in New Tab."

    I just discovered that after about 5 seconds of "Hey, where'd my new tab go??"

    --
    I can see the fnords!
    1. Re:Open Link in New Tab changed by Paradigm_Complex · · Score: 5, Informative
      I prefered Firefox's older way of dealing with this. To revert, go to about:config and change

      browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent true

      to

      browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent false

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
  12. Re:Speed Kills (play it safe - buy a Chevy) by headkase · · Score: 4, Funny

    I ignore all moderation here, especially down moderation as that is always disagreement. There should only be positive mods and they should not be limited to 5. Set your threshold wherever you like with that. There are no consequences to moderation any more either as the only thing it used to affect, order of comments if you used that no longer really exists.

    --
    Shh.
  13. Re:Javascript performance by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Informative

    That delay is nothing to do with your browser - that's Slashdot scanning of a bunch of ports on your IP address. I spotted this a few weeks back when I made a post to Slashdot while running a "tail -f" on my firewall logs, although I've been aware of the lag a lot longer than that. It seems that if your firewall just DROPs the packets you get a delay while it retries a couple of times, whereas if you REJECT then it's a good deal quicker. There's some caching going on as well, once you've gone through this the lag disappears for a day or two, then re-starts. As it says in my .sig - WTF?

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  14. Re:Javascript performance by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These tests are mostly pointless anyway. They measure raw JS performance, which would matter if you'd be doing, say, number crunching. In practice, the most heavyweight operation that is likely to be done by scripts in a browser is DOM manipulation, and that's an entirely different thing. What does it matter if your super-efficient JS AOT compiler based on quantum branch prediction can call a method on a DOM object as fast as a plain native JMP, if the implementation of said method causes reflow and redraw of most of the page?

    Coincidentally, it's why Opera feels so fast for actual browsing while still using an interpreter for JS (and consequently sucking in any synthetic JS perf tests) - its interpreter is an order of magnitude slower than e.g. Chrome, yes, but it's got an extremely fast layout engine and renderer, so DOM updates are instantaneous.

  15. how about making FF fun again by cinnamon+colbert · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The GUI that pops up when you want to bookmark something - case study in bad design
    How about a real editor for bookmarks, with some minimal feature like export this folder (when you need to send someone a bunch of stuff)
    How about mozilla not being a jerk about extensions, and getting rid of the spam that makes it hard to see anything but the top 5 extensions big brother mozilla thinks you should have

    How about a stable platform for extension developers

    How about letting the world know how awesome FF+noscript+adblock is when you go to a site like YAHOO
    I hadn't been to YAHOO wihtout my little protectors, noscript/adblock/flashblock for some time and was astonished at how much ads have taken over the front page - how can people stand it

    how about giving the users some control over privacy, so we have the wipe things clean on exit menu again

    how about giving some users an idea of how much info the SOBs of the web, like google, are collecting

  16. Re:Javascript performance by mrdoogee · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Chrome is open source in the same way that OS X is open source.

    Sure they're both based on a open source project (Chromium/Webkit and Darwin/BSD) does not mean they are truly open source. Try to modify and redistribute either and see how long before either of their "parents" get all lawyer-ey.

    Remember kids, free doesn't always mean open source, and open source doesn't always mean free.

  17. Re:Javascript performance by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not SMTP; HTTP. The ports scanned are all common default ports for web proxy applications like Squid's :3128, various ":8080" type combinations and such like. I'd have to go digging through my logs to get the complete list, but I'd guess there are about a dozen ports checked in total.

    What's so irksome about it is that it's a straight SYN scan done very slowly that impacts any users that have a firewall that DROPs packets with an apparently inexplicable delay of several seconds. If you really feel the need to do this, which the Slashdot team obviously does, it would be much quicker and less annoying for users do the scan at a faster rate without the two or three retries currently used. Better yet, kick the scan off in the background while the data is being entered data into the form and reject the post if necessary when the "Preview" or "Submit" button is clicked. Even if a post is submitted through an open proxy before the scan completes, Slashdot's delay between posts from the same IP will ensure that only one post can get through before the ban hammer comes down.

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  18. I'm sorry but this is pure bloat. by Requiem18th · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Personas could work AND WAS ALREADY WORKING as a lightweight theming replacement without being tied to the browser code as an addon.

    REPEAT: It already works as an addon.

    This is essentially an unremovable addon like that MS .NET addon that MS shoved down our throats.

    Look, I have for the most time defended Firefox ever increasing features as progress. I already don't think they managed their "awesomebar" well at all, I like it but many loyal users didn't and instead of making it an option or an extension they gave it a hip name to add insult to injury.

    But now they are taking an already working addon into the browser.

    The thing I liked about FF was it's modularity, it's what caused the browser to split form the mozilla suit in the first place. This is a step into the wrong direction, into a more monolithic application.

    Why do FF developers hate their own extension framework dammit!?

    --
    But... the future refused to change.
  19. Re:Javascript performance by Simetrical · · Score: 4, Informative

    Chrome is open source in the same way that OS X is open source.

    Sure they're both based on a open source project (Chromium/Webkit and Darwin/BSD) does not mean they are truly open source. Try to modify and redistribute either and see how long before either of their "parents" get all lawyer-ey.

    The analogy Chrome : Chromium :: OS X : Darwin/BSD is nonsense. You can't build an almost identical replica of OS X from open-source code, or anywhere close. Chromium is fully open-source, and it's essentially identical to Chrome. It's what the Chrome developers themselves use for development and testing.

    --
    MediaWiki developer, Total War Center sysadmin