Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

For Firefox 4, You'll Need To Wait Until 2011

Posted by timothy on from the they-wanted-a-prime-number dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla said that it will not be releasing Firefox 4 RC, or the final version, before early 2011. Apparently, the bugfixes in the current beta take up much more time than anticipated. Mozilla is working on the feature freeze release Beta 7, which has 14 bugs left. The beta 7 is about six weeks behind schedule and will be released 'when it is ready,' according to Mozilla. It seems as if the original schedule, which estimated that Firefox 4 RC would be released in the second half of October was a bit too optimistic. Microsoft, by the way, released a new IE9 platform preview (PP6) at PDC 20910 today."

11 of 238 comments (clear)

  1. When it's done by Joehonkie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nothing wrong with releasing it when it's done.

    1. Re:When it's done by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Interesting

      >>>Unless we're talking about Microsoft, in which any delay is castigated.

      The delay of Vista was one of the best things for users. It's allowed me (and others too) to use the same XP computer for nearly ten years. Plus the occasional RAM upgrade (from 128 to 512K). What a great bargain that allowed me to save tons of money, and it reminds me of how I was able to use my Commodore Amiga for ten years without needing to upgrade.

      Unfortunately I don't think I'll be able to get 10 years out of my Windows 7 or OS10.6 machine, which is a shame because I'm used to driving things until they die. My TV is twenty years - my VCR 15 years - the cars are 25 years and 13 years respectively. I like to get my money out of the things I buy.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  2. Chrome by baresi · · Score: 4, Funny

    And by that time Chrome will be at version 12 or 13

    --
    RGdot.com
  3. Depends on what "beta" means... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You could have predicted this lateness because the Firefox folks seem to think "beta" means "Let's add new features every couple of days". I've been using Minefield on and off for several months and it got a lot less stable once it hit the "beta" stage, about the same time that they started changing a bunch of things and adding a bunch of features. Before it went to "beta" it had been fine for a long time, but several times since the beta stage I've had to revert to 3.6.

    Yes, I realize I'm using nightlies and should expect bugs, etc, but the traditional definition (not that it is relevant any more) of "beta test" is that the software is basically complete and is being tested for stability and regression, _not_ that it is in a mode where new features are being added on a weekly basis.

    I'm looking forward to Firefox 4 and am sure it will be good overall when it's finally done, but the progress in this period of development has not filled me with a lot of confidence that this will be any time soon.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
  4. Re:Anybody remember if... by jonescb · · Score: 4, Informative

    What are you talking about? I've been using 64-bit browsers in Linux for years!

  5. we know all about it by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    a couple of thousand of us have been watching you surf since one of the many bored hackers decided to install the streaming remote desktop on your pc about 5 months ago just for fun. how do you get any work done with all those pop ups?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  6. WebGL / Canvas is really exciting! by graveyhead · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've wanted a way to draw in a browser - I mean really draw, not just use divs as pixels - for a long time now. Finally it's here! WebGL is really smooth now, I've been watching it in the latest minefield builds. Some guy in IRC posted a demo city drawing that had 24k faces and still rendered smooth as silk. 2d drawing on a canvas is also very nice - very easy to use.

    This is the dawn of a new era of killer web content. My guess - within two years, WebGL will be the highest paying job in web dev.

    A few more months is nothing, I've been waiting years for this ;-)

    --
    std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
    1. Re:WebGL / Canvas is really exciting! by graveyhead · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If it's exploits you're looking for, I doubt WebGL is a good vector for attack. It's a relatively small finite API. Where are you going to attack? Vertex and fragment data is only handled at all inside a shader - which you must supply. Good luck breaking out of that box. Any obvious attacks like resource over-allocation will likely be squashed quickly.

      Compare this with the video spec, which has a huge abstraction right in the middle of it. This opens up any attack vectors that are already in the supported codecs.

      --
      std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
  7. Neither the RC nor the final version? by jfengel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Be bold: release the final version before the release candidate. You can release the final version on schedule in 2010, and then slip the RC to 2011. That's the kind of innovative software development methodology we should expect from Mozilla.

  8. Use nightlies by FedeTXF · · Score: 4, Informative

    I encourage everyone using beta 6 to use the nightly version (http://nightly.mozilla.org/) as their main FF experience. The JS is 10 times faster on most public benchmarks and the boomarks and profile data are not affected even when switching back and forth between 4.0 and 3.6.
    I have both installed: 3.6 that comes with my Linux distro and 4.0 unzipped in my home folder and being updated every morning automatically.

  9. Re:Anybody remember if... by TeknoHog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why would you need a 64-bit native browser?

    So I don't need to have 32-bit libraries on disk wasting space? Not to mention the performance improvements to be had with a proper 64-bit jit'ing JS engine (don't underestimate the power of a larger register set).

    This. I would hate to see a distant future where we still use i386 binary browsers with compatibility layers on top of compatibility layers on top of compatibility layers, just because no browser needs more than 4GB.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.