Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla To Release Firefox 4 Next Month

Neil writes "Damon Sicore, Senior Director of Platform Engineering at Mozilla, has announced that the company is almost ready to ship Firefox 4. On its mailing list, Mozilla has revealed it has around 160 hard blockers to fix, before proceeding to Release Candidate stage. Both the RC and the final version would arrive in February, according to Sicore. Mozilla was originally planning on having Firefox 4 out by the end of last year, but it had to delay the release till 2011. Last month, Firefox 4 Beta 8 was released for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux 32-bit/64-bit, with support for 57 languages. Mozilla's roadmap says it still wants to release a Beta 9, a Beta 10, and at least one Release Candidate build before the final version."

47 of 266 comments (clear)

  1. meh by sortadan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Been using the beta. No real complaints, seems a bit snappier, but on the whole no big whoop. If anyone knows how to get the status bar back that would be nice. And for some reason they always put find at the bottom of the page, which is totally not intuitive since users enter info at the top with the search and address bars...

    1. Re:meh by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And for some reason they always put find at the bottom of the page ...

      I always looked at that as a nod to vi. In addition to putting the "search this page" on the
      bottom you can activate it by hitting the / key, just like doing a find in a vi buffer. As a
      long time vi user I actually appreciate this and find myself missing it now that I use Chrome
      more often.

      For really hard core vi users their is also this for FireFox: Vimperator.
      For me it was a little too hard core and I never got used to it but never the less I
      appreciate the effort put into it!

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    2. Re:meh by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      I always looked at that as a nod to vi. In addition to putting the "search this page" on the bottom you can activate it by hitting the / key, just like doing a find in a vi buffer.

      Didn't realize that. What a cute little feature. Thanks.

      Slashdot - even better than Man pages!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:meh by blair1q · · Score: 2

      Yup. They've screwed the pooch with the status-bar move. 99% of webpages that you want to preview the URI on you can't tell anything significant because it no longer has its own space and has to fit in address-bar space your current page's URI isn't using.

      There's also the issue of buttons that appear and disappear, generally buttons you configured onto the toolbar for a reason.

    4. Re:meh by blair1q · · Score: 2

      I never use the /. I mean the '/'. I use /. like a filipino houseboy.

      Mixing vi into a context where most commands are windows-normal just causes mechanical dysfunction in the part of my brain that's been trained to non-think in vi when using an xterm. If I hit that /, I expect that esc, hjkl, etc. will also work, and I can make painful errors when they don't. There are edit windows that permanently delete the text you entered when you hit esc. I really don't want to accidentally train myself to do that more often. (Yes, ^Z works on some of them. Only some. And not if you've done esc-tab-submit...)

      Same reason I avoid gvim. Don't cross the streams.

    5. Re:meh by spinkham · · Score: 2

      The JavaScript on 64 bit Linux never got the tracing interpreter everyone else got in 3.5. They went from the 3.0 javascript engine straight to method JIT/tracing JIT in this release.

      That's a change from "OMG slow" to "Zing!" on my platform of choice...

      Since Firefox and it's extensions are also written in JavaScript, it's quite an improvement..

      --
      Blessed are the pessimists, for they have made backups.
  2. This didn't release yet? by Admodieus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wasn't this supposed to be the answer to Chrome - yet Chrome has shipped several iterations in the time it took them to get from 3 to 4? I think Firefox is on beta 10 or whatever. For a while, I maintained that I would switch back to Firefox once it matched the speed and minimalist interface that Chrome had, as I didn't like using a browser from Google. Now? Not so sure anymore - I'm so used to Chrome and it fits my workflow so well. It will take a lot to get me back.

    --
    "It's a reverse vampire...they....they crave the sun!"
    1. Re:This didn't release yet? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For a while, I maintained that I would switch back to Firefox once it matched the speed and minimalist interface that Chrome had, as I didn't like using a browser from Google.

      You know there ARE more than 2 choices, right?

      Did you consider Opera?

    2. Re:This didn't release yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, and neither did anyone else. Move on, already.

    3. Re:This didn't release yet? by Haedrian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think Firefox was ever meant to be 'minimalist'. I always saw Firefox as the add-on and feature platform.

      Sure the line is getting blurry now... but I don't use FF because it opens 15 seconds faster. Just because it has features I find useful. Like the synch, and panorama and stuff...

    4. Re:This didn't release yet? by supersloshy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wasn't this supposed to be the answer to Chrome - yet Chrome has shipped several iterations in the time it took them to get from 3 to 4?

      Version numbers mean absolutely nothing; they only determine important milestones... or, in Chrome's case, pure marketing by making several "releases" painted as milestones, when in reality they're all quite minor updates. Firefox has a much more stable (and less confusing) version numbering system.

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    5. Re:This didn't release yet? by Lord+Ender · · Score: 3, Informative

      FireFox was created to be the "lighweight" version of Mozilla, a browser which had a built-in email, IRC and News client.

      But in ANY case, if your apps are taking 15 seconds to load, you need to buy an SSD STAT!! Disk IO on mechanical disks is pitiful. I can't imagine having to go back to waiting on apps to start.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  3. Dumbed down by MrL0G1C · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've never reverted a version before, always liked the new one, but with FF 4 and it's lack of status bar and lack of SSL related security notices and missing right-click menu options, I've got to ask what the hell are they doing? Mozilla seem to be trying to dumb down FF and are removing useful features in the process. Double click blank space for a new tab is gone, right-click -> new tab is gone.

    It's slower to use now because quick options and quick information have been removed. Also, hovering over URLs now squeezes the URL to be visited into the URL box with the current URL, unreadable light coloured fonts have been chosen and for most URLs you can barely read a fraction of the URL - It's dreadful. Plus right-click -> block image has been removed.

    What next? Quit trying to copy Chrome and IE if I wanted to use those corporate straitjackets I would be.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:Dumbed down by MrL0G1C · · Score: 2

      Looks likes a the tab related stuff was fixed / my system only. I still don't like the status Info going missing, there should be an option to turn the status bar on in the view menu.

      And how do you know if a page is partially or badly encrypted without clicking something and digging deep and being a SSL expert? - seriously, who wants to have to manually check every time - a notice should stand out if a page is not encrypted right.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    2. Re:Dumbed down by tuppe666 · · Score: 2

      Double click blank space for a new tab is gone, right-click -> new tab is gone

      middle mouse button is friend. using it on a link will bring it up in a new tab; using it on the blank space will bring up a new tab; using it on a tab removes that tab. Almost the same functionality only better.

      hovering over URLs now squeezes the URL to be visited into the URL box with the current URL, unreadable light coloured fonts have been chosen and for most URLs you can barely read a fraction of the URL - It's dreadful

      Its a lovely feature, but they do need to sort out the colours.

      I am a little sick of accusations of copying when in reality I think they are moving in the same direction. Internet Explorer is looking more like Firefox daily. Firefox's interface changes very little over 3 major versions. have a look through the history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mozilla_Firefox

    3. Re:Dumbed down by MrL0G1C · · Score: 2

      Trying to cram the status bar info in to the url box with the url is not a 'lovely feature' it's fugly and useless, I like to have an idea of how long a page is taking to load and where the link I'm looking at is going.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  4. Re:I sure hope... by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With "Panorama" aka "Tab Candy" aka "Bolted on tab management feature that only power users need", I'm not so sure. :-(

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  5. Re:I sure hope... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    but once they got a good market share and user appreciation, it became bloatware.

    Some people call it "bloat", other people call it features that they asked for and find useful.

    Seriously, if you want a stripped down / light-weight browser, there are other options.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  6. Re:how by Mr.+Spontaneous · · Score: 4, Informative

    You'll have to get addons for both. They want to phase out the status bar, and they figured not providing that functionality was for the best. The titlebar is part of an ongoing WONTFIX, because they think Tabs on Top deserves more love. Thankfully, tired of people's complaints, they whipped together this addon that does the trick: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/221514/ (Vista+)

    --
    Its all fun and games until someone loses an eye... then its just fun.
  7. Missing menu bar? by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does the new Firefox have its menu bar missing just like Chrome and IE8 do? 'cuz I'm a Firefox user and I really want to have all of the browser's configuration and management features jammed into some weird little button in the corner like my Chrome and IE8 using friends do. It's so awesome when the File, Edit, etc. menus that are present in every other application on your desktop go missing in your browser, and I want Firefox to suck that way too!

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    1. Re:Missing menu bar? by supersloshy · · Score: 3, Informative

      By default on Windows, it's replaced by the Firefox Menu. Just right-click anywhere on the UI (besides the page) and turn the menu bar back on. You can also do this from the preferences menu inside the Firefox Menu itself.

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    2. Re:Missing menu bar? by eko3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think your desire is in the minority. Most people don't want to play around under the hood of their browser. Most people could care less. Most people want to see more facebook, foursquare, linkedin, twitter (ad naseum).... and that's exactly what they are getting with these new revs. Welcome to Web 2.0... 3.0... eh... whatever...

  8. Re:meh - Status Bar by jd142 · · Score: 2

    There are a couple of status bar add-ons you can pick up, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/235283/ worked for me.

  9. No Status Bar = FAIL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know you can get an add-on to replace it.

    But that requires each and every user to look for and install something that should already be there!

    For the developers to take the status bar completely out... that's just ridiculous.

    At the very least, put a little check box in the options page to turn it back on.

    1. Re:No Status Bar = FAIL by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not really a fail. What they've done is split the functionality of the existing status bar in two. One part displays the URL you hover over; that has been moved to the URL bar instead. The other part is the add-on icons, and that's been moved to a distinct add-on toolbar, which can be shown or hidden easily as the user prefers. Each and every user will not be installing a status bar extension, because each and every user doesn't want or need a dedicated status bar. IMHO they've implemented the needed functionality in a better way.

      The whole point of FF is it will look like and behave like whatever you want it to, more or less. Changing the way it works by default doesn't change that.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

  10. Re:I sure hope... by GNious · · Score: 2

    Well, the latest Beta runs a lot worse, slower, unstable than the latest 3.6.13, so unless things change quickly .....

  11. Re:how by Shikaku · · Score: 2

    How about they just admit they're trying to copy Chrome and just make it an option instead of forcing it on people?

    Thanks Mozilla.

  12. This version removes Gopher support by ickleberry · · Score: 2

    In a 'pre-emptive removal of unknown exploits' similar to what Microsoft did when they released IE6.

    Fortunately the overbite addon exists, but does not seem compatible with recent Beta versions.

    1. Re:This version removes Gopher support by kbrosnan · · Score: 2

      There have been recent issues with gopher causing security problems. http://www.mozilla.org/security/announce/2010/mfsa2010-68.html

      --
      These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based upon the order I joined. -Homer Simpson
  13. Re:how by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They want to phase out the status bar, and they figured not providing that functionality was for the best

    Wow, that's simply awful. The status bar is there for a reason. Do they really want people following links with even less information than they have now? If my browser is stalling out trying to load a page, how will I know what domain to block?

    Looks like Mozilla is continuing to dumb down its user interface. Is there a browser around that targets the geek market? One for those of us who want more information and more control?

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  14. Re:I sure hope... by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its NOT the seamonkey model; unlike opera, mozilla, seamonkey etc, it doesnt have built in mail, torrent, ftp (at least not worth mentioning), an HTTP server (opera...), newsreader, etc.

    Its JUST a browser, like its always been.

    And I raise a motion that all complaining that 3.0 is too slow and bloaty, should be forced to use version 1.0 or 1.5 or 2.0, and see just how slow they really are when used with modern expectations of heavy duty JS, 30 some tabs, and zillions of extensions. I seem to recall an AWFUL lot of complaining from days of yore about 1.0 and 1.5's memory usage and bloat.

    What is it they say, "the grass is always greener..."?

  15. Status bar by bazmail · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bring back the god damn status bar. Change for change's sake is never a good idea.

  16. Re:how by TheRealGrogan · · Score: 2

    I hate that... I rely on the status bar all the time. I disable the javascript setting that lets sites change the status bar text, so I see only what I'm supposed to. (and I run my browser maximized)

    In Firefox 4.x, when you hover over URLs it DOES show part of it up top, near the address bar but it's truncated. You can see the domain you are about to connect to, but often not much more than that. It's important to see the entire URL.

    That's a show stopper for me. I also dislike the new user interface.

    I'm currently using Minefield in my Windows 7 install, just because it's a convenient 64 bit Firefox binary that is able to update itself. (official rather than third party). I don't care as much, because Windows is just for games, and the only browsing I do is to download new video drivers and such, and check a few of my forums.

    Also, I can excuse this right now because it's "beta" quality, but when I first start Minefield in Windows (for the first time in a session) there's a lengthy, hard disk gyrating delay before it opens. I don't know what the Hell it's doing, but after that it's fine (and quick enough at page rendering)

    But when we get to the point where Firefox 3.x.x is no longer maintained, I'll be changing browsers in Linux, which is my work environment and the browser is a very important application.

    I'm not sure what that is going to be, because I like Firefox (and like to do my own custom builds of it), hate Chrome, hate Konqueror and I have never been very fond of Opera (Though it's quite usable). Maybe Seamonkey, if they don't mess that up too.

    I can't see Firefox 3.x going away any time soon though, so I'm probably OK for a while.

  17. Re:how by splict · · Score: 2

    Do they really want people following links with even less information than they have now?

    It still shows the url on hover, however now it does it in the address bar. Takes a bit of cramming to fit it up there though, so it isn't ideal.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a yo-yo.-Enoch Root
  18. Re:how by psyklopz · · Score: 2

    Tabs on top are fun, but work better in chrome.

    I tried the RC, and the tabs aren't truly on top. So, if the window is maximized, I can't just toss my mouse cursor to the top of the screen and have it sitting amongst all the tabs.

    Instead, they put a little 'Firefox' dropdown at the top. The dropdown should be somewhere else-- the tabs need to be on top so they are a 'million pixels high'.

  19. Re:I sure hope... by StuartHankins · · Score: 2

    Ummm... just uncheck the "update add-ons automatically" checkbox in Preferences (Advanced... Update). Then you can do your manual updates as you wish.

  20. Re:how by StuartHankins · · Score: 2

    This one works too: Status-4-Evar. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/235283/

  21. Re:how by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mozilla, like all market centric organisations, does not care about technical features, usefulness, usability or technical competence. Like all such companies, they care about only one thing--the latest fad. They will follow this fad, be it graphical, academic, ergonomic and they will follow it regardless of its effect, positive or negative, on their overall product.

    Mostly, these fads are graphical: Moving menus and status bars, button redesign, interface overhaul, theme redesign and countless other features that are of use or interest only to the 0.1% of users who are even remotely interested in design or aesthetics. The rest of us simply have to put up with them, confusing and unhelpful as they are.

    Often, the fad is ergonomic. The latest brain fart from an inexperienced school of 20-something UI "experts" simply _must_ be implemented, because it is the latest "best practice" or "modern interface". The MS Office Ribbon is the pinnacle of this kind of fad, and shows how destructive and unhelpful following it can be. No doubt the status bar offended the creed of the latest generation of UI prodigies and had to be done away with. The same with tabs on top. Most people are in reality confused, perturbed and frustrated by these kinds of unhelpful changes, but organisations implement them anyway. I suspect largely to keep their otherwise useless UI design teams in employment.

    Sometimes, the fads are academic. The self signed cert debacle being the primary example. Users were deprived of convenient working encryption because encryption without authentication was declared worse than unencrypted connections by fiat. Some useless academic process had not been followed because of the myth in the middle.

    Basically, the development of Firefox is not done with the interests of users in mind. It is done with the interests of experts too many opinions on how things should be done, and not enough willingness to compromise or listen to feedback. Mercifully however, we still have extensions, so the worst meddling can be successfully undone. Pity the users of Chrome then.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  22. Re:how by beardz · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's a show stopper for me.

    Same here for quite a while - fortunately Status-4-Evar plugin showed up to remedy that particular ill.

  23. Re:Status of the status bar by ampathee · · Score: 4, Informative

    Chrome lacks a status bar only when the status bar would be empty. As soon as there is something to put in it, it appears.

    Mouse-over a link, and it shows you the target. Click a link, and it tells you what the progress is, until it's finished. Then the status bar disappears again.

  24. Re:how by BenoitRen · · Score: 2

    Is there a browser around that targets the geek market?

    Yes, it's called SeaMonkey. However, it's slowly turning into the project of the SeaMonkey Council leader instead of the community's.

  25. Where's the bloody status bar? by TheOddOne · · Score: 2

    For the love of all that is holy... why are we no longer allowed to know what we are hovering and what we are loading?
    What a lovely "addition" and quite "progressive"... i'm all for progress, but come on people....

    --ToO

  26. Re:I sure hope... by blair1q · · Score: 3, Informative

    I was forced to use 2.0 on certain machines until a few months ago, and frankly it can't handle the modern Internet.

  27. Re:how by Teun · · Score: 2

    Yes you can see the link in the address bar, but only when working full screen on a 2500+ pixel one.

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  28. Re:how by Hatta · · Score: 2

    You get the url of link on right side of the your top url bar.

    I'm already using the right side of my top URL bar. Why not leave the status bar where it is? It's not hurting anything. I have plenty of vertical resolution for it. What about my noscript icon, and the SSL icon?

    If they really want to save some vertical space, they should get rid of the find bar. Bring back the find window from 2.x.

    Also now it tells you whenever it's connecting or downloading to/from the server on the actual tab so it's actually more informative.

    How do you fit an entire URL on the tab? My current tab has the following visible "Mozill...". That's barely enough characters to fit 'slashdot', let alone linux.slashdot.org

    Besides, if it tells me what site it is connecting to on the tab itself, where am I supposed to read the page title?

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  29. Re:how by syousef · · Score: 2

    That's a show stopper for me.

    Same here for quite a while - fortunately Status-4-Evar plugin showed up to remedy that particular ill.

    Yeah what's the bet the motherfuckers start blocking extensions when people decide they are standard? Ever since they took away the option to revert from Awfulbar and it started requiring an extension, I don't trust them. They've gone off the rails!

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  30. What Mozilla needs to do by walllaby · · Score: 2
    There are only a very few things Firefox needs to do to take the mantle of King Browser from Chrome.
    • Be Faster, or at least as fast as Chrome. Having used the Beta sparingly, just on "feel" and appearance alone, it appears to have accomplished this. Javascript runs fast, and images don't have any of the problems that Chrome seems to have (especially animated gifs).
    • Be idiot-proof enough to continue taking users away from IE, yet remain moddable enough for power users and their extensions. Needless additions like Panorama tend to ruin this perception.
    • Support HTML5. The beta doesn't test as well as Chrome currently, but it remains to be seen whether that matters. Both are using WebM now, so video support is a wash. http://html5test.com/
    • Have a nice, streamlined interface. Fails so far due to: Awkward tabs (unnecessary repetition of Page title in Menu bar and Tab bar) and terrible placement of url hover. I don't mind the removal of the status bar, but it's been established that URL previews should be at the bottom-left of the screen, where we've become accustomed to seeing them with status bars and Safari/Chrome. That being said, Tab management with lots of tabs in Firefox (having the scroll-function) is superior to Chrome's "make every tab tiny so they all fit in the same window" approach.

    Honestly it doesn't have to be a perfect browser, as I'm getting ready to ditch Chrome just on the basis of poor image support and the fact that Firefox is FOSS, through-and-through. Scrolling in Firefox is also much nicer than in Chrome. It's all in the details, and since Firefox is nigh-endlessly customizable through extensions, most of those details can be taken care of. It's just a matter of how soon all those extensions get updated for Firefox 4, and how much drag they're going to put on the browser once everything is just the way you want it.