Firefox 8.0 Beta Available

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by Soulskill on Friday September 30, 2011 @03:15AM from the another-day-another-version dept.

An anonymous reader tips news that Mozilla has released the beta version of Firefox 8, only a few days after going live with the final version of Firefox 7. According to the announcement, the big changes this time around include the ability to use Twitter as a default search engine, more versatility in restoring tabs on startup, and improved user control over add-ons. "Users will receive a one-time notification to review and confirm third party add-ons they want to keep, disable or delete. When Firefox starts and finds that a third-party program has installed an add-on, Firefox will disable the add-on until the user has explicitly opted in, giving users better control over their Web experience."

38 of 305 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Im confused by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2011-09-30 03:20 · Score: 3, Funny

Is 'firefox' a browser or a unit of currency in Italy?

--

"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
are you kidding me? by hymie! · 2011-09-30 03:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

I was just about to point out that I had to revert to Firefox 5.X because Firefox 6 broke a web site I need.
Then I read this:

the ability to use Twitter as a default search engine,
and I'm seriously wondering why I don't run Opera or Chrome.
Oh, right. FoxyProxy is the reason why I don't run Opera or Chrome.
1. Re:are you kidding me? by facetiousprogrammer · 2011-09-30 03:25 · Score: 2
  
  I switched to Opera this week. bye bye chrome and firefox.....
2. Re:are you kidding me? by MechaStreisand · 2011-09-30 03:38 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  No, the difference is that Chrome doesn't fuck with things on every new version, and Firefox DOES.
  
  --
  Disclaimer: IANAL. This post is, however, legal advice, and creates an attorney-client relationship.
3. Re:are you kidding me? by RogueyWon · 2011-09-30 03:55 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The really sad thing? The other week, the latest release of Firefox 6 decided that it wanted to intermittently crash my Nvidia drivers. Until I figured out I could fix this by disabling the hardware acceleration option (which has absolutely zero impact on performance anyway), I was coming to the conclusion that rather than Opera or Chrome, if I was going to switch, it would be to IE. Having not used it for years, I was pretty shocked at how much it had improved in the interim.
  That said, I think there's some deep part of me that would just find it hard to trust IE.
  But yes, Firefox has long since passed the point where a new version meant "oooh, new features" and reached the point where it means "oh god, what have they broken or ruined this time?"
4. Re:are you kidding me? by BZ · 2011-09-30 03:55 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Is there a bug on file on this? We try really hard to not break websites, obviously; if we broke something without realizing it we would _really_ like to know.
5. Re:are you kidding me? by MrZilla · 2011-09-30 04:11 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I tried switching from FF3 to FF6 recently. I did not like it at all.
  Currently been running Chrome for a few days, it's OK, but has some irritating issues (for me).
  Will try Opera next week.
  Then IE.
  Then I will give up and move to some deserted island and avoid modern browsers for ever.
  
  --
  mov ax, 4c00h
  int 21h
6. Re:are you kidding me? by icebraining · 2011-09-30 04:27 · Score: 2
  
  If Firefox is able to crash your Nvidia drivers, it's the drivers - or possibly the Windows graphics subsystem - that are fucked, not Firefox.
  I know this is irrelevant to you as the user, but we're on /.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
7. Re:are you kidding me? by PixetaledPikachu · 2011-09-30 04:45 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  And it still has a large number of uncopied features (like a mail client) which I've simply become used to having around.
  
  Not having mail client is actually one of my major reason in adopting firefox, and abandoning netscape
8. Re:are you kidding me? by Waccoon · 2011-09-30 05:36 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I developed the exact same problem with my ATI drivers after updating to Calalyst 11.7. Blue Screens of Death after watching exactly 3 YouTube videos under Adobe Flash.
  I disabled hardware acceleration in Flash and now the system is perfectly stable.
  I'm still using Firefox 3.6.x
  So, either Flash is the culprit, or there's something wrong with trying to use "hardware acceleration" (of what?) through the overlay that Firefox is using. Does Opera/Chrome/IE have similar problems? I've just accepted that Flash itself was the problem, and haven't tested any other browsers.
9. Re:are you kidding me? by Zak3056 · 2011-09-30 05:49 · Score: 2
  
  why didn't you switch when you could use ebay as search engine in firefox? or wikipedia? or amazon? or bing? or yagoo?
  have you noticed, default is google, and every single engine can be set as default, should you want to.
  basically, you're dumb.
  I don't think he's complaining about the fact that there are search engine choices, but rather that the biggest new feature in a major version update is "you can use twitter as the default search engine." I mean, seriously, this is Mozilla saying, "We broke all your addons, but in return for the massive inconvenience, we've given you a trivially implemented new feature."
  
  --
  What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
10. Re:are you kidding me? by rubycodez · 2011-09-30 05:51 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The BUG is between your comrades right ear and left, they are DESTROYING a once-good software because this version churning breaks plugins, breaks access to web sites, and break use with other web-fronted softwares. Your team is ignoring user needs and flying off on a ridiculous tangent that does the users no good. People are getting fed up with this crap and ditching Firefox. Your project will LOSE MONEY that it gets based on user share. Tell them to quit being ivory tower dumb-asses working in a vacuum and start taking heed of the real world of users.
11. Re:are you kidding me? by shutdown+-p+now · 2011-09-30 06:00 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  An API that is accessible to userspace code and can crash the system, or otherwise significantly affect all processes running on it, is unacceptable. "Undefined behavior" that crashes the calling process only is okay. "Undefined behavior" that crashes the driver in the kernel is not.
Re:fuck firefox by Joce640k · 2011-09-30 03:24 · Score: 2, Funny

Um, the rapid release schedule is what gives Firefox its stability and confidence.

--
No sig today...
Why is this news? by loftwyr · 2011-09-30 03:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

With Firefox releasing betas/alphas and new releases every few weeks, why are we covering this? Can't we just have the ever six week release story and maybe another one if they do something innovative?
Chrome is on version 15 but I don't see a story here every number change.
1. Re:Why is this news? by Microlith · 2011-09-30 03:35 · Score: 2
  
  Because it gives Slashdot a way to garner page hits from the inevitable Firefox hatefest.
2. Re:Why is this news? by Baloroth · 2011-09-30 04:09 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  This was my reaction too. This isn't even a release, it's a beta. AFAIK Firefox constantly has a beta out, it shouldn't be news to anyone on this site.
  
  --
  "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
Re:___ firefox by ackthpt · 2011-09-30 03:25 · Score: 4, Funny

Um, the rapid release schedule is what gives Firefox its stability and confidence.
We'll know for sure, when they release 9.0 Beta next week.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Nightly builds by killmenow · 2011-09-30 03:26 · Score: 2

Fuck it. I may as well do up a script to check out the latest nightly updates and re-build FF every day for me.
1. Re:Nightly builds by jalefkowit · 2011-09-30 03:50 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Don't bother, before you're done rebuilding a new version of Firefox will be out anyway.
  
  --
  Read my blog.
Third Party Addons... by nschubach · 2011-09-30 03:27 · Score: 3, Interesting

Users will receive a one-time notification to review and confirm third party add-ons they want to keep, disable or delete. When Firefox starts and finds that a third-party program has installed an add-on
I assume this include Microsoft stealth adding extensions to the browser?
IE: Windows Media Player Plugin

--
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
Re:fuck firefox by Tsingi · 2011-09-30 03:34 · Score: 2

I use nightly. Updates every day. No problem doing that.
What third-party addons? by DNS-and-BIND · 2011-09-30 03:42 · Score: 5, Insightful

The addons I want to keep? Sorry, I've never had this experience. It's more like, "the addons I want to permanently disable as they won't be updated to the latest version because the creator finished his project and moved on with his life". Seriously, a browser whose entire idea is 'you can extend it' combined with constant compatibility-breaking updates?

--
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
1. Re:What third-party addons? by jcupitt65 · 2011-09-30 04:44 · Score: 2
  
  They have a new add-on update thing for exactly this reason.
  Previously, all add-ons were marked "incompatible" by default on a major version change and authors needed to test their add-on and explicitly mark it as OK for it to work. This caused the painful loss of add-ons during major updates that you mention.
  The new system scans the source code for every add-on automatically and flags as compatible all those which don't touch parts of firefox which have changed. As a result, as long as the author of the add-on didn't mess with the internals of the browser too much, add-ons will automatically move between versions with no work from anyone. I have 9 add-ons in my ff and they all moved to ff7 painlessly.
  Add-ons which depend on some changed or removed feature will need updating, but there's not much you can do about that. Jetpack aimed to make add-ons less closely tied to the browser, but that seems to have gone rather quiet.
Re:fuck firefox by JonySuede · 2011-09-30 03:43 · Score: 2

I use nightly too and everything is working fine, seems*1 faster than chrome and most importantly not a google spy.
1-Perception of speed is more important than a synthetic benchmark number....

--
Jehovah be praised, Oracle was not selected
wow by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-30 03:52 · Score: 2

oh wow. twitter as a search engine? you sure it doesn't warrant an even BIGGER version number? like say 15? it's a major enhancement to the search bar after all
Re:fuck firefox by Anonymous Coward · 2011-09-30 03:56 · Score: 2, Informative

They've just using the major number for what the minor number used to mean.
Very stupid.
Re:Seriously? by Anrego · 2011-09-30 04:00 · Score: 2

It's supposed to signify something. That's the whole point of having a major and minor (and build) number.
<something big changed and may require config changes>.<something relatively minor has changed and I should just be able to keep working>
I have no idea what the purpose of this whole versioning/rapid release scheme is... but from my vantage point it looks very silly.
Re:Seriously? by mcvos · 2011-09-30 04:02 · Score: 2

The fact that they have a dot in the middle suggests that they have some structure; that the number in front of the dot is more significant than the one after the dot. Why call it 8.0 when it's just a meaningless number? And why is mine called 7.0.1 instead of 7 or 7.1 or 8?
In fact, why not just use build numbers? Just give me Firefox 7136 and I'll admit that it's just a number with no implication of meaning or structure.
Microsoft must be sick of this by ZeroSerenity · 2011-09-30 04:07 · Score: 2

I mean, how much money have they spent on cakes?

--
For those who seek perfection there can be no rest on this side of the grave.
Re:fuck firefox by kilodelta · 2011-09-30 04:13 · Score: 2

Sure, because I note every version since 4 breaks certain JAVA functionality. That's why I note they're still updating v3.6.x and are on v3.6.23 now.
Re:fuck firefox by SiMac · 2011-09-30 05:01 · Score: 2

1-Perception of speed is more important than a synthetic benchmark number....
What!? You mean that "Classic Scheme benchmarks, translated to JavaScript by Florian Loitsch's Scheme2Js compiler" don't capture the use cases of modern websites?
This is like losing my tools while trying to work! by GarryFre · 2011-09-30 05:04 · Score: 2

You know how annoying it would be to have to stop and look for your tools because someone's pet monkey would sneak away with your tools? Well Firefox seems to have become that pet monkey. I'm deep into some project, and suddenly I get some upgrade notice and I have to review which updates are now broken? Oh then I got to find out what else is broke? Firefox, give us a break!! Er wait don't! You've been giving us plenty of broken tools, web sites.

--
www.Migrainesoft.com - Computer giving you a headache? We can fix that!
Re:Seriously? by Luckyo · 2011-09-30 05:16 · Score: 3, Informative

Or in case of proper firefox releases, 3.6.23. The last number was for minor crap like this release, middle number was for minor and major features, and first number was for very big changes.
Good thing 3.6 is still supported. Someone at mozilla foundation still has a shred of sanity left.
Wow guys by Joshua+Fan · 2011-09-30 05:25 · Score: 2

We're finally taking a break from the Microsoft/Apple bashing. Always refreshing to have a new company to hate.
Re:fuck firefox by Megane · 2011-09-30 06:05 · Score: 2

Try Seamonkey instead. It's still an old-school browser, and as a Mozilla product, it's been benefiting from the good parts of Firefox.

--
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
Re:Nonsense.. FF is slow and buggy. by justforgetme · 2011-09-30 06:45 · Score: 2

This is a practice done for many programs nowadays. It is good because end user should never be faced with the application's destruct routines. Having big window applications just cluttering the desktop with unresponsive behemoths is plain bad UX. That is why all IDEs and productivity applications have splash loaders. Google chrome and chromium do that as well. you just don't notice it on them because they are multi instanced by design so when you accidentally close chromium you (theoretically) can re-launch it immediately because all you will do is create another instance of the application. You might argue that FF and Opera should not be single instance apps but that is another story entirely.
I don't know what security model you are referring to, can you elaborate?
I know that perceptive speed is not the key point of an app but it matters in workflows and UX more than you think (apparently). Chrome might be better than FF on handling resource hungry webGL implementations but for the average facebooks I don't think js engine differences are of matter.
I am happy with ff8(aurora) best memory performance I experienced in ff and as far as I can tell the fast development schedule has actually made that devs think about what new functionality they will include.
way to go

--
-- no sig today
Re:___ firefox by Stormtrooper42 · 2011-09-30 06:49 · Score: 2

Technically, Firefox 9.0 is scheduled to enter Beta at the same time they release Firefox 8.0.
That means November 8. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases
Why yes, just 6 weeks after Firefox 7.0 release...

Seriously, calm down on the major releases, Mozilla.