Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ask Slashdot: Life After Firefox 3.6.x?

Posted by Soulskill on from the i-hear-netscape-is-good dept.

Mooga writes "I am a hard-core user of Firefox 3.6.x who has chosen to stick with the older, yet supported version of Firefox for many years now. However, 3.6.x will soon hit end-of-life, making my life, and the lives of similar users, much more complicated. 3.6.x has been known for generally being more stable and using less RAM than the modern Firefox 10 and even Chrome. The older version of Firefox is already having issues rendering modern websites. What are others who have been holding onto 3.6.x planning on doing?"

2 of 807 comments (clear)

  1. My friend, we have just the thing. by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You want SeaMonkey. Modern Gecko, archaic memory management model. Required system specs page says 128 MB of RAM and 233 MHz Pentium. It even sits in your system tray if you ask nicely enough. Not exactly pretty by modern standards, but I gather that's not your highest priority.

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  2. Re:As users, we're getting fucked over. That's why by DragonTHC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    here's what you were really asking through your raging: Why did Firefox drastically increase build numbers for only minor releases?

    great question AC, here's the answer. Public opinion held consensus that the higher the build number, the more advanced the browser. As IE was in build 9, Google chrome was in version 10, and Opera was in version 11 when Firefox version 4.0 came out, Mozilla decided to abandon their convention for build numbers and play catch-up. Nothing more than public opinion.

    I think this was a smart decision.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.