Slashdot Mirror
Firefox 15 Coming With Souped-Up, Faster Debugger
StormDriver writes "Firefox 15 has hit the Mozilla pre-beta Aurora channel, and it features a redesigned, built-in debugger."
The original weblog post has more. Thanks to improved debugger internals in SpiderMonkey, supposedly code should run just as fast with debugging enabled as without (ever try loading Slashdot with firebug accidentally enabled?). There are also new tools for testing mobile layouts from the comfort of your workstation, and the debugger can attach to remote processes (Something Emacs users have enjoyed for years now, albeit in a hackish manner and without support for mobile Firefox).
Honestly, "Web 2.0" transforms so much otherwise perfectly functional hardware into environmentally-unfriendly junk that you might as well just stick your dick in an endangered species.
The web ten years ago was fine: people programmed for content and efficiency. Why can't we stay that way, with the advancement being in quality and quantity of /content/?
(ever try loading Slashdot with firebug accidentally enabled?)
Yeah, it takes forever. But what is much faster is using the built in Web Console in the tools menu in newer versions of Firefox. I forget what version it was that started natively supporting debugging but it got a lot better (4 I think?). I'm very excited to see these improvements but my JavaScript has to support versions of Firefox all the way back to 3.6 so I'm still using Firebug and I'm still super grateful that Firebug came around. It literally revolutionized debugging web applications for me. There could have been tools before it but, man, that was the final nail on IE's coffin for support from us. Hell, even Chrome's built in debugging is way better than anything I can find on IE. I know the latest IE versions have gotten better but it's my strong opinion that every single person who uses the internet should be thankful for Chrome, Mozilla, Venkman and these debugging tools. They made the web experience a hell of a lot better and open by empowering developers.
My work here is dung.
Correct. Debugging scales down 3.8462 times when producing a final release.
So why not focus on faster browsing rather than debugging ?!?
As a web developing, most browsers (yes, even IE) have gotten to the sub millisecond rendering ranges. I mean, we're getting to the point where the browser is negligible compared to your network. Yes, you have broadband and it should be lightning fast but there are even little unavoidable delays for each GET or POST. So the next best thing is to empower developers who write the JavaScript code to be able to find out where their delays are. As debugging improves, we can even breakdown the experience and display that to the developer in the browser for each resource (images, CSS, JS, etc) on a page and then the developer can think about turning all those images into a spritesheet or improving some code. I mean, this is actually making the browsing experience faster for everybody by putting the right tools in the developer's hands. You can spend forever optimizing the backend but it doesn't mean jack squat when you're querying for 99 separate little images when the user first hits the page.
My work here is dung.
Well it seems to me that the version numbers increase at the speed of the factorial, so: 15.0 is 3.68024 which is about right too.
15.0 is like 3.9, right?
I'm still trying to figure out why I'm posting this with 13.0.1 and it says there are no updates. What is 14 going to have, a new start page and a little dancing animated monkey? Are they already done with it? Why hasn't it been released? Why are they working on 15 already? Why don't they stop releasing versions in rapid succession so my company can actually use firefox?
Or 23 if you are using chrome
Quit whining and just use the ESR release
Chrome is at 23 now
Can all these noobish people with their issue with version numbers get over it? Every Slashdot post has these idiots cribbing.
You can disable automatic updates. Why are you whining? You don't like something called 15? Write a Greasemonkey script to display the correct version number however you want.
All version numbers as supposed to say is which distribution came first and which came later. 15 > 14. That is all you need to know from a version number.
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem.
Yes they did. There was a benchmark story in slasdot a little while ago. It is as good as or better then chrome
While you may be right when it comes to a lot of other features few people need, I think an efficient, deeply integrated debugger isn't really something you can easily separate from the Javascript engine.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
I felt the same way, but then realized that "Firefox" is now the main version number much like OSX is more or less stuck at 10 forever.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Well, if it makes you happy, what about you just put the number after the three, so you don't have to worry about those things?
Lets call this one 3.15.0.
It makes a lot of sense actually. New features are actually getting MORE testing and are getting released to the public SOONER.
That would defeat the purpose of being worried about something that makes perfect sense just because the number changes too much, and then you can't use that as an excuse to ridicule Firefox on every new release post while totally ignoring the fact that Chrome started the trend in the first place because it just makes sense.
So no, you can't ask mwfisher not to be a totally retarded fuckerlord. That would be against his soul's purpose.
"Web 2.0" transforms so much otherwise perfectly functional hardware into environmentally-unfriendly junk
Find me a "web 2.0" site that requires anything newer than a decade and get back to me. "web 2.0" is meaningless marketing not a tech spec anyway.
Like many (most?) /.ers I have multiple machines on my desk and the experience on my oldest "secondary" box is basically identical to my newest. So it boots and starts chrome slower, who cares, once chrome starts I can't tell the difference.
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
They were releasing versions rapidly before (well, except for that ridiculously long gap between 3.6 and 4.0); they just had another number before the number that changes every time. Whoopee.
Having a feature development branch and a bugfix-release-candidate branch at the same time is nothing new: see Debian stable/unstable/testing, for example.
Are mere mortals already allowed to use it? Last time I checked, they required some sort of registration.
Though from what I was reading up on it, the ESR doesn't make much sense: a random FireFox release is given the "ESR" moniker with purpose of providing only security fixes for it. If the random FireFox version happens to be totally borked and unusable, security fixes alone wouldn't help much.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
Right. Plus, you could try the Firefox ESR (Extended Support Release) version, which is supported for the not quite long-term period of one year. It won't shut up the high-version numbers but it would allow you to skip from, say, version 10 to 15+ or whatever version comes a year after the initial release of the current ESR.
The web 10 years ago was not fine. People were still supporting Netscape 4, which in practical terms meant that everybody was stuck with inaccessible, inefficient, inflexible table layouts that had to transmit style information for every page load. Mobile websites were practically nonexistent; where they did exist, it was a severely cut-back version. Using a single responsive design to cater to desktop and mobile uses would have been impractical even assuming today's mobile hardware. Lots of JavaScript was essentially written twice - once for Netscape and once for Internet Explorer, because the various DHTML and layout methods were different and incompatible. Netscape transcoded from CSS to JSSS internally, and lots of websites only supported Internet Explorer on Windows - a single browser on a single platform, both by the same corporation.
From a content point of view, it was still difficult to produce and manage content. Anything beyond basic stuff usually involved a very limited CMS and writing code. The "WYSIWYG" editors generated terrible, inefficient code that often only worked in one browser. Security was far worse than it is now, developers were largely clueless about even the most basic vulnerabilities, and things like the PCI standard weren't put in place yet.
These days, people are paying more and more attention to content because the technology is largely at a point where they can. Consider YouTube, Wordpress or Facebook - people generating content at phenomenal rates. Efficiency is still a prime concern due to mobile browsing, and techniques such as CSS, caching and CDNs have improved efficiency immensely. User-empowering features such as user stylesheets, user JavaScript and add-ons have grown into a thriving ecosystem, and accessibility support continues to grow.
Ten years ago was a really low point for the web. It lacked the client diversity that came before it, it was rife with incompatibilities and the inefficient designs necessary to compensate for them, and it lacked the compatibility and accessibility that mostly came afterwards. In all of the history of the web, that is probably the one point I'd least like to be stuck in.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/10.0.5esr
Firebug just works but I have always had the feeling that it is hard on my browser.
If chrome would get a better debugger then bye bye firefox though.
[...] so my company can actually use firefox?
What is stopping you from doing just that?
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
and why do users need debugging?
They're using their grammar skills there.
Really, if developers are the audience why not just farm out this feature to the Seamonkey communication suite, the direct descendant of the Mozilla kitchensink browser + email client + HTML editor, etc. Wasn't the goal of Firefox to become the original speed browser by throwing out all the non-web features of the Mozilla dinosaur?
From my (totally unscientific) observation, most of the page load time is due to every page requesting crap from 10 different ad networks and trackers, which are inevitably overloaded. You can optimize the pages you serve all you want, but this may be a case where developers need to adjust the attitude of the commercial people involved instead.
Firefox RAM usage is a lot lower than Chromes actually, theyve done a good job making the browser more efficient. Firefox is faster as well, except for some hiccups here and there. Soon they will go ahead of Chrome, I dont know what changed, maybe its the new release cycle everyone is whining about on this page, but theyve done a good job with it.
Forget debuggers. I don't even load /. with javascript enabled.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
So why not focus on faster browsing rather than debugging ?!?
They're turning it into an OS. This is trickle down.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Sorry if it wasn't clear that I was speaking to versioning in general, and how some companies have given it up altogether(Think Apple with "The New Ipad"). Not at all trolling =\
I personally like minor/major release schedules, but that is my preference. When we get to firefox 40, or 50, they'll probably stop and re-think this choice again.
I wish that were the case. As web pages make use of more complex layout and dynamic data, the browsers have become key to not just rendering speed but debugging. Firebug was, for a long time now, key reason to use firefox.
Take a look at http://sinz.org/Maze/ for what turned into an interesting benchmark of layout and js/dom manipulation. (It was not the intent but it sure shows significant differences). Since I did that page, Firefox actually got much slower than it was but it still beats IE but loses badly to Chrome.
I'm still trying to figure out why I'm posting this with 13.0.1 and it says there are no updates. What is 14 going to have, a new start page and a little dancing animated monkey? Are they already done with it? Why hasn't it been released?
Ballmer threatened to sue them...
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
except in the real world, that isn't true, just in somebodies "benchmark"
Except in the real world, Firefox has been running for three weeks on this machine with about 20 tabs open and it's using a whole 320MB of RAM. That still seems a lot, but it's a tiny fraction of the available RAM.
My firefox process grows to 1.5GB in 24 to 48 hours. Closing all but one of the windows and attempting to free memory via about:memory does nothing.
Maybe you should remove the addons that are leaking RAM. As I mentioned above, my Firefox has grown to 320MB after three weeks.
The crap from different domains can often be loaded in parallel to the rest. More relevant to load time are the cases where resource C only gets requested after the browser processes resource B, which is included by resource A.
Under OSX it installs an update deamon without asking. Its separate from Chrome and stays there until you explicitly look for it and remove or disable it. Deleting Chrome has no affect, the update daemon just continues to run sending who knows what back to google every hour.
Want to update for me? Fine, do it in the app, don't start up processes I don't know about that will run forever even if I decide to ditch Chrome.
Finding that was my last experience with Chrome.
Why can't someone make a better browser than Firefox but make it as customizable?
That's an excellent idea. A tiny lightweight browser should rise from the ashes of the bloated monster that spawned it.
We could call it Phoenix!
That sounds really cool, but I think that name might be taken already.
How about Firebird?
That also sounds pretty cool, but it seems to be taken as well.
Hmm. What name should we try next...?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
This is when the bulk of the MemShrink work will land, which should make a lot of people very happy. To see what they've been working on, check this site out: http://blog.mozilla.org/nnethercote/
21.0.1180.15 beta-m for me... I am even trying the Beta version, I just upgrade a minute ago too...
The difference between Google and Firefox. Is that Google was designed in an environment that correctly supports this version number. There is no In your face, the new version is out. They are spots for very minor patch levels.
What Firefox did was lame, they just kinda blindly copied what Google did because they thought it was cool. Now people don't know how far behind they are in versions, because every minor fix is a major version number.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
We had a similar problem with Solaris. Solaris 2.5.5 then Solaris 2.5.6 then Solaris 7, Solaris 8...
Where they were 2.5.7 and 2.5.8....
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Why? Because it's the only browser that doesn't use Microsoft's screwy font rendering. I know I could run gdi++ to get that system wide, but I prefer hooking OS calls as little as necessary. DirectWrite rendering is better due to subpixel glyph positioning, but it's still too aggressive in hammering the glyphs to the pixel grid for my taste.
Yes, I put up with the other Safari annoyances because the me, the most important function of a web browser is displaying comfortably-readable text, and for me Apple's algorithm wins out big over Microsoft's. Even on a 109dpi screen, Safari is easier on my eyes. Looking forward to high-DPI screens, when I hope that hinted rendering will eventually die out as screen resolution approaches that of the printed page.
Firefox has gotten a lot better over the years, however. Been running Nightly since right around the time when they changed their development schedule, and I'm happy with how the performance and memory usage has improved over that time. If they'd offer options to disable hinted fonts (even if it caused a slight performance hit due to not using accelerated font rendering), I'd switch back completely.
FC Closer
I love how when you login you get the SunOS version. uname also reports the SunOS version. Then you do a cat /etc/release and you get the Solaris version. Then isainfo -kv if you want to find out what architecture you are on.
Now that's a hot mess.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
:/
"Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
and you are proud of this because ....
... run just as fast with debugging enabled as without ... and the debugger can attach to remote processes ...
Yay Firefox 15! With two new better things that I and most people will never use. And that attaching to a remote process thing - wow. Always never wanted to do *that*. No security worries there.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Yep
Until I posted this story last week with real RAM usage in a browser showdown, the lie will keep being repeated and modded up by moderators.
I just got tired of seeing the same comments over and over again which were valid with FF 3.0 and certainly 4.0 and 5.0, but not true anymore. I am glad to see moderators now mod down these comments. I would suggest the grandparent upgrade beyond 3.6 to ESR 10 which has memory improvements or use IE if he is at work and has only 1 gig of ram on his work machine.
I have never seen these memory leaks. At least not recently but I admit I only just started warming up to FF again after 4 came out. It had a lot of issues all last year.
http://saveie6.com/
I'm at just over 59 hours, and it's at about 400MB* on a 64 bit Arch Linux desktop. That goes out the window when Firebug is on. It seems to leaks memory like crazy. It can easily climb over 1.5GB* in only a few hours of debugging/development.
*Rough estimates based on top
FF13 is constantly using 60% or more CPU on all my machines, even with just an about:blank open.
If you're up to 2GB you're likely seeing a leaky plugin. Firebug, for me, seems to leak. In short, if you're seeing consistent ram usage > 500MB, you should try with all plugins disabled or in safe mode.
You haven't used Mozilla Firefox in years or you've never actually tried it in a corporate environment [...] Updates with no UAC prompt landed in Firefox 12.
The current version is 13, so that means the no-UAC update landed less than three months ago.
If you're going to push an update every few weeks and not even provide a sensible major/minor version number so people know when to pay attention, it's a really cheap shot to attack someone because they haven't kept up with every little change in every new version.
You do make sure new security fixes don't introduce regressions in a staging lab, don't you? It's how competent administrators do thing.
You do realise that many small businesses don't even have a full-time dedicated sysadmin, don't you?
There are some custom builds of Firefox with GPOs added in
Well, it's Open Source, so there are probably custom builds that make a tuna sandwich while Google loads, but that's hardly a compelling proposition when other major browsers support this business-friendly feature natively.
Firefox can be used in the corporate environment, it just requires a competent administrator.
Yes, it's all the customer's fault, and the beatings will continue until morale improves.
Sorry, but your head-in-the-sand attitude is exactly why Firefox isn't getting anywhere in busineses since the rapid updates began. You can post snarky AC comments all you like, but somehow I don't think the world is going to change through the sheer force of your willpower.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
That would be a more compelling argument if the first ESR wasn't already nearing end-of-life.
I think Mozilla and most large organisations have very different ideas of what constitutes extended support.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I resisted the move to Chrome for years, but a few weeks ago I finally game up on Firefox. I just got tired of dealing with all the system lockups caused by immense resource leaks. There are features I'll miss, and UI changes I hate having to deal with, but not nearly enough to make it worth sticking around. Especially after Firefox's upgrades started getting driven by Chrome envy.
Try: https://www.requestpolicy.com/
I read that at first as the version numbers increase at a speed fractional to light - ie i think something like 0.6C....
You have obviously never tried FF in enterprise environments. The original poster is correct, it can't be configured via GPO, only config files which the users can modify. I know there are work arounds for that but its a lot of messing around especially since you can configure and lock down both Chrome and IE via GPO. Releases are still too rapid on the enterprise release, each release still needs to be assessed and checked before it's deployed. In locked down environments you don't want users installing stuff nilly willy, or have external sources push updates into your network. Mozilla still has an extremly long way to go on this front And before you rant more about "competent administrators", FF requires a lot more administration than IE does and is a lot more fiddely to configure. I was on the ESR mailing lists for several months but then gave up on it recently when a dev (about 3 weeks ago, so extremly recent) posted Firefox is not an enterprise browser, and has never purported to be so. I think FF should take a leaf from Google as to enterprise setups...
I have. In fact I've deployed Firefox and other Mozilla applications to tens of thousands of users. I built the configuration and packaging environment, as well as some tools for us to manage site- and role-specific autoconfigs. A coworker of mine spent a lot of time in the JavaScript autoconfigs themselves and came up with some pretty impressive automations.
I can see how you might want GPO support if you're into it but for us it was great that we could deploy variants of one single file and support all 4 major OS platforms in use within our organization. We were able to provide preview releases of new Firefox builds that hadn't yet been tested with all the corporate apps and users could switch between them. As far as locking the settings or preventing auto-update, both of those tasks were both trivial and obvious.
Honestly Firefox and the rest of the products were fine to configure. The hassles really came a bit from what you'll have trying to automate any large organization, and most especially the politics from middle managers arguing about whether we could just push the update yet. Oh, the politics.
TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
I don't care, I am still on 10 ESR, which is 3.8, I guess? And it just had a point update 19MB in size!
It looks to me like Google does not have to do anything to win the browser war except wait until all the competitors have become so ridiculous that nobody uses them any more.