Slashdot Mirror


Firefox 18 Launches With Faster IonMonkey-Enabled JavaScript, Built-In PDF Viewe

An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla on Tuesday officially launched Firefox 18 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. The improvements include a new JavaScript compiler, a built-in PDF viewer, as well as Retina and touch support. The release notes are available, as is a list of changes for devs."

36 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. Lawlz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Psh, I just upgraded to Firefox 22 just 5 minutes ago. Firfox 18 is so 30 minutes ago.

    1. Re:Lawlz by hobarrera · · Score: 2

      Are we really going to have this kind of joke every time a firefox version is released? I'm mean, it's getting a bit repetitive. I've seen about about 10 times in the last 10 minutes!

  2. Re:Honestly? by Shikaku · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/all.html

    ESR versions are yearly if you care so much about fast releases.

  3. Re:Honestly? by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Informative

    Feel free to use the LTR and only upgrade once a year if you like. Nobody's forcing you to upgrade with every release.

  4. Quit whining by mcrbids · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Honestly, your whining is counterproductive.

    Firefox is following a standard open-source style policy of release early, release often and as a vendor following this exact mantra, I see that although I do hear a lot of whining from some of our (typically more backward) customers, we are able to evolve to meet new needs better than our competitors which has allowed us to grow at a sustained rate better than 50% per year for years on end.

    Many of our meetings with clients start with whines about how they have trouble keeping up with all the changes, followed up by hours of specifying new changes and additions that they'd like, closing with my pointing out that all the changes that they requested will be released as developed and them having to keep up with them as they are made available.

    Perhaps it's necessary for some people to see improvements in a bad light, but if you really don't like it... leave! Go use some product that doesn't update at all if you want. I hear you can still find Firefox 3.6 binaries if you look hard enough. Even Chrome updates constantly.

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    1. Re:Quit whining by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And your narrow-mindedness is annoying. Do you know why Microsoft only releases patches once a month for its operating systems?

      And your complaining about the mainstream version of Firefox while ignoring the existence of the enterprise version of Firefox makes your argument disingenuous.

      Here let me get you started: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    2. Re:Quit whining by Lucky75 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Firefox has a version that releases less often for corporate users. Also, Chrome does the exact same thing, sans the alternate version.

      --
      DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
    3. Re:Quit whining by Vaphell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's the reality of the web. People want to use css3, html5, svg, faster javascript and what not now, not in 1 year, maybe.
      I don't really pay too much attention to what companies want, if they had their way we'd be still using IE6.0

    4. Re:Quit whining by mcrbids · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Do you know why Microsoft only releases patches once a month for its operating systems? Because corporate environments can become violently ill when something is updated without it being tested first.

      We even offered to have a "stable" release version with updates only every 1 to 6 months, and have every released version have a 30 day trial period so that they could preview changes. We asked a 5% premium for this service. We thought as much as half of our client base would go for it based on the loud verbal feedback. But as soon as our clients found that they were choosing between having last year's product, totally stable with no updates or getting the new one with all the latest new features, bells, and whistles, guess how popular this option was? How many clients do you think signed that contract?

      Not one.

      My "narrow-mindedness" comes from my past experience... so now we listen to the whining carefully, and try to identify ways to better disseminate our change logs.

      And for the record, a product that doesn't need to be updated is something some programmers strive for: It means they've made something that does its job so well there's no need to change it.

      It's also a sign of a stagnant industry/marketplace. Needs change as circumstances change, and if the software doesn't change with the customer, it tends to disappear.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    5. Re:Quit whining by Cinder6 · · Score: 2

      Do you know why Microsoft only releases patches once a month for its operating systems? Because corporate environments can become violently ill when something is updated without it being tested first.

      I don't use Firefox, and I know it's popular to bash its rapid release schedule for some reason, but...

      Firefox 14.0: June 26, 2012
      Firefox 15.0: August 28, 2012
      Firefox 16.0: October 9, 2012
      Firefox 17.0: November 20, 2012
      Firefox 18.0: January 8, 2013
      Firefox 19.0: February 19, 2013
      Firefox 20.0: March 26, 2013

      Average is well over a month for each major version number. Granted, 13.0 came out less than a month before 14.0, but that was several versions ago, and is the only version in 2012 that had such a short lifetime. Mozilla doesn't ship new major versions that fast. There are point releases, but not as many as you'd think (only 1 or 2 per release).

      I don't see why people are upset about Firefox's release schedule. It's similar to Chrome's, which seems to largely get a pass. Then again, Chrome does silent updates. I assume (hope) Firefox does the same--is this not the case? If not, then that could get annoying.

      --
      If you can't convince them, convict them.
    6. Re:Quit whining by betterprimate · · Score: 2

      That's why Chrome, Firefox, etc., aren't the most-used browsers.

      You may not have noticed, but they *are* the most-used browsers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

    7. Re:Quit whining by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Firefox has admitted basically forever that "Corporate is not our target". If it were, we would have all sorts of things: ADM templates / GPO support, MSI installers, longer support terms, support for the OS certificate store (AKA an easy way to seed trusted root certs), support for smartcard readers, etc.

      Incidentally, Chrome has all of that, and I believe you can even pin a certain version if you need to.

      If both of those are unacceptable, use IE. Your environment is not one that Firefox has ever stated a commitment to supporting; their goal is to make a good general purpose browser, and if thats no good to you then oh well. These changes theyre making are generally a REALLY good thing for the average internet user.

    8. Re:Quit whining by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Chrome has full blown official MSIs, ADM templates, and full GPO support. It supports pulling in the system proxy and certificate store. It supports smart-card readers.

      It is, aside from IE, the most corporate friendly browser out there. That you think otherwise makes me think you havent done much research on the matter; certainly its lightyears ahead of firefox in a corporate environment. Its only big failing is that it utterly dies when used in a TS scenario, and I have a feeling it is an architectural problem that cannot be resolved without a rewrite.

      It appears that there are workarounds for the roaming profiles issue, but dont say "cant even handle roaming profiles" as if thats a gross failing-- a lot of apps fail horribly when run from a network share. You ever hear Microsoft's stance on using Outlook with network-stored PSTs?

  5. IonMonkey by girlintraining · · Score: 2

    Seriously, were y'all drunk when you came up with that name? It conjures up images of some kind of celestial primate flinging high energy particles about. Firefox at least sounds like something that could be found frolicing about in heavily wooded areas.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:IonMonkey by A10Mechanic · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Firefox" , . Remember, you must post in Russian.

  6. Re:Wasn't this supposed to happen silently? by ChronoReverse · · Score: 3, Informative

    It already happened. Check your settings to see if it's turned on.

  7. Re:I wonder... by ShaunC · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if it's going to override that setting when it updates itself.

    Doesn't seem that way. I had the Foxit Reader plugin installed, and after upgrading, PDFs still opened in Foxit. Quite frankly I can't figure out where the built-in PDF reader even is; I uninstalled Foxit and if I try to load a PDF, Firefox now just prompts me to save the file.

    --
    Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
  8. There is no PDF viewer, yet by ShaunC · · Score: 2

    From another article:

    One feature that didn't make it into this release, by the way, is Mozilla's new built-in PDF reader. While the organization has been working on this for a while, it will only make it into the beta release that's expected to arrive on Thursday.

    --
    Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    1. Re:There is no PDF viewer, yet by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 5, Informative

      there sure is, although it wasn't on by default for me: enable pdfjs inside about:config and set the pdf in content to 'preview in firefox'

      --
      -- the cake is a lie
  9. PDF.js by oever · · Score: 4, Informative

    The PDF viewer in Firefox, PDF.js is an amazing piece of software. It is written entirely in JavaScript and runs in the same sandbox in which a webpage runs. So it is very safe. The layout accuracy and speed of PDF.js are simply amazing. Text selection happens just like it does in the browser. Some PDF viewers only allow you to draw a rectangle on which to do OCR. PDF.js simply lets you select the glyphs.

    This viewer has been available as an add-on for a while already.

    --
    DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
    1. Re:PDF.js by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      Have you looked at recent benchmarks?

      I posted a story last July and Firefox handled the most amount of tabs with the least ram. IE 9 surprising wins too if you have just 1 - 2 tabs. Chrome now is the new pig. My, have things changed in just 1 year.

    2. Re:PDF.js by Tailhook · · Score: 2

      I can not comprehend of anything worse

      That's not much of an imagination. You can embed Javascript in PDF...

      It's turtles all the way down.

      --
      Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
    3. Re:PDF.js by DuckDodgers · · Score: 4, Informative

      They did that because an awful lot of PCs hacked by a website were hacked through security flaws in the PDF viewer. Writing the PDF viewer in Javascript means that the Mozilla developers only need to make Javascript in Firefox secure to protect the machine from intentionally badly formed PDFs, and of course they already needed to secure Javascript so that's no extra security work.

      As a scripting language, Javascript is still slow compared to something like well-written C++. But Firefox 18 is pretty close to the latest version of Chrome for Javascript performance (e.g. arewefastyet.com ), so I bet the PDF viewer in Javascript works quickly enough.

    4. Re:PDF.js by oever · · Score: 2

      No, I'm not being paid. I work on a similar project: WebODF. I wrote the post so someone (thank you) would ask me what is in it for me and I could plug this project.

      Seriously: my experience is that PDF.js works acceptably for most PDFs I threw at it. That included large PDFs with designer layout and scientific papers. Granted, poppler (okular, evince) is still way faster in rendering, but I enjoy PDF.js because it is good enough and I know the work it took to make it and can see the improvements they are making still. Trying to write a desktop type application in the browser makes one appreciate a good one like PDF.js.

      --
      DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
  10. OTOH by dogsbreath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Went to Chrome for a while to see what the buzz was about. Supposedly faster, cleaner, etc.

    Got po'd when I couldn't configure it to operate the way I wanted it to. Just personal taste and not a criticism; to each their own, as they say. However, I did not see any improvement in responsiveness and, for me there was a genuine loss of functionality. Went back to Firefox and have been very happy. Sure it would be nice to have some process options but Mozilla seems to be doing a bang up job of dealing with the various issues that caused process hangs and memory leaks. I can't remember the last time I had to kill an unresponding FF process. Used to happen weekly, even daily. Kudos to the FF team.

    For the most part the Firefox version changes have been transparent to me (well, except for tabs - grrrr - but I have been able to customize them to work the way I want). The update cycle is more or less the same with Chrome and IE. If they changed the numbering scheme so it went from, say, 10.17 to 10.18 instead of 17 to 18, there would be less reaction. Or maybe not. Anyways, it is not a huge issue.

    Firefox is easily competitive with any other popular browser and is well supported. Don't think I will bother trying a change again for a while unless something truly game changing comes along.

  11. Re:Too many revisions chased me away by Lucky75 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pretty sure that doesn't happen any more with the new way they write extensions.

    --
    DNA -- National Dyslexic Association
  12. Re: Firefox is not sandboxed! by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

    This is a major security risk if you ask me. Chrome and IE are and Mozilla is still behind. Flash luckily is now sandboxed which is a huge improvement but PDFs can contain nasty javascript exploits and without a sandbox could be a SECURITY NIGHTMARE.

    I am sticking with Firefox ESR 17.01. It will be supported for a year and and want to see if my suspicions are right.

    If my information is outdated feel free to correct as I am in the process of not recommending Firefox anymore unless the corporate system is still on XP. IE is much secure now in Windows 7.

  13. Re:I wonder... by Cyberax · · Score: 2

    You need to set pdfjs.disabled to 'false' in about:config. PDF reader seems to be disabled by default for old installations.

  14. a plugin full or security issue by JcMorin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah and Adobe have a long reputation of having seriously security with their PDF reader. Wonder why they want to make it run without the plugin...

  15. Re:Honestly? by dogsbreath · · Score: 2

    My browser is one of the first things I start up when I turn on my PC, and generally stays open until my PC has to reboot for some reason (which may be anywhere from a week to a month). This is really only possible now because I use Chrome.

    I call shenanigans. "[rebooting monthly] is ... only possible now [because of Chrome]" is just not true.

    I'm running Win7-64bit on a laptop with 6G ram and I use Firefox. FF is always running and I very very seldom kill the process. Like almost never. I reboot about once a month and usually because of something non-related to Windows or FF crashing/hanging. Usually just a Win security update.

    I run some heavy memory usage video editing apps and usually have a LOT of terminal windows open, along with multiple desktops. FF has not been an issue.

    eh, your mileage may vary but that is my experience.

  16. Re:version numbers by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

    Theyre only getting publicity because slashdot bothers posting the update stories, which honestly is the only way Id know there was an update.

    They switched models because its a BETTER MODEL. They can actually get useful features out more quickly than the old 1-year dev time. I dont know if anyone remembers, but the upgrade from 1.5 to 2.0 took like a year, and came with like 4 features-- a new-tab button, a completely messed up (still bitter) options GUI, and tab-close-undo.

    Now we get about that many features in an 8 week dev period, and incremental speed increases to keep pace with chrome. Im failing to see how this is a bad thing; its keeping Firefox remotely relevant to Chrome who was kicking their hiney in features and speed for about 2 years.

  17. Re:Really looking forward to ESR 17 version! by ls671 · · Score: 3, Funny

    One of my coworkers installed native Linux on his laptop with a VMware Windows machine on top that's running the IT department official versions, which let him max out the hardware RAM and lets him do most of his work from Linux, which was at least somewhat helpful.

    I used to do the same in 2002. Funnily enough, IT support guys would come to my desk to install stuff and I had win NT running in a VM fullscreen and the IT guys never realized I was running linux as the native host.

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  18. Re:Honestly? by ls671 · · Score: 2

    You can enable the "save tab prompt" when quitting. I saves all open tabs and you get re-logged automatically into the sites you were logged in when FF restarts. I close random tabs to leave only the tabs I need to work open when I restart because FF takes to much memory. about:config, preference browser.tabs.warnOnClose, browser.warnOnQuit, browser.warnOnRestart

    http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/796107

    http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/935532

    http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-do-i-restore-my-tabs-last-time#w_restore-the-previous-session-every-time-you-open-firefox

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  19. Re:Honestly? by viperidaenz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Would you rather use Adobe software to read PDFs?

  20. Re:Honestly? by hobarrera · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, I'd rather use zathura. Windows users can use SumatraPDF.
    Why do people keep assuming that Adobe is the only PDF reader there is, there's dozens out there.

    I prefer firefox not to have a PDF reader, so when I click on a link to a PDF I'm prompted to download it, instead of having to wait for it to load and be rendered with JS before downloading it.

  21. Re:Honestly? by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

    I don't, I use foxit. Most people use Adobe, because they're told to download Acrobat reader if they're unable to view the document.