Slashdot Mirror
Firefox 21 Arrives
An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla on Tuesday officially launched Firefox 21 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. Improvements include the addition of multiple social providers on the desktop as well as open source fonts on Android. In the changelog, the company included an interesting point that's worth elaborating on: 'Preliminary implementation of Firefox Health Report.' Mozilla has revealed that FHR so far logs 'basic health information' about Firefox: time to start up, total running time, and number of crashes. Mozilla says the initial report is pretty simple but will grow 'in the coming months.' You can get it now from Mozilla."
Mine went painlessly quick.
Remember when Mozilla Seamonkey, a full kitchen sink web suite, was faster and more efficient with memory than the "lean web browser" Mozilla Firefox?
Firebug is a good reason to use it. I don't really understand your justification for not testing web design in Firefox, considering it has a decent following.
Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
And yet you felt the need to comment on it. It would appear you care about Firefox more than you let on.
"I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
I updated after reading this, and I have no idea what a "social provider on the desktop" means. I see no change in Firefox.
I don't have any social features in my firefox. What? Do you just install every plugin every website you visit suggests to you?
You know, I feel like I only just upgraded to Firefox 20. In fact, there hasn't even been a 20.1 yet. I really like Firefox, I do. Some of the new web development tools (which I've only just discovered) are really nice. But, to be frank, apart from those, I can't tell the difference between 18, and 20. And looking at the changelog, I can't see anything that says, "I'm a major new version that breaks compatibility with previous versions".
So, I want to ask again (and I'm beating a horse that is not only dead, but buried, and decomposed, with only a few bones and other hard items left), what's the point of these fast track updates?
Many of the new features (e.g. the web developer tools and the Social API (only useful for people who actually use "social websites", i.e. not me)) would be better off as plugins. Instead, Mozilla should be focusing on things that actually improve both the user experience and the safety of browsing the web. So, perhaps blocking third party cookies by default, building in a simplified RequestPolicy-like tool (with a blacklist of ad networks and trackers), and maybe even improve the shitty bookmark system. But no, they want to improve the Social API.
I'll continue to use Firefox, it's better than the alternatives. But it's the plugins that really make it better, not the superfast increase the numbers (and hide useful UI - luckily that can be fixed with plugins).
HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
The only reason I'm running an 8.01 at the moment of is because I couldn't be bothered to track down a 5.0 version at the time of the installation.
Which still works just fine on my old box.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Remember when firefox wasn't trying to complete in some stupid version race, and just tried to be the best browser it could possibly be?
I miss that too.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Pffft 8.x. Firefox 3.6 with TabKit rocks! (Well, it's pretty slow executing javascript and manipulating large DOM trees, but the side-tabs with grouping, indenting, coloring, bookmarking, searching are priceless.)
I am seriously tired of all the new crap that they keep adding to FF. On new installations I must spend a good amount of time turning stuff off. Most of the features I turn off would be better in an extension or at leasr off by default.
We badly need a need a new Firefox. It's still the best of all the browsers because you can actually tweak it but the defaults are getting out of hands.
Almost everything that the foundation added since version 4 was not wanted.
What are your concerns with Firefox 21 versus 17?
Is it the social api? That was introduced in 17 so you already have it. And it can be disabled in about:config, just search for "social.enabled".
Is it the health report? You can disable that as well either through the advanced tab under preferences or through about.config, just search for "healthreport".
I remember the huge fanfare when Firefox 4 came out, we were on 3.x.x for ages. /., we don't need an article every time a new version is released. You don't do this with chrome either, and for good reason.
That was what, 2 years ago now I think? And so now we've since had 17 new "versions", it maybe deserves to be 3, at best. My point here?
They come out too frequently, with too few changes, and frankly very few people honestly care at this point.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
Why should one have to disable these things? Why are they not turned off by default? Isn't that the mantra of the FOSS community, "Let me decide!"?
Or are we giving the Mozilla group a pass despite their continuing plunge into bloat and unnecessary cruft because they're Mozilla?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
You know what idiotic thing they did? They combined Download and Web History. So since FF20, when you clear one, they both go. The reason they give is because Options such as that are hard to maintain. BS. Not to mention that silly, huge, Download dialog. Are they trying to scare people away or what?.
He's passionately apathetic.
> They combined Download and Web History. So since FF20, when you clear one, they both go.
Really? Mine doesn't do that. I've cleared my download history many times and still have >6 months of web history.
I just cleared my download history from Firefox 21. My browser history is still there.
You do realize that you've just wasted a perfectly good opportunity to write "Twenty-first post!"?
Ezekiel 23:20
You might consider starting, since FF's 20% market share is approximately equal to the combined share of Safari and Chrome.
> What are your concerns with Firefox 21 versus 17?
> Is it the social api? Is it the health report?
I don't think it's anything this sensible, I think it's just the version number. I don't really understand what issue people have with it, but that seems to be what's exciting most people. If they just versioned the new releases as point releases there wouldn't be half as many comments to this story. I think having mostly small incremental changes in new full version numbers has really upset some people's sense of normal software conventions and their brains have melted.
Improvements include the addition of multiple social providers on the desktop
On the desktop? Don't you mean "on the side of the Firefox window"?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Why should one have to disable these things? Why are they not turned off by default? Isn't that the mantra of the FOSS community, "Let me decide!"?
If you can disable them, how are you not given a choice?
Your disagreeing with their default state is not equivalent to not having a choice.
You're not. Especially when the first "improvement" to be mentioned is "the addition of multiple social providers."
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
And the only thing I really want in Firefox is *still* not there. But instead, more crap features.
It doesn't have to be like this. All we need to do is make sure we keep talking.
Finally allowed to get drunk.
If anyone ever asks "why do people still run IE 6", I would like to present Exhibit A.
You might consider starting, since FF's 20% market share is approximately equal to the combined share of Safari and Chrome.
What website is this with these numbers??
Remember when Firefox used to be a web browser? I liked it when it was a web browser.
Isn't that kind of bloat what happened to Netscape?
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
I don't have any social features in my firefox. What?
The Firefox release notes say you're wrong.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
You should consider installing the ESR version if you don't want to deal with the rapid upgrades. It is currently version 17.0.6. The "ESR channel" gets only security patches, no new features, until it reaches end of life after about a year, at which point you upgrade to the next ESR (Extended Support Release). Firefox version 3, 10, 17 (and future 24) are ESRs.
See http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/faq
You're not. Especially when the first "improvement" to be mentioned is "the addition of multiple social providers."
I read that as "multiple social diseases" and now it makes more sense to me.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
Sort of? It looks like it's automatically supported plug-ins you have to activate from the relevant web-page. You wouldn't see them unless you said "activate it" or whatever dumb link exists on the page.
Social is disabled by default.
Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
... legally that is.
BTW the related news: "obviously" as a tit-for-tat move against Russians for expelling a US diplomat in Moscow earlier today, in DC NTSB proposed lowering drivers' legal blood alcohol content http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/14/us/ntsb-blood-alcohol/.
FYI, you can revert to the old download window by setting the browser.download.useToolkitUI option to true in about:config. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/955204
One world is to implement Chrome like versioning.
The other world is to implement a Microsoft like need for making a grand entrance.
It's just a web browser, nobody gives a rat's ass what it does, that is why Google updates silently in the background without fuss.
It's the 21st century, web browsers do not need press releases anymore just like you don't need someone on the street corner announcing every hour of the day.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
They should just retire the version numbers, and just number them by the date and time they release it.
I'm running Firefox 20130514154005!
So it is going to be Firefox 100 by next year then?
Not according to my website stats, which is all I really care about.
1. Internet Explorer 9.0 18.40%
2. Chrome 26.0.1410.64 13.07%
3. Internet Explorer 8.0 10.79%
4. Safari 6.0 10.13%
5. Internet Explorer 10.0 9.79%
6. Firefox 20.0 7.53%
7. Android Browser 4.0 3.58%
8. Safari (in-app) (not set) 1.51%
9. Firefox 16.0.1 1.50%
10. Internet Explorer 7.0 1.46%
It seems like it was only yesterday that Firefox 3 was released to great fanfare after years and years of refinement.
To think, Firefox has come seven times farther now! Amazing!
On a more serious note, what the fuck is a "social provider on the desktop"? A philanthropist that runs in the root window?
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
As usual, most of the important changes are only listed in the Developer changelog: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Releases/21
Highlights include:
element support
scoped attribute support for (allows a stylesheet to only apply to a particular element and it's children)
No more E4X
improvements
Recently I needed to find a plugin for a certain feature and remembered one for FF4 I used a while back. When to down load it on this new computer to find out the developer had stopped updating the plugin. The reason: these frequent updates didn't leave him enough time to continuously test and make sure it still worked with each version every few weeks. I searched for similar plugins and everyone I saw the author pretty much said the same thing. They had all discontinued development for FireFox because the release cycle was too quick.
Instead I ended up finding a plugin for Chrome and went with it. Frankly other than to test against FF and certain debugging. I don't use it that much anymore.
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
Nope, it's not the mantra of FOSS community. FOSS is about software licenses not "Let me decide!".
New major version, no real worthwhile features worth mentioning. Say, hasn't that mostly been the case for the last 15 or so versions now?
Firefox just comes with the Social API, as with addon APIs, you have to install something, otherwise it's just potential.
I had to quit using firefox for the first time in years because it kept locking up in a very ugly way in 20.4
I have been waiting for the upgrade so I can browse without locking every 6 seconds.
Safari isn't as intuitive for me since I am used to how firefox was and I don't have a chromium based browser on my system anymore.
Opera is a nice browser, but it really does have to do with how used to something one is.
What auto-update? it only updates when I type apt-get upgrade, and it does so silently.
Is it the health report? You can disable that as well either through the advanced tab under preferences or through about.config, just search for "healthreport".
The "Enable Firefox Health Report" only en/disables uploading the data to Mozilla. To disable data collection, set the config setting "datareporting.healthreport.service.enabled" to false. To clear already recorded data, delete the "healthreport.sqlite" file under your profile folder.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Hate to break it to you but you're wrong.
March 2013 figures:
StatCounter: Chrome: 38%. Firefox: 20.9%. Safari: 8.5%.
Wikimedia: Chrome: 44.0%. Firefox: 18.2%. Safari: 3.2%.
W3Counter: Chrome: 30.3%. Firefox 19.3%. Safari: 16.3%.
NetApplications: Chrome: 16.5%. Firefox: 20.2%. Safari: 5.3%.
Clicky: Chrome: 35.8%. Firefox: 21.3%. Safari: 9.5%
From the Wikipedia page on browser usage share. April stats doesn't have Wikimedia or NetApplcations but the figures still don't back you up for what is there.
You can update and keep TabKit:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tabkit-2nd-edition/
(If that is what was holding you back; the original dev disappeared so someone forked it and has kept it current)
Not sure why, but every single time Firefox updates, they break my favorite theme: Springshine. It's incredibly annoying. I suspect it's because they change the first number, instead of the second number, like a sane programmer would do (we should be on 4.18 or so now, not 21!).
I just restart firefox once in a while, and it updates then. Never seen Firefox hollerin' anything about updates. I've got it set to auto update though. Perhaps if you chose an option other than "Check for updates, but let me choose whether to install them" it'd be quiet. It's in Tools->options->advanced->updates.
If you're talking about the Flash plug-in update, that's a problem you can blame on Adobe for releasing something more insecure than IE. Talk about something that goes through more versions than Firefox.... that'd probably be it.
It's the old-fashioned philosophy that the user controls the computer, instead of the new-fangled Microsoft philosophy of "We Tell You What You Do Now"
Plus I have a few things here and there that don't work after certain things get updated, etc. Some things are never updated, and when they are more important than a browser update that breaks compatibility with the aforementioned mission-critical-dinosaur-app, the former takes precedent.
I agree actually, but I guess you could always try SeaMonkey. It supports a lot of Firefox extensions, and it still seems to have some sanity. I just can't go back to the older Netscape/Mozilla-style preferences window, but it's certainly not a bad browser. IMO Firefox should have been forked by the end of the 2.x series, or 3.6.x series at the latest. Firefox and Mozilla itself have been on a steady, sharp decline in sanity for years now.
If you click the download arrow, then click "Show All Downloads," it'll bring the Downloads History window up. You can then just right-click and click "Clear Downloads." It'll keep your web history. The only difference is it's now many more clicks than in the olden days. Kind of annoying, really.
Sort of, but Firefox isn't bloated, it has lower memory utilization than any of the other major browsers. Where it tends to fail is that it is more susceptible to scripts causing lag and freezes than other browsers, because they aren't using individual processes per tab.
I liked it better when it was Mosaic and the other choices were ... nothing.
They can take my LifeAlert pendant when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
And when the trees move back and forth, that's what causes the wind.
Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
And here I thought it was caused by clueless people spouting hot air.
Firefox just comes with the Social API, as with addon APIs, you have to install something, otherwise it's just potential.
There you go again, bringing logic and reason to an emotional argument. Won't somebody think of the delusional paranoids!
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
I just tried Firefox again after a year + on Chrome. I genuinely wanted Firefox to be better but it wasn't. In two days it corrupted its cache 3 times, forcing me to manually clear it. It choked on all of my google cookies and wouldn't allow me to login to gmail until I googled the answer (manually clearing all of my cookies as well as cache). On top of that the sync barfed all over the place when I added a third machine and and somehow the plugins I had loaded, specifically lastpass, ended up taking a shit on all over the place because sync broke.
I'm sorry but Firefox is a piece of shit. It was cool 10 years ago but Mozilla hasn't done a fucking thing worth mentioning in years now. It's only getting worse too with FirefoxOS and Rust. There is no leadership at Mozilla and they are slipping into irrelevancy quickly.
I really liked it as a simple, straightforward browser I could customize. But Firefox keeps putting more and more effort into trying to Chrome, and adding bells and whistles and tweaking the interface. I got tired of needing to put things back the way I liked them everytime an update took them away or broke them. If I wanted to use Chrome, I'd use Chrome. Maybe if the next version is Firefox 122, that will make me like it again.
... forcing people to create extensions to get the feature back
And then proceed to break extensions with every single release. I haven't gotten some extensions to work for several updates ... fire gestures and/or all-in-one, printedit, download helper. I know they don't purposely break them, but I don't understand why they just stop working and never work again. Is it because I'm on Linux? Not to mention that it has become quite a memory hog and seems to have issues releasing memory and shutting down gracefully. I don't really like any of the alternatives as much, but have really considered dropping FF.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
I moved my users over to Comodo Dragon a couple of years back when it became obvious that FF cared more about bling than security by refusing to implement low rights mode for their browser. Low rights mode would help not just the Windows users but could be integrated with AppArmor if they wanted but the fact is it really looks like Moz don't care, its all about bling and mobile now.
At the end of the day they can't get around the fact that the browser is the single biggest attack vector on any PC and that running the browser in the same level of permissions as the user is just fricking DUMB. best practices should ALWAYS go for the least permissions required to do the task at hand but while Chromium added support for LRM less than 6 months after it came out the fact that its been 6 years and still no LRM in Firefox really is inexcusable.
Just look up the article i wrote in my Journal about the Yahoo porn bug about why running a browser in the same permissions level as the user is a BAD IDEA, its a perfect example of why LRM is an important security feature as that attack does not work on any browser with LRM, even IE, it ONLY works on Firefox because FF has too high a level of permissions. So while I wish the FF users nothing but luck until they have LRM I simply cannot in good conscience recommend using FF.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Since Firefox has started their crazy version numbering, I've given up on upgrading. I use 27 different addons and perfectly configured to make my web browser do what I want. It is near impossible to do an upgrade without spending hours reconfiguring the addons, some of which need to be manually downloaded and have their "MaxVersion" incremented so they will install. Maybe in 6 more months when we reach Firefox 50 I'll give it a try, but until then. Firefox 8 all the way!
Application: Firefox 8.0 (20111104165243)
Total number of items: 27
- Active Stop Button 1.4.10
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/active-stop-button/
- Adblock Plus 1.3.10
http://adblockplus.org/en/
- BetterPrivacy 1.68
http://nc.ddns.us/extensions.html
- ColorfulTabs 7.1
http://www.binaryturf.com/free-software/colorfultabs-for-firefox/
- Cookie Monster 1.1.0
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-monster/?src=api
- Copy Link Name 1.3.2
http://www.captaincaveman.nl/
- Download Statusbar 0.9.10
http://downloadstatusbarapp.com/
- DownloadHelper 4.9.14
http://www.downloadhelper.net/
- DownThemAll! 2.0.8
http://downthemall.net/
- Export Cookies 1.2
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/export-cookies/?src=api
- Find Toolbar Tweaks 3.0.0
http://homepage3.nifty.com/georgei/extension/ftt_en.html
- Firebug 1.8.4
http://www.getfirebug.com/
- Greasemonkey 0.9.13
http://www.greasespot.net/
- HeaderControlRevived 1.1
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/headercontrolrevived/?src=api
- Hide Caption Titlebar Plus 2.4.1
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/13505/
- Menu Editor 1.2.7
http://menueditor.mozdev.org/
- Movable Firefox Button 1.4
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/movable-firefox-button/
- NoScript 2.1.7
http://noscript.net/
- OptimizeGoogle 0.78.2
http://www.optimizegoogle.com/
- RequestPolicy 0.5.27
http://www.requestpolicy.com/
- Screen Capture Elite 2.0.0.23
http://www.grizzlyape.com/
- Searchbastard 1.5.5
http://searchbastard.rosell.dk/
- SkipScreen 0.6.1.2
Firefox just comes with the Social API, as with addon APIs, you have to install something, otherwise it's just potential.
There you go again, bringing logic and reason to an emotional argument. Won't somebody think of the delusional paranoids!
Too funny, and real true too! Please mod up!
Immediately after updating to 21 I noticed the browser seemed awfully sluggish. They re-enabled smooth scrolling... Turning it [back] off fixed the problem, but why couldn't it keep my previous setting?
They haven't implemented this until now? Seriously? Good gawd wake me up when Firecrotch grows up and matches WebKit's HTML 5 support.
why the hell are downloads in the library, why the hell when I bookmark (my bad dumb fuck star) a page its in a separate windows not the stupid bookmarks menu, why the fuck do you asshats keep making this thing more like chrome, if I wanted chrome I would god damn use chrome.
See, this isn't a response...and it sure as siht isn't a 'zinger' or a 'witty retort'
so the hell what, Cromium exists? That does not answer parent's point at all...
in fact, it actually proves you wrong and him right, if anything, b/c the link was to a Google product's homepage. exactly the kind of useless information the parent was bemoaning...
jeez way to prove his point for him
Thank you Dave Raggett
I think having mostly small incremental changes in new full version numbers has really upset some people's sense of normal software conventions and their brains have melted.
It is amazing that these so-called "smart people" and "nerds" here on slashdot cannot grasp just a different way of numbering things. I have been amazed about that before, the nerd community is extremely conservative. Every innovation or new idea is bad at first and has a really hard time getting adjusted to.
For me, the numbering scheme Firefox uses is actually easier. Firefox is "done". Every feature they add or list of bugs they find is grouped together and lumped into a new version. That new version will be oldversion+1. It is extremely simple. You see this in many other software projects, the Linux kernel being one as well. It will probably never see 4.x (and if it does, it will be arbitrary, like the 3.x release). Java is doing it, Internet Explorer is doing it, hardware like iPhone is doing it, Ubuntu is doing it. All these things are "done" and upgrading won't (shouldn't) break anything.
Software development follows a asymptotic line; in the beginning many things change and there is the need to subclasses updates (using major.minor.build), later in the lifecycle of the project, changes are smaller or less intrusive. There simple is no need to have such large granularity in version numbers.
Hell, I don't even know which version of Firefox or the Linux kernel I am using. Everything just works and I hardly see any changes after an update.
-- The Internet is a too slow way of doing things, you'd never do without it.
Why don't I experience your problems on Firefox?
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Why didn't you take the more secure approach and use a tool like sandboxie?
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Unless you have to stream to users who don't have the H.264 codecs installed. This includes users of Windows XP, users of Windows Vista Home Basic, and users of GNU/Linux distributions that haven't licensed the H.264 patents.
I suggest you go back to IE6. It's more the type of browser your kind like.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Because I need tools that any home and SMB user can use easily and SanboxIE ain't that tool, it just ain't. And why would i want to go to the trouble of downloading some other program just to make up for the fact that the FF devs are shitty when it comes to security, when I can give them any Chromium based browser instead and just be done with it?
I also don't see why you'd think SandboxIE would be more secure than Low Rights mode, with LRM the browser is running at lower than even a standard user and with Adblock Plus and the optional Secure DNS that comes with Dragon frankly I haven't seen a single infection on any customer's PCs that use it, in fact all they need me for is hardware upgrades because without having the browser open as an attack vector its pretty damned hard to infect Win 7.
Oh and FYI but if you just absolutely positively have to run FF for some reason I'd argue that using Comodo IceDragon (The Comodo spinoff of FF) with the free Comodo Internet Security would be the better way to go as not only does it sandbox like SandboxIE but it also does scan before load on every webpage and will stop those with malware from even loading.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Because I need tools that any home and SMB user can use easily and SanboxIE ain't that tool, it just ain't. And why would i want to go to the trouble of downloading some other program just to make up for the fact that the FF devs are shitty when it comes to security, when I can give them any Chromium based browser instead and just be done with it?
You do know that if your home of SMB user is running as a privileged user you are screwed anyway? LRM is indeed a best practice, but it should be applied at user level. If the user can write to system areas, interfere with system processes, etc. it's already game over.
This Wikipedia article states that as of April 2013, Net Applications reported that over three out of every eight desktop users are still on Windows XP alone, not even counting Windows Vista Home Basic, Windows Vista Business, and GNU/Linux. If you target only those desktop operating systems guaranteed to include an AVC decoder, namely Mac OS X, Windows 7, and Windows 8, you're limiting your user base by nearly half.
I just googled "browser market share" and took the first link, which happened to be this one. It lists FF at 20.3%, Chrome at 16.35% and Safari at 5.38%. That seems to correspond to the "NetApplications" row on the wiki page, which, admittedly, has the least favorable estimate for Chrome.
Why not? I thought you were meant to be an experienced IT person, doing something like System Center Configuration Management should be trivial for you.
Because you're relying on just the security provided through the browser, when you could limit the browser's capability from effecting the entire OS.
Why do you keep capitalizing IE in sandboxie? It's nothing to do with IE.
Say some escalation exploit is used, the exploit code has direct access registry, files on the system. Sandboxie avoids that entirely because the environment is virtualized too. It also does not suffer vulnerability issue where a plugin can effect the entire system (like the Java applet exploits that effect Chrome too).
So far, from your response, I don't think you researched the software at all.
Says the experienced IT guy that doesn't know how to use "System Center Configuration Management" trivially. Yeah, I don't think I'll trust your 'security' audits, I actually doubt you do them.
I don't care what browser is being used, I find it ridiculous to be concerned about browser security and then to not actually implement something like sandboxie, considering the attack vectors are still completely capable via commonly used plugins, especially when you're bringing in users that you imply through your use of the words 'any home and SMB user' are not technically literate and therefore likely to click 'yes' to various security prompts despite the dangers.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
FF's developers' mantra has been "you'll take it and you'll like it!" ever since 4.0.
You might consider how many of your Internet Explorer visitors are using something else and spoofing the user agent... Although I do think this is getting less common.
I miss having cut/paste work. I really don't know WTF they were thinking when they broke that.
Lynx is a stripped-down browser, without enough artificial intelligence capability to have "feelings". EMACS, on the other hand? Sure, it's just meta-x-cokebottle and RMS's your uncle.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
At $DAYJOB, the IT department supports the long-term-support versions, currently at 17.0.5. It crashes a lot, and often gets into a runaway burn-the-whole-CPU trap (I've got an 8-CPU-core PC, so it shows up as 12-13% CPU utilization, so the rest of my machine's ok even though the browser stalls.)
The main add-ons I'm running are NoScript, Ad-Block-Plus, and Ghostery.
It does seem to recover much better from crashes than 10.x long-term-support did, but it's still annoying.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
That's the problem with apathy. Nobody cares.
Yup, exactly. {grumble, grumble} so why does yours get +4 insightful and mine was modded down as a troll? Oh, you fickle moderators... I wan't trolling; I was seriously expressing concerns that Firefox is no longer just trying to be the best browser but has become encumbered with a ton of cruft like "social provider" nonsense.
So as I understand it, you are against the implementation of any feature that could be described as "Search all tabs in all open browser windows", claiming that anyone whose "IQ is greater than 50" should never need it even as people open upwards of two dozen tabs. What if anything do I misunderstand?