Meet the browser: Firefox Next

By bogas04
in Web Browser Discussion & Support

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Chasethebase Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

erm , yeah ie9 is faster coz of dropping support for xp and not coz of some chakra (or dead code elimination :shiftyninja: ) , so yeah xp is the one to blame :)

attachment.cgi?id=525501

Some new stuff regrading the branches :D

Which build has this rolled out to? Or has it not rolled out yet, Aurora's current build is not updated with this UI yet, and it looks more refined than current builds.

Veteran

bogas04

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Which build has this rolled out to? Or has it not rolled out yet, Aurora's current build is not updated with this UI yet, and it looks more refined than current builds.

it is JUST A MOCKUP , and tracking bug for it is : https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=649480

Veteran

bogas04

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Does this mean there is two sets of nightlies now, one set for Firefox 5.0 and one set for Firefox 6.0?

I'm getting a bit confused :(

No . Nightly now = Firefox 6.0a1pre(dated 13 april) , Aurora = Firefox 5.0 , but yeah for time being we have 4.2(dated 12 april) in trunk folder

Grand Master

+Audioboxer Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted

No . Nightly now = Firefox 6.0a1pre(dated 13 april) , Aurora = Firefox 5.0 , but yeah for time being we have 4.2(dated 12 april) in trunk folder

Okay, thanks for clearing that up!

Grand Master

+Audioboxer Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted

So think of it as Nightly = Chrome Dev, Aurora = Chrome Beta, Stable = Stable.

Yup, adopting that mindset now. I'll probably try running the nightlies now that they've revamped the icon/graphics. Bit wary of extensions breaking though, but we'll see - Chrome doesn't really have this problem on dev.

Grand Master

ViZioN

Posted
Posted

It works with extensions.CheckCompatibility6.0a.

Thanks but tried this command (even making the first 'c' lower-case) but my addons are still disabled. Tried adding a extensions.disableCheckCompatibility == true also seems to have no effect. Are you sure it was that command you added and not some other tool that disables compatibility checking? What am I missing?

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

Nice to see that once again Firefox is becoming primarily a Windows browser with Mac and Linux users supported by accident rather than actually deliberately designing for the platform. Promises of OpenGL accelerated layers in Firefox 5.0 and low and behold they've failed to deliver - why aren't I surprised.

Blame the platforms (OS X 10.6+ and X.org) - not the browser. Mesa has not even caught up to *Windows* in terms of OpenGL support, and even OS X 10.7 DP2 is even further back.

Also, both OS X and Linux distributions have continually refused to allow the same UI as Firefox 4 uses on Windows today. (Firefox 4's UI on Linux is identical to that of Firefox 3; what's up with that?)

Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

True, but x64 browsers ATM, aren't ready for primetime yet. They're kinda like Office x64, nice to have, but not really needed by 99.9% of users.

That said, I hope IE10 x64 has the new JS engine IE9 x86 has.

If you have multiple mailboxes (say, GMail/GoogleMail and that of your ISP), Outlook 2010 x64 is a better choice than the same mail application in x32. The problem with Office 2010 x64 (like IE x64) is the lack of add-ons and plug-ins; most of the x64 plug-ins and add-ons that do exist were Microsoft-written.

I switched up with 2010 for exactly that reason - I have GMail and my ISP mail acount; both of which get a crapton of e-mail. Outlook 2010 x32 would bog down, if not flat-out fall down, while 2010 x64 runs like a champ, even using GMail's IMAP defaults.

Where x64 plug-ins and add-ons exist, Office, like IE (or even Firefox) is a lot more stable in x64 (stability FTW).

Mentor

Gaffney

Posted
Posted

Wait so is it better to be on 6.0 nightly or 5.0 aurora ?

If 5.0 is still in the works and 6.0 at the same time, then will changes from 5.0 be added into the 6.0 channel and more ? Or will the changes made in 5.0 not be added to 6.0 until 5.0 is released or near release ?

Veteran

bogas04

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Wait so is it better to be on 6.0 nightly or 5.0 aurora ?

If 5.0 is still in the works and 6.0 at the same time, then will changes from 5.0 be added into the 6.0 channel and more ? Or will the changes made in 5.0 not be added to 6.0 until 5.0 is released or near release ?

nightly = all latest patches will land there , not tested , can crash etc

aurora = selected patches from above ones would land here , i.e. changes in aurora will be in nightly , but not vice-versa , lil QA done on it , more stable than nightly

Grand Master

PNWDweller

Posted
Posted

Here is my main issue with the 4.x release they just did and I hope it is much better in the new releases.

There had been quite a few incompatible extensions and add-ons that would not run in 4.0 for quite some time. (Firebug, Febe, Greasemonkey for example), but were later fixed after 4.0 went gold. I sincerely hope that during the big version rush into 7 for later this year, they don't abandon all of the extensions and then cause more update issues.

I am a big fan of bleeding edge software, but it was sort of hard during the betas because of the extensions. To me also, it seems like they are pushing the numbers too freely. Why bother with a 5.0 when you are going to go to 6.0 and then 7.0? Seems pointless to me. I personally would rather go with a version 4.6 with all the fantastic speed and features that version 7 will eventually have.

EDIT: Okay now, I really don't know if this is a placebo effect, but for kicks, I downloaded the Nightly and it seems to be loading pages a lot faster than my FF4, but then again, it did dump 99% of my extensions so that might have been part of it. :)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By sphbecker · Posted

      If you don't care to read what I said, then you prove my point. Maybe written media is beyond your attention span. Titles are not summaries my friend.
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By +Nik Louch · Posted

      Nobody asked... in fact, I said "I don't care about political leanings"  
    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By Elliot B. · Posted

      TLDR. Here is a far better title (just a basic example): Windows 11 26H2 to allow disabling Web search results
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By Dan~ · Posted

      Restore will get my vote, only if to see if things are any different, doubt it though but Labour and Conservatives too out of touch and same thing over and over and over…, Lib Dem who?
    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2 to finally get one of the most requested features

      By sphbecker · Posted

      There is nothing wrong with this title. You have completely missed the plot when it comes to "clickbait." The issue was never that a title tries to entice you to click, that is how titles have worked for over 100 years. The issue is when the title subverts expectations, getting you to click expecting something that isn't there. The classic clickbait example is "Boyfriend caught cheating, what happens next will shock you," then what happened next is the girlfriend was upset...which is probably the least shocking outcome imaginable. If sounds like what you want is for the titles to be a collection of 10-word summaries that you can skim, get the just of the story, and only click if you want more details. That is not, never has been, and never will be what titles are. You can go all the way back to print newspapers during the great depression and see the same thing. The newspaper was locked in a vending machine, all you can see is the headline, you choose to put in 5¢ to buy the paper and read the rest if you want. Those headlines were written in a way to sell the paper, not just to provide a summery. Here are two actual headlines from that time, "Wall Street Lays an Egg," or "Stocks Hit Bottom?" Maybe you'd say something like "it was wrong then and it's still wrong now." Okay, fine opinion to have, but it isn't like Neowin is doing something unjurnalistic, they are just following the age-old standards for written media.

  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      525
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      199
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      94
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!