Firefox 12 released

Mozilla has now finalised the next version of their popular internet browser, Firefox 12 and is ready to download, although as of yet it hasn't been officially publicised. Overall, there isn't a huge amount of noticeable differences from the previous release but it is still recommended you update to the latest version.

For those eager to get their hands on the next version, you can download it from Mozilla's website. For the moment, you can also download other languages versions of the browser here. You can also view the release notes of Firefox 12 here, with the browser version being officially released on the 24th of April.

For those curious to see what's changed from version 11, which was released less than six weeks ago, here's what's new:

  • Windows: Firefox is now easier to update with one less prompt (User Account Control)
  • Page Source now has line numbers
  • Line breaks are now supported in the title attribute
  • Improvements to "Find in Page" to center search result
  • URLs pasted into the download manager window are now automatically downloaded
  • The column-fill CSS property has been implemented
  • Support for the text-align-last CSS property has been added
  • Experimental support for ECMAScript 6 Map and Set objects has been implemented
  • Fixed where WebGL performance may be degraded on some OS X hardware

Just in case there are those still using Windows 2000, Windows XP RTM or XP Service Pack 1, Firefox 12 will be the last version of the browser from Mozilla to officially support those operating systems. Windows XP SP2 and above will only be supported in the next version of Firefox.

Download: Firefox 12

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Torchlight II cinematic trailer gets animated

Next Story

New trailer for Pokémon Black and White 2 showcased

106 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Is anyone having increasing issues with firefox's stability? For the most part it's fine, but it seems to completely bug out on some sites. I usually get 5 to 10 crashes a week now.

It's seriously irritating. Not to mention it stall for near 10 seconds upon first use of anything with flash.

Eventually both mozilla and google will have to figure out another version layout... I mean a release every 6 weeks is about 8 releases per year... which means that when windows 9 comes out firefox will be @ version 44 or something... it's kinda of ridiculous (my opinion of course) on the other hand having Firefox/Chrome 69 will be interesting :-D

This is mind-boggling. You are complaining about Firefox' version numbers but use Chrome which uses *exactly the same* versioning system and development process as Firefox?

It's to the point of irritating how often they release major update numbers with minor improvements. I would have thought 12 would would be a metro app, not just minor improvements. Chrome is still my favorite on Windows 7 and IE10 on Windows 8.

patseguin said,
It's to the point of irritating how often they release major update numbers with minor improvements. I would have thought 12 would would be a metro app, not just minor improvements. Chrome is still my favorite on Windows 7 and IE10 on Windows 8.

This is mind-boggling. You are complaining about Firefox' version numbers but use Chrome which uses *exactly the same* versioning system and development process as Firefox?

Think I'll wait for it to appear in the About Firefox screen. Last time Neowin reported a browser release early Mozilla yanked it off their servers shortly after to patch it more.

One reason I reason I dont switch to chrome is the absence of the drop-down arrow in chrome's address bar. If I find a plugin that lets me do this I'll switch to chrome.

Deathknight74 said,
One reason I reason I dont switch to chrome is the absence of the drop-down arrow in chrome's address bar. If I find a plugin that lets me do this I'll switch to chrome.
Wouldn't the history menu solve your probl.... never mind I see your point....

Deathknight74 said,
One reason I reason I dont switch to chrome is the absence of the drop-down arrow in chrome's address bar. If I find a plugin that lets me do this I'll switch to chrome.

Unfortunately the dropdown error is already gone in Firefox 12 on OS X as well. Not sure about the Windows version and if there is an extension to reinstate it. It's definitely possible with Firefox' extensions should someone bother enough to write one and definitely impossible with Chrome's limited extension mechanism (which doesn't allow changes to the primary UI).

parengputik said,
Is it me or the ui seems to be more responsive now? It feels like I'm using the ui of opera now.

The responsiveness will keep improving, and should even more of an improvement in version 13.

parengputik said,
Is it me or the ui seems to be more responsive now? It feels like I'm using the ui of opera now.

Mozilla has kicked off a project called Snappy which solely deals with improving the interface responsiveness. Firefox 12 already incorporates some results from Snappy but its Firefox 13 and onwards which will contain the real deal. Stay tuned. :-)

Leave it to Neowin to only link to the Windows version of a software update that is on at least 3 OS's, and only talk about the Windows changes.

Oh lets forget that we also have Linux, Unix, and OS X users, but let give a link to other languages... This REALLY gets annoying.

Honestly, nothing bothers me more than the fact that Firefox and Chrome both change the major version number when there's only like 5 changes, none of them major. What difference is there between Firefox 4 and Firefox 12 anyway, other than a bunch of bug fixes and minor changes? The only big difference I can really see is that the forward button isn't shown all the time anymore, and even that doesn't count as a major update.

To my knowledge, no other software I know of does this. It's nice to get updates more frequently than before, but call it 4.5 or something, not 12. I know it's just a number, but it still bugs me. Either that, or do what Chrome did, and not show the version number anymore...

Of course, I can't call Firefox a horrible product because of that. I still love it, and its collection of extensions is great, but well, it just bugs me, especially seeing its version numbering wasn't always this way...

I honestly don't understand the FF versioning anymore...I have FF12 installed, and Nightly 14.01a. If Firefox is the "stable version" and Nightly is the "latest beta build", shouldn't Nightly only be on 13.01a? Or is Nightly 14.01a because they have to let "FFBeta" be the 13 build? And then there's Aurora, which is the bleeding edge of Firefox, even though Nightly is the nightly-built version of FF? I know I haven't read up a lot on the way Mozilla's handling this kind of thing now, but it sure seems a little complicated to me

Waiting for it to hit extra/ repo. Loving the rapid release cycles so far. We get the latest and greatest when it becomes stable

The only reason I use Firefox sometimes is to view 3D with nVidia 3D Vision from youtube, otherwise Chrome all the way!

Tried to make the switch to Chrome many times. Was starting to get around to Chrome, but there were regressions on version 18 where the find on page doesn't work on every website (which I use a ton) and now the removal of middle click on upcoming versions, just can't make the switch. Feels like Chrome is always just missing a few key features from making it my every day browser.

Plus Firefox is more smooth on a lot of aspects that Chrome still is just jumpy in. Mainly the white flashes when closing tabs etc. that occur.

Kaoxt said,
Tried to make the switch to Chrome many times. Was starting to get around to Chrome, but there were regressions on version 18 where the find on page doesn't work on every website (which I use a ton) and now the removal of middle click on upcoming versions, just can't make the switch. Feels like Chrome is always just missing a few key features from making it my every day browser.

Plus Firefox is more smooth on a lot of aspects that Chrome still is just jumpy in. Mainly the white flashes when closing tabs etc. that occur.

Haven't noticed any of that. No problems with middle click or find on page. Or white flashes. Using Chrome 19 on both OSX and Win7.

Ahmed Nefzaoui said,
Waiting for the nightly 15 to try it

You do realise it won't be anything newer for a week or so than Nightly 14 ?

No download happening with link provided in article and the one provided above this post is still showing v11.

There is really nothing sadder than a Browser Preference Troll.

Firefox = best overall. Especially for those of us who know what we're doing with tech
Chrome = best for noobs or poseur-geeks
IE9 = best for grandmas

Benda said,
There is really nothing sadder than a Browser Preference Troll.

Firefox = best overall. Especially for those of us who know what we're doing with tech
Chrome = best for noobs or poseur-geeks
IE9 = best for grandmas

Exactly! I am sure most of Chrome users come from those ads they see on Google Sites / Youtube or on Google Search Page!

Benda said,
There is really nothing sadder than a Browser Preference Troll.

Opera = best overall. Especially for those of us who know what we're doing with tech
Chrome = best for noobs or poseur-geeks
IE9 = best for grandmas


Fixed

bogas04 said,

Exactly! I am sure most of Chrome users come from those ads they see
on Google Sites / Youtube or on Google Search Page!


And the rest come from those who've installed Chrome when it's been bundled with
the installer of a totally unrelated piece of software, and usually one that's nothing
to do with browsing the internet. CCleaner was one such program that did this.

th3r3turn said,


Fixed

You wish it was fixed. Opera is absolutely awful on majority sites I visit. Has so many rendering errors it's rediculous.

bogas04 said,

Exactly! I am sure most of Chrome users come from those ads they see on Google Sites / Youtube or on Google Search Page!

Yup, a slow buggy browser is better thana fast broser, I bet those ancient extensions are fantastic too.

BumbleBritches57 said,

Yup, a slow buggy browser is better thana fast broser, I bet those ancient extensions are fantastic too.

Chrome has more then it's fair share of bugs. Developers are even making Chrome worse IMO with them removing Middle Click feature and tons of other features Chrome users have grown used to.

th3r3turn said,


Fixed


Is Opera still actively being developed? I'd forgotten about it after I had a horrible time trying to install this social-browser-beta thing from them :\

Matthew_Thepc said,

Is Opera still actively being developed? I'd forgotten about it after I had a horrible time trying to install this social-browser-beta thing from them :\

I don't think they've ever had a social browser BETA... you sure you;re not mistaking it for RockMelt or something?

You wish it was fixed. Opera is absolutely awful on majority sites I visit. Has so many rendering errors it's rediculous.

Please, do list all these broken sites?

I am sticking to a policy of just having one web browser on my machine - Internet Explorer 9. I honestly don't see a value in having Firefox, Chrome or Opera installed since neither of them offer any significant performance improvements on my GPRS connect. Besides, when you are on Broadband, the difference in speed is noticeable. I have been using IE 9 since December on my new machine and I don't miss having an alternative to use.

Mr. Dee said,
I am sticking to a policy of just having one web browser on my machine - Internet Explorer 9. I honestly don't see a value in having Firefox, Chrome or Opera installed since neither of them offer any significant performance improvements on my GPRS connect. Besides, when you are on Broadband, the difference in speed is noticeable. I have been using IE 9 since December on my new machine and I don't miss having an alternative to use.

Good luck having pages not crash or your browser being slow as ****, both in rendering and in launching.

Mr. Dee said,
I am sticking to a policy of just having one web browser on my machine - Internet Explorer 9. I honestly don't see a value in having Firefox, Chrome or Opera installed since neither of them offer any significant performance improvements on my GPRS connect. Besides, when you are on Broadband, the difference in speed is noticeable. I have been using IE 9 since December on my new machine and I don't miss having an alternative to use.

I agree with the fact that IE9 is definitely more than able to be used as a one-and-only browser for most people (I use it as my default browser), but for web developers who need to be able to test sites on FF and Chrome, it doesn't hurt to have an alternative or two installed

Mr. Dee said,
I am sticking to a policy of just having one web browser on my machine - Internet Explorer 9. I honestly don't see a value in having Firefox, Chrome or Opera installed since neither of them offer any significant performance improvements on my GPRS connect. Besides, when you are on Broadband, the difference in speed is noticeable. I have been using IE 9 since December on my new machine and I don't miss having an alternative to use.

nice, looks like you don't miss proper page rendering either. Sticking to IE9 instead of using Firefox/Chrome is like sticking to your GeForce FX5800 because you "don't need" all that fancy DX11 stuff people is talking about. Why bother with better efficiency, less sound and proper texture rendering, right?

BumbleBritches57 said,

Good luck having pages not crash or your browser being slow as ****, both in rendering and in launching.


Well, I have been using it since December and I haven't missed out on anything. If it was such a problem I would have installed FF or Chrome long ago.

BumbleBritches57 said,

Good luck having pages not crash or your browser being slow as ****, both in rendering and in launching.

I use IE9 as well.. Never had a page crash once. Never had a problem with speeds either, all before I can blink or notice.

As soon as you install one plugin for firefox or chrome the loading time goes out the window compared to IE. I used Firefox maybe 6 years ago? For tabbed browsing. Ever since IE has had it there has been no reason to install more apps on my PC.

Again, the causeless IE hate is strong in this thread..

BumbleBritches57 said,

Good luck having pages not crash or your browser being slow as ****, both in rendering and in launching.

Well, IE9 users don't need 'luck' not to have these Chrome/Firefox issues, do they?

gonchuki said,

nice, looks like you don't miss proper page rendering either. Sticking to IE9 instead of using Firefox/Chrome is like sticking to your GeForce FX5800 because you "don't need" all that fancy DX11 stuff people is talking about. Why bother with better efficiency, less sound and proper texture rendering, right?

I might take your comment too literally, but you know this case is actually the way around, right? Try doing some actual graphical tests with your uberc00l Firefox&Chrome against IE9 instead of sticking to your own caricatural personal beliefs.

Cøi said,
Try doing some actual graphical tests with your uberc00l Firefox&Chrome against IE9 instead of sticking to your own caricatural personal beliefs.

Sure! let's try with background gradients, multiple backgrounds, border backgrounds, text shadow or maybe some WebGL. yeah, IE9 will be faster... at rendering nothing.

gonchuki said,

Sure! let's try with background gradients, multiple backgrounds, border backgrounds, text shadow or maybe some WebGL. yeah, IE9 will be faster... at rendering nothing.

genuinely curious, but have you come across many websites that use WebGL, etc? (background gradients are coming in IE10 (if I remember correctly))

Matthew_Thepc said,

genuinely curious, but have you come across many websites that use WebGL, etc? (background gradients are coming in IE10 (if I remember correctly))

if you are into CAD or 3D in general: https://360.autodesk.com - upload your DWG/DWF stuff, view it with WebGL on the browser.
As for IE10, it's not here yet. But yes, it's up to par with the other browsers and works quite fine. IE9 has been way behind the other major players for a long time now (at least 1 year, since Firefox 4 got released).

gonchuki said,

Sure! let's try with background gradients, multiple backgrounds, border backgrounds, text shadow or maybe some WebGL. yeah, IE9 will be faster... at rendering nothing.

WebGL? Oh no, IE9 doesn't support some rare features which are far too complicated and just a security hole anyway?
I also don't get why this would be the only reason IE9 is "way behind" other browsers?

I do NOT like the Maintenance Update thing it wants to install.... wtf Mozilla!? Good thing I always do a custom install on any software otherwise I would have missed this. I do NOT want applications even as much as I like Firefox to run behind the background to update or anything without me knowing what is going on.

sava700 said,
I do NOT like the Maintenance Update thing it wants to install.... wtf Mozilla!? Good thing I always do a custom install on any software otherwise I would have missed this. I do NOT want applications even as much as I like Firefox to run behind the background to update or anything without me knowing what is going on.

You can uncheck it during installing it / from advanced options Something which you can't on Chrome

bogas04 said,

You can uncheck it during installing it / from advanced options Something which you can't on Chrome

But Chrome dosen't run a seperate app to check for updates, when you open Chrome, chrome itself checks for updates in teh background, ya know, like all apps should. Chrome just shows how ridiclously stupid devolepers are.

BumbleBritches57 said,

But Chrome dosen't run a seperate app to check for updates, when you open Chrome, chrome itself checks for updates in teh background, ya know, like all apps should. Chrome just shows how ridiclously stupid devolepers are.

You sir , are wrong.
Go to run and open msconfig.exe and Click startup Tab , you would find the process Further in firefox go to about:addons and click plugins , you would fing Google's plugin for updating. Its called GoogleUpdate.exe

http://googlesystem.blogspot.i...isible-googleupdateexe.html

BumbleBritches57 said,

I know ALL about Msconfig n00b. keep thinking you're 1337 tho.

Really, that's what you decided to go with? Wow.

BumbleBritches57 said,

I know ALL about Msconfig n00b. keep thinking you're 1337 tho.

he didn't say you didn't know about msconfig. he said you didn't know about googles update exe running in the background.

BumbleBritches57 said,

I know ALL about Msconfig n00b. keep thinking you're 1337 tho.

Wow, what are you 12? He showed you that you were wrong and you threw a childish hissy fit.

I am waiting for FireFox 13 Beta, if there are none of the changes that I expect then I am done with FireFox for good.

There needs to be improvements with startup and page rendering, both are slower than IE and Opera. Maybe a cleanup of the current UI and a new tabs page needs to be implemented like it was supposed to be in FireFox 12.

I am honestly getting tired of Chrome and FireFox releasing these updates when there are little to no changes at all. If there needs to be a bug fix or a minor change to the browser we do not need a new FULL release, just an update like 4.5 (which is where we should be). Unless there are large changes like an updated UI, faster javascript engine, overall enhanced performance then there needs not to be a major update.

Just because Google does a rapid releases cycle, does not mean everyone should do it. Besides, what all changes in the new Google Chrome releases? Nothing.

I mean IE9 is a great example of this. Drastic update in performance, UI, and features, that deserves a major update. Not, "Oh we fixed a page rendering bug" or "we decided to fix this pixel"

itylernallen said,
I am waiting for FireFox 13 Beta, if there are none of the changes that I expect then I am done with FireFox for good.

There needs to be improvements with startup and page rendering, both are slower than IE and Opera. Maybe a cleanup of the current UI and a new tabs page needs to be implemented like it was supposed to be in FireFox 12.

I am honestly getting tired of Chrome and FireFox releasing these updates when there are little to no changes at all. If there needs to be a bug fix or a minor change to the browser we do not need a new FULL release, just an update like 4.5 (which is where we should be). Unless there are large changes like an updated UI, faster javascript engine, overall enhanced performance then there needs not to be a major update.

Just because Google does a rapid releases cycle, does not mean everyone should do it. Besides, what all changes in the new Google Chrome releases? Nothing.

I mean IE9 is a great example of this. Drastic update in performance, UI, and features, that deserves a major update. Not, "Oh we fixed a page rendering bug" or "we decided to fix this pixel"

Very true with what you said about Version Naming, but at least now we get updates sooner. The problem with old method for firefox was that new features which could be there in an upcoming minor update can't be pushed because it is supposed to land with a major version , at least now nothing is blocked from landing if its done and fit for use. Anyways , you can expect these features from Firefox 13 Beta

*When opening a new tab, users are now presented with their most visited pages
*The Awesome Bar now auto-completes typed URLs
*SPDY protocol now enabled by default for faster browsing on supported sites
*Restored background tabs are not loaded by default for faster startup
*Smooth scrolling is now enabled by default
*The default home page now has quicker access to bookmarks, history, settings, and more

Other than that it is Firefox 13 which has NUMEROUS MemShrink and Snappy bug fixes which indeed make it a faster browser

bogas04 said,

Very true with what you said about Version Naming, but at least now we get updates sooner. The problem with old method for firefox was that new features which could be there in an upcoming minor update can't be pushed because it is supposed to land with a major version , at least now nothing is blocked from landing if its done and fit for use. Anyways , you can expect these features from Firefox 13 Beta

*When opening a new tab, users are now presented with their most visited pages
*The Awesome Bar now auto-completes typed URLs
*SPDY protocol now enabled by default for faster browsing on supported sites
*Restored background tabs are not loaded by default for faster startup
*Smooth scrolling is now enabled by default
*The default home page now has quicker access to bookmarks, history, settings, and more

Other than that it is Firefox 13 which has NUMEROUS MemShrink and Snappy bug fixes which indeed make it a faster browser

Or, you can escrow version numbers completely, except to differentiate between an update and the old version, ya know, the entire purpose of version numbers to begin with.

What I'd really like to see is a better UI for Mac OS, particularly Lion. Get rid of the title of the page from the top of the window, slide the tabs up there, and provide official support for full screen mode. They seem to be completely ignoring this.

Kyle A said,
slide the tabs up there

are you sure OSX allows you to do this? I've never developed for it, but if Mozilla's not using it on OSX and they are on Windows, it seems like it could be something to do with limitations Apple put in.

How many times do I have to press the damn refresh button for internet explorer to download this file. firefox browser did it. SMH

DrOmango said,
How many times do I have to press the damn refresh button for internet explorer to download this file. firefox browser did it. SMH

agreed about downloading large files; FF beats Chrome and IE hands down when it comes to large downloads IME.

BumbleBritches57 said,
Why hasn't Firefox just given up? Chrome is everything Firefox ever was plus a whole lot more, Firefox'll never be able to catch up. just give up.

Chrome sacrifices accuracy for speed, so Chrome is not yet what Firefox ever was and is. Also, ****ty privacy.

BumbleBritches57 said,
Why hasn't Firefox just given up? Chrome is everything Firefox ever was plus a whole lot more, Firefox'll never be able to catch up. just give up.

That's the stupidest thing anyone would say, Firefox should give up, really? why so every one could end up only using chrome. No thank you, I'll stick to Firefox and Opera. Your more than welcome to stick to that crap <chrome>.

BumbleBritches57 said,
Why hasn't Firefox just given up? Chrome is everything Firefox ever was plus a whole lot more, Firefox'll never be able to catch up. just give up.

Firefox is the only browser which is run by a non profit company whose goal is to make Web open and better , it's not after market share and money , unlike chrome/ie etc. Do not track is latest example , and earlier Pop up blocking and many other things and forcing ie to follow standards help web. If it was only chrome , I can see google changing web for its need! Like right now , after kinda overtaking firefox I see a decline in their development process , since chrome 15 every version was getting a tad slower , it's only crankshaft which gave some boost in last say 5 versions.

BumbleBritches57 said,
Why hasn't Firefox just given up? Chrome is everything Firefox ever was plus a whole lot more

Yes, a lot more memory usage. Chrome breaks down completely once you leave Google's intended usage scenario and start pushing it by opening many tabs/windows. With 4 GB RAM my notebook starts swapping processes like mad and Chrome's interface becomes extremely unresponsive. And that's not even taking into account that Chrome's interface has no notion of tab overflow and only shrinks tabs until one cannot discern anymore to which site it belongs.

In contrast to Chrome I can have easily dozens of tabs open in Firefox with the help of tab groups, switch to tab, tab overflow and not loading tabs until selected (which conserves a lot of resources).

I have no use for a browser which is solely optimized for a very limited use case and fails otherwise instead of scaling somewhat gracefully.

I don't see any updates to performance. As of now, Firefox takes at least 10 seconds to load and show it's window (with no add-ons). Chrome and even IE start up almost instantly. And start-up lag isn't the only performance issue I have with FF. Until "little" issues like this are fixed, FF won't be my go to browser.

spacer said,
I don't see any updates to performance. As of now, Firefox takes at least 10 seconds to load and show it's window (with no add-ons).

Strange, my copy of v12 (with about 20 or so addons) loads near instantly. Just a regular SATA drive with SuperFetch, nothing fancy. Same with IE, Chrome maybe takes two seconds, if that, just a hair slower on this hardware. GUI responsiveness is significantly faster than Chrome as well, about the only place is flat is the benchmark sites. Everything is is quite fluid and snappy.

spacer said,
I don't see any updates to performance. As of now, Firefox takes at least 10 seconds to load and show it's window (with no add-ons). Chrome and even IE start up almost instantly. And start-up lag isn't the only performance issue I have with FF. Until "little" issues like this are fixed, FF won't be my go to browser.

Sounds like you might need to defrag your sqlite db's. Turning off "Block attack sites" and "Block forgeries" helps quite a bit too.

$ find ~/.mozilla -name \*.sqlite \
-exec sqlite3 {} vacuum \; \
-exec sqlite3 {} reindex \;

spacer said,
I don't see any updates to performance. As of now, Firefox takes at least 10 seconds to load and show it's window (with no add-ons). Chrome and even IE start up almost instantly.

True, Chrome is faster showing the window first. But it remains barely usable on my machine as long as loads the extensions afterwards which brings the browser to a grinding halt until its finished. As you can image it gets worse the more extensions you have. Firefox is slower to paint the first window but at least I can start browsing immediately once its there.

Billmaster said,
waiting for waterfox

waiting for Palemoon here as Waterfox is a memory hog where as Palemoon's memory usage is more inline with the official Firefox builds.

Mr Spoon said,
Firefox is sooo five years ago
I'd switch to Chrome if the ad blockers were actually decent. Firefox still wins win it comes to extensions, imo at least.

Kyle A said,
I'd switch to Chrome if the ad blockers were actually decent. Firefox still wins win it comes to extensions, imo at least.

Since the release of the WebRequest API in Chrome, adblockers work just as well as they do in Firefox. I would agree that Firefox still has more powerful extensions in general though.

Kyle A said,
I'd switch to Chrome if the ad blockers were actually decent. Firefox still wins win it comes to extensions, imo at least.

Go to chrome web store and search "Adblock plus"
Just be sure to go to adblock settings and update everything. I have Adblock, Adblock popup blocker, and element hider. It works very well!

Wakers said,
Can someone confirm whether this fixes the intermittent freezing issues?

I can't confirm, but I have noticed that it doesn't freeze the way it used to intermittently.

Wakers said,
Can someone confirm whether this fixes the intermittent freezing issues?

People on Forums did say it doesn't freeze unlike 11.0

thatguyandrew1992 said,
Haha, i love that the ad on this page is for Internet Explorer!

Its completely random, not funny at all.

sanke1 said,
Except UAC prompt, none of the new changes/features make any sense to average user.

Although not mentioned , Firefox 12 includes some of snappy and memshrink bug fixes which improves overall UI performance and memory usage.

bogas04 said,

Although not mentioned , Firefox 12 includes some of snappy and memshrink bug fixes which improves overall UI performance and memory usage.

what i don't get is WHY something like that is not mentioned?

because if it's there and they can measure it... it's something you think a company would definitely mention to beef up it's image.

ThaCrip said,

what i don't get is WHY something like that is not mentioned?

because if it's there and they can measure it... it's something you think a company would definitely mention to beef up it's image.

To be honest, sometime stuff can't be explained in easy way that other can understand, what if they told that they added async painting.. why changelogs mostly include bigger changes which users can see..

ThePitt said,
and this is the one that disable stuff and updates without let you know?. No thx

It lets you know and let's you disable it while installing Firefox 13 (Mozilla Maintenance Service) and let's you disable it even when you have it installed (Advanced Options) , something which chrome doesn't let you know ever...

ThePitt said,
and this is the one that disable stuff and updates without let you know?. No thx

If you want it to update manually, you can choose that in the settings.

I think ThePitts point is that when Firefox updates, most of the time, extensions become disabled because of the compatibility check. Unless you have yet another extension installed that disables this, it's a nuisance.

Regardless of how Chrome auto-updates, it is at least seamless compared to Firefox since addons don't break the way they do in Firefox.

jkroeder said,
I think ThePitts point is that when Firefox updates, most of the time, extensions become disabled because of the compatibility check. Unless you have yet another extension installed that disables this, it's a nuisance.

Regardless of how Chrome auto-updates, it is at least seamless compared to Firefox since addons don't break the way they do in Firefox.

Or you can just edit about:config and not install a plugin

NyaR said,

Or you can just edit about:config and not install a plugin

Which you have to do every update because, last I checked, after version 3.6, they decided to change the compatibility check to be version specific.

jkroeder said,
[...]most of the time, extensions become disabled because of the compatibility check. Unless you have yet another extension installed that disables this, it's a nuisance.

Looks like you haven't used Firefox for some time. Firefox 10 relaxed the controls on older extensions and now they are always compatible by default. This means that when you moved from 9 to 10 and then from 10 to 11, you had to do NOTHING to get your extensions be compatible with the latest browser.