Firefox developer gives more details on silent update plans

Mozilla has already announced plans to put in a silent update feature in future editions of its Firefox browser. Today, one of Firefox's programmers, Brian R. Bondy, has updated his blog with more information about how and when the new feature will be implemented.

First, Bondy says that a silent update is not the same as a background update for Firefox, stating that "background updates is a task that makes silent updates better, it is a component of the silent update project." When silent update is added, its users will be able to go into Firefox to choose one of three options. One is to automatically download and install updates; another is to check for updates but not to install them without prior permission; and the final option instructs Firefox not to check for any updates at all.

Bondy also said that the only things that Firefox will silently update will be direct upgrades to the browser. He added, "The updates cannot be tampered with; if they are, they will not be installed."

As to when this new feature will be put in, Bondy says that they will start appearing in the next version of the browser, Firefox 12, "but they will still be applied at startup. Meaning when there is an update, it will take slightly longer to startup." The ability for the browser to update itself silently in the background - while the browser is in use on other tasks, rather than at startup - won't appear until Firefox 13 or 14.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Hacker group taking over LulzSec name for new attacks

Next Story

Hotmail and Live Services disrupted in the UK

33 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

So are they going to silently break extensions too. Worst thing about Firefox v Chrome, can't remember ever seeing a Chrome extension disabled after and update, happens all the time with Firefox.

glyfz said,
So are they going to silently break extensions too. Worst thing about Firefox v Chrome, can't remember ever seeing a Chrome extension disabled after and update, happens all the time with Firefox.
No it doesn't, unless you're using particularly old or unusual addons. Addons updated by about Firefox 4-5 are extremely likely to still be working perfectly, and addons default to compatible now.

These features have been in Chrome for ages, why do they think they can keep up when they're literally YEARS behind the competition? Why are they even trying? We don't want or need Firefox, Chrome has everything they could ever offer and more.

BumbleBritches57 said,
These features have been in Chrome for ages, why do they think they can keep up when they're literally YEARS behind the competition? Why are they even trying? We don't want or need Firefox, Chrome has everything they could ever offer and more.

Does Google pay you or something?

BumbleBritches57 said,
These features have been in Chrome for ages, why do they think they can keep up when they're literally YEARS behind the competition? Why are they even trying? We don't want or need Firefox, Chrome has everything they could ever offer and more.

Tried to migrate to Chrome from Firefox couple of times and never managed to do it. Chrome just couldn't provide me of the superior speeds and functionality of my Firefox setup.

Pupik said,

Tried to migrate to Chrome from Firefox couple of times and never managed to do it. Chrome just couldn't provide me of the superior speeds and functionality of my Firefox setup.

Superior speed? Are you kidding me, oh damn you just lost a millisecond of your life, what will you do now, go sue them maybe? How can people make stupid comments like these? Look up the browser speed tests and see for yourself, they are all in 1-2seconds from eachother. Oh DAMN 1 SECOND! MY life is ruined! /s

D'uh.

alwaysonacoffebreak said,

Superior speed? Are you kidding me, oh damn you just lost a millisecond of your life, what will you do now, go sue them maybe? How can people make stupid comments like these? Look up the browser speed tests and see for yourself, they are all in 1-2seconds from eachother. Oh DAMN 1 SECOND! MY life is ruined! /s

D'uh.


The **** are you on about? Since when it's wrong to prefer for websites to be loaded instantly without ads, tracking cookies and useless and potentially harmful scripts running?

BumbleBritches57 said,
These features have been in Chrome for ages, why do they think they can keep up when they're literally YEARS behind the competition? Why are they even trying? We don't want or need Firefox, Chrome has everything they could ever offer and more.

As a web developer, Chrome sucks. It still renders some stuff in the same was that IE does.

My biggest concern is the way that Firefox deals with incompatible add-ins during the update process. I'm tired of updating Firefox only to find that half my add-ins aren't compatible (apparently) and my browsing experience is broken.

It would be alright if they warned you about add-in compatibility BEFORE installing the update but they warn you AFTER once it's too late.

This will be even more of a problem with silent updates.

It should be pretty rare to come across incompatible addons now - there are rarely changes between releases that'll break them. Do you have particularly old addons?

firefox users whined about version number for Chrome!! and then wola
then some whined about automatic updates and not here we go...

still1 said,
firefox users whined about version number for Chrome!! and then wola
then some whined about automatic updates and not here we go...

Really? Where? Show me where firefox users are "whining about chrome"? If anything, Firefox users are whining about Firefox.

Kushan said,

Really? Where? Show me where firefox users are "whining about chrome"? If anything, Firefox users are whining about Firefox.


where have you been living? in caves? search the internet.. and dont tell me not even a single firefox would have whined about chrome's version number and auto update...

still1 said,

where have you been living? in caves? search the internet.. and dont tell me not even a single firefox would have whined about chrome's version number and auto update...

No, why should I search the internet? You made a pretty blanket claim, if it's true it should take you mere seconds to back it up.
Yeah sure, there's enough Firefox users out there that no doubt a few of them "complained" about Chrome's versioning system, but you're making it out that the majority of users complained and that's the fabrication.

It's like saying "iPhone fans complained about Android's notification system, then wola" or "Windows users complained about OSX's <insert feature here>, then wola", or "<any popular program/service>'s users complained about <any competitor to said popular program/service>'s <feature> and then wola".

It's a non-statement and it has nothing to do with users.

still1 said,
firefox users whined about version number for Chrome!! and then wola
then some whined about automatic updates and not here we go...

wola? really? *facepalm* I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

I believe what you are looking for is the french word "voila".

kenboldt said,

wola? really? *facepalm* I don't want to live on this planet anymore.

I believe what you are looking for is the french word "voila".


No one care if you dont want to live in this world.. i hope u know the way to do it.

Don't know why they don't just play nice and integrate with Windows update.
I would trust it more then.
Yet another reason to use Metro FF. Windows Store Update integration.

dotf said,
Don't know why they don't just play nice and integrate with Windows update.
I would trust it more then.
Yet another reason to use Metro FF. Windows Store Update integration.
Umm... Microsoft only allows their products and drivers to be updated via Windows Update... how's this gonna work again?

DJ Dark said,
Umm... Microsoft only allows their products and drivers to be updated via Windows Update... how's this gonna work again?

oh, right

ok, still another windows 8 upgrade point.

dotf said,
Don't know why they don't just play nice and integrate with Windows update.
I would trust it more then.
Yet another reason to use Metro FF. Windows Store Update integration.

We could really use a unified updater. Even OSX doesn't have one officially afaik, all the programs just use the same component for that.

What I don't want to see is tons of different updater services running for all my programs. That's just stupid.

LaXu said,

We could really use a unified updater. Even OSX doesn't have one officially afaik, all the programs just use the same component for that.
...

A unified updater would be nice, but the problem is then who runs it? Apple and Microsoft would remove entries for programs that violate certain terms or laws, and if you use a 3rd party you can't really be sure if they're trust worthy.

Maybe a system where each application registered itself, and all the updater did was query the developers site and show an update prompt would work. No central controlling party.

dotf said,

oh, right

ok, still another windows 8 upgrade point.

Actually no. Metro web browsers are a special case and cannot be installed through the windows store.

LaXu said,

We could really use a unified updater. Even OSX doesn't have one officially afaik, all the programs just use the same component for that.

What I don't want to see is tons of different updater services running for all my programs. That's just stupid.

aptitude ftw!

DJ Dark said,
Umm... Microsoft only allows their products and drivers to be updated via Windows Update... how's this gonna work again?

The Windows Update and Windows Store update mechanisms are separate. Metro apps will be automatically updated through the Store.

FalseAgent said,

The Windows Update and Windows Store update mechanisms are separate. Metro apps will be automatically updated through the Store.
If you re-read the original comment I replied to you'll notice a mention of both windows u

DJ Dark said,
If you re-read the original comment I replied to you'll notice a mention of both windows u
Ugh I hate touch screens at times...
Let's try this again.
If you re-read the original comment I replied to you'll notice that he mentions both windows update and windows store update.