Recommended Posts

Guys, think about what a Release Candidate is. Why would it say release candidate on a candidate for release? It's intentionally not supposed to change further.

Because that's not the usual method. For every software company other than Mozilla, release candidates cannot become final without rebuilding. I like the way Mozilla does it, but "Release Candidate" usually just means that it's another testing build.

I understand that's the usual process, but sometimes bugs do sneak in and then the program is changed. It would still make sense to say this is the RC version, and then say final or just 4.0 when it's officially final.

If that were strictly adhered to, you'd never release the final, because bugs will always be found.

The idea in Firefox's case is that the RC is when nothing else changes - if a showstopper appears, you make a new release candidate. You don't fix the bug, then put out the final. Bugs found after declaring the RC final are then point releases.

Alpha, beta, release candidate definitions differ from group to group - but the above approach certainly isn't wrong or particularly strange.

an annoying bug in the RC which wasn't there in beta 12 for me:

if you click refresh then click on another tab you have open you can't click on refresh until the previous tab's page has been refreshed, very annoying!

No issue here for me on RC1.

For some reason extensions won't install anymore on my nightly builds, and I have to download the latest nightlies because the auto updater says I have the most current version each time :/

I think I might wipe it when the RC is out and see if that fixes it!

If that were strictly adhered to, you'd never release the final, because bugs will always be found.

The idea in Firefox's case is that the RC is when nothing else changes - if a showstopper appears, you make a new release candidate. You don't fix the bug, then put out the final. Bugs found after declaring the RC final are then point releases.

Alpha, beta, release candidate definitions differ from group to group - but the above approach certainly isn't wrong or particularly strange.

I do think they should emphasize that it's an RC build. There are still people who might think they already have the ff4 just because one of their friends sent them a link from majorgeeks.

And if some showstopper blocker comes up, people will start whining about it blaming it on FF4 (when what they currently have is a test build)

For some reason extensions won't install anymore on my nightly builds, and I have to download the latest nightlies because the auto updater says I have the most current version each time :/

I think I might wipe it when the RC is out and see if that fixes it!

As far as I understand the builds don't update when a release is near.

I do think they should emphasize that it's an RC build. There are still people who might think they already have the ff4 just because one of their friends sent them a link from majorgeeks.

And if some showstopper blocker comes up, people will start whining about it blaming it on FF4 (when what they currently have is a test build)

I would think that if nothing is found, it will actually be shipped as the final build, so without the RC in the About screen!

As far as I understand the builds don't update when a release is near.

Thanks :)

For some reason extensions won't install anymore on my nightly builds, and I have to download the latest nightlies because the auto updater says I have the most current version each time :/

I think I might wipe it when the RC is out and see if that fixes it!

LOL, I thought there really are no updates. So we have to manually install everytime the nightlies is updated? I'll probably wait for the RC then.

is it worth installing the RC on the mozilla ftp or should i wait for it to be officially released

its still showing B12 on the FF4 site

I downloaded the Release Candidate from the Mozilla FTP earlier, and it seems to be running perfectly well for me. Previously, Minefield and the Firefox 4 betas would 'hang' on me for some time, but this doesn't seem to have happened with the Release Candidate yet. Hopefully, it won't happen at all.

is it worth installing the RC on the mozilla ftp or should i wait for it to be officially released

its still showing B12 on the FF4 site

If you can wait a few days more, then wait. a few more days of waiting won't hurt.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I think it depends on what you're looking for to do, and the time you have to spare. With my Dwarf 3, I easily spend 3-4 hour sessions; half an hour driving to an un-light polluted place, another half hour unpacking and setting up the smart scope + tripod for equatorial tracking, then 15 more minutes mucking around with settings and shooting calibration frames, spending a few hours shooting, merging with past photo sessions, etc. It's crazy how time flies and I often get home later than I expected. It's something I still need to set aside a good part of an evening to do, all in all. For one session, where you often need like four for best results when it comes to deep space objects. Even with a smart scope like Dwarf 3, regular non-astro photography is still way more approachable to people getting into photography. I find this is a time consuming niche no matter how I go about it. With practice, I can probably begin cutting time here but I think where smart scopes find their home is among people who love to shoot the night sky but don't have the spare time to go deep with the "navigator level" attunement to the night sky itself in addition to everything else. Having said this, _if_ you have even more time to spend on this hobby, it will probably be even more rewarding to do it more by hand and learn the skies and the details of how it all works.
    • I misread the title and thought Teams itself would be redesigned. Imagine having this one as a native WinUI app.
    • Dell, HP PCs ran into endless reboot, BitLocker recovery loops but Windows 11 isn't to blame by Sayan Sen Last month Neowin reported on a major issue on Dell systems wherein a bug in its official support tool was leading to endless blue screen of death (BSOD) and restarts. Following our report, Dell officially acknowledged its SupportAssist-related crash issue, confirming that the culprit is not Microsoft's operating system but rather a faulty version of its own remediation software. In a newly published support advisory, Dell stated that version 5.5.16.0 of Dell SupportAssist Remediation and Alienware SupportAssist Remediation can trigger blue screen errors and unexpected system restarts. The company notes that the problematic component operates independently of the main SupportAssist application, meaning users should not remove the primary SupportAssist software when troubleshooting the issue. According to Dell, the crashes are linked specifically to the SupportAssist Remediation service, which is bundled with SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools, and as such it has since released an updated version, 5.5.16.1, which is said to resolve the problem. Affected users are advised to first verify whether version 5.5.16.0 is installed by checking the Installed Apps section in Windows Settings. If so, Dell recommends updating SupportAssist OS Recovery Tools through either SupportAssist's "Update Software" feature or Dell Command Update. Dell also advises users to back up important data before performing the update and to ensure systems remain connected to power throughout the installation process. If you are still having issues though make sure to report to the Dell support forum. As it turns out though Dell is not the only PC maker currently dealing with update-related headaches as HP is also facing a separate but probably equally frustrating issue involving recent Windows Secure Boot updates that were released with recent Windows 11 Patch Tuesdays. Similar to Dell, HP also put up its own support article where it explains the issue. The company says that affected devices could hit a brick wall when booting as they run into a BitLocker recovery loop after the April 2026 updates. The problem appears to affect systems wherein the new UEFI Secure Boot CA 2023 certificates fail to apply properly. As such affected users will find themselves entering their recovery key over and over again despite the system otherwise functioning normally. HP says such PCs should be updated to the latest available BIOS version and configured with the necessary Secure Boot certificates before installing Microsoft's Windows 11 Patch Tuesday updates. Systems that are already experiencing the problem may require BIOS configuration changes to restore normal boot behavior. Admins can find information regarding that in the support article here on HP's official website.
    • Getting further away from the artistic study of mental disease that was the first game... (which never needed any sequels to begin with) But I get it, a company has to make money. And the second was at least visually impressive, if not in any other way.
    • If its the devs fault you would think Unreal would help M$ take full advantage of Unreal and work with them to fix the performance issues. Otherwise they are catching unwarranted bad press.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      246
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      neufuse
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!