Recommended Posts

Is anyone using the new mozilla profile manager? http://ftp.mozilla.o...ilemanager/1.0/

profilemanager.jpg

Now is very easy to use use all firefox versions without having to change things on shortcuts icons. Besides by changing the user agent string on about:config (nightly and ux are recognized as mobile browsers for some websites) (string->new->general.useragent.override->value=(example: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/8.0) you can try every version without worry.

I wonder if mozilla will add the option to add a new tab as private without having to star a new session. (like google chrome)

Memory consumption is moot when most people now have computers with at least 4GB ram these days. This is like saying I have a 250GB hd and Windows system files take up 15GB. Low ram footprint is always great, but I'm not worried about it when it means giving up performance.

Freeing up memory and allocating memory are not free operations.

Anyone know how to get the extension Linkification to work with Firefox 9.0 Beta? Almost all of my extensions work except for that one and the Java console. It worked great in 8.0

You can install Addon Compatibility reporter. That should allow it to work.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/add-on-compatibility-reporter/?src=api

Yes I know, 11 is a great deal faster and does better things but the same results could have been with Firefox 4.11. The only reason they jumped the numbers up, was due to Chrome. This cannot be denied. At the rate Mozilla is going we will have a Firefox 20 by 2013.

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

  • Like 3

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

:yes:

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

I am glad to hear that, then I hope that you are testing every release up and including the final.

Some sweetness related to addons - more will come soon - in the end (default compatibility of addons)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700201

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695977

-Removal Trace Monkey JS engine code may happen this week, which means 67k lines code going to finish its journey in FF. Also related bugs to it will die. (in test process currently)

-Silent Updates (removal of UAC dialog) work is finished and may land soon. (in review process currently)

-Partial support of Chrome to FF your data import is done, may land soon (in review process currently)

I am glad to hear that, then I hope that you are testing every release up and including the final.

There is no need to follow each version through Nightly, Aurora, then Beta, and especially not after Final is released. If a bug or feature isn't fixed coming out of Nightly then that usually means you can just keep following it in the next version of Nightly. Aurora is basically for stability testing of the Nightly patches that landed and Beta is pretty much what the Release Candidates used to be.

You can install Addon Compatibility reporter. That should allow it to work.

https://addons.mozil...porter/?src=api

I knew about that, but I didn't think I'd have to do that since all my other addons work. I found a hacked version that works, though. Here is the link to it for anyone that wants it. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2061460/linkification_1.3.9c.xpi

There is no need to follow each version through Nightly, Aurora, then Beta, and especially not after Final is released. If a bug or feature isn't fixed coming out of Nightly then that usually means you can just keep following it in the next version of Nightly. Aurora is basically for stability testing of the Nightly patches that landed and Beta is pretty much what the Release Candidates used to be.

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

Grinder, can you do us all a favor and at least go and read up on some official resources before spewing your misinformation all over the place? I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, but if it's to be helpful and share accurate information, you are failing horribly at it.

Grinder, can you do us all a favor and at least go and read up on some official resources before spewing your misinformation all over the place? I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, but if it's to be helpful and share accurate information, you are failing horribly at it.

What I posted is correct. Nightly patches are for Nightly builds. Aurora patches are for Aurora builds. You sir are the one that fails to comprehend a very simple concept. I suggest that you visit some of the sites below and educate yourself:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Features/Release_Tracking

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Main_Page

https://quality.mozilla.org/

https://affiliates.mozilla.org/en-US/

http://www.andrewturnbull.net/mozilla/historyfx.html

https://developer.mozilla.org/en

You can do me a favor and just leave me alone as you are contributing nothing.

anyone?

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Features/Desktop/Firefox_Home_Tab

The above is all I can find on it.

What I posted is correct. Nightly patches are for Nightly builds. Aurora patches are for Aurora builds.

I see now that rather than educating yourself, you're choosing to throw a hissy fit over your ignorance getting called out. So would you mind telling us which one of your posted links back up your claim above, or that Aurora is stable? :rolleyes:

I see now that rather than educating yourself, you're choosing to throw a hissy fit over your ignorance getting called out. So would you mind telling us which one of your posted links back up your claim above, or that Aurora is stable? :rolleyes:

You still have a problem with the English language. I said that The Nightly build that I am using is stable. To this is can prove as it has never crashed. I did use Aurora while it was still under the release as a Nightly and at that time it was stable. I do not use Aurora now so I have no Idea of it's stability other than to say if the build was stable as a Nightly, logic would dictate that it is stable in the second release phase which is Aurora,

I need to switch from Nightly to Aurora today, since yesterday Nightly build I'm facing memory leaks, when You look in about:memory after few minutes of browsing there will be entry: "Heap Unclassified" which is not releasing memory and during browsing this memory is stuck there for good (browser restart), I've check this in save mode, normal mode with all adds disabled, same thing over and over again, on Mozilla forum I saw some similar reports but looks like no one is taking this seriously... :)

Edit:

OK, Looks like bug is on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=702813

I need to switch from Nightly to Aurora today, since yesterday Nightly build I'm facing memory leaks, when You look in about:memory after few minutes of browsing there will be entry: "Heap Unclassified" which is not releasing memory and during browsing this memory is stuck there for good (browser restart), I've check this in save mode, normal mode with all adds disabled, same thing over and over again, on Mozilla forum I saw some similar reports but looks like no one is taking this seriously... :)

Edit:

OK, Looks like bug is on https://bugzilla.moz...g.cgi?id=702813

I'm experiencing the same issue. Thanks for the link.

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

Yeah, the Nightly builds have been very stable for me for quite some time, too. That being said there's still a chance that you'll run into issues (like the one above) that an Aurora user would be less likely to encounter.

From some of your other posts you seemed to hint that you should test, for example, Nightly 11, then Aurora 11, and so on. I was just saying there's no need to do so. I wasn't saying that each channel doesn't get their own patches.

I had that same issue when I updated my nightly and finally got to restoring it. browsed the net for a while... had the same thing.

had 2.2GB commit and 2.1GB RAM usage overnight. I only left 15 tabs open overnight. but with 120 approx browser actions.

I'm experiencing the same issue. Thanks for the link.

Yeah, the Nightly builds have been very stable for me for quite some time, too. That being said there's still a chance that you'll run into issues (like the one above) that an Aurora user would be less likely to encounter.

From some of your other posts you seemed to hint that you should test, for example, Nightly 11, then Aurora 11, and so on. I was just saying there's no need to do so. I wasn't saying that each channel doesn't get their own patches.

What I said is that I do not do that, I stay with the Nightly Builds. I did say that the Builds that I did test turned into Aurora and they were stable when I tested them in the nightly channel. One may run into problems no matter what channel that they are on. It is supposed to be that the Final is more stable than the Beta and the Beta is more stable than Aurora and so forth. But it does not always work that way. Firefox 8.01 will be released later today or tomorrow , so I suppose a problem was found. More than likely a security issue.

You still have a problem with the English language. I said that The Nightly build that I am using is stable. To this is can prove as it has never crashed. I did use Aurora while it was still under the release as a Nightly and at that time it was stable. I do not use Aurora now so I have no Idea of it's stability other than to say if the build was stable as a Nightly, logic would dictate that it is stable in the second release phase which is Aurora,

Or maybe you should learn some technical knowledge about software and realize that stability entails a lot more than simply not crashing. And even then the current Aurora channel contained at least two crasher bugs when it was first released. Just because you don't run into them since you don't do extensive testing doesn't mean no one else does.

There's also no such thing as Aurora "having its own patching process". If you really knew how Bugzilla works you'd also know that all incoming patches are always merged with mozilla-central first, but tracking flags can be nominated for each bug to be merged to other release channels as well without waiting for the patched mozilla-central code to trickle out to them days or weeks later.

Again, if your intention is to help, then please make sure you have accurate information before you do. If your intention here is simply to put on a show of being more intelligent and informed than you actually are... then carry on, I guess.

Anyone know why Firefox always slows down and even locks up for a few seconds whenever downloads are done? I don't have that issue with Chrome or other browsers. Is it because of the pop-up notification, poor code, bad extension, or what? Is that being worked on? It's my only real complaint right now. Surely I'm not the only one experiencing this, right? I'm using 9.0 Beta

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
  • Posts

    • It's amazing that anyone still uses this bloated trash.
    • @Sayan...I have defended you at various points as I hope you know. This headline however is utter trash...shame on you sir!
    • An actual cosmic "Eye of Sauron" had been looking straight at us all along by Sayan Sen Image by Kovin P. Vasquez via Pexels | Not representative An international team of researchers has solved a long-standing mystery surrounding a distant blazar known as PKS 1424+240, helping explain why it produces some of the brightest high-energy gamma rays and cosmic neutrinos ever observed despite appearing to have a relatively slow-moving jet. The findings were published on June 6 in Astronomy & Astrophysics Letters. The study addresses a broader challenge in astrophysics: understanding how extreme cosmic objects accelerate particles to very high energies and produce very high-energy (VHE) photons and neutrinos. PKS 1424+240 is located billions of light-years from Earth. It has attracted attention for years because it is both a powerful source of VHE gamma rays and the brightest known neutrino-emitting blazar in the sky, according to observations by the IceCube Neutrino Observatory. It is also associated with one of the strongest peaks in IceCube's nine-year neutrino sky map A blazar is a type of active galactic nucleus powered by a supermassive black hole that pulls in surrounding matter and launches jets of plasma moving close to the speed of light. What makes blazars unique is their orientation. One of their jets points almost directly toward Earth, making them appear exceptionally bright across the electromagnetic spectrum and allowing scientists to study some of the most extreme physical processes in the Universe. The scientists exclaimed it's like the 'Eye of Sauron' in deep space. Usually, the brightest gamma-ray-emitting blazars are expected to have jets that appear to move very quickly. However, radio observations of PKS 1424+240 suggested that its jet was moving much more slowly, creating a contradiction that became part of a long-running problem known as the "Doppler factor crisis." To investigate, researchers analyzed 15 years of observations from the Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA), a network of 10 radio antennas spread across the continental United States, Hawaii and St. Croix. Using a technique called Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI), astronomers combine signals from widely separated radio telescopes to create a virtual Earth-sized telescope capable of revealing extremely fine details. The team combined 42 polarization-sensitive radio images collected between 2009 and 2025, creating a much deeper and more detailed view of the jet than had previously been possible. The observations were carried out as part of MOJAVE (Monitoring Of Jets in Active galactic nuclei with VLBA Experiments), a long-running program that studies the brightness, polarization and magnetic field structures of jets produced by active galaxies. The project aims to better understand how activity near supermassive black holes is linked to high-energy radiation and neutrino emission. “When we reconstructed the image, it looked absolutely stunning,” said Yuri Kovalev, lead author of the study and Principal Investigator of the European Research Council-funded MuSES project at the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy. “We have never seen anything quite like it — a near-perfect toroidal magnetic field with a jet, pointing straight at us.” The image revealed an unusual geometry. The researchers found that Earth lies almost directly in line with the jet, with a viewing angle of less than 0.6 degrees. In simple terms, astronomers are looking almost straight down the jet. This turned out to be the key to the mystery. Because the jet is aimed almost directly at Earth, a relativistic effect called Doppler boosting dramatically increases its apparent brightness. The study found that this effect boosts the emission by a factor of about 30 while also making the jet appear slower than it actually is. “This alignment causes a boost in brightness by a factor of 30 or more,” said Jack Livingston, a co-author at the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy. “At the same time, the jet appears to move slowly due to projection effects — a classic optical illusion.” The nearly head-on view also gave scientists a rare look at the jet's magnetic field. Using polarized radio signals, they detected a clear toroidal, or doughnut-shaped, magnetic field component. The observations suggest the jet carries an electric current and that its magnetic field helps launch, shape and stabilize the flow of plasma. Researchers believe this magnetic structure may also play a key role in accelerating particles to energies high enough to produce both gamma rays and neutrinos. “Solving this puzzle confirms that active galactic nuclei with supermassive black holes are not only powerful accelerators of electrons, but also of protons — the origin of the observed high-energy neutrinos,” Kovalev said. The research was conducted under the MuSES (Multi-messenger Studies of Energetic Sources) project, which investigates how active galactic nuclei accelerate particles and generate different cosmic signals, including light and neutrinos. Scientists say understanding how protons are accelerated and linked to neutrino production remains one of the major unanswered questions in astrophysics. The findings help explain why some blazars can appear to have slow jets while still producing extremely bright high-energy emissions. More broadly, the study strengthens the link between relativistic jets, magnetic fields, gamma rays and high-energy neutrinos. Researchers say the results provide new clues about how some of the Universe's most powerful natural particle accelerators work and offer important insights for multimessenger astronomy, which combines different types of cosmic signals to study extreme events in space. Source: European Research Council, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Gotenks98 is right... Outlook (new) is absolute trash. Doesn't Mozilla have an Enterprise Version of Firebird?
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      pestcontrol46 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      pestcontrol46 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      510
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      273
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      75
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!