updates Meet the browser: Firefox Next

[demon_speed]

Why use Firefox when you can use either Palemoon or Waterfox? They are much greater versions of Firefox!

[mancode20]

I have never tried Palemoon or Waterfox, but I have heard good things. Isn't the disadvantage to using them that they aren't updated as much as Firefox? While Firefox is now officially on version 18, they are still behind, aren't they? Do you get the newest features such as tab animations with them? Are they faster in terms of overall browser responsiveness and scrolling? 18 has been the best for me, but some sites still feel a little jerky at times. Thanks for the link for 19 beta!

[bawz]

Why use Firefox when you can use either Palemoon or Waterfox? They are much greater versions of Firefox!

waterfox is Dead

[dysgenics]

waterfox is Dead

http://www.waterfoxproject.org/development.php

wat

[demon_speed]

I have never tried Palemoon or Waterfox, but I have heard good things. Isn't the disadvantage to using them that they aren't updated as much as Firefox? While Firefox is now officially on version 18, they are still behind, aren't they? Do you get the newest features such as tab animations with them? Are they faster in terms of overall browser responsiveness and scrolling? 18 has been the best for me, but some sites still feel a little jerky at times. Thanks for the link for 19 beta!

Yes, they are much more optimized. Palemoon is updated pretty often > http://www.softpedia.com/progChangelog/Pale-Moon-Changelog-141741.html , about every month there is an update :). Tab animations? You mean like colored tabs? Yeah I think Palemoon is really responsive.

waterfox is Dead

I know :/.. I started using it about 1.5 month ago cause I got tipped by another forum member about it's awsomeness for being a 64-bit browser only :).

[mancode20]

Yes, they are much more optimized. Palemoon is updated pretty often > http://www.softpedia...log-141741.html , about every month there is an update :). Tab animations? You mean like colored tabs? Yeah I think Palemoon is really responsive.

I know :/.. I started using it about 1.5 month ago cause I got tipped by another forum member about it's awsomeness for being a 64-bit browser only :).

No, I mean the somewhat smooth animation you get when re-arranging tabs. It started since version 17 and is in 18 as well. Is that in Palemoon and Waterfox?

[Dmxnet]

Anyone having a lot of crashes after updating to firefox 18.0 ?

I can use my browser for like 5 -20 min and then it crashes :/ it almost never crashed in latest firefox 17.

Think i have had about 30 crashes today -.- thinking about moving to chrome -.-

Anyone know how to downgrade with every add on, bookmarker, usertyles, greasemonkey scripts and settings/layout ?

[Dmxnet]

Hmm seems like i had a ****ty nvidia driver -.-

[cetla]

Hmm seems like i had a ****ty nvidia driver -.-

Nope, I ran into the same problem. After ff18, everything just went to hell.

You can reinstall FF17.0.1 over the current one and it'll keep all your settings.

[Sub_Zero_Alchemist]

Anyone having a lot of crashes after updating to firefox 18.0 ?

I can use my browser for like 5 -20 min and then it crashes :/ it almost never crashed in latest firefox 17.

Think i have had about 30 crashes today -.- thinking about moving to chrome -.-

Anyone know how to downgrade with every add on, bookmarker, usertyles, greasemonkey scripts and settings/layout ?

No crashes here, try doing a complete fresh install and update your video drivers and see if that helps.

[demon_speed]

No, I mean the somewhat smooth animation you get when re-arranging tabs. It started since version 17 and is in 18 as well. Is that in Palemoon and Waterfox?

Hm I don't know, but if not there should be an advanced setting wich users can go in an change settings that developers don't have as default.. Othervice it would be as an add on.

[bawz]

http://www.waterfoxp...development.php

wat

he posted that back in December 21, i still see no Waterfox18 release an i bet i dont either

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Yes, Aurora does not update automatically for a few days after the Nightly merge, so the code can stabilise.

Why would you follow a specific version through the cycle? That seems somewhat pointless.

All you would do is not get any new features for four months, and potentially lose features as they're backed out for not being stable enough. What benefit is there? (And you end up with the problem that your browser wants to update, but you are avoiding it ... sort of).

Yes it is so I am staying with 21.

[Dmxnet]

Nope, I ran into the same problem. After ff18, everything just went to hell.

You can reinstall FF17.0.1 over the current one and it'll keep all your settings.

I just reinstalled my nvidia driver and i havent had a crash since, and the new firefox is faster than v17 :)

[cetla]

I just reinstalled my nvidia driver and i havent had a crash since, and the new firefox is faster than v17 :)

Lol, frustrated with FF18, I tried ff19b1 and all is well. Still on the same Nvidia driver. WTH is wrong with Mozilla these days?

[+Zlip792 MVC]

Some news:

HTML5 Scoped Style attribute support landed, also HTML5 <time> tag basic support landed but behind experiment forms preference entry. So this is some good progress in this department.

Now from Inbound, some interesting bug which I think matters to discuss, like I always I share.

API to mark depreciated api as a result of refactoring of code and conversion to aysnc API: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=812859

CSS3 Animation related fix: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=827717 , https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=827698

Externally opened URLs may open in new private window: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=829180

64-bit offset in Audio/Video (nothing to do with FF 64-bit progress so relax): https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=829223

Regression fix on Mac OS X: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=821329

GC (Generational GC preparation bug fixes): https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=829372 , https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=828607

Adding ability to run JS tests in parallel to build Firefox faster: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=827960

Ion Monkey regressing some sites (This fix also be included in FF 18.0.1): https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=818023

Brian Hackett work on dense array related small contribution - JS Engine: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=827490

Download Panel - Library downloads view does not show end time of downloading: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=828247

Ion Monkey small failure fix in one benchmark: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=829277

[MemShrink] GC to DOM Workers: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=828887

XMLHttp Request Bug in DOM: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=608735

WebIDL: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=828532

Some Retina Display high dpi images: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=829258 , https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=826999

In pursuit of making sites can't look into installed plugins, some progress work landed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=757726

Keyboard navigation fail in Library Download View: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=828895

Networking: DNS related: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=826455

OS.File API related enhancement: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=802534

Social Panel bug under Mac OS X: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=828120

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

The <time> tag is different to the "time" input type, <time> is basically a span and has been supported for a while.

It seems Bug 777283 (The implementation of the input type) is only the support code, there doesn't appear to be a UI yet.

[+Zlip792 MVC]

The <time> tag is different to the "time" input type, <time> is basically a span and has been supported for a while.

It seems Bug 777283 (The implementation of the input type) is only the support code, there doesn't appear to be a UI yet.

Sorry mistook, thanks for correction yes, because it does not have UI yet that's why it is behind preference.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

I like the idea of hiding experimental properties behind preferences, it lets them stop using prefixes (Since that's gone so well thanks to WebKit browsers), and it means that you have to explicitly enable them if you want to test them (Which reduces reliance on non-standard properties, which is something else that'd be nice for WebKit to have)

Of course the downside is that it gets less testing, but that's an acceptable tradeoff to avoid polluting the web.

[+Zlip792 MVC]

I like the idea of hiding experimental properties behind preferences, it lets them stop using prefixes (Since that's gone so well thanks to WebKit browsers), and it means that you have to explicitly enable them if you want to test them (Which reduces reliance on non-standard properties, which is something else that'd be nice for WebKit to have)

Of course the downside is that it gets less testing, but that's an acceptable tradeoff to avoid polluting the web.

Webkit also hide sometime properties behind build system flags or sometime in about:flags. Although I personally like Firefox approach more better and you point is also valid, proper functionality is better than half baked experience.

[Kirkburn]

About gfx drivers and issues with them: don't be too quick to jump on specifically Mozilla or Nvidia/AMD or Windows as the cause - it's a very complex area.

Yes it is so I am staying with 21.

I don't understand how that was a response to my question? I'm not going to make you change, but I still have no idea why would stick to a specific version rather than channel.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

About gfx drivers and issues with them: don't be too quick to jump on specifically Mozilla or Nvidia/AMD or Windows as the cause - it's a very complex area.

I don't understand how that was a response to my question? I'm not going to make you change, but I still have no idea why would stick to a specific version rather than channel.

I said yes, meaning that I agreed with what you posted and then I went back to using the Nightly builds. As you stated it makes no sense to follow say Fx 20 thru all of the stages-(Nightly-Aurora-Beta-Final)

[Kirkburn]

I said yes, meaning that I agreed with what you posted and then I went back to using the Nightly builds. As you stated it makes no sense to follow say Fx 20 thru all of the stages-(Nightly-Aurora-Beta-Final)

Ah, fair enough :)

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Webkit also hide sometime properties behind build system flags or sometime in about:flags. Although I personally like Firefox approach more better and you point is also valid, proper functionality is better than half baked experience.

I think that's more Chrome than normal WebKit, but it is a step in the right direction. The main problem is that when properties aren't hidden, they get put on this "perpetually supported for compatibility" list, so they're never actually removed then. On the surface it sounds great (older pages don't break), but the flipside is that for the best compatibility with multiple versions you need to use the non-standard properties (Since the old behavior is kept maintained), and that starts leading to ingrained bad behavior (For the longest time WebKit had a bug on OS X that let you use PostScript names for fonts rather than their standard names, to this day I'm still seeing sites that rely on that bug, breaking in pretty much everything, etc.)

[+Zlip792 MVC]

I think that's more Chrome than normal WebKit, but it is a step in the right direction. The main problem is that when properties aren't hidden, they get put on this "perpetually supported for compatibility" list, so they're never actually removed then. On the surface it sounds great (older pages don't break), but the flipside is that for the best compatibility with multiple versions you need to use the non-standard properties (Since the old behavior is kept maintained), and that starts leading to ingrained bad behavior (For the longest time WebKit had a bug on OS X that let you use PostScript names for fonts rather than their standard names, to this day I'm still seeing sites that rely on that bug, breaking in pretty much everything, etc.)

Yes, when browser companies ship half baked vendor prefix enabled support and mention about it, they are maintained and carry forward by developers for too long and they then don't change even when they go with original spec implementation which as result broke sites badly.

So putting experimental properties behind preference is great thing IMO. So no user mess up with them unless they become ready for prime time.