updates Meet the browser: Firefox Next

[bawz]

AFAIK xul is Dead. which is why Mozilla want Addons Devs to write there Addons in SDK so Mozilla can get rid of XUL

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Ehh, XUL is in a funny place, everything it did is slowly being moved into HTML/CSS (Flexbox being a big one), eventually they'll be at a point where they could rewrite the entire interface in plain HTML and then they wouldn't need XUL at all.

[+Zlip792 MVC]

Firefox 37 Beta 2 out with first TIME 64-BIT... Great to see progress!

 

Readability landed in Firefox Nightly.

[Boo Berry]

Firefox 37 Beta 2 out with first TIME 64-BIT... Great to see progress!

Here's a link: ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/37.0b2/win64/en-US/Firefox%20Setup%2037.0b2.exe

 

Going to be using 64-bit Firefox from now on.

[rsnn]

So next stable version 37 will have x64?

[+Zlip792 MVC]

So next stable version 37 will have x64?

 

I'll guess probably but I think even if that will not be the case, it will be opening a door for testing 64-bit which will be great.

[rsnn]

I'll guess probably but I think even if that will not be the case, it will be opening a door for testing 64-bit which will be great.

 

MSE working on youtube and x64, seems like a senior version

[Boo Berry]

But keep in mind MSE is still pretty experimental, especially H.264.

[rsnn]

But keep in mind MSE is still pretty experimental, especially H.264.

 

I've been using MSE on Youtube with Firefox since I uninstalled Flash like 5 or 6 months ago and it works perfectly smooth with no errors. I'm just looking for 60fps, I don't care about 1080 It's fine for me at 720.

[Boo Berry]

I was just pointing out that MSE support in Firefox is still experimental and a work-in-progress. There's bound to be issues here and there that'll be fixed over time. That said, YouTube videos are working fine for me, including 60fps videos.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

In 36 yes, but they're going to be shipping it in 37 (Along with EME if it doesn't slip), so it's not that experimental any more. WebM support is though, so don't enable that.

The biggest issues blocking 64bit support have been fixed (Stuff like the crash reporter not working, and actual crashes), and after that all that was left was plugin support, but both Flash and Silverlight install 64bit variants now so they're not going to bother with 32bit plugins with a 64bit browser, so it's mainly an issue of working out how to upgrade users (Last thing they want is to automatically upgrade users from the 32bit to 64bit release, and break all their plugins and binary addons)

[+Red King Subscriber²]

In 36 yes, but they're going to be shipping it in 37 (Along with EME if it doesn't slip), so it's not that experimental any more. WebM support is though, so don't enable that.

The biggest issues blocking 64bit support have been fixed (Stuff like the crash reporter not working, and actual crashes), and after that all that was left was plugin support, but both Flash and Silverlight install 64bit variants now so they're not going to bother with 32bit plugins with a 64bit browser, so it's mainly an issue of working out how to upgrade users (Last thing they want is to automatically upgrade users from the 32bit to 64bit release, and break all their plugins and binary addons)

I have been using a 3rd party 64-bit for a long time without any problems.

Best idea would be to check if user only has whitelisted 64-bit compatible add-ons / plugins and then upgrade those uses by default.

EDIT: And I am fairly certain that ABP / ABE slows Firefox down considerably...

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Yeah, problem with those 64bit community builds is that they worked "well enough" that people didn't report problems, but then when Mozilla went to run their tests (Which test nearly every part of the codebase, that's the point) they'd often fail and crash. One of the last things blocking an official 64bit build was actually a problem with the way the JS engine interacted with the crash reporter, so that under certain circumstances it could crash in such a way that the crash reporter would produce a broken crash report, their tests caught it, yet it basically never happened under normal web browsing.

It's similar to those old edited builds of XP people used to slim down the install size, they'd work perfectly fine until they tried to print, then they found out the print spooler had been ripped out to save space (We often had threads about that)

Edit: And that's ignoring the random preferences that community builds flip, like Waterfox 35 enabling support for MSE for MP4 and WebM.

[AdityaRizky_78]

Firefox 37 Beta 4

x86 = ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/37.0b4/win32/en-US/Firefox%20Setup%2037.0b4.exe | Another language

x64 = ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/37.0b4/win64/en-US/Firefox%20Setup%2037.0b4.exe | Another language

[bawz]

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/beta/all/

 

for 64 bit version http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/37.0b4/win64/

 

please dont use ftp://ftp as the server is not load balanced

[gohpep]

EDIT: And I am fairly certain that ABP / ABE slows Firefox down considerably...

And that's why I use uBlock. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/releases

[bawz]

I have been using a 3rd party 64-bit for a long time without any problems.

Best idea would be to check if user only has whitelisted 64-bit compatible add-ons / plugins and then upgrade those uses by default.

EDIT: And I am fairly certain that ABP / ABE slows Firefox down considerably...

 

oddly my Firefox is relatively fast an i do use ABP. i always keep my extensions up to date. ABP is on AMO. ublock isnt.  i tend to trust an extension more thats on AMO 

[ViperAFK]

oddly my Firefox is relatively fast an i do use ABP. i always keep my extensions up to date. ABP is on AMO. ublock isnt.  i tend to trust an extension more thats on AMO 

ublock is on amo and has been preliminarily reviewed by mozilla: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/ublock/

[bawz]

ublock is on amo and has been preliminarily reviewed by mozilla: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/ublock/

last i looked it wasnt on AMO.

[gohpep]

last i looked it wasnt on AMO.

Well it is now, so there is no reason not to switch

[bawz]

Well it is now, so there is no reason not to switch

problem is, you still gotta update ublock Manually by going to ublocks git website. i just did another search for it, still doesnt show up.  an im not gonna do that.

[gohpep]

problem is, you still gotta update ublock Manually by going to ublocks git website. i just did another search for it, still doesnt show up.  an im not gonna do that.

Well, no, those are considered dev builds, and those on AMO are stable.

[+Heartripper Subscriber¹]

Today I switched to ublock from ABP and wow, RAM usage on startup dropped from about 350MB to 190.

[torrentthief]

you guys should check out adguard adblocker, it also uses little ram. Firefox 37 beta 5 is out btw.

[Boo Berry]

you guys should check out adguard adblocker, it also uses little ram. Firefox 37 beta 5 is out btw.

Very true, especially when compared to ABP. There's the 2.0 beta available on their site which is said to use less resources than the 1.x builds.