Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

Message
Author
User avatar
GoManutd
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:06 pm

Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#1 Postby GoManutd » Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:10 pm

as i expected would happen, the business world has balked at mozilla's rapid release cycle.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20109 ... e-firefox/

User avatar
Fargo
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 659
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:44 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#2 Postby Fargo » Thu Sep 22, 2011 2:52 pm

Good. Sign me up for the long term release. I don't like constantly updating my software. I dropped PCLinuxOS because I got tired of the rolling release idea. Just give me a solid reliable product and keep the security updates coming. I don't want things constantly changing on me. I use my computer to get work done. Not a toy to play with. (OK somestimes its a toy). Just give me a solid release with security updates and I'll check back in again in a year or so to see if its worth updating to the latest and greatest.

User avatar
lucky9
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 12272
Age: 70
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:54 am

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#3 Postby lucky9 » Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:40 pm

Looks like the best of both worlds with this new paradigm.
Yes, even I am dishonest. Not in many ways, but in some. Forty-one, I think it is.
--Mark Twain

User avatar
GoManutd
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:06 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#4 Postby GoManutd » Fri Dec 23, 2011 10:35 am

looks like firefox hasn't improved situations fast enough.

FF9 will not be included in the latest revs of Red Hat Enterprise....

http://www.internetnews.com/blog/skerne ... linux.html

User avatar
joany
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 6109
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:45 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#5 Postby joany » Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:05 pm

FF 5.0 was very stable on my system, whereas I experienced repeated incidents of being unable to restart FF 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0 after closing it. Fortunately, FF 9.0 is rock-solid again, and I think I know why: A fix was mentioned in the detailed FF 9.0 release notes, correcting a bug that kept Firefox in the process stack after Firefox was closed. This had something to do with how Firefox processes Java scripts and apparently Mozilla was aware of the bug, but they didn't think it caused any problems, so it remained unfixed in FF 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0.

One could argue that the Firefox release cycle is too fast. However, I'm very glad they released FF 9.0 when they did.
MX-14; 3.12-0.bpo.1-686-pae kernel using 4GB RAM
2.4GHz AMD Athlon 4600+
NVidia GeForce 6150 LE; 304.121 Display Driver
You didn't slow down because you're old; you're old because you slowed down.

User avatar
Jerry3904
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15031
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:13 am

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#6 Postby Jerry3904 » Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:30 pm

I agree joany, FF 9 is more stable even in Beta than its immediate predecessors.
Production: 4.2.0-0.bpo.1-amd64, MX-15 RC1, AMD FX-4130 Quad-Core, GeForce GT 630/PCIe/SSE2, 8 GB, Kingston SSD 120 GB and WesternDigital 1TB
Testing: AAO 722: 3.16-0-4-686-pae. MX-15, AMD C-60 APU, 4 GB

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 11029
Age: 57
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#7 Postby Stevo » Fri Dec 23, 2011 8:59 pm

I'll have Iceweasel 9.01 for M11 finished building tonight. I may just build Firefox for 8.5, due to time constraints, and the fact that we do have Iceweasel for M11. I'll try doing Seamononkey 2.6 for 8, 8.5 and 11...
The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true.

James Branch Cabell

User avatar
zeeone
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 12:50 am

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#8 Postby zeeone » Tue Jan 03, 2012 11:35 pm

Stevo wrote:I'll have Iceweasel 9.01 for M11 finished building tonight. I may just build Firefox for 8.5, due to time constraints, and the fact that we do have Iceweasel for M11. I'll try doing Seamononkey 2.6 for 8, 8.5 and 11...


So does this kinda mean that M11's Iceweasel might, maybe work with 8.5, if I add the repo for it?
Research, Research, Research, Before You Walk The Plank.
Registered Linux User # 398829

User avatar
Dieselrider
Forum Guide
Forum Guide
Posts: 1200
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 6:57 am

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#9 Postby Dieselrider » Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:05 am

I surely disagree with FF9.0 having advantages over 8.0, at least in my situation. 8.0 was indeed a good and stable as I have seen while 9.0 leaves alot to be desired. 9.0 is giving me a real good look at seamonkey and opera 11.60, however. That might be their best feature in FF9.0. JMHO

User avatar
Zevon
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 549
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 11:23 am

Re: Mozilla proposes not-so-rapid-release Firefox

#10 Postby Zevon » Wed Jan 04, 2012 12:45 pm

Dieselrider wrote:I surely disagree with FF9.0 having advantages over 8.0, at least in my situation. 8.0 was indeed a good and stable as I have seen while 9.0 leaves alot to be desired. 9.0 is giving me a real good look at seamonkey and opera 11.60, however. That might be their best feature in FF9.0. JMHO


Just as a MMDV kind of thing I've found FF-9.0.1 to be more stable than FF8 was, also the locking up on Flash content not so frequent. It (9.0.1) also seemed faster initially but has slowed with increased use. The very irritating lack of TB email link clickability came with it too though. :frown:


Return to “Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest