Firefox 5 Beta Just Around the Corner

I am currently using Firefox 4.0.1. I have used Firefox and a number of their extensions for years.

When FF 4.0 Beta came out I make the big mistake of updating to it from 3.6.x before I checked the extension compatibility for FF 4.0 Beta.

Unfortunately Firefox has never come up with a pre-installer compatibility check for their updates and extensions. Yes Firefox checks the compatibility for your extensions but only after the update has been installed rather than before. The extensions could easily be checked for compatibility with updates before the actual installation of the update just by having the installer check the directory where the extensions are kept before the actual install of the update occurs. The installer could then notify the user of the list of incompatible extensions and give the user the options to continue to the actual installation of the Firefox update or cancel it. In any case Firefox has chosen not to do this as of yet even though I dropped it in their suggestion box a while ago.

So you have to manually go through your extensions one by one and check them on the Firefox Addon website to see if each extension is compatible with the update. The other option is to do the update and then see which extensions are incompatible with the update. If you don't like the list then you have to uninstall the update and possibly depending on how you did things reinstall the older version of Firefox. A big pain in the butt.

I am currently using 25 Firefox extensions. I just checked them one by one with the Firefox Addon website to see if they were compatible at this point in time with Firefox 5.x,

13 of my extensions are compatible all the way through 6.x
12 of them are not compatible beyond 4.x. Five of these are security related extensions and seven are convenience and time saving related extensions.

I am not going to make the same mistake again and update to a Beta release of Firefox that leaves me without about half my extensions.

I will wait. Since the 13 that are compatible with 5.x or also compatible with 6.x it could be that I wind up skipping 5.x altogether unless there is a security related problem with 4.x that 5.x removes that outweighs the negatives of not having the use of certain extensions some of which are security related.

It is usually a matter of waiting for a couple of weeks, before most of the major ones become compatible.

As far as the UI is concerned, it is extremely customisable and is very easy to get the 'old' FF look back. I however prefer the new minimalistic and much faster FF4.

sandeep108 said:

It is usually a matter of waiting for a couple of weeks, before most of the major ones become compatible.

As far as the UI is concerned, it is extremely customisable and is very easy to get the 'old' FF look back. I however prefer the new minimalistic and much faster FF4.

1. Even if it were only two weeks which it was not it would be totally unacceptable. In fact I when I updated to Firefox 4.0 Beta5 from Firefox 3.6.x some of my extensions were not updated until Firefox did there RTW of 4.0. That was months.

2. Secondly why would I want to go a couple of weeks or even a couple of days without security features especially when my computers are on 24 x 7 and I am on-line somewhere over 10 hours a day, doing what I do on-line.

Firefox position on this stinks and has absolutely no defense unless they don't want people who use their extensions to also use their Betas.

One example of a non-security extension that I use is ReminderFox. I have items scheduled in there out a year or more and a long list of ToDos which I use more as short notes. I am not about to switch to another calendar program for whatever period it is during the period that ReminderFox is not compatible with a Beta release. That would be stupid. Also I have tested and used a number of other calendar programs and ReminderFox works best for me so I am not switching to something like Google Calendar which I have tested and do not like.

I really like Firefox and think highly of Mozilla but on this subject I think that they really are not handling it properly. At least they could do as I have suggested and tell you which of your extensions are not compatible with an update before you install the update.

Since you seem to have certain special situations, why would you even then try a beta?

You can always continue to use the older version (Mozilla does provide security updates for quite a long period for the older versions as well), till such time you know the add-ons would be compatible.

I agree that probably a tool to check the compatibility first may be nice, but well, it is only a web browser and free to boot.

MadSupra354 said:

I just liked the look of the older Firefox better.

So did I

I really like the new Firefox, even though I did not dislike the old version. It's all a matter of personal taste and I find the style more like the recently released Opera 11.10 which is excellent in it's own right.

That said, I still prefer Chrome, and use the others in this order.

1) Chrome 11.0.696.65
2) Firefox 4.0.1
3) Opera 11.10
4) IE 9 (finding it better as I become faster)

I'm a cross platform guy, so my MacBook Pro has Safari and it's a dud.

Cheers :)

Beta tested 4 (then tried release) and despite what others have posted it is NOT customizable to include what was LOST from 3 or even from 2. I can live with 3.x but not 4.x - I hope 5 goes back to a proven winner.

(Proudly posted using Firefox 2.0.0.16)

Regards,
GEWB

GEWB said:

Beta tested 4 (then tried release) and despite what others have posted it is NOT customizable to include what was LOST from 3 or even from 2. I can live with 3.x but not 4.x - I hope 5 goes back to a proven winner.

(Proudly posted using Firefox 2.0.0.16)

Regards,
GEWB

Using Firefox 2, IMO is a security risk. v4 is also much faster than 3, forget about 2. I suggest you browse Mozillazine forums, I did get my 3.0 look back exactly with 4.0, but then actually preferred the neater / cleaner look of 4.0, except for the tabs on top (which is a simple check box to set it the old way).

With add-ons and extreme customisation (I can easily set FF cache to use my RAMdisk, or choose among multiple profiles all over several disks, which I cannot set on Chrome), Firefox remains my first choice, then IE9.

sandeep108 said:

Using Firefox 2, IMO is a security risk. v4 is also much faster than 3, forget about 2. I suggest you browse Mozillazine forums, I did get my 3.0 look back exactly with 4.0, but then actually preferred the neater / cleaner look of 4.0, except for the tabs on top (which is a simple check box to set it the old way).

With add-ons and extreme customisation (I can easily set FF cache to use my RAMdisk, or choose among multiple profiles all over several disks, which I cannot set on Chrome), Firefox remains my first choice, then IE9.

Reading about the older version bought back memories, yet your right about security and alternative measures.

Cheers

(posted via Samsung Galaxy S II)