Firefox 4.0, 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 to Ship in 2011
-
Incompatible addons are not a problem since you can disable the addon compatibility checker
But if the addons truly don't work or cause stability problems in the software, then what's the point? I've not run into anything yet that really requires FF4 or IE9. I'm happily plodding along as it's displayed in FF 3.6. I do realize that most add-ons are not broke, just not known to work or supported.
Well, I haven't had any stability issues with older addons since I use Beta 1 :)
-
-
It all starts to get a bit rediculous when the numbers start to get large too.
21, 22, 23, 56, 57, 58, 143 etc...
Most companies restart the numbering system or rebrand sometime close to after 11 becuase the numbers start to blur togeather (Photoshop as one of many examples)
Last edited by fseal; 09 Feb 2011 at 17:48.
-
Or like Paintshop Pro - I'm on version 13 now, uh - I mean X3 .
-
I think Mozilla is feeling stiff competition from Chrome, causing them to make big deals about everything. And apparently release new versions closer together.
-
-
Too bad we are still 10 betas away for an RC of Firefox 4.0
-
Too bad we are still 10 betas away for an RC of Firefox 4.0
Laughed at this, hehehe.
On another note, it's sad how susceptible the browser developers are to trends. Effin peer pressure man. I first noticed it when the private browsing feature became the must have.
Firefox: So you have Private browsing?
Chrome: Yeah, no biggie
Firefox: Hmm, now we do too! HA!
IE, Opera, Safari: Whatchu guys talkin about?
Ironically enough though, private browsing was one of the major contributing factors that led me to download the first major Chrome build. I had and still have no use for it since no one touches my computer but me but it was interesting at the time.
-
They need to be as fast as IE9 RC now hurry up Mozilla :)
-
-
Too bad we are still 10 betas away for an RC of Firefox 4.0
Laughed at this, hehehe.
On another note, it's sad how susceptible the browser developers are to trends. Effin peer pressure man. I first noticed it when the private browsing feature became the must have.
Firefox: So you have Private browsing?
Chrome: Yeah, no biggie
Firefox: Hmm, now we do too! HA!
IE, Opera, Safari: Whatchu guys talkin about?
Ironically enough though, private browsing was one of the major contributing factors that led me to download the first major Chrome build. I had and still have no use for it since no one touches my computer but me but it was interesting at the time.
At least the private browsing was a real feature, not just some update gimmick.
-
I don't get this idiotic "numbering cycle". Why does (major) version number matter at all? As long as the companies actually update and more regularly release new builds of their browsers (like Google does), who cares what the major version number is?
Besides, I don't buy this BS at all, if Mozilla had this in plan, v4 would be long released and already updated dozens of times.
its stupid yes, and google chrome only made it worst, now version number is big deal, I suppose the logical numbering should be the engine version, not some artificial big number
ex: opera is version 11 but its presto engine is 2.x
-
... now version number is big deal, I suppose the logical numbering should be the engine version, not some artificial big number
ex: opera is version 11 but its presto engine is 2.x
That sort of logic makes a lot of sense.