Firefox 53 Will Drop Support for Windows XP and Vista

[Brink]

Software companies are one by one giving up on Windows XP support for their products, and now it appears that it’s Mozilla’s turn to switch the focus to newer versions of Windows.

Firefox 53 will be the first version of the browser which will no longer support Windows XP and Windows Vista, so users who haven’t yet upgraded to Windows 7 or newer will have to either stick with Firefox 52 or move to a different browser.

Installation of the new version will be blocked on Windows XP when Firefox 53 launches in March 2017, but the good news is that Firefox 52 will be moved to the ESR (extended support release) branch, so it’ll continue getting patches until mid-2018.

Read more: Firefox 53 Will Drop Support for Windows XP and Windows Vista

 

[RoasterMen]

Should've been done last year.

 

[Jody Thornton]

Should've been done last year.

You won't say that when Windows 7 gets this same treatment . Besides, Vista should have still received support until April 2017 (it sort of is with the ESR v52), but is Vista that different under the hood from Windows 7?


EDIT: Actually I notice you're running Windows 10, so maybe it won't bother you

 

[TechnoMage2016]

When MS dropped support for XP, I just shut off auto updates on my XP machines and just kept on 'truckin'.

I'll do the same thing for Firefox. It ain't no big thing!
Out of my 20 PC's, I have only TWO that still run XP, but I don't do a lot of Web work on either one, so what version of FF they are using, really doesn't matter. Whatever it is, I just won't update it past ver 50.

Things do change, like the discontinuation of Ethyl Gas. We adapted, and kept on driving. As red blooded American boys, it's what we do. Eh?

I think there's a verse to a song that goes something like, "we shall survive".

If I lived through the early versions of Windows, DOS 2.0, and formatting MFM hard drives, I think I can live through almost anything.
However, the next hurricane to hit Florida, might be the exception.

Cheers Mates!
TechnoMage

 

[LMiller7]

It had to happen sooner or later.

Each new OS includes technology not found in earlier systems. Developers like to use this technology because it can make their work easier and makes a better product for their users. Maintaining support for older operating systems that lack these features is a burden for the developers. Initially the burden is usually small but with each new OS and upgrade to the application this burden becomes heavier. At some point the decision is made that the costs are too great and support for the older OS is dropped.

When Microsoft drops support for an OS this serves as a sign to application developers they should consider doing the same. If the OS is popular, as is XP, then support may be maintained longer. With less popular operating systems, such as Vista, it may be dropped sooner.

Internally Vista and Windows 7 are very similar but there are some differences that may be significant to an application. Generally only the developers would know. Don't expect to see this documented anywhere.

And dropping support for an OS doesn't necessarily mean the application won't work with it. It does mean that it hasn't been tested with the OS, at least not fully, and there may be issues, maybe minor, maybe major. It may work for a time but even a minor update to the application could break compatibility. As the OS is no longer supported this would likely be undocumented.

 

[lehnerus2000]

On the plus side, XP/Vista users won't have to put up with any more pointless GUI changes.

If I wanted to use Chrome, I'd install Chrome.

 

[cornemuse]

On the plus side, XP/Vista users won't have to put up with any more pointless GUI changes.

If I wanted to use Chrome, I'd install Chrome.

AMEN!!

I use Firefox portable 29.0, works just fine, , , , it dosent have to be on a thumb drive, (C:\firefox) and does NOT make/add to registry settings.

-c-

 

[Jody Thornton]

Isn't v29 an Australis release?

 

[lehnerus2000]

Isn't v29 an Australis release?

If I recall correctly, you are right.

 

[cornemuse]

I donno, , , this:

Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition 29.0 (web browser) Released | PortableApps.com - Portable software for USB, portable and cloud drives


Works for me, , , ,

-c-

 

[Bertison]

Thanks Brink for that heads up, passed on to UK MicroMart magazine forumites, one or possibly two still running machines with XP.

Thanks also to LMiller for a clear and comprehensive explanation of the reasons for FF to take this step.

 

[groze]

It had to happen sooner or later.

Each new OS includes technology not found in earlier systems. Developers like to use this technology because it can make their work easier and makes a better product for their users. Maintaining support for older operating systems that lack these features is a burden for the developers. Initially the burden is usually small but with each new OS and upgrade to the application this burden becomes heavier. At some point the decision is made that the costs are too great and support for the older OS is dropped.

When Microsoft drops support for an OS this serves as a sign to application developers they should consider doing the same. If the OS is popular, as is XP, then support may be maintained longer. With less popular operating systems, such as Vista, it may be dropped sooner.

Internally Vista and Windows 7 are very similar but there are some differences that may be significant to an application. Generally only the developers would know. Don't expect to see this documented anywhere.

And dropping support for an OS doesn't necessarily mean the application won't work with it. It does mean that it hasn't been tested with the OS, at least not fully, and there may be issues, maybe minor, maybe major. It may work for a time but even a minor update to the application could break compatibility. As the OS is no longer supported this would likely be undocumented.

I am actually surprised Firefox did that at least for the Vista part. There could be a way around it if you know how to compile windows firefox executable on a Linux system. I won't be able to recommend a Linux system that compiles windows correctly. I am sure there is one but I had trouble compiling source code software programs for Linux itself. You can compile on a windows system as well but I read it harder then using a Linux system.

 

[RoasterMen]

Should've been done last year.

You won't say that when Windows 7 gets this same treatment . Besides, Vista should have still received support until April 2017 (it sort of is with the ESR v52), but is Vista that different under the hood from Windows 7?


EDIT: Actually I notice you're running Windows 10, so maybe it won't bother you

I'm already on Windows 10 now. I will not regret saying that if that happens