Firefox Keeping Rapid Release, But Adding Silent Update Option

[Brink]

Firefox’s relatively new rapid release schedule lets developers implement and unveil new features and updates quickly, but there’s one thing we hate about it. No, it’s not the headache it causes enterprise users, although that sucks, too. It’s the constant update notifications. Geez, Firefox needs to update again, we get it already! Fortunately, Mozilla gets that we get that, and they’re looking to move to silent updates sometime in 2012.

Read more at:
Maximum PC | Firefox Keeping Rapid Release, But Adding Silent Update Option For Irritated Users

 

[jtennison]

I certainly hope that this feature is optional. I will switch to IE or Chrome before I allow allow Firefox to automatically update itself. I always allow 2-3 days to listen for screams of anguish before I update software to a new release. This is based on 30+ years experience as a senior programmer.

 

[Brink]

Yep, "Adding Silent Update Option" will be an option that can be turned on or off.

 

[Phone Man]

Also read this blog from Mozilla about adding a service to bypass UAC when doing the auto update. All of this is optional but probably a opt-out system so pay attention when this is implemented so you can take control.

Brian R. Bondy - Mozilla Firefox and silent updates

I always install the new version in its own folder. Then I can check it out before uninstalling the older version.

Jim

 

[Layback Bear]

I also keep old Firefox exe just in case the new one is doing things crazy. I don't like auto update anything, I want to take a look at things before installing them.

 

[dothackjhe]

I certainly hope that this feature is optional. I will switch to IE or Chrome before I allow allow Firefox to automatically update itself. I always allow 2-3 days to listen for screams of anguish before I update software to a new release. This is based on 30+ years experience as a senior programmer.

So you mean to say updates are usually bugged even to the non-beta ones?

 

[lehnerus2000]

Good Ideas

I always install the new version in its own folder. Then I can check it out before uninstalling the older version.
Jim

That is a good idea.
It is handy that FF allows you to install multiple versions, unlike a certain other browser.

I also keep old Firefox exe just in case the new one is doing things crazy. I don't like auto update anything, I want to take a look at things before installing them.

It is worth doing that for any installers you download.
I generally keep a few versions of most installers (just in case).

I have multiple FF installers saved (3.6.13, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8).
It has proved handy.

My XP installation won't run any version above FF 3.6 properly (It did a few months ago).
Soon as I install ANY add-on or search engine, it crashes within a few seconds (even with new, clean installs).
Strangely FF 3.6 has no problems with new add-ons or search engines.

If you have to build multiple VMs, it is handy not to have to download multiple installers repeatedly.
If your friends drop by and need the latest version of something, you can just give them a copy, instead of them having to download it.

 

[jtennison]

So you mean to say updates are usually bugged even to the non-beta ones?

By the time software get through the beta test process, most of the more serious bugs have been found and fixed. But almost always, some bugs remain. The hope is that any remaining one are minor, and only happen under rare circumstances. Look at the Firefox 7.0 release. Within the first day or two after the final release, a bug was found and fixed, and Firefox 7.01 was released.

 

[panais]

I also keep old Firefox exe just in case the new one is doing things crazy. I don't like auto update anything, I want to take a look at things before installing them.

 

[logicearth]

I certainly hope that this feature is optional. I will switch to IE or Chrome before I allow allow Firefox to automatically update itself. I always allow 2-3 days to listen for screams of anguish before I update software to a new release. This is based on 30+ years experience as a senior programmer.

Um....Chrome silently updates itself.

 

[dothackjhe]

So you mean to say updates are usually bugged even to the non-beta ones?

By the time software get through the beta test process, most of the more serious bugs have been found and fixed. But almost always, some bugs remain. The hope is that any remaining one are minor, and only happen under rare circumstances. Look at the Firefox 7.0 release. Within the first day or two after the final release, a bug was found and fixed, and Firefox 7.01 was released.

What was the reason why Firefox is rushing with their releases? They've been rushing since Firefox 3 if I'm not mistaken. .

 

[Phone Man]

The rapid release is designed to get updates and bug fixes out as soon as they are ready and not wait for 100 fixes before releasing an update. As the release date arrives, what ever is ready gets released and the rest will wait for the next release date. The real complaint is using a new major version number instead of minor version numbers for each update. This new auto update with the service to bypass UAC is stupid. From what I have read, it can be disabled and the service uninstalled. I just hope you have the choice to not install this stupidity instead of having to uninstall. Did I say this is stupid? Yes I did say this is stupid and who ever is running Mozilla must be having brain farts.

Jim

 

[dothackjhe]

The rapid release is designed to get updates and bug fixes out as soon as they are ready and not wait for 100 fixes before releasing an update. As the release date arrives, what ever is ready gets released and the rest will wait for the next release date. The real complaint is using a new major version number instead of minor version numbers for each update. This new auto update with the service to bypass UAC is stupid. From what I have read, it can be disabled and the service uninstalled. I just hope you have the choice to not install this stupidity instead of having to uninstall. Did I say this is stupid? Yes I did say this is stupid and who ever is running Mozilla must be having brain farts.

Jim

How is auto-updating that bypasses UAC any different from any other program that auto-update with minimal intrusion to UAC itself such as antivirus software and stuff?

 

[logicearth]

How is auto-updating that bypasses UAC any different from any other program that auto-update with minimal intrusion to UAC itself such as antivirus software and stuff?

Well if it installs itself the same way Chrome does, in the user's directory then it does not need to bypass UAC.

 

[panais]

I like firefox,though i also like to have full control in my system!

 

[Corazon]

That's news to me. :shock: I don't have any kind of service related to Firefox updates running. Or is this a feature yet to come?

 

[Stormkitty]

This is an upcoming feature that will debut in 2012.

 

[Corazon]

Good to know...I'll be watching out for that update service and DISABLE THE SUCKER.

 

[jtennison]

Good to know...I'll be watching out for that update service and DISABLE THE SUCKER.

What he said! +1

 

[JerometheGiraff]

Chrome and FireFox have gone insane. I use ChromePlus which has slower updates, which I prefer. Every since they do these rapid releases the extension base goes into the toilet. I'm waiting for, hopefully soon Amazon Silk. I hope they are better, to get me away from Chrome or FireFox. A Browser is a Browser updates every year is enough, who are they racing against time and the end of the world ? It appears like that when the end of the world happens who can say they had the most releases Chrome or FireFox, then last breath and, dead. To which I say when and if that moment comes will anyone care, I sure as hell won't, I won't even know what happen to my PC other then it probably is a pile of rubble as I'll be running.