THIS is one of the biggest reasons I've always hated Firefox, it just looks plain ugly! I also don't like the order in which it renders the pages.
I generally just use IE9, though I'd admit that Opera is the "best" browswer, and Chrome is the "fastest". (Safari's look doesn't impress me much, but still better than FF, plus I let it slide because it looks like the Mac version)
With 6 weeks release cycle, the upgrades are fairly seamless. Some add-on might not work, just because the version number needs to be updated, so if you use tonds of add-ons, and/or if you absolutely rely on some of them to work, you may want to double check that first. Otherwise I would just go ahead and upgrade. The mainstream/most-common add on are always up to date (e.g.: No Script, Adblock ...) so that's not a concern.
1) If they are going to update as often as Chrome, make the updates as painless as Chrome. I shouldn't have to click stuff, basically. I'm lazy ;) 2) They really have been picking things up lately, but I still feel bogged down by FF7 vs Chrome. Every UI interaction feels so instantaneous on Chrome, even if Firefox can keep up in benchmarks its the feel of them that gets me.
It is as painless as that. It checks every week or so by default, and offers you the new version. You have the option to do it manually, but you don't HAVE to.
I know, its just not as smooth as Chrome though. With Chrome, I've had times where I check the version number and realize I'm three ahead of where I was and never even noticed a slowdown or update page. WIth Firefox, each update is noticeable, you get the firefox updated page, checking for new extensions, etc. Its just not as seamless. If they want to copy Chrome with the fast new version releases, copy it right. Also, Chrome updates seem to break my extensions far more rarely than Firefox ones.
Sometimes there is such a thing as too smooth. I recently checked my Chrome version and found out I was 4 versions *behind* where I was supposed to be! The seamless auto update failed, so I wasn't getting any updates at all until I manually updated to the current version.
With how fast Chrome and Firefox are being updated I just can't see them ever being approved for use in an enterprise environment. Don't get me wrong, it's great (mostly) for consumers, but large IT shops move much slower. There are still plenty of apps out there that only work properly with IE6. Companies don't have the resources to test and validate their web apps every 6 weeks. At some point something has to give.
If you manage to find a website where Firefox and/or Chrom does not work, chances are it is either broken (so IE won't work either) or it has been designed for all the non-standard features of IE, so you may need to go to IE anyway. personally, I haven't had an issue with websites not working in FF/Chrome for ... what, 10 years maybe? It's just one point, but nowadays it's easier that a website works with FF and does not work with IE, that the other way around.
Hardly. Microsoft's own browser is incompatible with its other versions. In my enterprise moving to a different Internet Explorer version is a chore. Screens stop working, and we have to put any new IE through extensive testing because every time there's "Gotchas". We're still stuck at IE7 because IE8 and IE9 won't work with some important internally developed software, and no it wasn't our fault, we stuck to browser standards.
Legacy apps are one thing, but FF/Chrome don't really change very much from veersion to version, and if modern enterprise developers can't write compatible code, they've got bigger problems.
You'd really think so, unfortunately many of them are so incompetent that you're left with an ugly reality. I've seen a GE (as in General Eclectric) rep tell an M.D. that he needed to downgrade to IE 6 or 7 in order for his laptop to interface with a $5,000 cardio sonogram system that he leases... That's just ridiculous, I was able to teach him how to burn a disc on the rig he leases and then open it manually to extract the pertinent patient test result files, but it wasn't ideal compared to the built in (yet outdated) app with a GUI. When he switched to a Mac they basically told him he was on his own. Nevermind the security risks involved in making a medical professional run such an outdated browser in the same PC that holds patient records!
actually Mozilla has plans for Enterprise support and its basically going to be long term releases (yea, LTS) versions of Firefox that are supported for a year or something like that. Note that this is also for schools, orgs, etc.. not just "enterprise"
I object to mozilla suppressing the version numbers.
When trying to dnload Firefox from mozilla.org the version number is not listed. There are no links to "release notes" or "system requirements" even though the release notes instruct you to check the system requirements before installing! Also searching for those documents in "support" returns nada.
They stopped supporting non SSE2 processors like AMD-XP the same time they started hiding the sys requirements page. I think they should start a legacy or long term support branch for the thunderbirds, XPs and such, I often browse on an older system.
Jumping from FF4 to 7 in about... 3-4 months? And the BIG thing between FF6 and FF7 is the FONT?!
So what really came out today was ff4.3. Note, I will no longer refer to Firefox as FF, but as ff. Your stupid marketing team which I guess was hired from nVidia are plain STUPID. At the idiotic rate you guys are going in a race to catch up with Chrome (which is really version 2.4), you'll hit ff20 by 2013.
Let me guess, the big change between ff19 and ff20 will be changing the version number in the About page?
I'll stick with ff4.0. Opera 11 is a better browser anyway. Far more useful, far more functional out of the box with many functions YOU (mozilla) have copied from because you guys are no longer creative nor have original thought or talent.
Actually the "about" page is "about" Mozilla not firefox. The about/about firefox page is a link to it's self! No version number is referenced. Even the system requirements page for 7.0 only refers to version 6.0. I doubt it's even being updated.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
Back to Article
frumpsnake - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
...is that fonts don't look like ass anymore.bwave - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link
THIS is one of the biggest reasons I've always hated Firefox, it just looks plain ugly! I also don't like the order in which it renders the pages.I generally just use IE9, though I'd admit that Opera is the "best" browswer, and Chrome is the "fastest". (Safari's look doesn't impress me much, but still better than FF, plus I let it slide because it looks like the Mac version)
Souka - Thursday, September 29, 2011 - link
I use IE9 mostly also.At work, IE 8/9 is only allowed.
At home, I very rarely have problems with IE9, but ocassionaly have problems with FF and Chrome, especially when dealing with government websites
I like them all.... I don't like them all.... depends on what I'm doing.
Kamen75 - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
I've been using 7.0 for a few hours now and it does seem a bit snappier. ABP and my few other add-ons work fine.KeithP - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
What does everyone think? Should I upgrade to 7 now, wait till Friday to upgrade to 8, or maybe wait another couple weeks and upgrade to 9 or 10?Decisions, decisions.
-KeithP
yankeeDDL - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link
With 6 weeks release cycle, the upgrades are fairly seamless. Some add-on might not work, just because the version number needs to be updated, so if you use tonds of add-ons, and/or if you absolutely rely on some of them to work, you may want to double check that first.Otherwise I would just go ahead and upgrade. The mainstream/most-common add on are always up to date (e.g.: No Script, Adblock ...) so that's not a concern.
tipoo - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
1) If they are going to update as often as Chrome, make the updates as painless as Chrome. I shouldn't have to click stuff, basically. I'm lazy ;)2) They really have been picking things up lately, but I still feel bogged down by FF7 vs Chrome. Every UI interaction feels so instantaneous on Chrome, even if Firefox can keep up in benchmarks its the feel of them that gets me.
Targon - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
It is as painless as that. It checks every week or so by default, and offers you the new version. You have the option to do it manually, but you don't HAVE to.tipoo - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link
I know, its just not as smooth as Chrome though. With Chrome, I've had times where I check the version number and realize I'm three ahead of where I was and never even noticed a slowdown or update page. WIth Firefox, each update is noticeable, you get the firefox updated page, checking for new extensions, etc. Its just not as seamless. If they want to copy Chrome with the fast new version releases, copy it right. Also, Chrome updates seem to break my extensions far more rarely than Firefox ones.e_sandrs - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link
Sometimes there is such a thing as too smooth. I recently checked my Chrome version and found out I was 4 versions *behind* where I was supposed to be! The seamless auto update failed, so I wasn't getting any updates at all until I manually updated to the current version.Sometimes prompts are good...
shabazkilla - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
With how fast Chrome and Firefox are being updated I just can't see them ever being approved for use in an enterprise environment. Don't get me wrong, it's great (mostly) for consumers, but large IT shops move much slower. There are still plenty of apps out there that only work properly with IE6. Companies don't have the resources to test and validate their web apps every 6 weeks. At some point something has to give.jah1subs - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
Totally agree with you. I can easily imagine that the new script for a help desk in a corporation will be:"Are you calling me about problems with Firefox or Chrome?"
"You Are."
"We do not have the resources to keep up their constant changes. Please use Internet Explorer (whatever our current supported version is)."
Thank You.
Good Bye.
Microsoft must be THRILLED.
keepme - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
that being said if sites were written respecting standards, any version of any browser should work just fine;yankeeDDL - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link
If you manage to find a website where Firefox and/or Chrom does not work, chances are it is either broken (so IE won't work either) or it has been designed for all the non-standard features of IE, so you may need to go to IE anyway.personally, I haven't had an issue with websites not working in FF/Chrome for ... what, 10 years maybe? It's just one point, but nowadays it's easier that a website works with FF and does not work with IE, that the other way around.
rickcain2320 - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link
Hardly. Microsoft's own browser is incompatible with its other versions. In my enterprise moving to a different Internet Explorer version is a chore. Screens stop working, and we have to put any new IE through extensive testing because every time there's "Gotchas".We're still stuck at IE7 because IE8 and IE9 won't work with some important internally developed software, and no it wasn't our fault, we stuck to browser standards.
crimson117 - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
Legacy apps are one thing, but FF/Chrome don't really change very much from veersion to version, and if modern enterprise developers can't write compatible code, they've got bigger problems.Impulses - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
You'd really think so, unfortunately many of them are so incompetent that you're left with an ugly reality. I've seen a GE (as in General Eclectric) rep tell an M.D. that he needed to downgrade to IE 6 or 7 in order for his laptop to interface with a $5,000 cardio sonogram system that he leases... That's just ridiculous, I was able to teach him how to burn a disc on the rig he leases and then open it manually to extract the pertinent patient test result files, but it wasn't ideal compared to the built in (yet outdated) app with a GUI. When he switched to a Mac they basically told him he was on his own. Nevermind the security risks involved in making a medical professional run such an outdated browser in the same PC that holds patient records!keepme - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
actually Mozilla has plans for Enterprise support and its basically going to be long term releases (yea, LTS) versions of Firefox that are supported for a year or something like that.Note that this is also for schools, orgs, etc.. not just "enterprise"
ziptone - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link
I object to mozilla suppressing the version numbers.When trying to dnload Firefox from mozilla.org the version number is not listed. There are no links to "release notes" or "system requirements" even though the release notes instruct you to check the system requirements before installing! Also searching for those documents in "support" returns nada.
They stopped supporting non SSE2 processors like AMD-XP the same time they started hiding the sys requirements page. I think they should start a legacy or long term support branch for the thunderbirds, XPs and such, I often browse on an older system.
semo - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link
The only reason why I still use FF:https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cha...
Ctrl+K is great but only if all the browsers supported it!
Belard - Thursday, September 29, 2011 - link
Jumping from FF4 to 7 in about... 3-4 months? And the BIG thing between FF6 and FF7 is the FONT?!So what really came out today was ff4.3. Note, I will no longer refer to Firefox as FF, but as ff. Your stupid marketing team which I guess was hired from nVidia are plain STUPID. At the idiotic rate you guys are going in a race to catch up with Chrome (which is really version 2.4), you'll hit ff20 by 2013.
Let me guess, the big change between ff19 and ff20 will be changing the version number in the About page?
I'll stick with ff4.0. Opera 11 is a better browser anyway. Far more useful, far more functional out of the box with many functions YOU (mozilla) have copied from because you guys are no longer creative nor have original thought or talent.
ziptone - Monday, October 3, 2011 - link
Actually the "about" page is "about" Mozilla not firefox. The about/about firefox page is a link to it's self! No version number is referenced. Even the system requirements page for 7.0 only refers to version 6.0. I doubt it's even being updated.