digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Released :: Firefox 3 Beta 1

ftp.mozilla.org — As of right now when I posted this article, there seems to be only a Mac and Linux version, but a Windows version is bound to come in the next while. Check back here for the latest nightlies and betas: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • schestowitz, on 11/13/2007, -176/+8More details in this new article ( http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,139351-c,mozilla ... )

    --
    (Sig) Tell the admins to ban trolls, such as users:

    * carly34
    * flatfish
    * kretik
    * harlowmonkeys

    These are known abusive people (among several more) who have come from other Web sites and forums. They come to stalk and spread libel about particular people in Digg.com, using slanderous comments (and by systematically modding down many of others', by their own admission). It has gone on for months. This will the sig until admins stop ignoring requests to stop such Web-wide astroturfers. Address the source of the problem, not those who suffer from it. Don't let corporations control social sites.
    • ToadLeg, on 11/13/2007, -70/+20More details in this new article ( http://news.google.com/news?q=firefox+3+beta )

      --
      (Sig) Tell the admins to ban trolls, such as users:

      * schestowitz

      These are known abusive people who have come from other Web sites and forums. They come to broadcast a message on a completely unrelated article. They systematically seek an article that looks like it may become popular, with no comments on it, so that they may have their message read by many people. It has gone on for months. This will the sig until admins stop ignoring such Web-wide astroturfers. Address the source of the problem, not those who suffer from it. Don't let assholes control social sites.
    • freedomknight, on 11/13/2007, -3/+12@schestowitz
      You are feeding trolls, just don't care about those ass hats.
    • kretik, on 11/10/2007, -4/+12I guess those four people in your little list buried you a grand total of seventy six times? Oh noes, the Digg system has been subverted!
      Oh, wait. You're just a troll. Never mind.
      • carly34, on 11/10/2007, -0/+1He is spouting the same nonsense on Usenet. The numbers just don't add up at all.
    • postalblowfish7, on 11/10/2007, -2/+19Tell the admins to ban spammers such as:

      schestowitz

    • schoate09, on 11/09/2007, -2/+7Ban roy *****.
  • wgrzywacz, on 11/13/2007, -8/+193Bug test day for the first release candidate of Beta1 is on Friday, Nov 9.

    Don't rush.

    Burried as inaccurate.
    • draegloth, on 11/13/2007, -0/+115From the readme:
      These files are not release versions, they are just potential release
      versions. Use them at your own risk, without any of the warnings that we
      will be putting in the release notes.

      To be honest, if you're here from Digg or something similar, we'd really
      rather you waited until 3.0b1 was officially announced, so the servers
      don't get overloaded and we don't have a bunch of extra work to do.
    • trunkster, on 11/11/2007, -1/+18Buried, sense they don't want the servers overloaded.
    • daanishrumani, on 11/11/2007, -0/+4Important Note:
      http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nig ...
  • pyrox420, on 11/08/2007, -15/+50Here is a link that has the windows version:
    http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nig ...
    • Bridea, on 11/13/2007, -5/+2Just downloaded and installed it. Thanks for the link!
      • tickets1st, on 11/13/2007, -2/+1Me too. Once you go to switch back to Firefox 2 from 3, then the problems start. I had to uninstall ALL versions of Firefox and then - worst of all - load up IE to download Firefox again. It's good but I see why this version isn't highly publicized, it's a bastard to switch back to v2.
        • Monk22, on 11/13/2007, -0/+2maybe thats why it hasnt been released yet?
    • kingkilr, on 11/13/2007, -2/+7Damned, I can't use it because none of my addons work with it :(
    • arjung, on 11/13/2007, -11/+1good to see that the windows version has stayed under 10MB. my biggest complaint with the mac version was the enormous size of Fx2.0 (even Fx3.0 is 44 MB). a compact browser should be just that, compact.
      • deadsquid, on 11/13/2007, -2/+16having to create a build for both ppc/intel might have something to do with that :)
    • DarknessGP, on 11/07/2007, -2/+3Not only is it the windows version, it appears to be a slightly newer build of Beta 1.
    • SurlyDuff, on 11/07/2007, -0/+6Most of your addons should work with nightly tester tools extension installed. However, since they forced all extensions to provide secure updates in the trunk nightlies, I have several of my extensions not even working with nightly tester tools installed.
      • Neiby, on 11/09/2007, -2/+9I can't find a version of nightly tester tools that is compatible with Beta 1. I've found two that are compatible with the alpha.
        • Neiby, on 11/08/2007, -3/+7What hell.....why would someone digg that comment down?? Seriously, sometimes I wonder what the ***** you people are thinking. it's simply a statement of fact. Someone recommended a certain tool, but I can't find a version of that tool that works. Since you dugg me down, you must have the version of the tool that works. Care to point us in the right direction?
    • surian, on 11/13/2007, -1/+41This made me laugh, it's the "IMPORTANT NOTE" file from the link:

      "To be honest, if you're here from Digg or something similar, we'd really
      rather you waited until 3.0b1 was officially announced, so the servers
      don't get overloaded and we don't have a bunch of extra work to do."
  • gtluke, on 11/13/2007, -0/+79i've been running the windows one (minefield) for about a month now. it seriously consumes 20% of the ram that firefox 2 did.
    • jpaolini, on 11/11/2007, -1/+38That's honestly the best news I've heard all week - and you've convinced me to install to see for myself. That's always been my one big complaint with Firefox - it's a resource hog.

      Let's hope they keep it nice and light for the final release.

      Edit: Windows one is just in another folder, it's here:
      http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nig ...
      • carly34, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2Same thing here. It seems faster as well. I have not found any bugs as of yet.
    • init100, on 11/07/2007, -2/+8Is that Minefield the same thing as Gran Paradiso?
    • jbaez, on 11/07/2007, -1/+9ive been using the mac version and its been running so much better. it opens much faster now and it really hasnt crashed on me as much as firefox 2 did before. i guess they are better job at optimizing and cleaning up the bugs.
    • sahaqiel, on 11/07/2007, -1/+4i've been using Minefield in Arch Linux for 3 days. The best thing so far is being able to browse Digg much much faster ( I don't know which is faster, minefield or opera ). As for the memory, I didn't really notice that many improvements but I don't give it much thought as I have 2 GiB RAM.

      For anyone wondering Gran Paradiso is the Alfa release and Minefield is the Nightly release.
      • robindwilliams, on 11/08/2007, -5/+2Do you mean 'Alpha' release?
        • Ultramagnus0001, on 11/10/2007, -4/+5I no what he meanted to be said. Is you be the grammer police
      • init100, on 11/07/2007, -1/+5"For anyone wondering Gran Paradiso is the Alfa release and Minefield is the Nightly release."

        I always wondered. Thanks for the clarification.
      • MalDON, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I like alfa better than alpha.
    • MWeather, on 11/13/2007, -1/+20When you say it runs faster, that's with all the same plugins installed, right?
      • carly34, on 11/11/2007, -0/+4For me, yes. Same exact plugins except one theme which did not translate over.
    • dhelmet78, on 11/07/2007, -3/+6If I start up firefox 2.0.0.9, just viewing my start page, it uses 24Mb ram. Using the new beta 3, just viewing my start page, it uses 45Mb of ram. Considerable difference, almost double as much to just load up the program and do nothing.
      • comrade693, on 11/11/2007, -0/+3Starting up a browser is hardly nothing...
    • muka3d, on 11/13/2007, -27/+8You know what comsumes 10% of the RAM that Firefox 2 does? Opera 9, and it's still faster and has more features...
      • franksands, on 11/10/2007, -0/+10I would like to use Opera very much, but it doesn't work properly with the sites I use, google maps for example
      • trenchfever, on 11/10/2007, -0/+13Gimme adblock plus for opera and I'm in. I know I know. It has a content blocker and filtering system. But these are all half assed solutions. Thank you but no thank you.
      • Baku, on 11/13/2007, -0/+12Opera is an awesome browser, but their widget system is terrible. Firefox's Extension system is so much better! If someone could do that for opera so I could use the del.icio.us extension... I'd swap permanently.
        • Neiby, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3Same here. I like Opera, but it just doesn't do what I need it to do, at least as easily as I can make Firefox do it.
      • jdhore1, on 11/13/2007, -1/+5gimme a decent-looking Opera on Linux and something better than Opera's ***** adblock and i'll consider it.
      • MalDON, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3Just because opera uses less ram and can pass the acid 2 test doesn't mean it's a better browser. Sometimes ram and rendering needs to be sacrificed for usability. Firefox is simply more usable.
      • stevebergen, on 11/13/2007, -3/+0Go Opera, it is the best browser ever made.
  • dagamer34, on 11/07/2007, -1/+15Someone list the expected features of Firefox 3?
  • webpimp, on 11/07/2007, -11/+3great now i can finally update firefox on fedora!. currently fedora only works with 1.5
  • slashbot, on 11/08/2007, -14/+2beta 1? awesome

    Sounds like I'll be downloading this as soon as I see it for windows
  • mojonandha, on 11/08/2007, -16/+1i just want to vent out my frustration with firefox. My firefox has been crashing a lot lately and i really hate to stop using em because it gave me pleasure during those days when IE were crashing . I downloaded opera and it looks cool.....Maybe i will start using opera for all my needs.

    Well i also gotta tell yall that my firefox crashes only of my winxpsp2 laptop. maybe only couple of times in my ubuntu laptop.

    I can actually reproduce this issue. Just open expedia.com and orbitz.com in a new tab. Start searching for air fares and in between it will just hang.
    • victorycig, on 11/08/2007, -1/+11Go tell it on the bugzilla mountain.
    • init100, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3"i just want to vent out my frustration with firefox."

      If you have been using Firefox 2, you might want to hold off on migrating to Opera before at least giving the soon-to-be-announced Firefox 3 Beta a try. I have been running Gran Paradiso (Firefox 3 Alpha) for almost six months, and they have been very stable. Especially the last version, which hasn't even crashed once, despite being alpha software.
      • MasteRR, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1Is it stable with Flash videos too? Flash is the main reason FF crashes on me.
        • init100, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3I haven't noticed any crashing with Flash videos on Gran Paradiso. Alpha 9 has been stable, no crashes whatsoever, and I do use Flash.
          • Neiby, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3I haven't noticed any crashing with Firefox 2 at all and I use it on several different machines. I seriously don't remember the last time it crashed.
        • RobotBuddha, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2Not for me, on linux with compiz and the latest flash beta. Closing a tab on youtube seems to freeze the browser about 5-10% of the time. With the state of flash support on linux, I can't really place the blame on mozilla though. And it is beta, both browser and flash. Not that there's much of a choice on linux as far as flash goes. Either feature incomplete and unusable with compiz, or usable and feature complete but beta.
    • lcarsdeveloper, on 11/07/2007, -2/+3My firefox crashes probably once or twice a day. The main problem is that every window you open is part of the same session, so if one window goes you lose them all. Luckily the "Restore session" option was implemented, it's saved me a lot of headaches, although I have lost a couple of forum posts I was in the middle of typing. I can't be bothered disabling all my extensions to see if it's one of those, I can't live without my Web Developer and Firebug! It's still my favorite browser for speed and security.
      • DemonWasp, on 11/10/2007, -0/+6Interesting, since I'm running both Web Developer and Firebug (as well as AdBlock), and I've never noticed any crashing issues with FF2.0.0.9. I leave it running for days on end, under heavy use (digg, flash video, downloading, gmail, everything and anything). More frequently, Windows gives out first.
        The horrific memory usage, of course, drives me nuts, but apparently that's largely fixed. The only other issue I'm having currently is that my single-core work computer has frequent "hang" issues where the UI will seize up for a second or two at a time, especially whenever I load a new page, or when I'm typing in text fields and boxes - in the course of writing this comment, I've had to wait on 5 occasions for FF to start accepting input again.
        • rondeth, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1FWIW, FF 'hangs' on my dual-core 3.2GHz machine at work when opening >1 tab at once with one core maxing out...annoying as hell, but I've become addicted to the plugins. Even with no 3rd party exts installed it does the 'multiple-tab-100%-cpu-usage-thing' here...using official 2.0x releases and the 'optimized' builds.
  • cawfee, on 11/07/2007, -2/+21Are these builds compatible with AdBlock Plus? Their site doesn't state the version span it works with. No surfing for me without everyone's most hated controversial ad blocker.
    • Bridea, on 11/07/2007, -1/+8Beta1 for Windows isn't compatible with ABP.
    • init100, on 11/07/2007, -3/+4AdBlock+ and NoScript work well with Gran Paradiso, so I don't know why they wouldn't work with Firefox 3 Beta.
      • init100, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3Update: I checked, and according to the extension page, Firefox 3 Beta1 isn't listed (it isn't released yet) as compatible, but that does not mean that it won't work. It may not install without tweaking the allowed versions in the xpi archive though.
    • Technofrood, on 11/07/2007, -0/+5You could try the Nightly Tester Tools, they add a "Make All Compatible" button to the Extensions Window, it only changes the version check in the extension, so it may not work for all extensions (If code the extension uses in FF has changed and works in a different way it may not work) but every extension I've used it with seems to work fine.
      • cawfee, on 11/07/2007, -1/+4Just tried it, no dice. Says the NTT themselves aren't even compatible.
        Oh well, give it a little time until the first RC and we'll have updated extensions soon enough.
    • EbilPhish, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I had no problems with adblock plus, infact the only extension that didn't work for me was the del.icio.us bookmarks but I don't use that much anymore since I discovered how to make a keyword that accepts a search string (just put %s in the url).
  • BackwardsPanda, on 11/13/2007, -8/+20http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nig ...
    Windows
    • slashbot, on 11/11/2007, -5/+2Thank you sir.

      Dugg up
    • spect3r, on 11/11/2007, -1/+6Did you read the IMPORTANT NOTE
      "These files are not release versions, they are just potential release
      versions. Use them at your own risk, without any of the warnings that we
      will be putting in the release notes.

      To be honest, if you're here from Digg or something similar, we'd really
      rather you waited until 3.0b1 was officially announced, so the servers
      don't get overloaded and we don't have a bunch of extra work to do."
  • NoobieDoobieDo, on 11/08/2007, -16/+2Opera!
    • Trax91, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1Yeah, I watched her shows too but no need to shout out.
  • lazzerous, on 11/07/2007, -3/+20anyone have screen shots?
    • MikeCerm, on 11/07/2007, -3/+4I tried one of the alpha releases, and it looks exactly the same as version 2.
      • trunkster, on 11/11/2007, -0/+2I believe only the Macintosh version is getting a face lift.
  • roberto_deneero, on 11/07/2007, -16/+102.0.0.9 crashes more on Leopard than Earnhardt Jr. on Sunday.
  • daxsymbiont, on 11/07/2007, -3/+16addons don't work.

    (renders faster digg!)
  • warlord, on 11/07/2007, -1/+10Seems to be faster at loading and displaying webpages than firefox 2 but this may be down to it being a virgin install with no extensions working at the moment.
    • daxsymbiont, on 11/07/2007, -1/+2true
    • silfiriel, on 11/07/2007, -2/+2you can install it without adopting all the stuff from F2?
      • warlord, on 11/07/2007, -2/+1The default install location will install the beta over your existing copy of firefox, so if u uninstall it you will have to install firefox 2 again but if u select it not to delete your bookmarks and settings then once you install firefox 2 again all your extensions and bookmarks will be the same
    • morphie, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3And the fact that this release uses a new major version of the gecko rendering engine. :)
      • init100, on 11/07/2007, -1/+6Which, among others, pass the ACID2 Test. :)
    • greedoe, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2I was thinking the exact same thing. Everything works faster, from web pages to new windows popping open, but probably because I have zero extensions (as none of them were ported over from FF2).
  • kevyn, on 11/07/2007, -1/+9Has there been any mention of an actual release date for FF3?
  • theokandroid, on 11/07/2007, -1/+3what's different?
    • hankydysplasia, on 11/07/2007, -0/+8Biggest thing for me as a photographer is color profile management. Previously only Safari had them.

      make sure you enable it in about:config. gfx.color_management.enabled set to true.
    • RobotBuddha, on 11/07/2007, -0/+5I can load large digg pages without a freeze, and for the first time forms don't look like crap on linux and osx.
  • CNSecrest, on 06/02/2008, -1/+6It's a little buggy, but I'm digging it.
  • JasonCox, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3Still the 2.0 theme? Oh well, there's lots of time left in the beta.
  • slashbot, on 11/07/2007, -1/+7Most extensions are not compatible and are disabled at this time.

    Adblock plus is unfortunately among them. That being said, I like this install
    • emehrkay, on 11/07/2007, -2/+2yeah, I just found out the hard way that firebug doesnt work. Anyway to have this installed and 2.x installed. Ill try a diff directory
  • thecosmicpope, on 11/07/2007, -1/+5Page rendering feels more like Operas progressive one now, rather than the FF2 version. Don't know if it's changed but it certainly feels different, smoother, faster because of that. I'll move back to FF2 at the moment to get all my addons back, but it's a promising beta.
    • init100, on 11/07/2007, -0/+4I agree completely (except on the comparison with Opera, since I never tried it). It certainly has changed. The reason why I started to run Gran Paradiso was because I filed a bug report with Mozilla about the slow rendering of large pages in Firefox 2, and one developer asked me to try Gran Paradiso and report if the same problem still existed there, which wasn't the case.
  • deto, on 11/07/2007, -0/+6Does this install over FF2, or does it create a separate install?
    • cawfee, on 11/07/2007, -1/+5Put it in a separate directory, then you can just uninstall it later without adding anything to your existing FF install. The only thing it added to my v2 was a "Places" folder in my bookmark toolbar, which you can easily remove later.
    • greedoe, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I didn't actually have an install, the program just sits in my temp folder and i double clicked on the Firefox exe file extracted from the zip file. I assume the actual beta will have an installer.
    • Fergy, on 11/07/2007, -0/+2By default it installs over FF2 and uses FF2's profile. You can install FF3 in a separate directory and you can make a separate profile for FF3 please read http://www.mozilla.org/support/firefox/profile
  • ginestony, on 11/07/2007, -1/+33Here's a screenshot from the windows version...
    http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=firefox3g ...
    so far (only playing with it for 4 minutes) there isn't anything significantly different. The favicon has a little home now, there's a star editor next to the "go" arrow, and a new "places" folder. A couple things to note of importance... the memory hogging has gone down considerably. Right now, with a few tabs open its only eating about 48mb of ram, and when I minimize it it goes down to an incredible 3mb! Also, a cool feature is when you close firefox it asks you if you want to save the tabs you had open on the next start of firefox. So far so good... especially for a beta. Now we just have to wait for the design team to make some minor updates I'm sure.
    • init100, on 11/10/2007, -0/+10"The favicon has a little home now"

      This "home" also contains the hostname when visiting a secure site. Hovering the mouse over the hostname shows information about the signer of the certificate.

      "there's a star editor next to the "go" arrow"

      This one lights up when I go to my home page (as set in the browser preferences). I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean yet.
      • surian, on 11/10/2007, -0/+2The star seems to be something similar to how Gmail allows you to "star" important emails. The star seems to let you flag pages you like or that you intend to visit again soon. Look at the "Places" folder and you'll see a lot of "Recently Starred Pages" and "Most Visited Starred Pages".

        The stars seem to be a way to bookmark without bookmarking.
        • init100, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1I see. I have no Places folder, so I cannot try it. This might be because Gran Paradiso imported my Firefox 2 bookmarks when I installed it.
    • DemonWasp, on 11/07/2007, -1/+13Hooray for it asking to save your opened tabs! I've been killing the firefox.exe process to preserve my tabs until now.
    • trenchfever, on 11/07/2007, -1/+11Never knew digg has ads :-P
  • tuxthepenguin, on 11/07/2007, -0/+7Anyone know how to enable addons that are disabled? I'd really like to use mouse gestures with this beta.
    • ginestony, on 11/07/2007, -2/+2have to wait for the addon developers to make their version compatible with 3.0
    • FreakyT, on 11/07/2007, -1/+9You can always Install the nightly tester tools extension:
      http://www.oxymoronical.com/web/firefox/nightly

      That will force add-ons to run, though they don't always work properly.
    • ultrafez, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1Go into your Firefox profile directory and open extensions.rdf, then search for "maxVersion" without the quotes. Change the version number that is next to each instance of maxVersion to something like 3.* which will make the extension compatible with all versions of Firefox until they introduce Firefox 4. You should be sorted by then!
  • bakerster, on 11/07/2007, -0/+22confirmed : firefox 3 beta (stock) is fast as ***** compared to safari 3 (stock) on leopard!
    • karishbhr, on 11/07/2007, -0/+5It's super fast on leopard. So happy with it.

      I was expecting the OSX theme, but it is not built in yet, so I downloaded Grapple for Firefox 3 alpha and it works perfectly

      http://www.takebacktheweb.org/
      • jbaez, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1yea i been using that theme for a couple of days its pretty nice
  • lcarsdeveloper, on 11/11/2007, -0/+11Ok...this really impressed me: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38949 ...
    I hate it when I want to go back to a site but I can only remember the title, great work Mozilla!!!! (saves having to open the History toolbar)
    • passive, on 11/07/2007, -4/+2If you think that is neat, check out the 9.5 beta of Opera. It has a similar feature, except it searches the entire content of your visited pages. It's quite nifty, and from what little use I've had of it, going to become a necessary feature of all modern browsers.
  • nirav72, on 11/07/2007, -0/+13Memory footprint has definitely gone down. I just tried out the windows version. I did a comparision with 2 tabs open on FF3 and FF2. FF3 was taking up a lot less memory with the same number of tabs and same sites opened. Haven't noticed anything else that is different. Just some minor cosmetic changes. Oh..the page rendering seems a lot more snappier. But that could be just my own perception.
    • lcarsdeveloper, on 11/07/2007, -0/+8No, I'm noticing the exact same thing! Rendering time seems drastically reduced, and the AJAX pause when you post a Digg comment is completely gone!
  • NovusVir, on 11/07/2007, -1/+5Wow, I'm impressed by this beta version. It's much less of a memory hog than 2 was, I'm happy with this, even if ABP is disabled for now.
    • Ryetronics, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1I noticed this as well, but is it really accurate without extensions working? I use about 15 different extensions, and with none of them on, of course the beta is going to run faster and keep memory down. The real test comes when they're compatible, right?
      • init100, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1"I use about 15 different extensions, and with none of them on, of course the beta is going to run faster and keep memory down."

        Note that some extensions, such as AdBlock+ and NoScript, actually reduce memory consumption since they prevent the browser from loading memory-intensive ads, Javascript and Flash animations. This may compensate somewhat for the memory use of some other extensions.
  • ct2000, on 11/07/2007, -0/+7plus.. Organize bookmarks now has tags and site previews among other things! oh yeah and is fast on Leopard!!!
  • ChaosProfessor, on 11/07/2007, -1/+2i have been running the alpha version for a while and it runs well
  • acidbass, on 11/13/2007, -15/+23i see it goes 2.0 - > 2.0.0.1 > 2.0.0.2 > 2.0.0.3 > 2.0.0.4 > 2.0.0.5 > 2.0.0.6 > 2.0.0.7 > 2.0.0.8 > 2.0.0.9 > 3.0

    Makes sense to me.

    I got an idea, why not just do it like: 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 ....... 2.9 , 2.10 , 2.11........ then 3.0

    • Godel, on 11/08/2007, -2/+14They save the tenths place for major updates that are not quite major enough for a new version number, like the 1.5 release.
      • noblepenguin, on 11/10/2007, -2/+8If that's the case why not 2.0.1, 2.0.2, 2.0.3…, 2.0.9, etc.
      • acidbass, on 11/10/2007, -1/+2exactly, they get too liberal with their numbering, its way over kill
    • belorion, on 11/10/2007, -0/+28The location of the increment actually has meaning. For most software, 2.0 -> 2.0.0.1 means a very minor patch (sometimes it is an *important* patch, say for security, just a minor change in code). 2.0 -> 2.0.1 is usually a collection of patches, security fixes, etc. 2.0 -> 2.1 would mean new minor features or modifications to existing features such that there is a noticeable difference, and usually include bug fixes as well. 2.0 -> 3.0 would mean brand new features that did not exist before, often accompanied by significant changes to the underlying codebase
      • acidbass, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1belorion:the increment obiviously has some meaning, my point is it doesnt have much if any meaning.
        And is that true, the official meaning for a 4th decimal place version is a *very minor patch*.
        LOL!
        Sorry, you lose.
        there is no accepted meaning for versioning,its oftendifferent from project to project what the versioning means.... although developers often label 1st, 2nd etc. digit versions for major/minor /very minor bug fixes, there is no real meaning,

        thats my point,

        If they are making up the standard, why not use a few less decimal places, like 2.
    • rghai6, on 11/08/2007, -0/+3They've been working on 3.0 for months now, They had released the alpha versions of 3 much before they launched 2.0.0.7. How can you assume there won't be a 2.0.1.0 ?
      • init100, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1"How can you assume there won't be a 2.0.1.0 ?"

        Why would they do that? I think that you are actually referring to a possible 2.0.0.10 version, which is not only possible, but probable.
      • jdhore1, on 11/08/2007, -1/+2If they do go above 2.0.0.9, they'll just go to 2.0.0.10 like they did with either 1.0 or 1.5
      • kbrosnan, on 11/08/2007, -1/+0There will most definitely be a 2.0.0.10. Firefox 2 will get security updates till 6 months after Firefox 3 is released.
      • Aleksej, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1I think the parent poster means 2.0.1.0, where the second (from the right) number is incremented. That’s what’s been discussed above, anyway.
    • Zippo, on 11/08/2007, -0/+3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#N ...
      Granted, each developer often uses their own numbering method, but all the updates release since 2.0 have been security fixes and minor maintenance. They haven't really changed enough to warrant a 2.1 or even 2.0.1.
    • liljay2k, on 11/07/2007, -6/+1um isnt 2.1 the same as 2.10, your idea was on the right track but not quite it
      • GeekSwag, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3Yea, except not at all...
      • burk3, on 11/08/2007, -0/+3It all depends on how the developers feel about the versioning. I've seen situations where 2.10 = 2.1.0, or 2.1 != 2.10 (ie it went 2.1, 2.2, ..., 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, etc), or anything else you can think of really.
      • Kawolski, on 11/07/2007, -0/+3Yes, just like how the IP addresses 128.1.1.1 and 128.10.10.10 are the exact same too.
    • Aleksej, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1I have been told the second (from the right) number was intended for API compatibility breaking fixes. The third number is apparently for things like what 1.5→2.0 (which should have been 2.0→2.5) was.
  • marlinspike, on 11/07/2007, -2/+11Does it solve the memory leak issue on Windows? I'm tired of having to re-start my browser every so often when it starts to hog over 150MB of memory and slows to a crawl.
  • CrashinDutchman, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1Do themes still work?
  • rockyh, on 11/07/2007, -6/+4Calling the Mac version a beta is a bit of a far fetch - it's certainly not Leopard compatible. For a start there are two File menus, the browser chrome does not update to active window state and the interface looks identical to FF2. That said, this is beta1...
  • slashbot, on 11/07/2007, -1/+2Definitely impressed with the install. Faster render times, less freezing on digg, and lower memory usage with several tabs open.

    I am only temporarily reverting to FF2 until the add-ons are made compatible. Nice job Mozilla!
  • Gobd, on 11/09/2007, -1/+5Nightly Tester Tools at http://www.oxymoronical.com/web/firefox/nightly will force extensions to work. Adblock Plus has no problems with FF 3.0 when forcing it to run.

    The version scheme works fine. it goes 2.0.0.0 to 2.0.0.x meaning 2.0 branch security fixes. If anything the devs would have gone to 2.5 like they did from 1.0 but they felt that there were enough changes that 3.0 was a better choice.
  • DagYo, on 11/07/2007, -7/+2Firefox on Leopard is just unacceptable, even the beta crashes every 10 minutes or so. I've tried FF on 4 computers with fresh installs of Leopard, still getting the same results on all.
  • drunkmuppet, on 11/07/2007, -0/+8So far the biggest difference i've noticed is the lack of pop-up warnings. Ie. "Do you want to save this password" is no longer a popup but a drop down tool bar.

    It runs pretty snippy.
    • init100, on 11/08/2007, -1/+7"Ie. "Do you want to save this password" is no longer a popup but a drop down tool bar. "

      Which is a very useful change since it allows you to decide if you want to save the password *after* you can conclude that it works.
  • mooninite, on 11/08/2007, -0/+8Holy smokes! Native buttons on Linux and super fast rendering speed! Digg comments go up and down in a blink of an eye! It's all good. :)
    • crimesaucer, on 11/07/2007, -0/+0Yeah, for the other alpha builds past alpha6, only a few native Linux buttons were showing... for example, Gmail still had those ugly box buttons in alpha8...

      Now Gmail has beautiful clearlooks buttons and check boxes...
  • rowlodge, on 11/07/2007, -7/+2it better more than double the speed to load pages or ill just use the safari beta 3 which is faster than the old firefox.
    • awesomeface, on 11/07/2007, -0/+1what if it's faster than safari?
  • blooby, on 11/08/2007, -2/+11"To be honest, if you're here from Digg or something similar, we'd really rather you waited until 3.0b1 was officially announced, so the servers don't get overloaded and we don't have a bunch of extra work to do."

    Ha
  • jinxo, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1If you have Mr Tech Local Install already added, by default it disables version checking as well, so a straight upgrade should allow existing extensions to work fine. You will need to disable some of them yourself anyway, however, as they genuinely won't work. ABP works fine, tho.

    And DAMN this is fast (running it on Leopard on a 2.2GHz MBP w/ 3GB).

    I just wish I could use the Aqualicious widgets instead of the more Aqua-native ones that come with it by default (I'm not too fond of the look), but, hey, not a big deal :) . All in all, I must say, after a brief period with it, so far, I am most quite enthusiastic about this release.
  • Rileyper, on 11/08/2007, -3/+9Read the special notice (it mentions digg)
    • hdar3415, on 11/08/2007, -2/+9To be honest, if you're here from Digg or something similar, we'd really
      rather you waited until 3.0b1 was officially announced, so the servers
      don't get overloaded and we don't have a bunch of extra work to do.
  • anthonylawrence, on 11/07/2007, -1/+1Cheers.This is a good thing.a great thing.
  • dannyross, on 11/08/2007, -3/+1Meebo doesn't like it. Looks like it's not displaying some sidebar gifs. Other than that, its super fast.
  • Ryetronics, on 11/11/2007, -0/+5The new Gmail is so much faster in this beta than in FF2. Wow! These load times are amazing. I feel like I just got my first broadband connection again.
    • dannyross, on 11/07/2007, -0/+4Wow, you are right. Emails load instantly. I was starting to get mad at gmail but i love it all over again now!
      • phinn, on 11/12/2007, -3/+1emails load instantly on the new Gmail with Firefox 2 anyway. I really hope they improved performance and reduced memory though, I don't care about anything else (other than rendering pages correctly of course)
      • phinn, on 11/12/2007, -4/+1emails load instntly on the new gmail with Firefox 2 anyway. I really hope they improved performance and reduced memory though, I don't care about anything else (other than rendering pages correctly of course)
    • crimesaucer, on 11/07/2007, -0/+0I've tried the FF3 alpha 6, 7, and 8... and they have finally fixed the clearlooks Linux widgets for gmail in this nightly Beta... so gmail is finally looking really nice on my Archlinux using Gnome.
  • greatcaffeine, on 11/07/2007, -3/+1They need to fix it on Leopard... they got the window color all wrong. It looks like a background window, even when it has focus.
  • Alphab, on 11/08/2007, -2/+30From http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nig ...

    These files are not release versions, they are just potential release
    versions. Use them at your own risk, without any of the warnings that we
    will be putting in the release notes.

    To be honest, if you're here from Digg or something similar, we'd really
    rather you waited until 3.0b1 was officially announced, so the servers
    don't get overloaded and we don't have a bunch of extra work to do.
  • ZachSka87, on 11/13/2007, -2/+15AHEM!!!
    "These files are not release versions, they are just potential release
    versions. Use them at your own risk, without any of the warnings that we
    will be putting in the release notes.

    To be honest, if you're here from Digg or something similar, we'd really
    rather you waited until 3.0b1 was officially announced, so the servers
    don't get overloaded and we don't have a bunch of extra work to do."
    • IEatHamburgers, on 11/08/2007, -1/+3If I had a dollar for each time I'd seen that in the comments here, I could buy a pizza.
  • justdave, on 11/08/2007, -1/+17buried as innacurate, it hasn't actually been released yet (not even as 3.0b1), it's a QA version that hasn't been signed off on yet.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.