Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 to be released before the end of 2011 • Hacker News Board

Re: Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 to be released before the end of 2011

#111

Post by billybob » Tue, Feb 08, 2011, 6:50 PM UTC

rjprins wrote: post #101

trezor wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess at this point version 9 looks OK. You have MSIE 9, Opera 10 etc and we've grown accustomed to those. It's up there at the same level and not particularly out of place. Now look back: the public stable release of Chrome 1 was on 11 December 2008. That's roughly 5 up per year. In another year it will be 15 and then 20. After a while it will start looking silly (like it did with MS Office) and I don't think the…

I disagree, the number is there to indicate a version, nothing more. The version number in Chrome is not exposed to users in a marketing way. Google simple decided to go for big version numbers, because what does switching from 2.95 to 3.0 mean if you release new features constantly and major steps thus never happen? Sticking to decimal point version numbers makes no sense in this case.

If you use semantic versioning (http://semver.org/), switching from 2.95 to 3.0 means you made backwards-incompatible changes. Major features could still happen in a point release.

Re: Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 to be released before the end of 2011

#112

Post by ahrjay » Tue, Feb 08, 2011, 9:34 PM UTC

thristian wrote: post #99

nitrogen wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give some examples of HTML/CSS-compliant layouts or layout features that were broken by changes in Chrome or Firefox?

Recently I worked on a website with a lot of forms, and decided to use HTML5 form validation to make my life easier, with a JS fallback for older browsers. It turns out that Webkit added support for HTML5 form validation, then found a problem, so they switched off the implementation without switching off the exposed API . So every JS fallback that tests for the presence of the HTML5 methods on form elements will assu…

They didn't "switch it off" they merely turned off form submission blocking when the form was invalid. It's back on in chrome now because they have the error notification bubble. The constraint validition API, the error pseudo-classes and the extra attributes all work in Safari.

Re: Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 to be released before the end of 2011

#113

Post by emil0r » Tue, Feb 08, 2011, 10:16 PM UTC

mrcharles wrote: post #31

kgtm wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my first hand experience in FPS gaming in non-amateur settings the vast majority of average users will not be able to notice a (say) 50 ms difference in UI responsiveness. I covered that when talking about network latency in my previous post. Of course this is just my experience, scientific findings may very well dispute my ignorance.

Correction, the vast majority of users will not be able to explain that they feel a responsiveness issue, but they do indeed feel it. Less hardcore gamers will often just blame other things -- loose controls, or ignored button presses, or what not. I see it pretty regularly in playtests and such. Anyway, it's not something someone can simply say "Hey, this app took longer than 50ms to respond!" It's more of a gut fee…

Old hardcore quake3 player here. Q3 didn't wait for a server response, but the net-code was not that great and the interpolation did iirc not really take into account server responses. You could end up with players teleporting because of network issues. OSP was the first mod iirc that tried to fix it and it was somewhat successful.

The one mod that made great strides to fix the issues with the Q3 net-code was CPM (www.promode.org). 50-70ms to the server felt like 20-30ms in Vanilla Q3 and when you hit 20-30ms in CPM it felt like LAN play in VQ3. It fixed the niggling issues of lost packages (caused players to warp) as well. You even had some players that intentionally downloaded things in the background to cause dropped/delayed packets so that they would warp.

Eventually the net-code in CPM got so good the community even had cross-Atlantic competitions. The team I played in had 100-120 ping vs west-coast American teams on NYC servers and it was actually playable to the point where you could have fairly fair fights with them. Except against Team Abuse... :p. Man what a schooling in team-play and lock-downs of maps they gave my team.

Re: Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 to be released before the end of 2011

#114

Post by thristian » Wed, Feb 09, 2011, 1:59 AM UTC

ahrjay wrote: post #112

thristian wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recently I worked on a website with a lot of forms, and decided to use HTML5 form validation to make my life easier, with a JS fallback for older browsers. It turns out that Webkit added support for HTML5 form validation, then found a problem, so they switched off the implementation without switching off the exposed API . So every JS fallback that tests for the presence of the HTML5 methods on form elements will assu…

They didn't "switch it off" they merely turned off form submission blocking when the form was invalid. It's back on in chrome now because they have the error notification bubble. The constraint validition API, the error pseudo-classes and the extra attributes all work in Safari.

If the answer to "are the contents of this form valid" is always "yes", I don't really care how much of the validation API the browser supports; it's effectively going to waste.

I'm glad to hear it's turned back on; I hope the form-validation interface is as sleek and professional-looking as the one in Firefox 4.

Re: Firefox 4, 5, 6 and 7 to be released before the end of 2011

#115

Post by davej » Fri, Feb 11, 2011, 3:52 PM UTC

l0nwlf wrote: post #23

davej wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Major versions are just a number. How many major versions of Chrome were there last year? I haven't looked it up but I bet it was more than 4.

Google Chrome version number is meaningless as told by Google itself: http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2010/11/google-chromes-vers... This doesn't however mean that other browsers too have meaningless version numbers.

That link is an unofficial blog. Either way, the point stands though, they're still just arbitrary numbers. Back in the day when software was paid for by version number, an increase of 1.0 was a marketing tool that usually meant a significant update. Browsers are free and are beginning to implement auto-update which makes the version number of a browser even more insignificant.