Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 85 posts

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#11

Post by abraham »

mbchandar wrote: post #4

i am worried. even though it touched 16, it still sucks most of my memory and slows down the system and drains the battery immediately (1 hour of power) Firefox still needs to improve its memory usage.

Check what extensions you are using. Firefox by itself uses much less memory and is very fast now.

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#12

Post by vnuk »

Why does Firefox's roadmap look like "copy everything that Chrome has"?

If Firefox users needed (or wanted) marketplace for (web) apps (or any other Chrome feature) they'd already be using Chrome ...

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#13

Post by mccr8 »

mbchandar wrote: post #4

i am worried. even though it touched 16, it still sucks most of my memory and slows down the system and drains the battery immediately (1 hour of power) Firefox still needs to improve its memory usage.

Can you be more specific about the kinds of problems you are seeing? Can you reproduce these problems in safe mode? You should file a bug at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/ and put [MemShrink] in the whiteboard.

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#15

Post by sabret00the »

freehunter wrote: post #3

I wish they'd just bump the version number to 30 then save major revision numbers for major revisions. I don't see anything in here that would warrant anything but a bump from 15 to 15.5 under the old Firefox revision standards.

It's worth mentioning that the complete bug list is a lot larger: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/16.0/releasenotes/bugli...

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#16

Post by abraham »

Ensorceled wrote: post #9

Is 16 worth installing? Firefox used to be my favourite browser, but I stopped using it when the almost daily install and "reload or disable" addons cycle became too painful.

That cycle should be invisible now. It updates silently in the background and should only notify you if an extension gets disabled.

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#17

Post by darkstalker »

freehunter wrote: post #3

I wish they'd just bump the version number to 30 then save major revision numbers for major revisions. I don't see anything in here that would warrant anything but a bump from 15 to 15.5 under the old Firefox revision standards.

How come no one complains about Chrome version numbers?

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#18

Post by freehunter »

superxor wrote: post #8
freehunter wrote: post #3

I wish they'd just bump the version number to 30 then save major revision numbers for major revisions. I don't see anything in here that would warrant anything but a bump from 15 to 15.5 under the old Firefox revision standards.

I think it's time to cut this 'version number' debate. Mozilla has been pretty clear about the plan to use such a system. The only problem was from enterprise users which Mozilla has addressed. The background auto-update is in the stable builds now, should be enough to keep FF updated. I am really tired of this versioning non-sense. Users complained, Mozilla addressed legitimate concerns. Now it's just a difference i…

I know they've been very open about why they're using major revision numbers for minor features. I don't like it when Chrome does it either. I just don't like the arms race that is developing to have the higher revision number. I just get a little disappointed when I see a new major number and the changelog is minor additions and bugfixes.

Just because Mozilla has their reason for making the change doesn't mean everyone has to be happy about the change. I'm not complaining about Firefox, I'm complaining about the number, and the corruption of what that number is supposed to mean.

Re: Firefox 16 live: Here's What's New

#19

Post by sabret00the »

vnuk wrote: post #12

Why does Firefox's roadmap look like "copy everything that Chrome has"? If Firefox users needed (or wanted) marketplace for (web) apps (or any other Chrome feature) they'd already be using Chrome ...

Web Apps are a very real part of the future of the web. The fact that this space exists in the first place whereby there was only desktop apps previously should be testament enough to that. I may not personally agree with Mozilla in regards to the role of web apps, but I think that we all agree, it's better to be in a position to allow users to make their own minds up rather than go off of what a few loud naysayers want.
Post reply on HN