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

Firefox 26 is released

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 204 posts

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#171

Post by nnethercote »

saidajigumi wrote: post #97
achairapart wrote: post #78

Firefox 25 hanged most of the time, it seems was because of Firebug. I disabled Firebug. Firefox 26 hangs at start up. CPU stuck at 100%. Almost 1 GB of ram used with 1 tab open (I can't even open a new one). What happened, Mozilla? I'm giving up with this browser.

Anecdata: I use FF heavily on a daily basis and haven't seen any of these problems. Issues of this magnitude are "set the internet on fire" problems. If a few web searches don't turn up tons of other users having these problems then it's best to assume there are local issues that need troubleshooting. Some suggestions on that: 1. Have you tried troubleshooting Firefox via Safe Mode? https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/…

I call this "your experience is not universal" (YEINU).

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#172

Post by PavlovsCat »

acdha wrote: post #131
lucb1e wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Numbers aren't intrinsically important True, so yeah I stand corrected about that. Now, can we tell Mozilla this and get off this ridicul^H^H^Hrapid release cycle?

This release cycle is great: it's not quite as fast as Chrome but it means that I can start using features for 90+% of the Firefox-using public within months of release rather than years.

Well, the version numbering system has no bearing on the frequency of updates

Still, I don't see the difference between 1.0/1.01/1.02 and 1.0/2.0/3.0 -- it's still "3 versions". I say version numbers are bullshit, codenames doubly so.. just make it the release date or build number and be done with it. Automate it, and let no human ever think about it again. It's just an identifier for a specific changelog entry after all, and has no meaning by itself.

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#173

Post by kps »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #159
prteja11 wrote: post #3

Love this - All Java plug-ins are defaulted to 'click to play' I tried convincing my coworkers to disable java and failed (we are not developers).

... and this breaks a bunch of banking sites that use hidden applets.

Any such site was already broken. This change at most makes that apparent to a few more people.

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#174

Post by tom9729 »

hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #159
prteja11 wrote: post #3

Love this - All Java plug-ins are defaulted to 'click to play' I tried convincing my coworkers to disable java and failed (we are not developers).

... and this breaks a bunch of banking sites that use hidden applets.

Looks like a notification[1] is shown. I assume "Allow" will whitelist the site. Of course this doesn't help if a trusted site is compromised, but I think C2P is better than nothing.

[1] http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/firefo...

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#175

Post by russellsprouts »

shmerl wrote: post #110

About gstreamer video playback: I didn't find a way to prioritize formats. Let's say some video is available in VPx (WebM) and H.264 (mp4). Firefox will pick first whatever is listed first on the page. So for me it always picks H.264 on Youtube. I prefer to use open codecs though when there is a choice, but there is no apparent way to set the priority.

I think the browser is supposed to load them by the order listed in the HTML.
Unfortunately, I think there were bugs in older browsers, so they broke if mp4 was not listed first. So most websites list mp4 first.

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#176

Post by caipre »

winslow wrote: post #113
bryanlarsen wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of software is developed via some sort of agile software process these days. This means a new version of the software quite regularly, released on a time basis rather than a feature basis. This is what made version numbers meaningless. There are three common solutions: time based: Ubuntu 12.04 increment the major number: Chrome 31 increment the minor number, never or rarely changing the major numbers: Linux 2.6…

What is your solution then if these don't work well?

I'd suggest Semantic Versioning[1]: ..

[1]: http://semver.org/

Major releases break the API, so programs that depend upon them may not work. Minor releases add or improve features while preserving existing functionality. Patches fix bugs.

This is exactly why having version numbers is important. Even if the number becomes arbitrary, it's existence is necessary to build dependency trees.

Aside: I'm not certain, but it seem as though Firefox does have a major.minor version scheme: my user-agent reads "Mozilla/5.0 ... Firefox/25.0"; Firefox 5.25 is probably the most correct.

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#177

Post by quaint- »

systems wrote: post #126
yeukhon wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. to clarify for people who are not clear, see this https://wiki.mozilla.org/RapidRelease/Calendar

will the linux version still show the window frame on top of the tabs? Update: seems so http://people.mozilla.org/~shorlander/blog-images/australis-... why didnt they take this chance to fix this, chromium does it>

Chromium does it, to a pretty useless extent. With so many window managers, it's pretty hard to draw correct window borders on every machine, and Chromium doesn't even try: with Ubuntu, for example, it draws the titlebar buttons in the "wrong" corner.

Let's face it, the Linux version will only show the window frame if you choose to draw it: not all do (with tiling wm's it's pretty rare, even). Firefox is easy to customize, which allows every distribution to match it looks to whatever theme they use. Linux doesn't have the DE like OSX and Windows do.

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#178

Post by shmerl »

russellsprouts wrote: post #175
shmerl wrote: post #110

About gstreamer video playback: I didn't find a way to prioritize formats. Let's say some video is available in VPx (WebM) and H.264 (mp4). Firefox will pick first whatever is listed first on the page. So for me it always picks H.264 on Youtube. I prefer to use open codecs though when there is a choice, but there is no apparent way to set the priority.

I think the browser is supposed to load them by the order listed in the HTML. Unfortunately, I think there were bugs in older browsers, so they broke if mp4 was not listed first. So most websites list mp4 first.

May be an add-on can allow overriding the priority. I'll take a look if it's possible.

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#179

Post by panzi »

voltagex_ wrote: post #167
spindritf wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just download youtube videos[1]. It has many advantages over youtube.com. Hardware acceleration is one but also no stalling when skipping ahead, no disappearing videos that you planned to watch later, no need to sign in. Actually, youtube as a repository of material for download works much better than youtube as a streaming site. [1] http://rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/

The only issue I have with youtube-dl is that there's nothing stopping Google from playing hardball and blocking youtube-dl completely. That said, I'd love a Firefox plugin that dumps the YT url directly to youtube-dl.

This userscript downloads the video via the browser. I guess YouTube shouldn't be able to tell if the user downloads the video or views it with the html5 player. The script can be used with Firefox (Greasemonkey) and Chrome. http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/98782 Please only use it to download videos that are under a free license or otherwise allow downloads. ;)

Re: Firefox 26 is released

#180

Post by jeorgun »

caipre wrote: post #176
winslow wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your solution then if these don't work well?

I'd suggest Semantic Versioning[1]: . . [1]: http://semver.org/ Major releases break the API, so programs that depend upon them may not work. Minor releases add or improve features while preserving existing functionality. Patches fix bugs. This is exactly why having version numbers is important. Even if the number becomes arbitrary, it's existence is necessary to build dependency trees. Aside: I'm not certain, but it…

``Mozilla/5.0'' doesn't seem to mean anything much— it's in Chrome's (and Konqueror's!) default user agent as well.
Post reply on HN