Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 25 is released

mozilla.org

31–40 of 236 posts

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#31
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeez, why can't browser developers be more considerate of the poor put-upon user agent-detecting site developer?

Haha, are you making a reference to this gem: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=765645 ?

No, but that thread is golden, and certainly captures the essence of the agent-sniffer. That is, if YHWH had ever heard of agent sniffing, he would do it all the time and complain bitterly whenever it breaks, which is also all the time. Like any skilled troll, YHWH kept me guessing as to whether he was actually trolling or not. Those mozilla folks have the patience of ages. Best response was:

For future reference: look into externalizing your scripts/css into a separate file and referencing that instead of copying and pasting to every page.

I also liked the find | xargs and sed one-liners. They might as well have been speaking Aramaic.

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#32

I find it irritating that Mozilla now herds its Firefox users toward the Stub installer, and not the full offline-install redistributable binary. The actual download itself is available on the "Systems & Languages" page: > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/ This kind of download is important, when you want to try out a new release, without committing yourself to it. For example, let's say you want to load it…

I think the stub is for an improved experience for the average user with slow internet access. You're likelier to download and run a 1MB file and then wait for the install to finish, than you are to wait for a 25MB file to finish downloading in the first place. (I wonder if they push the stub so as to collect more (system) information without having to say that it's Firefox itself that's collecting that information.)

I think it's mostly a tactic to mitigate, prevent, defend against denial of service, since the Mozilla user base is absolutely gigantic.

My suspicion is that it's essentially a "security through obscurity" tactic, so that the majority of users are left with no choice but the "smart" installer, which offers greater control for load balancing heavy duty traffic during peak download periods.

See also: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5613152

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#33
post #28

It will hang like previous versions ? Unhappy with the performance so i shift to chrome.

Alternatively, you could help us improve the responsiveness of Firefox: https://dutherenverseauborddelatable.wordpress.com/2013/10/0...

I am willing to help you get started, if you are interested.

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#35
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeez, why can't browser developers be more considerate of the poor put-upon user agent-detecting site developer?

Haha, are you making a reference to this gem: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=765645 ?

My favorite bug report. The reporter of the bug runs quite a few over the top early 2000s looking religious websites. I won't post them here because they give me a ton of security warnings on FF but the more adventurous reader may want to take a look. Lack of -moz-opacity:0.7 should really be at the bottom of the reporters problems.

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#36

I find it irritating that Mozilla now herds its Firefox users toward the Stub installer, and not the full offline-install redistributable binary. The actual download itself is available on the "Systems & Languages" page: > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/ This kind of download is important, when you want to try out a new release, without committing yourself to it. For example, let's say you want to load it…

For example, let's say you want to load it up in a VM

You've just excluded >95% of Firefox users. Those that do use a VM will know how to get hold of the full installer.

If they'd stop making full installs, I would be annoyed. But they're just optimising for the most common use cases.

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#37

I find it irritating that Mozilla now herds its Firefox users toward the Stub installer, and not the full offline-install redistributable binary. The actual download itself is available on the "Systems & Languages" page: > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/ This kind of download is important, when you want to try out a new release, without committing yourself to it. For example, let's say you want to load it…

Super annoying, yes! I completely agree with you. It's not just Firefox being the culprit here though... .NET is the same, and so is Chrome, and the list can grow like a mayor's coat-tails!

Also, here's a genuine usecase for a truly offline installer... What if you are the "resident software/pc maintainer" of your extended family.... In such a case, would it not make better sense to have one complete download, then copy it into a pen drive, and install it on every machine, without spending 30 mins to an hour on every machine, doing a download+install for every single one!

The rationale of an online installer might be justified as some of the replies indeed seem to do, but, I think that there is something fundamentally flawed/wrong with having to first "download an installer", only to have it "download the application" again! I mean, what the hell!?

EDIT: Also, the speed of these release cycles (not just Mozilla, but other software too!) are getting old and tired to keep up with, TBH...

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#38

I find it irritating that Mozilla now herds its Firefox users toward the Stub installer, and not the full offline-install redistributable binary. The actual download itself is available on the "Systems & Languages" page: > https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/ This kind of download is important, when you want to try out a new release, without committing yourself to it. For example, let's say you want to load it…

I think the stub is for an improved experience for the average user with slow internet access. You're likelier to download and run a 1MB file and then wait for the install to finish, than you are to wait for a 25MB file to finish downloading in the first place. (I wonder if they push the stub so as to collect more (system) information without having to say that it's Firefox itself that's collecting that information.)

Wrong, the stub is an annoying experience if you are behind a company firewall, or with slow connection. And the point about bandwidth saving doesn't make sense either, since instead of putting Firefox installer in a file share and be done, now I have to put there a stub, instruct everyone how to bypass the proxy, if possible, and then everyone has to download it again and again.

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the stub is for an improved experience for the average user with slow internet access. You're likelier to download and run a 1MB file and then wait for the install to finish, than you are to wait for a 25MB file to finish downloading in the first place. (I wonder if they push the stub so as to collect more (system) information without having to say that it's Firefox itself that's collecting that information.)

Wrong, the stub is an annoying experience if you are behind a company firewall, or with slow connection. And the point about bandwidth saving doesn't make sense either, since instead of putting Firefox installer in a file share and be done, now I have to put there a stub, instruct everyone how to bypass the proxy, if possible, and then everyone has to download it again and again.

Well, in that case, you can easily put (or link to) the full download, can't you?

Or am I missing something?

Re: Firefox 25 is released

#40
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the stub is for an improved experience for the average user with slow internet access. You're likelier to download and run a 1MB file and then wait for the install to finish, than you are to wait for a 25MB file to finish downloading in the first place. (I wonder if they push the stub so as to collect more (system) information without having to say that it's Firefox itself that's collecting that information.)

Yeah, that is if you have dial-up. Even the slowest DSL is enough for 768KBps.

That really depends on the country you live in.
Post reply on HN