Firefox 3.0 (Merged: Firefox 3 comes out tomorrow!)

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

crp
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:17 am UTC

Firefox 3.0 (Merged: Firefox 3 comes out tomorrow!)

Postby crp » Wed May 21, 2008 4:42 am UTC

Huzzah! It has come, now with word-wrapping boxes when hovering over pictures, making it easier to obtain XKCD comic's alt-text!

Anyway...
3.0 is faster than the previous versions, your bookmarks are now secure from computer crashes in a nice little database, and the overall feel is much more desirable.

I even looked at some source code

Code: Select all

if (firefox.open == 1)
{
    return awesome;   
}
else if (ie.open == 1)//////////
{                         //  \o/  //
    return pity;       //    |   //
}                        //   / \  //
else                    ///////////
{
    return "Paula Bean! Brilliant!"; //wtf is a stack?
}


Though in its testing phase I find my overall experience familiar yet innovative
GJ Mozilla

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby EvanED » Wed May 21, 2008 5:04 am UTC

I've been using it since last summer. I don't have any complaints about it relative to 2.0, except that I'm too lazy to install the nighly tester tools so I can use extensions.

User avatar
evilbeanfiend
Posts: 2650
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:05 am UTC
Location: the old world

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby evilbeanfiend » Wed May 21, 2008 9:43 am UTC

surely that should read

Code: Select all

...
{
    return "Paula Bean! Brillant!"; //wtf is a stack?
}


i will most likely wait for release.
in ur beanz makin u eveel

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Xbehave » Wed May 21, 2008 1:43 pm UTC

EvanED wrote:I've been using it since last summer. I don't have any complaints about it relative to 2.0, except that I'm too lazy to install the nighly tester tools so I can use extensions.

about:config
extensions.checkCompatibility -> false

Disclaimer: use at your own risk it may kill your entire family with an invasion of sporks, but more likely will allow any extention that is compatible with Firefox3 betas to work & most small firefox2 extensions.

Although i have just found a bug: spork is not in the default dictionary.

edit: you have may have to add the boolean yourself. right click new->boolean
Last edited by Xbehave on Wed May 21, 2008 4:09 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby zenten » Wed May 21, 2008 2:05 pm UTC

Xbehave wrote:
EvanED wrote:I've been using it since last summer. I don't have any complaints about it relative to 2.0, except that I'm too lazy to install the nighly tester tools so I can use extensions.

about:config
extensions.checkCompatibility -> false

Disclaimer: use at your own risk it may kill your entire family with an invasion of sporks, but more likely will allow any extention that is compatible with Firefox3 betas to work & most small firefox2 extensions.

Although i have just found a bug: spork is not in the default dictionary.


I don't have an extensions.checkCompatibility

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Xbehave » Wed May 21, 2008 4:10 pm UTC

zenten wrote:I don't have an extensions.checkCompatibility

you have may have to add the boolean yourself.
right click, new->boolean
extensions.checkCompatibility
false
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby zenten » Wed May 21, 2008 6:02 pm UTC

Xbehave wrote:
zenten wrote:I don't have an extensions.checkCompatibility

you have may have to add the boolean yourself.
right click, new->boolean
extensions.checkCompatibility
false


Yay, it worked.

Thanks.

User avatar
wing
the /b/slayer
Posts: 1876
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 5:56 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby wing » Tue May 27, 2008 1:03 am UTC

It *STILL* leaks memory like a sieve.

45 minutes ago, I killed Firefox because it was consuming 600mb of RAM and my system was on the verge of entering that horrible locked-to-death state that Linux gets in when swap and RAM both hit 100% utilization. Restarted it with the same FOUR tabs, and it was consuming 300mb (for FOUR tabs with no animation or anything on them...)

Right now, it's back to consuming 531mb. I'll have to kill it again in a little bit.
I AM A SEXY, SHOELESS GOD OF WAR!
Akula wrote:Our team has turned into this hate-fueled juggernaut of profit. It's goddamn wonderful.

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Xbehave » Tue May 27, 2008 1:23 am UTC

wing wrote:It *STILL* leaks memory like a sieve.

45 minutes ago, I killed Firefox because it was consuming 600mb of RAM and my system was on the verge of entering that horrible locked-to-death state that Linux gets in when swap and RAM both hit 100% utilization. Restarted it with the same FOUR tabs, and it was consuming 300mb (for FOUR tabs with no animation or anything on them...)

Right now, it's back to consuming 531mb. I'll have to kill it again in a little bit.


Not sure whats going on there, i know most people assume that eating ram is a bad thing when in most cases its harmless as its just the OS not getting rid of ram till it has to, but you seam to know what your talking about. I can offer 2 solutions.
a) theres a firefox extention called ramback, that does what it says on the tin
b) you can configure linux to lie to firefox about how much ram you have, cant rember the details for that one tho

edit: oh and i came that im not sure what the ubuntu team have done but on kubuntu gutsy the firefox tar was stable & looked nice, on hardy i have the choice of it looking nice and being unstable (the repo version, is crashing without flash) or being ugly (the tar version falls back to gtk).
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby zenten » Tue May 27, 2008 4:50 am UTC

wing wrote:It *STILL* leaks memory like a sieve.

45 minutes ago, I killed Firefox because it was consuming 600mb of RAM and my system was on the verge of entering that horrible locked-to-death state that Linux gets in when swap and RAM both hit 100% utilization. Restarted it with the same FOUR tabs, and it was consuming 300mb (for FOUR tabs with no animation or anything on them...)

Right now, it's back to consuming 531mb. I'll have to kill it again in a little bit.


I haven't noticed this problem. Right now it's taking up 287 MB for me, and it's been running for about a week now without closing. That's with loading up all sorts of bloated, Ajax heavy sites and whatnot.

User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Berengal » Tue May 27, 2008 2:24 pm UTC

Right now my firefox uses 63.3 mb. I just started it though, and it's only up to one tab at the moment. I have noticed it beign up to 400mb before, but since I never close it and never restart my computer that's to be expeced when my ram seldom hits even 50% (4gb total). Back when I only had one gig (and was running windows) it was around 150mb most of the time, but I closed it alot more often there (only one desktop) and restarted at least once a week.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.

User avatar
e946
Posts: 621
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:32 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby e946 » Tue May 27, 2008 4:33 pm UTC

Tried it for a week, had tons of problems with it, and went back to 2.

The biggest problem was the fact that creating a form and submitting it via a javascript bookmark no longer works if the target of the form is on a different web site. I need to be able to do that for testing of my web site, meaning if I want to test things, I either need o use a more complicated solution or use a different browser.

Images constantly stopped loading halfway through, the fonts were alaways off, table widths acted diffrently than they do in every other browser, and firebug didn't work, een after disabling the check for extension compatibility.

User avatar
Emu*
Posts: 689
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:47 am UTC
Location: Cardiff, UK
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Emu* » Tue May 27, 2008 7:11 pm UTC

Been using Gran Paradiso since Alpha-7, and never really had problems with it except certain MSDN sites causing crashes. Not had crashes from any other sites as far as I can remember.
Cosmologicon wrote:Emu* implemented a naive east-first strategy and ran it for an hour, producing results that rivaled many sophisticated strategies, visiting 614 cells. For this, Emu* is awarded Best Deterministic Algorithm!

User avatar
Cornelius
Posts: 155
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 4:54 am UTC
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Cornelius » Wed May 28, 2008 7:02 am UTC

I'm using Firefox 3 Beta 5, which comes with Fedora 9.
I'm using 62.5 MiB of RAM, out of 1010.3 MiB of RAM on my computer.
THE SIEVE IS CLOSED, PEOPLE.

My entire system uses less than half of my total RAM for music, Firefox, a chat client, and all my other stuff.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby b.i.o » Thu May 29, 2008 7:52 pm UTC

wing wrote:It *STILL* leaks memory like a sieve.

45 minutes ago, I killed Firefox because it was consuming 600mb of RAM and my system was on the verge of entering that horrible locked-to-death state that Linux gets in when swap and RAM both hit 100% utilization. Restarted it with the same FOUR tabs, and it was consuming 300mb (for FOUR tabs with no animation or anything on them...)

Right now, it's back to consuming 531mb. I'll have to kill it again in a little bit.


What the hell do you have open that's causing it to use so much memory!?

I've only managed to get over 200mb a few times--and that was with some serious tabbing going on.

I've only had FF3 RC1 crash twice--both on Facebook. RC1 is a gigantic improvement over Beta 5 in that regard.

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby ash.gti » Fri May 30, 2008 1:27 am UTC

b.i.o wrote:I've only had FF3 RC1 crash twice--both on Facebook. RC1 is a gigantic improvement over Beta 5 in that regard.


/Offtopic
Facebooks new chat functionality has apparently caused a number of browsers to crash. It crashed my Opera and Webkit developer's builds.
# drinks WAY to much espresso

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Amnesiasoft » Fri May 30, 2008 3:11 am UTC

ash.gti wrote:Facebooks new chat functionality has apparently caused a number of browsers to crash. It crashed my Opera and Webkit developer's builds.

So, basically, Facebook chat sucks.

User avatar
wing
the /b/slayer
Posts: 1876
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 5:56 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby wing » Fri May 30, 2008 9:45 am UTC

It also likes to deadlock (not crash) when I close tabs - probably because the memory management is so fucking broken. (It should be noted that I use 64bit builds and as such am likely to get boned by some random doesn't-know-enough developer's platform-dependent code)
I AM A SEXY, SHOELESS GOD OF WAR!
Akula wrote:Our team has turned into this hate-fueled juggernaut of profit. It's goddamn wonderful.

User avatar
kovan
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby kovan » Fri May 30, 2008 1:28 pm UTC

I really hate the new address bar dropdown. What was wrong with the dropdown list?

This new one looks like some kind of Web 2.0 AJAX abortion.

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Xbehave » Sun Jun 01, 2008 11:57 am UTC

kovan wrote:I really hate the new address bar dropdown. What was wrong with the dropdown list?

This new one looks like some kind of Web 2.0 AJAX abortion.

i like it but i can be turned of.
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

Threechtwo
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:12 am UTC
Location: City of York 2.0
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Threechtwo » Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:41 pm UTC

I'm just going to wait until the official release. I have gobs of RAM, so the memory issue doesn't bother me much. I'd use Safari, but I love the extensions I have and couldn't do without some of them.

By the way, they're trying to set a record for most downloads of a piece of software when it launches. You can pledge to download it if you want.

Xbehave
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:45 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Xbehave » Mon Jun 02, 2008 8:17 am UTC

Xbehave wrote:edit: oh and i came that im not sure what the ubuntu team have done but on kubuntu gutsy the firefox tar was stable & looked nice, on hardy i have the choice of it looking nice and being unstable (the repo version, is crashing without flash) or being ugly (the tar version falls back to gtk).

Figured this one out, i always used the 32bit firefox, because it was easier with plugins ect, now im torn because i have replaced my firefox-killer button with a plugin killer, but on the minus side firefox as a whole is slightly less stable (i guess 64 bit builds arnt as well tested)
GENERATION 20: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

pegasos989
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 7:14 am UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby pegasos989 » Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:46 pm UTC

The download record will fail miserably, me thinks. Why? Because on many linux distributions the new versions already have FF3 Beta something or RC something. The people on these will feel less urge to update and some might even get them from repositories (automated downloading can't count or FF will never beat windows update). Even on non-linux, a lot of the early adopters already have some quite new-ish version... That should hamper downloading amounts a lot. And how do they even count it? I'm sure many will download it from different mirrors all around the world, bit torrent or something similar that will propably not get counted. This is a lot more common on early firefox adopters than with many other softwares.


Now, when it comes to FF3... I love it. Been using since Beta 2 I think. While I don't like a few things, some others help a lot. For example, now I can type "XKCD" in the address bar and it wont' suggest just addresses starting with it but any address including it, ranked by how often I've chosen that one, so forums.xkcd is quite close to the top. I don't understand how I was able to live before that ability. Javascript executes a lot faster, which is a great bonus on some sites.

What I don't like? Well, the outlook. The default font is thinner. From a web developer's point of view, this can be a pain in the ass with some sites, really.



But now... To Internet Explorer 8 (Beta 1 is out, Beta 2 soon to come)... THAT is the real pain in the ass. If you make websites, just use it to test if your site works properly with FF2, FF3, IE6, IE7, IE8, Safari and Opera... There are too many...

Random832
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Random832 » Wed Jun 04, 2008 8:43 pm UTC

crp wrote: return "Paula Bean! Brilliant!"; //wtf is a stack?


You spelled "Brillant" wrong.

User avatar
ash.gti
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 1:18 am UTC
Location: Probably a coffee shop.

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby ash.gti » Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:25 pm UTC

pegasos989 wrote:But now... To Internet Explorer 8 (Beta 1 is out, Beta 2 soon to come)... THAT is the real pain in the ass. If you make websites, just use it to test if your site works properly with FF2, FF3, IE6, IE7, IE8, Safari and Opera... There are too many...


At my office we will drop FF2 support once FF3 is fully released, and we are dropping IE6 support when IE8 is released. Unless our contract says otherwise we don't develop for old browsers.
# drinks WAY to much espresso

User avatar
Xanthir
My HERO!!!
Posts: 5426
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:49 am UTC
Location: The Googleplex
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Xanthir » Mon Jun 09, 2008 1:27 am UTC

Bleh, IE6 is still holding roughly 30% marketshare, so I'll still be making sites (barely) presentable in it for a while. Luckily none of my bosses use it or have sympathy for people who do, so I have free reign to juryrig my sites into something vaguely usable without Marketing jumping all over my back.

What annoys me the most is that, while our traffic stats show FF use on the uptake, it appears to be people moving from IE7 to FF. IE6 numbers have been stable the entire time we've had stats that record that sort of stuff.

Oh well. One of the good things about Vista is that it'll kill IE6 as people move off of XP.

A good thing about FF (and the non-IE browsers in general) is that you *can* afford to drop support for them fairly quickly. Upgrades move through the system so fast that you see only a tiny percentage of people on the old stuff a year later.
(defun fibs (n &optional (a 1) (b 1)) (take n (unfold '+ a b)))

recurve boy
Posts: 353
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 5:48 am UTC
Location: Sydney Australia
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby recurve boy » Thu Jun 12, 2008 9:10 am UTC

Threechtwo wrote:I'm just going to wait until the official release. I have gobs of RAM, so the memory issue doesn't bother me much. I'd use Safari, but I love the extensions I have and couldn't do without some of them.

By the way, they're trying to set a record for most downloads of a piece of software when it launches. You can pledge to download it if you want.


FF3 is pretty good. I've not had too many problems. Just some JS heavy sites have broken behaviour. But lots of this seems to be fixed with the latest RCs.

The real test will be SquirelFish vs Tamarin.

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby turnwrite » Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:28 pm UTC

The RAM problem had better be fixed or I'm switching to Camino. Seriously.
"How fortunate are you and I.."

Random832
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Random832 » Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:43 pm UTC

So... what if I don't want a "forward" button next to the "back" button?

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby turnwrite » Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:09 pm UTC

Random832 wrote:So... what if I don't want a "forward" button next to the "back" button?


And why is the "back" button so freakin' much bigger than the "forward" button in the default theme? Is that someone's idea of not ugly?
"How fortunate are you and I.."

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby EvanED » Sun Jun 15, 2008 10:16 pm UTC

turnwrite wrote:And why is the "back" button so freakin' much bigger than the "forward" button in the default theme? Is that someone's idea of not ugly?

The fact that the back button is almost certainly used more is a good reason.

(Actually it *has* to be used more, since the forward button doesn't do anything if you haven't hit back first. So every forward use corresponds to a back use, and there are many back uses left unpaired.)

User avatar
turnwrite
Posts: 54
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:16 am UTC
Location: Oh, you know. Here.

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby turnwrite » Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:12 am UTC

Yes, yes, I understand that. My point is that this

Image

looks a whole lot sleeker than this

Image

and in practice really isn't any less usable.

Ah well, at least it's easily customizable. To each his own.
"How fortunate are you and I.."

Random832
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Random832 » Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:39 am UTC

Yeah, but I'd really honestly rather have this:
back_mac.png
back_mac.png (1.7 KiB) Viewed 8266 times

Or, in my case, more like this:
back_win.png
back_win.png (2.38 KiB) Viewed 8271 times

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Amnesiasoft » Mon Jun 16, 2008 2:59 am UTC

Back...forward...buttons?
Couldn't you just use one of those fancy mice with 800gajillion buttons and map one to each function?

or just use mouse gestures >_>

TheGZeus
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 3:20 pm UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby TheGZeus » Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:20 am UTC

Amnesiasoft wrote:Back...forward...buttons?
Couldn't you just use one of those fancy mice with 800gajillion buttons and map one to each function?

or just use mouse gestures >_>

At that point you could use Conkeror, but that's another thing altogether.
I have nothing more to say on the actual topic at hand, so I'll get myself gone.

User avatar
enk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:20 am UTC
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby enk » Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:24 am UTC

Amnesiasoft wrote:Back...forward...buttons?
Couldn't you just use one of those fancy mice with 800gajillion buttons and map one to each function?

or just use mouse gestures >_>


That doesn't handle the case where you want to jump many history steps at once.

But for the usual back/forward stuff, GUI buttonage is a poor choice.
phlip wrote:Ha HA! Recycled emacs jokes.

User avatar
Amnesiasoft
Posts: 2573
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 4:28 am UTC
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Amnesiasoft » Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:45 am UTC

enk wrote:That doesn't handle the case where you want to jump many history steps at once.

Work those flabby thumbs!

User avatar
enk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:20 am UTC
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby enk » Mon Jun 16, 2008 6:49 am UTC

Amnesiasoft wrote:
enk wrote:That doesn't handle the case where you want to jump many history steps at once.

Work those flabby thumbs!


Sometimes you specifically want to jump past several pages at once, for example if they involve http requests you don't want to send again.
phlip wrote:Ha HA! Recycled emacs jokes.

Random832
Posts: 2525
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby Random832 » Mon Jun 16, 2008 12:52 pm UTC

enk wrote:
Amnesiasoft wrote:
enk wrote:That doesn't handle the case where you want to jump many history steps at once.

Work those flabby thumbs!


Sometimes you specifically want to jump past several pages at once, for example if they involve http requests you don't want to send again.


Well, there is a history menu in the menu bar - that's more "list of the last N pages you've visited in any window" than "sequence of pages for this tab" though.

User avatar
enk
Posts: 754
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 12:20 am UTC
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Contact:

Re: Firefox 3.0

Postby enk » Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:08 pm UTC

Yeah, it's not the same.

But if you know the count, you can just type in the address bar:

Code: Select all

javascript:history.go(-3);


8)
phlip wrote:Ha HA! Recycled emacs jokes.


Return to “Religious Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests