Mozilla Firefox 6.0 - Final

[kachimasu]

I'm looking foward for Firefox 7.

Firefox 6 is little bit better than previous version.

[BetaAddict]

Thank you, cap. I know it. But indeed they (at least media) promised to speed up development. And development speed was always been Mozilla's large problem.

So in other way - no matter if there are no new functions they still bumping major version.

Realistically, there will always be new functions and improvements, even if they are considered minor to whatever philosophy of software development you hold. So you simply will not see them sit for 6 weeks and not add a single feature. I'll wait for the day you prove me wrong.

I'm looking foward for Firefox 7.

Firefox 6 is little bit better than previous version.

Oh yeah, baby. :woot:

Already have been using Aurora FF7 for a few weeks now. They have done a superb job with reducing memory footprint and improving performance, hasn't crashed once.

[Allan]

Just one damn time, I'd like Firefox to use their brains - when I click to open a new tab, I want my home page to show. New Tab Homepage isn't working in 6.0, and I'll have to remember how I 'hacked' it for 5.0 :s.

EDIT: for Fx 6.0 try NewTab URL

[Samurizer]

Why on earth is everyone messing with ridiculously convoluted ways to deal with extension compatibility?

Just install this and be done with it.

[ViperAFK]

Why on earth is everyone messing with ridiculously convoluted ways to deal with extension compatibility?

Just install this and be done with it.

The guy I was replying to tried that extension and it wasn't working for him.

Development, schelopment. Nothing has changed. This speed-up is an illusion. Like most marketing tricks, it will have people firmly believing into their ability to predict the future.

In no known software development process under the sun versioning system has not, does not, must not and will not prohibit, restrict, prevent, even as little as just delay features done according to the project schedule being delivered to the end users in any way. Any kind of a release is ultimately the decision of the management of the project. End of story, big, fat period.

Dude, they didn't just change the version numbering, they ARE releasing new versions, with new features more often. Of course it doesn't necessarily mean the overall development is "faster", but the changes themselves do make it to the users faster (in smaller increments). How hard is that to understand? Before all the minor releases were security/bugfix only, now every release does usually have new features in addition to bug/security fixes. The new schedule is simply time based (every six weeks).

What is with people putting so much importance on the goddamn numbers themselves? Extension compatibility is a problem, but mozilla is working on that, and disabling compatibility checking works fine most of the time. Most extensions don't actually break.

Bitching about version numbers is the very definition of making a mountain out of a molehill.

[Scorbing]

Mozilla Firefox 6.0 - Final

Firefox 6 - faster, more secure, easier to use and sporting a new look, this latest Firefox release sets a new standard for web browser innovation. Firefox is small, fast and easy to use, and offers many advantages over other web browsers, such as the tabbed browsing and the ability to block pop-up windows. View Web pages way faster, using less of your computer?s memory. Take Firefox with you wherever you go. Synchronize your browsing across multiple devices. Forget clunky URLs ? find the sites you love in seconds. Firefox has the most ways to customize your online experience specifically for the way you use the web. It is built with you in mind, so it?s easy and instinctive to use even the first time you try it. Thousands of Add-ons (little extras that augment Firefox to meet your unique needs) just waiting out there to help you do more, have more fun and be more creative online. Firefox keeps your personal info personal and your online interests away from the bad guys. Simply put, your security is our top priority.

Downloads:

Download Firefox 6.0 for Windows EN US

Other languages

All systems

Still don't see it on their official web site. They still have v5.01

[Phouchg]

Dude, they didn't just change the version numbering, they ARE releasing new versions, with new features more often. Of course it doesn't necessarily mean the overall development is "faster", but the changes themselves do make it to the users faster (in smaller increments). How hard is that to understand?

Is exactly what I'm trying to say - the numbers are irrelevant, arbitrary, they are unrelated to the features that would be added to the browser regardlesses (according to the project specification). The management has simply opted for more regular releases for the benefit of users (which is very good on it's own).

[ViperAFK]

Is exactly what I'm trying to say - the numbers are irrelevant, arbitrary, they are unrelated to the features that would be added to the browser regardlesses (according to the project specification). The management has simply opted for more regular releases for the benefit of users (which is very good).

Ahh, sorry misunderstood your other post :blush:

[sundayx Veteran]

Still waiting for Lion support i.e. scrolling and two finger back/forward. Actually no other browsers supports this still (except Safari of course).

[ViperAFK]

Still waiting for Lion support i.e. scrolling and two finger back/forward. Actually no other browsers supports this still (except Safari of course).

I think initial support for this has landed in aurora.

[Andrew Lyle Global Moderator]

apparently it's not final..

[Yorak]

apparently it's not final..

This has already been established, lol.

[7Dash8]

Is exactly what I'm trying to say - the numbers are irrelevant, arbitrary, they are unrelated to the features that would be added to the browser regardlesses (according to the project specification). The management has simply opted for more regular releases for the benefit of users (which is very good on it's own).

Wait, what? No the numbers aren't arbitrary in software development. Major changes use major version numbers, minor changes use minor increments. That's how it works for all software. That is until Google Chrome developers perverted this thinking and made us all expect two small changes and a flash update to be equal to a major version increment.

Why bother putting version numbers in front of the product at all then? Why not just call it Firefox instead of Firefox 6.0 if the numbers no longer have any meaning?

I'm all for faster development, but what is this stupidity from Chrome that's infected everything else? We should be getting Firefox 4.5 right about now, not Firefox 6.0, 7.0, 12.0 or Seventy Jillion point Oh at random intervals.

[alexalex]

What versions ? Firefox will be done with version numbers , just like Chrome doesn't display any version number on page (unless you check for it).

Remove version from About window

Asa Dotzler [:asa] 2011-08-13 19:27:38 PDT

When a user opens the About window for Firefox, the window should say something like "Firefox checked for updates 20 minutes ago, you are running the latest release."

It is important to say when the last check happened and ideally to do the check when the dialog is launched so that time is very near and to drop the version and simply tell them they're on the latest or not.

If a user needs the full version information they can get it from about:support.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678775

[7Dash8]

What versions ? Firefox will be done with version numbers , just like Chrome doesn't display any version number on page (unless you check for it).

And that's great, when Firefox actually does away with them. For now though, it's still heavily promoted as Firefox 6.0, 7.0, etc. It's obviously done for marketing purposes as it serves no other purpose.

[Phouchg]

Wait, what? No the numbers aren't arbitrary in software development. Major changes use major version numbers, minor changes use minor increments. That's how it works for all software. That is until Google Chrome developers perverted this thinking and made us all expect two small changes and a flash update to be equal to a major version increment.

Why bother putting version numbers in front of the product at all then? Why not just call it Firefox instead of Firefox 6.0 if the numbers no longer have any meaning?

I'm all for faster development, but what is this stupidity from Chrome that's infected everything else? We should be getting Firefox 4.5 right about now, not Firefox 6.0, 7.0, 12.0 or Seventy Jillion point Oh at random intervals.

I completely feel for you. My unimpressing speeches were all about Firefox only. I often express myself very unclearly, I know :laugh:

I sincerely hope that this "trend" it doesn't spread virally among the developers. Though, the world has been steadily going to hell long before Chrome appeared; it's just the most recent, most flashing example of this numbering f*ckup. A simple wiki lookup makes it evident that it's all for marketing purposes, it has been done many times before by major players.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_version#Keeping_up_with_competitors

To conclude - like George Carlin used to say - it's all bull*, folks, and it's bad for ya.

[ViperAFK]

Wait, what? No the numbers aren't arbitrary in software development. Major changes use major version numbers, minor changes use minor increments. That's how it works for all software. That is until Google Chrome developers perverted this thinking and made us all expect two small changes and a flash update to be equal to a major version increment.

Why bother putting version numbers in front of the product at all then? Why not just call it Firefox instead of Firefox 6.0 if the numbers no longer have any meaning?

I'm all for faster development, but what is this stupidity from Chrome that's infected everything else? We should be getting Firefox 4.5 right about now, not Firefox 6.0, 7.0, 12.0 or Seventy Jillion point Oh at random intervals.

It completely depends on a certain software's the development model what constitutes a "major" version number. All these complaints are getting more and more absurd. Its a damn number.

[7Dash8]

It completely depends on a certain software's the development model what constitutes a "major" version number. All these complaints are getting more and more absurd. Its a damn number.

Please stop spouting nonsense. It's not "just a number", it's meant to be a descriptive variable that indicates how far along the software has progressed. It's also used to inform users, for things like version compatibility.

Otherwise why the hell were version numbers and names introduced in the first place? Why not just call Windows "Windows", and let the users figure out whether something is compatible with XP Vista or 7 on their own?

If Firefox 6.0 is just "Firefox", can you tell me then which extensions and themes will work with it at any time? What about people who aren't always connected to the internet and can't update to the latest build every second day, will they know their compatibility and security status once version numbers are gone?

So stop saying "it's just a number" to defend firefox... it has a meaning and that meaning has gone down the crapper because of idiot fanboys and trendy developers.

[ViperAFK]

Please stop spouting nonsense. It's not "just a number", it's meant to be a descriptive variable that indicates how far along the software has progressed. It's also used to inform users, for things like version compatibility.

Otherwise why the hell were version numbers and names introduced in the first place? Why not just call Windows "Windows", and let the users figure out whether something is compatible with XP Vista or 7 on their own?

If Firefox 6.0 is just "Firefox", can you tell me then which extensions and themes will work with it at any time? What about people who aren't always connected to the internet and can't update to the latest build every second day, will they know their compatibility and security status once version numbers are gone?

So stop saying "it's just a number" to defend firefox... it has a meaning and that meaning has gone down the crapper because of idiot fanboys and trendy developers.

It updates every two months, not every second day, that point is completely exaggerated. I am saying with the time-basesd release cycle "major" and "minor" are totally irrelevant so stop trying to apply them. Square peg, round hole buddy. The version number can still be used to determine compatibility.

[Kirkburn]

(Further to ViperAFK's points...) To the end user, what matters is that they're on the latest version, and their stuff works. Removing emphasis on version numbers has little effect on that. They're obviously not going to entirely remove versioning.

[dnast]

And that's great, when Firefox actually does away with them. For now though, it's still heavily promoted as Firefox 6.0, 7.0, etc. It's obviously done for marketing purposes as it serves no other purpose.

Hmm....I don't see any mention of Firefox 6 (or any other version) on their main website.

[7Dash8]

Hmm....I don't see any mention of Firefox 6 (or any other version) on their main website.

See my reply here:

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1019218-new-firefox-6-belies-rapid-release-complaints/page__st__45__p__594242422#entry594242422

Basically they tried accelerated release for marketing purposes, saw it fail, now they're "doing away with version numbers". Doesn't make any sense. Why did they bother jacking up the numbers in the first place if it wasn't for marketing purposes? Does it help their developers or the beta testers that major increments come more quickly now? It was pretty obviously a marketing ploy and they're backpeddling after the feedback they got.

Also have a search around the net - everyone except mozilla is calling it Firefox 6.0 not "the latest version of firefox". That's because in the tech world version numbers actually do matter and have some meaning, even for the average user. Imagine Microsoft trying to tell users to switch from IE6 to IE9 without using version numbers as a reference... how would they do it? Version numbers matter.

[ViperAFK]

See my reply here:

https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1019218-new-firefox-6-belies-rapid-release-complaints/page__st__45__p__594242422#entry594242422

Basically they tried accelerated release for marketing purposes, saw it fail, now they're "doing away with version numbers". Doesn't make any sense. Why did they bother jacking up the numbers in the first place if it wasn't for marketing purposes?

Because they weren't trying to "jack up the user numbers". They overhauled the release cycle for the benefit of the users.

[7Dash8]

Because they weren't trying to "jack up the user numbers". They overhauled the release cycle for the benefit of the users.

Obviously this is pointless since you seem to have some sort of problem following logic.

There's no reason why you can't accelerate the release cycle but maintain sensible version numbers which are descriptive and follow the standard.

Think about my example about IE6 to IE9, I included it for a reason. XP users can't update to IE9, they can only update to IE8. So if Microsoft dropped version numbering for IE, they couldn't tell all Windows users to update to the "latest version of Internet Explorer", because for XP users it's IE8, for Vista and 7 users its IE9. So for one last time: Version numbers matter. They are descriptive, there is a widely recognized standard, and yes, users do know about and care about version numbers.

But obviously some people don't have the comprehension skills to consider all the possibilities and will blindly follow the Mozilla and Chrome line. End of conversation.

[dnast]

With them putting out new releases every six weeks there won't really be any more major versions. If they went the route of 4.1, 4.2, etc. like most people are advocating, the extensions would still break. They only pass compatibility checks for security and stability updates i.e. 4.0.1 and the like.

Also, with these incremental updates, when do you decide to label one of them 5.0?

That being said, I still see people's gripes with Firefox's new versioning system. I'm mostly playing devil's advocate. It doesn't matter to me either way, personally.