• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Firefox 5.0 released

This is the first release in Mozilla's new "rapid-release cycle". I'm OK with the idea itself, but I wish they wouldn't destroy the entire concept of major version numbers in the process. They might as well just call in Firefox 42 and increment that number by 3 with each release.

Google shares plenty of the blame for this, too, with Chrome.

/me sighs and shakes his head.
 
I agree, it does seem to defeat the purpose of version numbers if we're going to see Firefox 256 by the end of next year, it's a little silly :p

I'm all in favor of rapid release cycles though!
 
I heard that 6 will come out in August.

And I was using version 5 without knowing it before I checked the help menu. They should just call it 4.1 and ignore their version number envy. Not that it really matters.
 
They will eventually hide the version number altogether. It is the best direction for firefox.
 
Last edited:
Joey McGee said:
They will eventually hide the version number altogether. It is the best direction for firefox.
Click to expand...
That seems to be the opposite of what they are doing now, which is making leaps in the version number for publicity and to try to make their version number look better against the competition.
 
Is it impossible they are going with it for other reasons? It just makes things easier, that's what my friend at mozilla said earlier when I made him laugh with this question. I didn't bother asking him what that meant, because I suddenly just didn't care any more. :o But he did add that they would eventually hide the number before it got too ridiculous.

I understand that tech companies may do stuff like that sometimes but it doesn't add up here. Chrome is already at 13.

I also asked about the pcworld article and he just said meh, they've been saying stuff like that since we started, we can't get everything right for them.

I dunno, the tech stuff gets a little antagonistic for my taste :p
 
Last edited:
Alan said:
That seems to be the opposite of what they are doing now, which is making leaps in the version number for publicity and to try to make their version number look better against the competition.
Click to expand...


Which is completely nonsensical. Firefox chiseled away at IE 6's market share with versions 1, 2, and 3. No one is even aware of what version Chrome is on without looking it up.

I can see no reason for this and have not seen a reasonable explanation from anyone on the Mozilla side.

Joey McGee said:
Is it impossible they are going with it for other reasons?
Click to expand...


Of course not. Are they good reasons, though? I haven't seen any.

It just makes things easier, that's what my friend at mozilla said earlier when I made him laugh with this question.
Click to expand...


Ask your friend, "Easier for whom?" It's certainly not easier for all those extension developers who would either have to update their extension every 3 months just to indicate compatibility with the new "major" version, or set the maximum version compatibility some 3 major versions into the future, risking breakage down the line.

This would be less of an issue if they fixed their system for determining extension compatibility. Using a "maximum version" and increasing the major version number of Firefox every 3 months is going to [continue to] piss people off.
 
Last edited:
Alan said:
That seems to be the opposite of what they are doing now, which is making leaps in the version number for publicity and to try to make their version number look better against the competition.
Click to expand...
Maybe back in 1999 that would have been the story.

But, I doubt that is a motivation, today. Too much version-number-fatigue in the minds of users, for it to make any difference.
 
Mozilla Thunderbird is jumping straight from 3.1.x to version 5.

People at Mozilla are really wanting to get higher version numbers quickly for some reason, whatever that reason is.
 
Alan said:
Mozilla Thunderbird is jumping straight from 3.1.x to version 5.

People at Mozilla are really wanting to get higher version numbers quickly for some reason, whatever that reason is.
Click to expand...


I don't know much about the thinking behind this, but IMO it just looks very silly.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
Which is completely nonsensical. Firefox chiseled away at IE 6's market share with versions 1, 2, and 3. No one is even aware of what version Chrome is on without looking it up.

I can see no reason for this and have not seen a reasonable explanation from anyone on the Mozilla side.




Of course not. Are they good reasons, though? I haven't seen any.




Ask your friend, "Easier for whom?" It's certainly not easier for all those extension developers who would either have to update their extension every 3 months just to indicate compatibility with the new "major" version, or set the maximum version compatibility some 3 major versions into the future, risking breakage down the line.

This would be less of an issue if they fixed their system for determining extension compatibility. Using a "maximum version" and increasing the major version number of Firefox every 3 months is going to [continue to] piss people off.
Click to expand...

That is supposedly in the works.
 
I recently upgraded to v5 and when I bring up the History, I can't get it to sort by folders. All it shows is a long list of all the individual pages. Is there any way to get it to show just the folders of the websites, instead of pages?

Steve S
 
New Firefox add-on: Version Clock. Displays the changing version numbers in real time, just like the storage space ticker on the Gmail home page.

It won't be long before Firefox updates as often as No-Script.
 
Last edited:
Another Mozilla project, the Thunderbird email client jumped to version 5.0 today (or maybe yesterday).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom