Firefox 7 (And Its Improved Memory Usage) Hits Beta Channel

13

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Talcum X

I just found out 6.0 was out.  I still run 3.6 as 4.0 didn't display several websites correctly.  I was thinking 4.1 was a current version.  I haven't been keeping up with the tech news as of late...

avatar

grayscale00

Still waiting for the day when people just stop complaining about version numbers and learn about the difference between firefox's channels. Stable FX6 users whining when an article about Nightly 9.0, or Beta 7.0 can get annoying.

avatar

DogPatch1149

Tackling the memory leak problem?  Well, you know what they say...seventh time's the charm.

avatar

NineRaven

Firefox must be working with the Fedora development team the way they've been cranking these out.

avatar

CHR15x94

Cool, been looking forward to FF7. Firefox has always been a memory hog and a tad slower than other browsers, hope this helps.

As for people complaining about constant releases, I'd blame Google as much as Mozilla for the decision, as well as the many average users who seem to think new version number = big changes. Mozilla was sort of forced into it. It was either join Google's rapid release club, or look irrelevant.

Not saying I like it, but I don't blame them for making the decision.

avatar

Holly Golightly

I don't even know which version of FireFox I am using now. Last time I remembered... I installed FireFox5... But I think it somehow updated on its own. Not 100% sure. I hope that FireFox gets its act together on the updating... Because all of these releases are getting annoying. They should be more secure like Internet Explorer. Releasing a new version every now and then... Not all the time like Google. Work out some of the kinks first.

avatar

ferariman

They should be more secure like Internet Explorer

 

 

 

does that say what i think it says???

 

avatar

Holly Golightly

Well, according to several recent articles, yes, Internet Explorer is the safest browser in the market right now. Because they do not have rapid release, they are able to better observe the flaws, and have the time to correct these problems, making a more secure, long term release. Which in a way, is better. FireFox should be more like FireFox... And less like Chrome. 

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/internet_explorer_9%E2%80%99s_new_malware_blocking_features_leave_competition_dust

avatar

thetechchild

Firstly, if you're using Windows in the first place, you have to understand that you're sitting on top of one of the worst possible platforms with regards to security. Secondly, IE9 uses "URL-based filtering", meaning warnings based on where you're going. This can be easily accomplished in any other browser using addons like Web of Trust. Chrome's sandbox, while not absolutely perfect, is a powerful security feature that other browsers would be hard-pressed to beat. Moreover, both FF and Chrome *could* have *better* security, not worse, if they utilized rapid release properly.

The only difference between conventional release cycles and rapid releases is that rapid releases update more often, and so can respond to bugs faster or release minor features immediately. Firefox's issue right now is addon compatibility and the update process ; Chrome, for instance, can update simply by restarting (without any interaction required), and this almost never breaks any addons.

avatar

cownaetion

"The only difference between conventional release cycles and rapid releases is that rapid releases update more often, and so can respond to bugs faster or release minor features immediately"

Microsoft has their weekly updates, and can push updates out to fix bugs faster than Mozilla can with their major releases (according to your statement of FF's major releases).

"Firstly, if you're using Windows in the first place, you have to understand that you're sitting on top of one of the worst possible platforms with regards to security."

Wrong. Technically it is OSX that has the most vulnerabilities, Windows is just a bigger target.

"Moreover, both FF and Chrome *could* have *better* security, not worse, if they utilized rapid release properly."

The original commenter stated that it IS more secure, and you just solidified that fact. 'could have' does not mean it is. Mozilla is going down hill, and after following this browser's lineage since Netscape 3, it is sad to see.

avatar

tornato7

I think this rapid release schedule is just a way to stay in the news more. Previously you would hear about firefox evey couple of months but now everyone's talking about it every day.

avatar

I_pwn_newbz86

Call of Firefox: Modern Browser 3

avatar

poee

^LMAO

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.