Firefox 8.0 Released

by Andrew Cunningham on 11/8/2011 3:30 PM EST
POST A COMMENT

37 Comments

Back to Article

  • rstove02 - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    I remember when minor updates resulted in one of the numbers to the right of the first decimal point increasing. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    Blame Google and Chrome. :-\

    Welcome to Firefox 4.3.1, a.k.a. Firefox 8.
    Reply
  • Zoomer - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    So you're saying mozilla can't think for itself and do what it wants to? Reply
  • Belard - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    There have been more changes in Opera 11.50 ~ 11.52 than firefox 4.0~"8.0".

    And still, Opera kicks Chrome and ff in features and functionality... and stupid ff team went so far and copied the look of Opera to their browser, that is how lame they are are.

    An Awesome feature of Opera... ever close the wrong window with tabs? Or closed tabs hours ago and then realize you needed a tab? Opera allows you to easily bring it back.

    Tab Grouping rocks on Opera.
    Reply
  • bigboxes - Thursday, November 10, 2011 - link

    Put down the fanboi sauce. :eyeroll Reply
  • inighthawki - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    This is retarded. They are trying too hard to be chrome. I choose to use Firefox because it's NOT chrome, so stop trying to copy what they do! Reply
  • JHBoricua - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    What's retarded is ppl getting worked up over something so silly as a version number. I use Firefox simply because it works for me. I couldn't care less about the version scheme. Reply
  • CharonPDX - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    Except some uses (especially corporate environments and corporate-made web apps) have policies based on "major version" numbers.

    My company's web-managed app only has Firefox 3 as the latest approved Firefox. Our software gives nasty warnings if you're running too new a version. We only add new versions about once every six months to one year. And, of course, it requires testing. So we'll probably have FF6 (MAYBE 7) supported in our next release.

    It doesn't just inconvenience US, it annoys our customers. The fact that Firefox said "we don't care about the corporate user" doesn't matter.

    Hell, *I* like to use Firefox, but my own test environment bitches at me every time I try to. (Of course, we don't support Chrome at all.)
    Reply
  • locust76 - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Don't forget that every single add-on breaks and must be updated when they release a new major version... Reply
  • Obsoleet - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Get this and never have that problem again.
    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/add...
    Reply
  • jramskov - Thursday, November 10, 2011 - link

    You're fortunately wrong. All the add-ons hosted by Mozilla is being automatically checked for compatibility and the vast majority is validated as compatible. The developers of the add-ons that are incompatible are of course getting notified.

    Mostly it is only externally hosted plugins that gets disabled and that is a good thing! And yes, you can easily enable the add-ons again.
    Reply
  • iwod - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    Rapid Release Train Schedule were discussed heavily even before Google has released Chrome. Chrome was merely a catalyst that pushes Mozilla forward.

    And I believe we should ditch version number and use Year and Month instead.
    Reply
  • zorxd - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    I have been waiting for this since a while Reply
  • semo - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    Adding a new add-on policy should have been a .5 update. I was hoping for a final 64-bit version by version 8. Maybe in V12 in a couple of weeks. Reply
  • JNo - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    I understand the rationale behind the major vs .x release nomenclature but really, who cares? Progress is progress however they number it... Reply
  • mlcloud - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    The problem is, how do you name major releases? If they did Firefox 3 -> 4 all over again, how would it be named now? Or will they never do major releases? :< Reply
  • jordanclock - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    The point is they won't be doing major releases. Instead of waiting 6mo-1yr for a whole new version, they just keep adding new features and releasing them when they're ready. Reply
  • Spivonious - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Welcome to Agile. Quick releases means quick progress. I agree with the version numbers though. These have all been minor updates.

    Either ditch the versioning altogether, or go with a date-based version as Ubuntu has done.
    Reply
  • jramskov - Thursday, November 10, 2011 - link

    I guess that depends on how you look at it. I personally think that making the browser use 20% less memory is a big deal (included in release 7).

    I also think that automatically disabling externally hosted add-ons (which various companies has sneakily installed) is a pretty nice thing. Remember the Skype add-on that was responsible for many thousands of crashes?
    Reply
  • locust76 - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Progress is progress, true. But the numbering scheme breaks add-ons and destroys compatibility, because add-ons and websites are looking for explicit version numbers. You can't write an addon that's compatible with versions 4+, because you don't know what's coming in version 5.

    There are tons of addons that worked perfectly fine in 4.x but are now broken because:

    A) The developers have things to do other than writing software they don't get paid for

    B) Mozilla keeps jacking up the version numbers every month-and-a-half for piddly shit that deserve a 0.0.1 bump at most.
    Reply
  • Zoomer - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Wonder if they will still release security/bug fixes for the last "major" version number. Will be an interesting fiasco in the making if they didn't, since most people probably won't update major version every few weeks. Reply
  • jramskov - Thursday, November 10, 2011 - link

    You're wrong. See http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/11/the-... The graphs sadly doesn't load, but here's the relevant quote:

    "Firefox retains its clean split between people on the new, rapid release versions (4-9) and those on the old stable version (3.6). The rapid release users are upgrading fairly quickly, though the cut-overs are neither as rapid nor as automated as those of Chrome. However, almost a quarter of Firefox users are sticking with version 3.6. Until and unless Mozilla produces a stable edition with long-term support, this is unlikely to change."
    Reply
  • SquattingDog - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    This is a major issue. Most of my corporate and business clients cannot update past 4.0.1 because of this critical add-ons for their business that do not working on 7.x or 8.x.

    There was nothing wrong with the previous versioning scheme - when a new "major" version of Firefox was out, you knew that there were going to be some changes to the UI and a bunch of under-the-hood fixes/tweaks. Now it's just minor revisions respun with silly numbers that break add-ons.
    Reply
  • SquattingDog - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Argh, where's the edit option. "do no working..." should read "do not work in..." Reply
  • jramskov - Thursday, November 10, 2011 - link

    Add-ons hosted on Mozilla is automatically checked for compatibility and the vast majority needs no changes and are approved automatically. Reply
  • hackztor - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    try out pale moon. its based on firefox and they have a 64bit build. It holds me over until official 64bit from mozilla. Reply
  • Omega215D - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    There was an update schedule by Mozilla in which they are releasing 9 before year's end and it should sport 64-bit. I could've been mistaken and it might be in 10 but they stated it was to be released quickly after 8. Reply
  • Glibous - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    Apparently people feel Google is "doing more" because they have more frequent releases. I personally like the new release schedule Mozilla has set but I do agree that the changes presented in v8 do not warrant a full release. I'm betting we will appreciate what Mozilla has done in this version with the overall experience (under the hood improvements). If not i'll just trick myself and check HTML5test and hope there is a bigger overall score. Bigger number means better browser right? :/ Reply
  • AncientWisdom - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    I've been using BarTab Lite to disable the loading of a tab until I click it, and as a power user (that at any given time has tens of tabs open), it is a life saver. It is definitely awesome that they now include that functionality built in as well as the disable add ons by default. I hate it when those programs (sometime sneakily) install add ons on your browser (I usually remove them, but still), and it is good that they will be hidden away by default.

    In regards to the discussion about the version numbers, I couldn't care less, but no one can argue the fact that we are now getting little incremental updates in a speedy manner, way better than waiting months for new functionality IMO.
    I'm not 100% sure (could be an illusion, don't think so though) but I think we also end up getting more over the same period of time. Every release since 4 had features that I found useful.

    My 2c.
    Reply
  • Hrel - Tuesday, November 08, 2011 - link

    it's pretty frustrating. Model numbers should be indicative of the changes that have been made. Firefox 4 to firefox 8 nothing is that different. we really are on like 4.3.5. Not a big deal for random users. But any group, corperation, club, school, whatever, it's a fucking problem. Reply
  • locust76 - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    And with the release of Firefox 8.0, Mozilla has broken all addons once again. Reply
  • thestinkinggenius - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Try using the Compatibility Reporter Add-on, it allows you to install add-ons even if they are not reported to be compatible with new versions. All of my add-ons still work with the new version. Reply
  • jramskov - Thursday, November 10, 2011 - link

    Damn, you have now posted this 3 times in this thread. Seriously, get a life instead of posting blatently wrong information. Reply
  • jed22281 - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    Huh? They've rarely been in sync over the yrs.
    Tis not entirely feasible....
    Reply
  • Belard - Wednesday, November 09, 2011 - link

    I head that firefox 44.0 that is coming out next year is supposed to be the best ever! Reply
  • bigboxes - Thursday, November 10, 2011 - link

    Fanboi much? :eyeroll Reply
  • kandrews - Friday, November 11, 2011 - link

    I upgraded to mozilla firefox 8.0 x86 en-us and every time i try to open it is says" your computer must be restarted to complete a previous upgrade of Firefox. Do you wish to reboot now"? i have rebooted several times and still no good.. i cannot even uninstalll

    any ideas
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now