Options
Firefox 17
1saintly
Posts: 4,197
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Check out "What’s New" and "Known Issues" for this version of Firefox.
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/17.0/releasenotes/
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTIzMjM
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/17.0/releasenotes/
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTIzMjM
0
Comments
And the TMP developers aren't planning to do much about it until next January.
There's a "fix" involving installing the developer build of TMP, but in my opinion that's not a wise fix, expecting "ordinary" users to start going off release tracks and installing dev builds.
The death knell for this browser I think; the model of the too-frequent updates to the core browser and then the popular add-ons getting unpredictably locked out, for months rather than days, is just unworkable for ordinary users and especially corporates with strict version control going on in their desktop platforms.
I used Firefox right from the start when it was known as Firebird, but also started to loose faith in it from version 4 onwards and eventually switched to Chrome.
I believe Firefox now updates silently in the background like Chrome, rather than asking to download updates every few weeks so that's one annoyance sorted.
Not when it does it and causes your favourite addons to be disabled! Epic fail.
Firefox ESR will update every 10 months rather than every 6 weeks. Uses upstream versions 10 ... 17 ... 24 ... 31 , ie every 7th main version. After release, Firefox ESR will then only receive security and bug fixes but no new features until the next major landmark is released 10 months later.
I also think Firefox versions 4-11 were disappointing, but with 13 onwards they seem to have got their act together again.
Firefox 10 ESR was released in Jan 2012
Firefox 17 ESR was released in Nov 2012 and will be supported for about a year
Firefox 24 ESR is due out in Sept 2013
Yes, yes, that's not the point though. Especially if looking at it from the company / multi-PC deployment point of view rather than the individual at home only using one or two laptops/machines. Why should someone have to employ workarounds all the time, just to get reliable / expected functionality?
That's a start towards getting FF considered viable for company use again, but still looks like a sticking plaster applied on top of a totally bonkers version numbering and management strategy.
I think Google Chrome started the version numbering Olympics. Two years ago if you said you'd soon be benchmarking Firefox 17 against Chrome 23 people would think you were bonkers. Makes IE10 and Opera 12.11 numbering system look almost sane.
This doesn't yet work in Windows 7 when running as standard user.
I now use a variation of the Chrome browser - It's called Comodo Dragon. It's the same layout as chrome but with lots of added security and privacy features. It's fast too!
http://download.cnet.com/Comodo-Dragon/3000-2356_4-75119680.html
Quite a few people have made the switch to chrome.
same here. whenever I have to use FF now it seems so dated and behind with the times. it needs a complete overhaul.