Mozilla Releases Firefox 3 Beta 4 356
Somecallmechief writes "Firefox 3 Beta 4 is now available for download. This is the twelfth developer milestone focused on testing the core functionality provided by many new features and changes to the platform scheduled for Firefox 3. Ongoing planning for Firefox 3 can be followed at the Firefox 3 Planning Center, as well as in mozilla.dev.planning and on irc.mozilla.org in #granparadiso."
And now, for the two burning questions: (Score:0, Interesting)
Second: What does it say about the Mozilla dev team's priorities that it's even possible that IE might beat Firefox to this punch?
Been using it for 2 days now OSX (Score:5, Interesting)
First question (Score:5, Interesting)
what about wmode??????? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:first memory leak post (Score:5, Interesting)
New Address Bar (Score:3, Interesting)
Some docs say to tweak the 'browser.urlbar.richResults' setting, which I have done and it has had zero effect (FF3 Beta 3). Any ideas?
Re:Same bugs? (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate that when you click "view source", it reloads the page. I loagged this and was told that storing the page's source was a waste of memory. Forget that no other browser behaves that way. Forget that it's about 10k in the 200mb of ram used. Forget that it can be cached to disk.
I was also told that viewing the source made me a tiny minority and that if I wanted the feature I should go code it myself. Coz, y'know, viewing source is *such* a niche task. Only the tiny group of people with the very obscure jobs called "web developers" do it.
Idiots.
For those interested in performance numbers (Score:5, Interesting)
Not bad.
Re:is it just me (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Toolbar UI Changes? (Score:-1, Interesting)
I can understand the logic from people placing Preferences there, although it is flawed (because you can edit preferences there; since when do menus make full sentences? Although I'd like to see a menu item "Me" in the help section). But add-ons? You don't edit add-ons (well, regular users don't). They manage them.
Would you agree to keep it in the Tools menu if it had been called Add-on Manager instead of Add-ons?
Re:Why do you need it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, I'm running a 64-bit OS. I do have a chrooted 32-bit environment for my online banking, but keeping the chrooted environment up-to-date is a hassle.
If you think that *memory* is the sole raison d'etre for 64-bit, you are mistaken. AMD64 is a new instruction set with many advantages. In fact, almost everything I run is 10-70% faster in 64-bit and this has nothing to do with memory limits.
Re:New Address Bar (Score:3, Interesting)
Hint to the devs: I already have a search field, its right next to the address bar. I can live with that.
Re:New Address Bar (Score:3, Interesting)
I suggested some kind of tag for the searching, e.g. "s: slashdot" searches for slashdot in URL, title, etc, where as "slashdot" uses old-style auto-complete but they wouldn't have any of it.
Unfortunately I think it's also quite deeply buried in the code, so it might not be too easy to replace the functionality.
I will point out, though, that there have been times when I've used it to find a page that I could remember part of the title of. I just think it's terrible design to force such potentially inconsistent results ("addresses starting with what is typed" versus "anything - page or bookmark - with the typed characters anywhere within it, including session IDs") with no way of doing a "just auto-complete" behaviour.
Re:first memory leak post (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:New Address Bar (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know whether I like it yet (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm also running the latest beta. (Score:5, Interesting)
For those of you on Windows who don't want to hose your registry with multiple Firefox installs, I highly recommend the portable version. In fact, for 20 different reasons I recommend the portable version of not only Firefox, but all your Windows apps:
http://portableapps.com/news/2008-03-11_-_firefox_portable_3_beta_4 [portableapps.com]
It's not a real package management system, but it beats the hell out of installing and reinstalling tons of crap in Windows. I think in many ways it also beats most Linux package managers I've dealt with.
I also want to submit a complaint about a lack of x64 apps in general. There is still no Skype for 64 bit Linux, for example, and that's just plain bad form.
Keep rocking Mozilla! Keep rocking FOSS! Keep rocking portableapps.com!
rhY
Re:New Address Bar (Score:2, Interesting)
a) I don't like a long list of my personal bookmarks appearing whenever I start typing a URL. I'd rather not have my personal bookmarks being put on displayed if/when others are looking at my screen. The fact that this is the default behaviour bothers me.
b) The results are too big/flashy - just a simple list (the url and title as separate/coloured fields on a single line would be sufficient)
c) Not enough (or not working) customization options. I should be able to give priority to how (let alone *if*) it searches my bookmarks and/or typed URLs. On Fedora 7, I installed ff3 from a fedora repository last night (this ff3 claims to be beta 5) - in about:config, 'browser.urlbar.maxRichResults' can be set to a smaller number (or zero) making the results much less obtrusive. However, the option that I really want is 'browser.urlbar.matchOnlyTyped', but it has no effect. I still see my bookmarks being listed. I can only assume this is a bug. In either case, these options should be much more prominently displayed in the preferences, and better options for tuning search results need to be provided.
That's pretty much it. What I find most ironic is that this thing with extra features can be disabled with an add-on that installs the old location bar...isn't this usually the other way around (install add-ons to *add* extra features)?
Re:first memory leak post (Score:3, Interesting)
You are correct that if you leave Firefox on a page with a banner ad that continually changes, and the ads cause Firefox to use more and more memory without limit, this is a problem. Give us the URL of a page we can visit to see the problem, and we can file a bug report.
Flash and JavaScript cannot really be limited to a certain amount of memory. For any limit that you try to impose, users are sure to encounter a site that needs more. In this case, I'm sure users would rather have the site work than refuse to allocate more memory. Above all, users want their browser to work properly on the sites they visit.
If you have a single tab open and load different pages in it, memory use cannot be only what is used for the last page opened. If you want to approach that ideal, you can disable the memory and bfcaches entirely. But still as memory is allocated and deallocated, memory fragmentation will cause memory use to creep up over time. There should be a maximum that is reached. If you can find a page or sequence of pages that cause Firefox to use an unbounded amount of memory as you keep loading them, please tell us what they are so we can file a bug report.
Re:first memory leak post (Score:3, Interesting)
Yesterday I had two pages opened - two! One was Unicode reference page and other was some forum, when suddenly my 512 MB ram was full and by the time I opened a terminal and ran vmstat, already 300 MB of swap was used! I killed firefox and restarted, with "Restore Session" and it happened again. Then I restarted it without restoring and entered the two URLs again, but everything went fine. Thus, I couldn't report it as a bug.
But it is just so amazing to see people saying something as a "fact"!!!