I realised yesterday that "yield" in Python (and I guess javascript) is kind of a baby continuation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation). It can be used to create coroutines and turn async code into sync (looking) code. Really powerful.
Anyone interested should learn what continuations are (in Scheme).
This property of ES6 generators, along with Promises, is what enables task.js [0] If you're interested in concurrency patterns for JS, you need to check it out.
Does this mean that we can use Task.js in ordinary web pages now?
A good resource for this is the control operations chapter [0] in Programming Languages: Application and Interpretation [1]. It start off with some motivation, then covers generators and continuations, with mention of threads and coroutines. The base motivation and most code is for an interpreter implementation, but it isn't impossible to follow if you're not familiar with such material.
I never got the point of generators until I saw Koa.js
I always thought generators were merely a way of making convoluted iterators, but when I realized that you can put your application logic inside a generator, in my head, it immediately turned it into a "how did I ever code without this before" kind of feature.
I just hope other browsers (especially IE) follow suit in implementing this feature
We (Bloomberg) sponsored Andy Wingo (Igalia) to do the work implementing the new generators in both V8 & SM in parallel, so the world would essentially get them in Chrome (+ Node, Opera) and Firefox at roughly the same time.
We don't use JSC here, so I couldn't make a good case for extending the work to cover Safari as well. Anyone wanting to help implement them in JSC has two good blueprints to work from.
I reached out to the IE team back when Andy was still early in the implementation and let them know what we were doing and what the release timeframe was in the hopes that it would help prioritize generators on their side, but I have yet to hear a peep about IE support.
Some time ago I was a Firefox user. Then Chrome came out and I first started using it for free-time browsing, while still developing on Firefox. Later, I decided to fully migrate to Chrome.
I've decided to change it again, so I'm going to give Firefox a try during this month. For now, it looks really nice, performance seems to be quite good and the feeling of getting at least a small part of my digital life away from Google feels nice as well.
Tomorrow I'll be trying out the Firefox' developer tools.
I'd be really happy if Firefox convinced me to stay, as I really love what Mozilla is doing for the web community.
>I'd be really happy if Firefox convinced me to stay, as I really love what Mozilla is doing for the web community.
If you love what they are doing then I urge you to stick with Firefox in the future. Firefox is the only major browser that is free software. Chrome is proprietary and sends a lot of your data to Google. Google entices a lot of programmers with their developer tools, but it's not worth trading freedom for.
Well, davexunit did say "Firefox is the only major browser that is free software". Chromium is arguably a very minor browser.
Besides, if you would like take a tiny amount of market share from Google (thereby weakening their ability to set standards such as the W3C's "EME" DRM, which they support), you know that using Firefox is the right thing to do.
It also shows Google that you're not buying into their free/nonfree paradigm that discourages developers from making apps/extensions not approved by Google's stores.
Also, Chromium OS, as distributed by Google, is not free of surveillance mechanisms such as the omnibar. You'd first have to audit, hunt and remove these features, or trust a third party to do this job for you.
Besides, in my experience, there are fewer good FOSS extensions in Chromium, in particular anti-surveillance ones, but that depends on what extensions you want.
Chromium isn't a "minor brower", it is Chrome. Nearly all the code that does any real work is developed as part of Chromium, google just throw a few patches on top to make Chrome.
Chromium is packaged in Ubuntu and Debian. It's not packaged in Fedora because Chromium forked a half-dozen libraries [instead of pushing changes upstream](http://ostatic.com/blog/making-projects-easier-to-package-wh...). Of course, none of these are 'fully free' distros.
I think you'll be quite impressed with Firefox's developer tools again. I've been more and more unhappy with Chrome's tools, mostly the subtle changes of not having filters and things so readily available anymore. The Firefox tools are quite slick though. I don't even use Firebug anymore.
So glad I am not the only one noticing the filter change. That additional click to display the filtering options that Chrome introduced really made me start using FF more and more for work.
I think this dumbing-down approach Google is doing with all their apps and websites will only alienate more and more professionals out of using their platform.
(Chrome DevTools team here). We cleaned up the filtering as it was totally inconsistent across all panels. So now it introduces one more click, but felt like generally that extra click was OK. I think we can still improve the UX, however. Which panels do you most use filters on (and for what?) Console, Network?
Hey Paul,
I'm trapped on Chromium-30.0.1599.101 (same goes for similar Chrome version) because DevTools freeze for ~3 minutes after GWT's SuperDevMode recompilation on newer Chrome/Chromium. There is huge regression in performance after Chromium 32.x.xxxx.xxx. Chromium-30.0.1599.101 is the latest version without this problem on my distro.
I've tried to report this but you guys don't have proper bug tracker only form in the about menu.
99% of the time I just want XHR, so this change added an extra click every time I open dev tools to look at the Network panel (also this step can be laggy if you're in development and you have hundreds of separate requests for your scripts/stylesheets, which I never care about). So I could actually be in favour of hiding away the filters if I could just set a default filter? Or if it just remembered my last selection?
The problems I've been having in Firefox are with badly behaved apps - with memory leaks and stuff. Firefox manages memory better than Chrome, but when a tab leaks it can freeze the whole browser. Still, this happens rarely enough that it isn't an issue for me, plus Firefox is much better at keeping many tabs open. I did disable Flash and now I have to "click to play" - but I'm doing the same thing in Chrome too, because fuck Flash.
I feel like Chrome is better when rendering stuff - like we've got this plotted graph in our app's admin, rendered with Javascript and I believe HTML5 Canvas or something, with too many points on it and Firefox can't handle the rendering, it chokes, whereas Chrome can do it. On the other hand, I feel like Firefox is snappier in general.
I don't even want process per tab, I'd be happy with something much simpler: Tell me which tab is causing Firefox to use 100% CPU! This happens fairly frequently with lots of tabs open (I guess I use a lot of websites with really bad javascript) and the only recourse is to either quit Firefox entirely and re-open it, or play a guessing game.
Firefox will stop any client side JavaScript after 5-6s and ask whether you want to keep running the slow running script or not. If will even change to that tab before prompting you. Isn't that what you just described?
Having just one gigabyte of physical RAM, I run Firefox with a 512M rlimit (the OpenBSD default), as I have to reserve some space for other software too (and swap is painfully slow on the spinning disk).
As far as browsing habits go, I do usually have quite a few tabs open (currently I've got 38, though they're not all loaded; I don't think I often go much over this often). None are pinned. Video is disabled, and I've got no flash or plugins.
I've got three extensions (noscript, https-everywhere, duckduckgo plus). I tend to run with scripts disabled and this helps a lot with memory pressure. Sometimes I make the mistake of thinking I need to enable javascript for something (hi Google), and that's usually when memory usage skyrockets and the thing dumps core :-) But eventually it'll happen even if I don't allow any scripts.
This is getting close to the limit of my expertise. What resource is bumping into it's system limit? Can you back up that answer with a stack trace or core dump? If so, would you mind filing a bug in our bug tracker? [0] It looks like if you put [MemShrink] in the Whiteboard field, the memshrink team should pick it up. If not, you could jump in #memshrink in our IRC server, irc.mozilla.org, and let someone there know. [1]
You can ping me directly on irc, too. My handle is a literal new line character (which _is_ a valid nick), and I'd be happy to help you get the bug filed if you run into any issues. Once you have a bugzilla account, you'll see it's generally pretty easy to submit bugs and provide feedback in channels that allow us to more easily find and work on issues. We're happy to help, too!
I'd file the issue myself, but I'd prefer to enable you to see how easy it is, and for you to provide the stack trace. Even providing steps to reproduce issues makes you a part of our Mozilla community. Welcome!
512 MiB rlimit and you usually have 10s of tabs open? I'm not surprised you're having problems; that's a pretty unusual and challenging configuration. Do other browsers behave any better?
You are talking about Chrome right ? We have a memory intensive app which works perfectly on FF26 (and IE11), and crashes the tab on Chrome 32 with memory hitting 3GB+ and up. Their garbage collector must be leaking like crazy. (Works in Chrome 22).
Firefox's new Australus UI will be merged to the Aurora channel in just a couple days, if you'd like to try it out (without installing the bleeding edge Nightly channel).
It looks very bad to me, doing everything against the UI conventions of the OS. The menu gone from the top right, why oh why? Didn't Firefox success started with being more "native" (close to the OS UI) than the predecessor? The history of bad decisions seems to repeat with every new generation?
Mozilla guys, you really want to annoy your users again? Why?
Australis looks nice in Ubuntu. The new menu is much better with big icons and can be customized however you like it. It's great IMO. I took a couple screenshots from latest nightly release. http://i.imgur.com/19Iwy7r.png, http://i.imgur.com/6Kouk14.png
Firefox just simply never lives up to the experience I get from Chrome or Chromium. It crashes very often on certain pages (harmless and trustworthy pages from sites that shouldn't be causing crashes) and extensions like 1Password just don't work properly all the time and scrolling/performance is never as good as Chrome. I always give it a third/fourth/fifth chance but can't stand Firefox for more than five minutes.
The second bullet is important, having up to date TLS is a big deal in today's security/spy conscience world. Its possible to currently get (if you monkey around in about:config), but default settings are powerful since the average user won't bother. And I mean average-user type average user, not average hackernews reader/poster.
An error occurred during a connection to www.howsmyssl.com.
Peer attempted old style (potentially vulnerable) handshake.
I don't think I would trust their judgement about how my SSL is doing.
I am happy about this Firefox release; it is not just that you had to be an advanced user to get TLS 1.2 previously but that doing so would break over half the web. Now it is possible to use TLS 1.2 where available and not use it when not available.
Except how many people trust absolutely every single CA in the huge list that browser comes with. It only takes one of them (or even a single intermediate CA that is listed by them) to sign a malicious key and the whole system is compromised.
2013 was such a good hear for Mozilla that I now looked at this release and was thinking - "blah! just another FF release". I then realised what had happened. They have developed so much momentum and such a good track record that I have taken their best product's release for granted...
I don't think so. It's easy now to look at the headline and think "Oh, just another Firefox release, it happens what? once a month?". That's a good thing. Users are upgrading, the process is smooth; Mozilla's having a relatively easy time iterating. Remember when Firefox 3, 4, and 5 came out? Each time, it was a big deal. Many complained and groaned. The upgrade process was problematic for many users. Some users would still have problems upgrading for many releases after that. It's been a great year if they can push out numerous high-quality releases, and have the process be so smooth that when users hear of a new version, they think "meh".
Have to give a lot of the credit to Google. Before Chrome, Firefox was floundering. Updates were painful. Chrome competition eventually got Firefox refocused. Chrome also pioneered rapid release cycles and auto-updating so that users didn't have to consciously think about being "ready" to update or find reasons not to. Hopefully they don't even notice.
Google's stated reason for developing Chrome was to push web browsers forward as a platform. Whatever you think of Chrome now, I think in that objective they succeeded admirably.
I think that's a false dichotomy. High profile targets like FF aren't going to survive without frequent updates, regardless of feature bumping releases. Personally I wouldn't want to have to go back to convincing people to upgrade between major releases again, and thus far Mozilla has kept FF pretty stable so I see no reason to worry.
False logic. Slow update does not mean you have secure version. You can get ESR if you want the so-called LTS version. Freqeunt update addresses multiple things quickly:
(1) security vulnerability,
(2) performance regression
(3) new features
For a software widely used like FF, it is important that they keep the software up-to-date, make the software as slim as possible, and make the software easy to use. If you want to do some "AB" testing, frequent testing is necessary.
When was the last time you boot up Ubuntu LTS and think "oh I need to update?"
Browser tends to move fast and break fast because browser is a complex software and because the tool people use to make web application are so flexible there are so many corner cases (which can be abused to use to make things work) it is hard to have a dead version.
I look at the CentOS machine yesterday and I thought "god, where is the shiny webconsole that FF comes with?" CentOS apparently comes with old FF and I had to force to upgrade to 26.
> Slow update does not mean you have secure version.
This was not my claim. When there are security vulnerabilities I'm happy for the updates to be as quick as possible and as frequent as necessary. The problem is:
> (3) new features
Adding new features has a high chance of new security flaws, when you're operating at the speed of firefox on such an error-prone technology stack.
Different users want to meet this trade-off differently. I want fewer features, in fact I'm ok not to be bleeding-edge compatible with the latest poorly-designed HTML draft spec if it means a more secure browser. It's a question of how and where Mozilla (or other browser teams) organize their effort.
1. FF is a product, meaning if Chrome or Opera or Safari have some shiny features that a lot of developers enjoy to have, FF will very likely implement that feature.
2. Some new features are to replace the old one. For example, the original Firefox sync was pain in the ass and so there will be a new thing called Firefox Account. That's a new feature to user but it's easier to use and makes more sense to users.
3. Some new shiny features are there because of requests. People requested them and developers thought they were useful for users to have. That's inevitable. Unlike Windows, unless you cry to TechCrunch, MS won't care about your email because it's one of the 1000000 emails they receive every day.
In reality, software can't stay in the way the old OS works. Granted, we take Android fun as they roll out new features. But we can't upgrade easily because the phone manufacture and/or the service provider does not provide the stock upgrade (at least this is how my shitty phone works).
I know there are compatibility breakage and some UI decisions are really really bad. For instance, the latest nightly rolls out a different color scheme for web console which I find a huge problem for people with poor eye sight (me) or work long hours. The UI is changing to australis soon (maybe 29, maybe 30, don't remember, they haven't have a final decision yet).
It is actually quite frustrating to work in the browser side. A line of change can impact millions of websites. Often time you have to make a complex patch to make simple adjustment.
Regarding security vulnerability, I personally think they are minor compare to other more common, cheap threats. They are exploitable (and yes some are critical and severe) but when was the last time you find yourself exploited because of browser? It was probably you downloading an infected file. I know this is kind of unethical to say, but I think it is fair to say browser is quite secure these days and attackers are more likely to do things like clickjacking.
I don't remember if Firefox rolls out update (not upgrade) that includes vulnerability fixes or not. Someone correct me on this.
On the flipside, a frequently updated browser that is constantly improving is a bit of a moving target. Because of the ease for them to push out updates, vulnerabilities can be fixed and pushed out to the vast majority of users in short order. Malicious people may only get a few days/weeks to wreak havoc at a large scale, as the vast majority will have updated shortly after the problem is fixed.
In Forefox's case, the frequent releases more have to do with rapid improvement and iteration than anything. Read the changelog and notice how it was largely a bunch of mid-moderate improvements. Some CSS goodies, some JS goodies, some security goodies.
Note that we don't wait 6 weeks to push security updates when there is any serious issue. We do "chemspill" releases in these cases to fix the problem as soon as possible (usually less than 2 days after it's reported).
Yes, that's what I was referring to. I was unaware that a newer version had been available that had addressed that issue. It's hard sometimes to plow through the FUD to know exactly what happened. Thanks.
It's a good thing? Yeah, except that you waste half an hour EACH DAY staring at automatic software updates. At this point I simply disable automatic updates for much of the programs on my PC. This fashion of quick release cycles has gone way overboard.
Why do you need to actually look at them? Apart from the long windows reboots/updates, I don't really see any application doing upgrades in the foreground anymore.
Or are there still some badly behaving update apps out there?
Oh my god, that's ridiculous. Nobody spends half an hour a day waiting on auto updates. The update downloads in the background and takes just a few seconds to install after restarting the browser.
in fact, it doesnt even "restart it". its applied whenever the user restart the browser. it only notifies the user if he never restart the browser, after a day or two..
Then Mozilla Thunderbird, then TortoiseGit, then TortoitseSVN, then Sublime Text Editor, then Notepad++, then Notepad++ informs me there is an update of a plugin that I never use, then VLC media player, then Google Chrome, then Oracle VirtualBox, then Visual Studio proudly announces a service pack, then Windows informs me that it wants to reboot in 10 minutes.
I strongly dislike the fact that almost every single piece of software wants to also install some kind of always running service to manage updates. It should be an OS hook that programs can use when they are first installed, and can be completely managed by the user if they care.
I have a Windows 7 PC but it is only used perhaps once every week or two (and usually for just a few minutes at a time). It's certainly not the best tool I've ever seen but Chocolatey [0] makes keeping (nearly all) my installed applications up-to-date very easy.
Chrome has recently started to be more of a burden for us. We use the Application Shortcuts on our sales teams Windows PCs, which has broken over the last couple of updates:
* Scrollbars have now changed, there are no up and down arrows. This has really confused our elder staff.
* Application shortcuts have started hanging and throwing the "Jim" screen, but the same web pages work fine usually.
* Java is awful to get installed and unfortunately we need that.
These have made me want to try Firefox even more, and seeing Generators has made me switch to the nightly build to see what else is up and coming!
Fwiw I've been finding Firefox (Ubuntu 12.04 default repo version) to be more stable than Chrome when I'm abusing tabs (like 50-100 tabs open, yes I'm pathological). Under such circumstances with Chrome my computer will occasionally freeze and I have no recourse but to REISUB it. Under similar circumstances with FF, things slow down and responsiveness gets worse, but no system freezes have occured yet.
There are some things I use Chrome for, like its JS profiling tools, but every time it freezes and forces a restart I go back to FF. Been staying with the latter more and more lately.
I've heard countless times that Chrome becomes flaky once you get to about 50 or 60 tabs.
In contrast, I know several Firefox users who regularly have open several hundred tabs, and one guy who sometimes exceeds a thousand. (Yes, a thousand.)
(And if you're about to respond with "why would anybody need that many tabs?", please don't. It's a tired topic; just accept that there are many different and valid ways to use a web browser, and yours is just one of them.)
I recommend to use a site-specific browser (SSB) for internal stuff. This way you get a fixed platform which can be updated as needed. For the internet, you can continue to use an auto-updating browser.
Take a look at XULRunner and the Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF).
I am using FF on Android (both phone and tablet) with sync and great addons like adblock/self destructing cookies/lastpass and am mostly a happy camper. Mozilla has resolved most of the performance issues barring one - compared to Chrome or stock browser the time it takes for FF to go from link tapped to page loading started is a bit annoyingly high. Many times after tapping a link it just sits there doing nothing or showing the spinner in the URL bar for quite some time.
Not sure if it's the addons but I recall having similar issue on a fresh install. If anyone from Mozilla reading this has any pointers, please let me know.
Edit: Also the one other thing that frequently bugs me is FF not honoring the Android intent system. YouTube and Play Store links when opened in FF give me no option of opening them in their respective apps - it goes straight to the URL. I guess I'll file a bug for this issue.
Firefox is both better and worse than other browsers in dealing with intents.
On the worse side, unlike some other browsers Firefox doesn't raise intents for redirected URLs, missing some opportunities to match appropriate apps. I believe the underlying issue is that too many redirect situations are ambiguous (especially if you might not be the default browser). I mostly deal with this with an external wrapper (Browser Auto Selector, Unshorten or the like), but it's still a weakness.
On the other side, the Firefox intnet feature that I love is that when you long-press/right-click/etc on a URL that matches some non-browser apps, you get the option of opening it in those apps (for YouTube, the Play Store, Twitter, etc.). I haven't seen any other browser with that option (though, to be fair, I spend most of my time in Firefox). It would be extra-wonderful if there were a reliable way to hit the YouTube link from an embedded video, but even without that, it's very handy.
You don't even need to long press to find this out -- if the URL of the site you're on 'supports' being opened in an app, a little grey android icon appears in the address bar. You can tap this icon to open the URL in the related app.
Oh, that's another cool feature! Thanks for mentioning it.
I can quibble that I wish it were a bit more obvious and that the Android icon appeared before the page started loading (next to the X), but it is still going to make many things more convenient for me.
The video isn't online yet, but at FOSDEM this weekend there was a talk about "Firefox on Android". The guy said that it's actually adblock that's causing the long delays.
As a general rule: if you think Firefox is slow/laggy, try running it with addons disabled. One or more addons are often the culprit.
For page load lag, addons like ABP are often especially bad because they're running the URI of each request against a bunch of regex filters to determine if the load should be allowed to begin.
Me too, the time it takes to initially load a link is really long compared to Chrome, even on a quad core mobile device. I hope they resolve this soon.
I don't think so. It happens all the time. Even when I just have about:blank open, and go to something like ddg.gg or google.com, it's like the browser hangs for a couple of seconds, then it loads the page really quick. It's that initial hang that is really aggravating.
It was mentioned in yesterdays release notes (draft). The note seems to have been removed now. Anyway, it said something that the tool did not made it for this release.
The GLSL editor is really great, with just one thing making it a pain to use. Namely, the split between the vertex and fragment shader is always vertical (apart from when the tools are really thin overall). Does anyone know how I can force it to use a horizontal split?
While I'm whining, is it possible to show the console at the same time as viewing the source for files? The fact that I have to switch between the console and source tabs in FF is pretty much the only reason I use Chrome for debugging.
At least in current Nightly, you can hit the Esc. key, to pop up the console regardless of the panel you're currently using (à la Chromium, basically). I'm not sure in which release this landed, though.
For the vertical split thing, opening a bug is the easiest way to get the feature in [1].
One interesting this is that all JS_ exports in their libraries have been removed. This kills support for things like GWT DevMode [0] among other plugins. This is good for security, bad for GWT.
Yes, we knew this was long in coming. Chrome is yanking similar support in NPAPI as well. That's why 2 years ago we started working on SuperDevMode. This happened a little quicker than we had planned, but some upcoming changes to the GWT compiler will make it an incremental compiler more like JavaC, and in SuperDevMode, compile/refresh should be much much quicker when that lands.
On the IDE side, IntelliJ 13.0.2 can attach a debugger to Chrome and provide an in-IDE java debugging experience using source maps. Similar work is ongoing from James Nelson for the Eclipse plugin.
Firefox recently added support for column number support in stack traces, so eventually, Java IDE debugging using sourcemaps attached to Firefox JS debugger should be feasible.
In the mean time, GWT developers who use Firefox will need to stick to Firefox ESRs.
Major browser updates used to be fun. Nowadays they just merge security updates and bump the numbers. Most won't even notice and just complain about the mandatory restart.
One disturbing thing about Mozilla security is that most of the "Critical" flaws[1] in their list would be marked as "High" on Chrome because of Chrome's superior security model.
Oh sure, they are not magic smoke indeed. Still, how do you explain that Use after free bugs are marked Critical in Firefox but High on Chrome? Seems like Chrome is doing a little bit better in security department.
Security flaws browser vendors use do not have different classification schemes. They all use CVSS Severity scores, go ahead and check.
Also definitions:
Firefox
Critical: Vulnerability can be used to run attacker code and install software, requiring no user interaction beyond normal browsing.
High: Vulnerability can be used to gather sensitive data from sites in other windows or inject data or code into those sites, requiring no more than normal browsing actions
Chrome
Critical:Allows an attacker run arbitrary code with the user's privileges in the normal course of browsing.
High: Allows an attacker to read or modify confidential data belonging to other web sites.
What are the market share stats like on FF versions these days? Presumably the auto-update feature means the vast majority are using the latest FF within a few weeks?
According to the release notes Flash is fixed. But after updating, I still can't get Flash to work with Firefox on my Android 4.4.2 Nexus 7. Flash works fine with Dolphin though. Bummer.
Nice that canvas dashed lines are now working, but there are still a lot of html5 features that either aren't implemented or are buggy: audio recording with getUserMedia sometimes turns off after a few seconds, drag+drop images from another website isn't implemented (only file upload from your own computer supported), no screen sharing. I've had to put a "try chrome if you have problems" message at the top of our app, as chrome is currently the only browser that fully supports all of the html5 features that we use.
> chrome is currently the only browser that fully supports all html5 features.
Well, no. No browser fully supports all HTML5 features. It's all a work in progress.
I guess your app happens to use features present in chrome, but other browsers lead in other areas. Off the top of my head, firefox had webrtc binary datachannels (important for multiplayer games) earlier. And a comment above mentions ES6 generators as well.
Basically Chrome supports all of the HTML5 features that we use (audio/video, drag+drop, screen sharing), whereas firefox doesn't. Perhaps there are features that firefox supports that chrome doesn't, but I haven't come across any.
As I said in my original comment, firefox supports drag+drop uploads, but not images from websites. You can drop an image from your hard drive, but you can't drag an image from another website. Chrome lets you do this.
Tab sharing isn't screen sharing. Chrome lets you share your entire screen, not just a tab.
As I said in my original comment it is getUserMedia audio that is buggy on firefox (it cuts out after 5 seconds), not audio in general. Luckily there is a hack to get it working: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/984179. Looks like it might be a garbage collection bug - it's not seeing the reference to the input device from the script processor node.
Semi-related: I've been using the Nightly and have come to really enjoy Australis over the current UX/UI scheme in the other builds. To that end, I'm excited for Aurora to get boosted up to 29 and, hopefully, get Australis along with it.
If you install via a package manager on Linux then generally you can only update the browser through the package manager. On my Gentoo box that's how I have to upgrade chromium and firefox.
In case you didn’t hear, starting with version 5 (released June 2011) Firefox changed to a different, must faster release schedule. They release a new major version every six weeks or so, but there are fewer changes in each major version than there were in early versions. They changed the schedule to get new features out to users faster. More info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Firefox#Rapid_relea...
