

Firefox 5 Beta is available for download - Garbage
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/5.0beta/releasenotes/

======
cfinke
When a new version of Firefox comes out, I always like to find the oldest bug
that it fixes. It looks like the winner this time is a 12-year-old bug
affecting MathML: <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=21479>

Also fixed is this 7-year-old bug that has annoyed me for years:
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=254714> (When you open a link in
a new tab, the new page's URL doesn't appear in the Location Bar until the
page loads.)

~~~
nickknw
Wow, thanks for pointing out that second one. That's bugged me for some time
too!

------
cemerick
The state of PDF support in Firefox on OS X has me stuck at FF 3.6, and it
doesn't look like that'll be changing for a while (unless I want to experiment
with random xpi's and running FF 4+ in 32-bit mode, etc).

Until that's resolved, all the fancy CSS tweaks in the world won't mean a
hoot.

~~~
randallsquared
On OS X, there's possibly the best PDF viewer ever, in Preview. I'm curious
why you'd want so strongly to avoid using it?

~~~
m_eiman
I prefer opening a PDF in a tab until I've had a chance to see if it's
something I want to keep. With download-and-open-in-Preview I'm filling up my
Downloaded Files folder with a lot of PDFs that I don't want to keep, and I'll
have to delete them manually.

~~~
cemerick
Indeed, I'm surprised this had to be said.

~~~
timtadh
As a linux user I am surprised. When I download to open in my reader the pdfs
go into /tmp. This is fine, because since /tmp is a ramfs it just goes away
when I turn off my computer. If I want it I just save it to a permanent
location.

~~~
randallsquared
Unlike m_eiman and cemerick, I regard dumping debris into my Downloads folder
as a feature. I basically never clean it out; it's just a convenience place to
keep stuff that I have a low probability of ever wanting again, auto-sorted by
how likely I am to want it (most recent first, in other words). Since I almost
never bother with more than the first few items in the stack display of
Downloads, it didn't occur to me that cleaning it out might be a chore, or
even desirable.

~~~
m_eiman
It's desirable when you're using a laptop with a 120GB SSD that for some
reason fills up all the time :/

------
kia
Actually the first beta of FF5 is available for almost a month on their ftp
here

ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/5.0b1/

~~~
asadotzler
That wasn't really a real beta. that was simply a copy of then Aurora to the
beta channel to test the process and the channel switching utility in Firefox.

------
eiji
Hm, still no win64 build available.

I mean they don't have to promote it through their website, just put it on the
ftp. Take advantage of the dev-channel for some testing. Yeah, I know, I don't
need Flash ...

------
nodata
Why do we have version 5 already?

~~~
robin_reala
Firefox is moving to a more Chrome-style of version numbering, to try and get
enhancements out to the web quicker.

~~~
afhof
If I wanted Chrome features, I'd download Chrome. The reason I use FF is
/because/ I don't want to use Chrome. If FF just copies from other browsers,
why have FF at all?

~~~
joshz
It's about faster release cycles not copying features.

~~~
jonathansizz
That doesn't explain why we have Firefox 5 rather than 4.1. It must be that
the Mozilla marketers were worried that the major version numbers were too low
compared to Chrome and IE, so by bumping them up every few months they can
catch up! I'm so impressed!

~~~
lurker19
Trye, but unfortunately no one can match Chrome teams ability to rapidly
ratchet version numbers. Chrome is is in a weird spot where they "had to"
rapidly catch up to MS, but now it is awkward to shoot ahead to version 20 or
30. Presumably his is why they started downplaying version numbers once they
caught up.

I wonder if Google is now committed to never break the Eextensions API now. To
their credit, Android has done a great job with API compatibility over
versions, not breaking old apps. Maybe Chrome can too, and dropping version
numbers has raised the bar for software quality, just like forcing auto-
upgrades has.

The whole thing is a bit silly.

This post composed in emacs 23. (Not really)

~~~
richbradshaw
Emacs has followed a similar idea, essentially they just dropped the 1. (or
was it 0. - can't remember!), so emacs 23 is really v1.23. Chrome is similar –
why use endless non integers for main builds?

------
sapper2
Unless they have the quick, silent updates of Chrome AND the (so far) perfect
quality control of Chrome, these quick releases do more harm then good.

~~~
dpcan
I JUST downloaded FF4 and now I see 5 is coming out.

Version-less updates of browsers makes sense, and they should be seamlessly,
silently, updated in the back-ground. This is getting crazy.

I install Firefox for friends and family who I want off IE, and this actually
embarrasses me a little. If I have to keep telling them to update, they will
quit - or end up using REALLY OLD versions of Firefox and we'll have an IE6
situation all over again soon but with Firefox.

I'm starting to install Chrome now. At least I can say that their browser will
always update, and they have nothing to worry about.

~~~
thomas11
Firefox 5 is not coming out. It's a beta. You shouldn't bother friends and
family with it.

~~~
rsoto
Actually, my Firefox it's advicing me to update. And I'm not on the nightly,
developer or beta channel.

~~~
thomas11
Strange, mine (4.0.1) doesn't. There's something broken either in the update
routine or in your Firefox. The beta is not supposed to be recommended to
users of a release version.

~~~
rsoto
Yeah, I'm also very confused. While I think it's a good idea to be pushing
relases more often, this is way too often.

Here's the about Firefox dialog <http://i.imgur.com/cDbN1.png> and the update
request <http://i.imgur.com/4SYRI.png>

------
joubert
IndexedDB?

------
ujjvala
Use it if you want break all the working addons for nothing.

~~~
freakwit
The list of bugfixes is hardly nothing: [http://www.mozilla.com/en-
US/firefox/5.0beta/releasenotes/bu...](http://www.mozilla.com/en-
US/firefox/5.0beta/releasenotes/buglist.html)

~~~
wisty
Still, there's no reason to break bugfixes. Heck, a lot of them still work, if
you flag some "developer mode", but you don't need to do that in Chrome.

Who care's if Mozilla has more extensions? They cause too much trouble when
you upgrade.

~~~
ZoFreX
I don't think it really counts as an "upgrade" if you opt-in to a beta.

~~~
lurker19
True, but unless FF adds a "re-version-tag my addons based on feedback from
testers" feature, we will get bitten when FF5 final comes out and disables all
existing deployed extensions.

~~~
gmac
In actual fact, they've changed the process so this generally won't happen:

[http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2011/04/19/add-on-
compatibili...](http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2011/04/19/add-on-
compatibility-rapid-releases/)

