Mozilla Developers Question 6-Week Release Cycle For Firefox

[alidan]

[citation][nom]Graham_71[/nom]All software should be released 'when it's ready' not set release dates 6 weeks/months in advance, if a major bug is found just before release putting the date back is embarrassing, if it's ready sooner why wait.No release date = less pressure, more flexibility for the developer & better product for the consumerAs for firefox, as far as im concerned such rapid cycles are meaningless, I know FF4 was all about HTML5 support, but 5,6,7 ?? It can't anything significant if it's only taken a few weeks to develop.[/citation]

6 ---> 7
10% preference increase, less resource hog
7 ----> 8
10% preference increase, less resource hog

in total, its about a 20% performance increase, putting it on par with i think chrome 13 in speed, and its using less resources as it upgrades.

firefox 9 is suppose to be a massive increase on resource management.

 

[royale_aus]

Anyone heard of continuous delivery/deployment? This is the way the industry is going.
Martin Fowler and the other industry bigwigs have been on about this for a while, it makes sense. People just need to move away from the old enterprise way of thinking.

I think every 6 weeks in fine, hopefully the can get it down even shorter.

 

[leakingpaint]

Anybody very worried about web browsers being resource hungry must have really old PC's...seriously...Mozilla must keep us safe like it always has, we need some speed as well but everything else should be a distant second.

90% of people just want a safe, stable browser without the bells and whistles. They should keep things simple and effective and they will always have support. I've been running Firefox at work on about 60 PC's for roughly 4 years and it works very well in a corporate environment, but recently with all these updates...it's getting annoying.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]leakingpaint[/nom]Anybody very worried about web browsers being resource hungry must have really old PC's...seriously...Mozilla must keep us safe like it always has, we need some speed as well but everything else should be a distant second.90% of people just want a safe, stable browser without the bells and whistles. They should keep things simple and effective and they will always have support. I've been running Firefox at work on about 60 PC's for roughly 4 years and it works very well in a corporate environment, but recently with all these updates...it's getting annoying.[/citation]

i open a few hundred tabs at a time... dont ask...
i have to keep firefox under 1.5gb of ram otherwise it locks up a bit, and gets unusably slow.

the less resources it uses the better.

and lets also take this into account. i have 10 win rar archives, mirc 2 acdsee 8's open an acdsee pro 4 , 4 explorers 5 frefox windows with about 40 active tabs, and about 250 inactive, task manager, zoom player and photoshop cs3... all on xp with 3gb of ram... any less resources the better.

seriously, who wants needless bloat?

 

[leakingpaint]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]i open a few hundred tabs at a time... dont ask...i have to keep firefox under 1.5gb of ram otherwise it locks up a bit, and gets unusably slow. the less resources it uses the better. and lets also take this into account. i have 10 win rar archives, mirc 2 acdsee 8's open an acdsee pro 4 , 4 explorers 5 frefox windows with about 40 active tabs, and about 250 inactive, task manager, zoom player and photoshop cs3... all on xp with 3gb of ram... any less resources the better. seriously, who wants needless bloat?[/citation]

No one wants needless bloat, but that's not what I'm saying, I'm saying the majority of people don't open 40 tabs in firefox. Feel free to do that but most people just want a safe and stable browser (stable includes a resource friendly browser) You don't need to update a browser every second to improve small things which most people will not even notice.

Mozilla should absolutely look at improving their browser constantly but not at the expense of inconvenience, so much so I'm considering removing firefox from our LAN and replacing it with Chrome only because chrome is starting to improve their network management and their updates are less intrusive. Had our environment been win7 I would go with IE because it's management over a network is just better.

 

[leakingpaint]

Well I just read something that proves my point right here on Tom's
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/mozilla-firefox-browser-wars-enterprise-internet,13509.html

 

[leakingpaint]

[citation][nom]leakingpaint[/nom]Well I just read something that proves my point right here on Tom's[/citation]
http/www.tomshardware.com/news/mozilla-firefox-browser-wars-enterprise-internet,13509.html