Mozilla Firefox 3.1 Beta 3 Released

[ronjor]

-{ Quote: "By Nicholas Kolakowski

Mozilla has released its Firefox 3.1 Beta 3 web browser, intended for developers and testers for evaluation and feedback. The open-source Firefox browser, which holds a competitive position over Apple Safari and Google Chrome, but still trails the all powerful Microsoft Internet Explorer, claims this version features a number of improvements, including increased support for new Web technologies, and is stable." }-Article (http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Web-Services-Web-20-and-SOA/Mozilla-Firefox-31-Beta-3-Released-524025)

[JRViejo]

The Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition 3.1 Beta 3 (http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/firefox_portable/test) has also been released by PortableApps.com.

[ronjor]

This is an impressive beta. Memory use is down and speed is up.

[Judge Dee]

It could be over excitement on my part, but I could swear that my 3 or 4 second lag on start-up is gone.

[EASTER]

Thanks ronjor

Been looking foward to the next release of FF for some time now.

I HONOR your opinion from the results that you no doubt have already experienced with this release.

I feel myself distancing farther more away from anything IE anymore even though i've experienced extermely small tidbits of any malware busting thru the iron shield i've built into it.

FF is just plain quicker plus all the excitement of it's add ons are innovative major advancements IMHO in comparison.

EASTER

[AKAJohnDoe]

Firefox: Open source, Extensible, Functional.

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

[Boost]

Loads faster and pages open faster also :thumb:

[raakii]

Yes i see many improvements:thumb: in this version.I want Mozilla to implement paste and go function:( .

[JRViejo]

I installed the portable version of this Beta in a run-of-the-mill 8 GB Flash drive from MicroCenter, and I'm impressed by how fast this version runs. All previous incarnations of FF 3 versions ran poorly on this drive, and although FF 3.0.7 is the first version to run half way decent, FF 3.1b3 beats that version by a mile! :thumb: Can't wait until FF 3.5 debuts.

[Mrkvonic]

Hi all,

I've written an extensive, enthusiastic review of Firefox 3.1 Beta (3), including new features like private browsing, selective clear private data, improved Javascript performance (sunspider), improved W3C compliance (Acid3), drag & drop tabs, and more.

If you're interested:

http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/firefox-3-1-beta.html

Cheers,
Mrk

[Firebytes]

Nice write up, makes me wish the final release was ready.

Thought I would tell you though that you have a typo in the very first sentence of your review. ;)

[chachazz]

-{ Quote: "Hi all,

I've written an extensive, enthusiastic review...................
Mrk" }-

Bravo Mrk:;D
Firefox 3.1 Beta 3 - Superb is too modest
http://www.tuxmachines.org/

[rookieman]

Has anyone tweaked this latest beta?If you did could you share it;)

[Mrkvonic]

-{ Quote: "Nice write up, makes me wish the final release was ready.

Thought I would tell you though that you have a typo in the very first sentence of your review. ;)" }-

Really, oops ... yes, holy banana ...
Mrk

[ViVek]

much better than the latest final version,i looooooooooooooove this beta
Nice work MOZILLA

[rookieman]

I installed this latest beta on Vista and I didn't see where it was any faster than their latest final version.Perhaps i'll try it on my son's XP and see what it does.

[virtumonde]

-{ Quote: "I installed this latest beta on Vista and I didn't see where it was any faster than their latest final version.Perhaps i'll try it on my son's XP and see what it does." }-
My neither on xp.But except from the 1st start browsing with FF is fast here.Only chrome beats it both in cold start by far,and in normal browsing(on some sites).
Unfortunately i became addicted to "fire gesture"addon which doesn't work with this beta so i'll wait for the final.

[Mrkvonic]

One of the reasons I did not mention memory in my review is because it's a delicate thingie. Testing on real vs virtual machine, windows vs linux gives different results with memory use from -50% to +50% compared to 3.0.7. Then, there are the extensions to take into consideration. Overall, gonna take some time testing this properly ...

Mrk

[lotuseclat79]

Hi Mrk,

Nice writeup. Have downloaded and will shortly install it. I just wanted to add the following comments to help clarify my understanding of the Privacy Feature if I misunderstand what it brings to the table and what it does not.

Note, though, that the privacy feature probably only works somewhat like the Stealther FF plugin, i.e. the privacy it affords will not hide your IP address or secure your browser information from begin logged at remote web sites, or tunnel your browser request to effectively hide where you are browsing from your ISP or DNS server requests as far as I can determine from what has been written about it so far. Is this correct?

If so, then the Private Browsing feature does not provide true Privacy, but by not leaving any tracks inside the FF profile may support a claim of plausible deniability without extra supporting logs from ISPs and remote web sites if some legal issue should arise for the user. This is at least a step in the right direction to provide Privacy, but much more needs to be done.

-- Tom

[Mrkvonic]

It provides local privacy, relevant for the host you run on, not server-wise, indeed. Sort of like stuff you don't want your wife to know :)
Mrk

[prius04]

-{ Quote: "...This is at least a step in the right direction to provide Privacy, but much more needs to be done." }-
Perhaps.......but what more can be done beyond, say, incorporating some sort of "anonymizer" into the browser?

[tlu]

Thanks ronjor and Mrk.

I installed the new beta on Kubuntu 8.10 today and it's running very well. I haven't done any benchmarking but it seems a little bit faster than 3.0.7.

BTW: For anybody else willing to try it on Ubuntu, here's (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/FirefoxNewVersion) the how-to.

[JRViejo]

Mrkvonic, excellent review, as always. The Hyperlinks in web page sources feature is turning out to be one of my favorites and I'm sure Webmasters are going to love it as well. Thanks for pointing that out. :thumb:

[Mrkvonic]

-{ Quote: "Thanks ronjor and Mrk.

I installed the new beta on Kubuntu 8.10 today and it's running very well. I haven't done any benchmarking but it seems a little bit faster than 3.0.7.

BTW: For anybody else willing to try it on Ubuntu, here's (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/FirefoxNewVersion) the how-to." }-

I did something much, much simpler: downloaded the tar archive, extracted it in the home directory and launched firefox locally with ./firefox. Then, if I'm not happy, remove the directory. When I wanna launch the existing firefox, just use global variable in the path (firefox) - or any of the existing shortcuts.

As to memory on Ubuntu, I checked the rss and vzs values, ff 3.1 took more than 3.0.7 on "cold" start. Didn't check what happens after 5 min, 30 min, 30 tabs, with flash, javascript, java, etc running. It's not a simple test.

Mrk

[Mrkvonic]

Just remembered, I should also check oom_score to see how the system treats the two FFs. Some programs preallocate memory, so it's difficult to tell what they're using whether it's real or just buffer. I'll run memhogs too to see what gives.

PS, this will be a double article: work with memory and FF benchmark :)

Mrk

[tlu]

-{ Quote: "I did something much, much simpler: downloaded the tar archive, extracted it in the home directory and launched firefox locally with ./firefox. Then, if I'm not happy, remove the directory. When I wanna launch the existing firefox, just use global variable in the path (firefox) - or any of the existing shortcuts.
" }-

Yes, that's simpler but with a small disadvantage: The usual plugins won't work. But it's probably fixed by copying /usr/lib/firefox/plugins to the new folder.

[Mrkvonic]

I had no issues with plugins. Which ones?
Mrk

[tlu]

-{ Quote: "I had no issues with plugins. Which ones?
Mrk" }-

Java, Flash etc.

[Mrkvonic]

I had no problems. FF Beta picked them up without issues. Honest.
I even tried this today as a part of my memory benchmarking thingie, trying to see the usage when streaming on Youtube. No issues. Strange ...

Did you download the package from Mozilla site or did you do something else?

Mrk

[tlu]

-{ Quote: "I had no problems. FF Beta picked them up without issues. Honest.
I even tried this today as a part of my memory benchmarking thingie, trying to see the usage when streaming on Youtube. No issues. Strange ...

Did you download the package from Mozilla site or did you do something else?

Mrk" }-

Mrk, I'm sorry - you're absolutely right, and I stand corrected! So somewhere in the profile there must be a reference to the plugins folder /usr/lib/firefox/plugins (-> /etc/alternatives/...). Or why doesn't it use the plugins subfolder in the newly created folder?

[Mrkvonic]

Have not looked too deply into. I could browse a little. Maybe run strace while streaming on Youtube and see what it picks...
Mrk

[JRViejo]

tlu, if you are using Linux:
-{ Quote: "Firefox now looks for plugins in /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins on Linux, as well as the previously supported locations." }-
Re: Firefox 3.5 for developers (https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Firefox_3.1_for_developers) (scroll to bottom)

[tlu]

-{ Quote: "tlu, if you are using Linux:

Re: Firefox 3.5 for developers (https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Firefox_3.1_for_developers) (scroll to bottom)" }-

Ah - thanks a lot, JRViejo! That explains it.

[JRViejo]

tlu, you are welcome! Take care.