Mozilla Firefox 5.0 Final

You already have that option -- to change the UI however you like.

As developers start using beta/ developer versions you'll see more forward compatibility... hopefully.

 

here's a portable version

http://fcportables.blogspot.com/2011/06/portable-mozilla-firefox-v50-final.html

 

If this version is "final" why is this included

ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/5.0/win32/en-US/index.html

from here:

ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/firefox/releases/5.0/win32/en-US/

 

Some of the information about Firefox 5 seems incorrect, IMO.

I'd avoid that site.

A browser is an important part of security and I won't experiment excessively.

 

It is not on the official Firefox download page, 6/19/2011 13:08 PST (Philippine Standard Time).

The get Firefox button points to: hxxp://www.mozilla.com/products/download.html?product=firefox-4.0.1&os=linux&lang=en-US

It not listed here either: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html

Until it is it is not official.

 

We need to wait till 21.06

1Q troubles me: are they going to update 4.01?

 

I couldn't be any less excited about this release.
Production machines and their addons still churning happy at 3.6.
Test boxen making slow and crippled progress with 4. And now this?
Silly world and the illusion of numerical progress.
Mrk

 

@chrisretusn: The FTP site is definitely official, and usually updates before main site.

 

Looks like downloading from ftp sites or major geeks or whatever rather than the official site is the secure way to go!

 

It's not just some ftp sites, it's mozilla's official site right?

 

Yes, think I'll wait quite some time before trying FF 5.0..Installed 4.0.1 only recently, set as default, and after a few days went back to 3.6.17.
The speed improvement seemed minimal, and, I may be wrong, but could be getting more bloated (installer also getting bigger) with each release?
They seem to be in some sort of "numbers race" (with Chrome?) all right, and are we seeing any great innovation or improvement?
What's memory leak situation like, also?

 

On my system addons cause memory leaks in FF 4.01, try to disable them and figure out which one by allowing them one by one. If FF is slow, usually a clean install helps (especially installing FF4 after FF3), just delete everything FF related from the registry, from folders in Users/AppData-, Local Setting, then restart and install it. The race....it's really important, the web is evolving, Google dictate the pace, Microsoft as usual pushing the brake.....but modern browser manufacturers should implement the new technologies (HTML5/CSS3) all the time. It is good for web designers to experiment with the new toys and also good for users: nicer looking websites which load faster, more accessible for user agents, more user friendly etc. You can check how your browser fair at html5test.com.

 

Of course the site is official, however, in the /pub/firefox/releases/ directory the latest link still points to 4.0.1. Until it points to 5.0, it is not official.

Actually until there is an announcement it is not official.

Firefox 5.0 might be final, and I have never disputed that point, but it is not as yet official.

That is supposed to happen next week. If on schedule it will be released on Tue. 21, June 2011.

One thing I think we can both agree on... Just because it's on MajorGeeks, does not make it Final or Official.

 

http://blog.mozilla.com/engineeringnews/

 

So this site (https://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/channel/) is redundant?

 

I have FF4 and latest Aurora builds on my desktop.
I have FF 3.6.7 on my laptop, which is a a lot less powerful, and has a lot more addons since its an older install.

FF3 works just as well as FF4 and I've yet to find a site it fails on. And it feels faster. I don't see any reason to use FF5 and spend 1/2 a day setting it up, and half the addons I need won't even work on FF4 (even with forcing compatibility).

Following the Chrome numbering nonsense (where major version numbers change every week) is wrong.

 

@tlu: Thnaks for that.

@vasa1: Must be sarcasm, I hope.

@skudo12: Yes, look at the address.

@chrisretusn: We'll see. I'll compare the checksums of the installers.
Agreed, I've never trusted third-party sites, especially after the KM Player incidence.

Just installed from the FTP. Add-ons works fine after being force installed. Sometimes, the browser lags with many tabs, but that may be just the add-ons.

 

How long will they support 4 now that 5 is out or about to be out?

 

What are the major changes from 4 to 5?

 

100%.

I really, really don't understand why people recommend ftp sites (and certain other sites) over the http site provided by Mozilla.

If one is really interested in being on the cutting edge, then one would already be subscribed to the beta channel or to the Aurora channel or to the nightly.

Source: -http://www.ghacks.net/2011/03/24/firefox-download-guide-how-to-download-the-web-browser/-

I would be interested in knowing what exactly the justification is for promoting the use of an ftp site is. Using it personally is one thing. Using (or misusing?) a forum to broadcast it is another.

IMO, pointing to a specific FTP site *can* overload a server. That's why there are mirror ftp sites available *if* one approaches by the official http site.

Pointing to an ftp site despite knowing all this *could* interpreted as a malicious attempt to bring a server down.

I'm really not going to say anything more since I'm not an "expert" on anything.

 

They only share that FireFox 5 is available in other mirrors or ftp, it's up to the you if you want to use it personally, there's nothing wrong in sharing information right?

 

vasa1 you need to calm down. That FTP site has been broadcasted plenty of times everywhere. If Mozilla dislikes it as much as you think they do, they would've said something.

 

I'm waiting for an explanation of why people prefer the ftp site.

I have given reasons, valid or not, for not preferring the ftp site.

 

Maybe some people want to test new things? Without waiting for the official release? (test, not use personally).