Mozilla Firefox 3.1 Beta 3 Released

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by ronjor, Mar 13, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,770
    Location:
    Texas
    Article
     
  2. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    20,956
    Location:
    U.S.A.
  3. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,770
    Location:
    Texas
    This is an impressive beta. Memory use is down and speed is up.
     
  4. Judge Dee

    Judge Dee Guest

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

    EASTER Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Posts:
    5,633
    Location:
    U.S.A. (South)
    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
     
  6. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Posts:
    989
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    Firefox: Open source, Extensible, Functional.

    :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
     
  7. Boost

    Boost Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Posts:
    1,293
    Loads faster and pages open faster also :thumb:
     
  8. raakii

    raakii Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Posts:
    593
    Yes i see many improvements:thumb: in this version.I want Mozilla to implement paste and go function:( .
     
  9. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    20,956
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    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.
     
  10. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,698
    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
     
  11. Firebytes

    Firebytes Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Posts:
    903
    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. ;)
     
  12. chachazz

    chachazz Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2004
    Posts:
    840
    Bravo Mrk::D
    Firefox 3.1 Beta 3 - Superb is too modest
    http://www.tuxmachines.org/
     
  13. rookieman

    rookieman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Posts:
    409
    Has anyone tweaked this latest beta?If you did could you share it;)
     
  14. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,698
    Really, oops ... yes, holy banana ...
    Mrk
     
  15. ViVek

    ViVek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2008
    Posts:
    551
    Location:
    Moon
    much better than the latest final version,i looooooooooooooove this beta
    Nice work MOZILLA
     
  16. rookieman

    rookieman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Posts:
    409
    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.
     
  17. virtumonde

    virtumonde Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2008
    Posts:
    501
    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.
     
  18. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,698
    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
     
  19. lotuseclat79

    lotuseclat79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    5,097
    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
     
  20. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,698
    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
     
  21. prius04

    prius04 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Posts:
    1,238
    Location:
    USA
    Perhaps.......but what more can be done beyond, say, incorporating some sort of "anonymizer" into the browser?
     
  22. tlu

    tlu Guest

    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 the how-to.
     
  23. JRViejo

    JRViejo Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2008
    Posts:
    20,956
    Location:
    U.S.A.
    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:
     
  24. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,698
    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
     
  25. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,698
    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
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.