• On CBS MoneyWatch: 4 Things You SHOULDN'T Buy at Target
The Download Blog
advertisement
March 11, 2010 1:21 PM PST

Mozilla aggressively asks older Firefox users to update

by Seth Rosenblatt

By Mozilla's lights, Firefox 3.6 has been a runaway success. The publisher of the open-source browser says that more than 100 million users have downloaded Firefox 3.6 since its launch in the middle of January. However, not all Firefox users have upgraded from Firefox 3 or Firefox 3.5, and Mozilla wants to change that.

Users of older versions of Firefox will start seeing this pop-up, asking them to upgrade.

(Credit: Mozilla)

As of Thursday, users of older Firefox versions will start seeing a pop-up encouraging them to upgrade. The window will come with three choices: Ask Later, No Thanks, or Get the New Version. The pop-up will appear after 60 seconds of keyboard inactivity, which Mozilla called a courtesy toward users and their workflows. Selecting "Ask Later" will defer the window for 24 hours. If a user has chosen No Thanks but decides later to upgrade Firefox, running the "Check for Updates" option from the Help menu will bring up the upgrade window.

One reason that many users cite for not upgrading Firefox is a legitimate concern about add-on forward compatibility. In the press release announcing the push, Mozilla stated that more than 90 percent of Firefox add-ons are compatible with Firefox 3.6. Users can also try to force older add-ons to be compatible by using the MR Tech Toolkit or Nightly Tester Tools add-ons, which add a "force compatibility" option to the add-on context menu, but these tricks also decrease the stability of the browser.

If you use an older version of Firefox, tell us why and which version in the comments below.

Seth peers into the deep, dark corners of software so that you don't have to. He has yet to suffer a single nightmare about OS/2. You can follow him on Twitter.
Recent posts from The Download Blog
Put a Starbucks card on your BlackBerry (hands-on)
WiiPhoto turns your TV into a digital photo frame
Two years on, Chrome reshapes browser market
Today only--save 50 percent on Norton Internet Security
Tab tweaks land in Chrome Canary
Skyfire promises Flash video playback on its iPhone app
New in iTunes: The nitty-gritty
Precautions to take before installing iTunes 10
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (49 Comments)
by bobmarleypeople March 11, 2010 1:43 PM PST
I modified the code in about:config to let me use "incompatible" addons. Guess what? THEY'RE COMPATIBLE!

They should be labelled "Compatibility unverified" or something, not "incompatible".
Reply to this comment 4 people like this comment
by March 11, 2010 5:45 PM PST
I think this is brilliant. I actually quit using Firefox after 3.6 and moved to Chrome full time partly because I was sick of dealing with broken plugins. I think WordPress has done something similar to what you recommend that seems to work really well.

They have a compatibility box on the right side of the page that gives you known data from users, but still allows you to download and install the plugin if you choose.

Eg. http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/bp-album/
1 person likes this comment
by SactoGuy018 March 11, 2010 1:44 PM PST
I think the Mozilla Foundation needs to tell the add-on developers longer warnings in regards to updating Firebox add-ons to work with new versions of Firefox. One add-on I really like--EasyGestures, a add-on that increases the functionality of using a mouse inside Firefox (it works great with FireFox 3.0 and 3.5)--should have been updated a long time ago for Firefox 3.6; I hope the developer has updated it to Firefox 3.6 compatibility by now.
Reply to this comment
by Lerianis4 March 11, 2010 3:36 PM PST
They have almost a YEAR in most cases right now to design their things for the new version of Firefox...... if that isn't long enough, nothing will be!

And usually, it's a simple fix of writing the builds that the extension is allowed on to include 3.6 or higher..... not really 'tough' to do.
2 people like this comment
by fjpoblam March 11, 2010 1:55 PM PST
I strongly agree with @SactoGuy018! I even try to keep up with the Minefield nightlies, but it's relatively hopeless...the add-ons are almost always out of date, or the compatibility override fails horribly.

(The compatibility override used to work, but I can't persuade it to work these days...)

Mozilla needs to encourage add-on developers to tinker actively "at the nightlies level" and stay ahead of the game. All too often, with betas or RCs, I've had to back off for want of essential add-ons such as Web Developer, FireFTP, and ColorZilla.
Reply to this comment
by exactlyy March 11, 2010 2:25 PM PST
cmon man , all the addons i use works just great in Minefields nighties builds.
you just need to use the compatibility override correctly.. try this and tell me if it doesnt work ;)
extensions.checkCompatibility.3.7a
and make it true
dont forget the ".3.7a" or it wont work .
1 person likes this comment
by bryan.teague March 11, 2010 2:02 PM PST
There are so many memory issue in the 3.6 Mac version if I leave it open over night it is using over 1GB of memory by morning. The 3.5 was bad but it just keeps getting worse why should I upgrade.
Reply to this comment 2 people like this comment
by td90uk March 11, 2010 4:07 PM PST
3.6 is actually a lot better and uses much less memory than 3.5. It is noticeably quicker at both loading web pages and starting up as well.
2 people like this comment
by mobycat March 11, 2010 2:27 PM PST
I also have memory issues with Firefox (but on a PC). Plus, starting with 3.5, Firefox freezes WAY too often. Now that Chrome has extensions, I've moved almost exclusively to Chrome. If I could figure out why some sites (like Hulu) don't work with Chrome on my computer, I'd uninstall Firefox entirely and be done with it.
Reply to this comment
by Mergatroid Mania March 11, 2010 3:05 PM PST
I haven't really checked how much memory FF uses, but I do have it open ALL the time. With 8Gigs of memory using Windows 7 64 bit version, I could really care less if FF wants 1G of memory.

Plus, since I upgraded to the latest FF 64 bit version for Win 7 about a month or so ago it hasn't crashed yet.

Maybe it's a hardware thing?
by Lerianis4 March 11, 2010 3:37 PM PST
Hulu isn't working with Chrome on your computer? I use Chrome specifically for video sites..... see if your Flash or Shockwave needs updated, that's probably the cause.
by fmendels March 11, 2010 2:31 PM PST
I haven't tried 3.6. I did, however, try 3 (or 3.5?) and had to revert back to 2.x because the browser didn't use my system fonts correctly. My system fonts are 150% (large fonts) -- in firefox 2, I have visible menus and sufficient "real estate" to see the web content. In 3.x, the menus were bloated and the resulting space for content was very limited. To compound matters, the font sizes within the webpages were enlarged far too much -- I couldn't figure out how to configure the font settings so that firefox could use the same system fonts as the rest of my programs.
I'd love to know whether this problem has been fixed, but don't want to test it myself since the last time I did, I lost Javascript on my office computer (only in firefox - very strange).
Reply to this comment
by Mr. Dee March 11, 2010 2:43 PM PST
Just not interested in getting a barrage of post 3.6.x fixes, since I am on a GPRS connection. 3.5.8 is working perfectly fine. When Mozilla readies version 3.7, I will upgrade to 3.6.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
by shiva7663 March 11, 2010 2:51 PM PST
FireFox v3.5 and newer, and various plugins associated with those versions, break Facebook page rendering. I'm sticking with the 3.0 fork until that is fixed.
Reply to this comment
by julie_strub March 11, 2010 3:00 PM PST
I downloaded the new version, and discovered that the IE plugin didn't work correctly. There are several content management sites I use for work that need to run in IE only - which worked fine with the IE plugin in the previous version of Firefox. I find the FF 3.6 completely useless now and have completely switched to Chrome.
Reply to this comment
by JohnTHaller March 11, 2010 3:26 PM PST
You have to realize that many of the add-ons you love are written by unpaid volunteers who have jobs, families, bills to pay, etc. So they may not have the time to work on them. I think it would make sense to make donations a more active part of the addons.mozilla.org website to help encourage more participation.

Many developers also don't want to go through the hassle of installing a new version of Firefox and maintaining multiple copies. That's one of the reasons why we package Firefox 3.7 Alpha 2 as well as Firefox 3.7 Alpha 3 Pre Nightly builds for portable use. Being portable, they're self-contained, so they won't mess with your standard Firefox install. They even run from the desktop:
http://portableapps.com/apps/internet/firefox_portable/test
Reply to this comment 3 people like this comment
by chaser6017 March 11, 2010 4:13 PM PST
Firefox it's been a great five/six years of use, but the constant crashing due to flash has pushed me to Chrome.

Steve Jobs is correct; flash is crap, yet for the next 5 to 10 years it's here to stay!
Reply to this comment
by biganthony2 March 11, 2010 5:26 PM PST
what ? flash is not crap (maybe your outdated flash is..) flash has never (ever) given me any trouble.
if there is a problem it would be with the developer of the flash app/script
also what would you use other then flash for your web-based arcade games/videos....?
by cheeseboy--2008 March 12, 2010 8:17 AM PST
Flash is crap. Have you ever run it under Linux, BigAnthony2? I'm very much looking forward to 3.7 sand-boxing Flash processes so that a single bad display ad doesn't lock up my entire browser.
2 people like this comment
by MSSlayer April 5, 2010 1:36 PM PDT
Steve Jobs thinks Flash is crap for only one reason:

It would destroy his app store and control of his crappy handheld devices.
by nerd97 March 11, 2010 4:45 PM PST
Was Mozilla really aggressive with this?
Reply to this comment
by bnsfrail March 11, 2010 5:14 PM PST
if ain't broke don't fix it
Reply to this comment 2 people like this comment
by Angmarr March 12, 2010 7:22 AM PST
doesn't work @ all in the information age!
1 person likes this comment
by i_sam March 11, 2010 5:50 PM PST
I haven't upgraded from FF 3.5.8 to 3.6 yet because of security issues. There is probably nothing more insecure about 3.6 than 3.5.8, but I'd rather wait until it has been patched at least once before I upgrade. I'm trying to wait until a few more bugs have been possibly removed (tired of waiting though ;)
Reply to this comment
by jimbocook March 11, 2010 5:59 PM PST
Downgraded to 3.5.8 because of 3.6's inability to preview from Dreamweaver.
Reply to this comment
by jweikel March 12, 2010 5:22 AM PST
Really? I'll have to check this out.
by jmhx7 March 11, 2010 6:08 PM PST
3.6 is way better than all the other versions. I've not had any crash or memory problems on it . I did a clean install and not an upgrade (I found completely uninstalling then installing the newer version from scratch tends to give the best results). I've used chromes latest version since it first became available and I can tell you it works great for 98% of the things I surfed, but firefox works 100% great on everything I need it to work on. I can't say that about any of the other browsers (and believe me I've used them all). So you guys talking about switching to chrome need to know you're in for a lesser browser - use it long enough and you'd see that for yourselves.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
by jmhx7 March 11, 2010 6:09 PM PST
3.6 is way better than all the other versions. I've not had any crash or memory problems on it . I did a clean install and not an upgrade (I found completely uninstalling then installing the newer version from scratch tends to give the best results). I've used chromes latest version since it first became available and I can tell you it works great for 98% of the things I surfed, but firefox works 100% great on everything I need it to work on. I can't say that about any of the other browsers (and believe me I've used them all). So you guys talking about switching to chrome need to know you're in for a lesser browser - use it long enough and you'd see that for yourselves.
Reply to this comment
by indiemixer March 11, 2010 6:44 PM PST
This explains why I saw a Facebook status update that said: "the new fire fox is cooool!! [:"
Reply to this comment
by mwbennett March 11, 2010 6:53 PM PST
I use an older version because the company I work for has software that requires an older version of Java, and Firefox 3.6 does not support older than 1.6 java even with the tools suggested in the article.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
by geognerd March 11, 2010 7:08 PM PST
One of my computers is running 3.5.x and the others are running 3.0.x. As an end user, I don't see any difference in speed or stability between 3.5 and 3.0. With each new version of Firefox, there is some change or new feature that I don't like, so I cling to old versions as long as I can. One extension I use in 3.0 is incompatible with 3.5, so I had to find an alternative. For me, 3.0 just plain works, so there is no incentive for me to update to 3.5 or 3.6. I'll dump 3.0 whenever they finally end support. Looks like the final update will be 3.0.19 on March 30th. Then I'll update to 3.5.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (49 Comments)

Search Download Blog posts

About The Download Blog

Download.com editors cover the world of downloadable software and beyond.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Download Blog topics