FireFox 3.5.3 Released.

Printable View

September 11th, 2009, 09:11 AM
t34b4g5

FireFox 3.5.3 Released.

Greetz.

For those that are regular users, or just happen to have FF installed there has been the Release of 3.5.3

http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox.../releasenotes/

This update off course fixed a few issues and a few security related issues

Quote:

Fixed in Firefox 3.5.3

MFSA 2009-51 Chrome privilege escalation with FeedWriter
MFSA 2009-50 Location bar spoofing via tall line-height Unicode characters
MFSA 2009-49 TreeColumns dangling pointer vulnerability
MFSA 2009-47 Crashes with evidence of memory corruption (rv:1.9.1.3/1.9.0.14)
September 11th, 2009, 03:26 PM
westin

Firefox is terrible!

I love it!

It sucks!

Use Opera!

Opera sucks!

I have no problems with IE!

That is because you are an idiot!

End of thread... right? :D
September 11th, 2009, 03:40 PM
ShagDevil

Quote:

End of thread... right?

You had me laughing. And being that it's Friday, I just had to add more.

I use Flock!

what the flock is Flock?

It's better than whatever crap you use.

UR MOM.
September 11th, 2009, 06:47 PM
JPnyc

You forgot "Firefox supports worldwide terror!"
September 11th, 2009, 07:02 PM
westin

You mean FoxFire.
September 11th, 2009, 07:39 PM
JPnyc

yeah, sorry. I've long suspected that I'm lysdexic.
September 11th, 2009, 08:25 PM
gore

As my trainee BOFH has rightly pointed out; It's becoming popular to say "MY Browser is more better than YOUR Browser" kind of like when some of us have a little fun with "MY OS is better than YOUR OS" and it's like that with browsers now it seems.

I guess some people haven't accepted the fact that Opera is currently the only real alternative to IE in terms of use and useful.
September 11th, 2009, 09:48 PM
ByTeWrangler

Opera Rules !
September 12th, 2009, 03:11 AM
t34b4g5

Quote:

Originally Posted by ByTeWrangler

IE Rules !

I fixed it for you. :D
September 12th, 2009, 08:57 AM
nihil

Has anyone actually tried it?

Have they sorted the slow start up problem?

For those of you who have had bad experiences and reverted to 3.0.x there is a new release of that as well: 3.0.14 ;)
September 12th, 2009, 09:12 AM
t34b4g5

Johnno, i'm currently using it atm. :eek:

and to answer your question.

cold start up time i would say have improved slightly, and warm startups have also improved.

Also this was with a stock default install with zero extensions or anything else added on/installed.

they still have the usual issues that really really need to be addressed.

:o
September 12th, 2009, 09:37 AM
nihil

Thanks mate!

I had a lot of problems with 3.5.2 which I am now suspecting was some kind of conflict..............possibly with residual ZoneAlarm elements?

I will try the new one on a different box and see what happens.

If they follow previous form they will support 3.0.x until January 2010, by which time they should have knocked some of the rough edges of 3.5.x

I am afraid I cannot ignore it as it is too popular and I need to keep my finger on the pulse :(
September 12th, 2009, 10:41 AM
t34b4g5

Greetz..

A quick google on ZA & FF 3.5.2 conflict pulled up this thread over at the ZoneAlarm forums>

http://forums.zonealarm.com/showthread.php?t=70141

i have also spotted another thread over at SysOpt forums about a user whom upgraded from 3.5.2 to the new 3.5.3 and it defaulted there settings & they have ZA installed also..

http://www.sysopt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=204623

:argue: ZA & FF :D
September 12th, 2009, 01:33 PM
ByTeWrangler

OpErA RuLeS :)
September 12th, 2009, 02:11 PM
t34b4g5

Quote:

Originally Posted by ByTeWrangler

OpErA RuLeS :)

Care to explain why? you know give some details for those of us that haven't given it a proper go..

some pro's 'n cons would be nice.. ;)
September 12th, 2009, 02:47 PM
JPnyc

I thought a lot of Opera until I tried to edit the mouse gestures.
September 12th, 2009, 06:24 PM
ByTeWrangler

Alright.. I hope I don't get thrown at for this..

I accept:

- Almost all developers or most of them will make sure their website works with IE and FF but will not give a lot about it functioning correctly with Opera.

- FF has more Add-ons then Opera will ever have.

But if you look at it from Code development standards FF, they definitely sucks. I am sure no one likes statistics pulled from another website here but it speaks the fact.

Opera from 9 to 10 was affected by 54 vulnerabilities. Opera's patching time has been "excellent", I've heard rumors that Opera publishes vulnerability information only after getting a fix. However I have never confirmed this. Opera has passed all w3c testes.

FF on the other hand was affected by 114 + 18 vulnerabilities from 3.x to 3.5.x. Lot of Add-on's have been found to be affected by their individual set of vulnerabilities. Apart from this lot of add-on's collect user information without their knowledge. FF gets more memory consuming with ever version. Lastly Mozilla team has never been able to plug FF's memory leak post V 2.0 I guess. FF partially meets W3C standards

I really cannot see one reason which could convince me how FF has better coding standards than anyone out there.
September 12th, 2009, 07:34 PM
JPnyc

that's because it doesn't.Opera's Presto engine is the gold standard at the moment.
September 18th, 2009, 10:47 PM
souleman

No one mentioned Safari? Even though it is the most compliant with the actual standards, and has more support for both HTML5 and XHTML2 (and CSS3), then any other browser.
September 19th, 2009, 10:40 AM
gore

Quote:

Originally Posted by souleman

No one mentioned Safari? Even though it is the most compliant with the actual standards, and has more support for both HTML5 and XHTML2 (and CSS3), then any other browser.

According to Wikipedia, Opera is the only one currently with the standards part. It's I think near the bottom. I haven't checked it this week so I'm not sure of the exact wording, but it said Opera is the only one that is 100% standards based.
September 21st, 2009, 02:18 PM
t34b4g5

I don't like opera, mainly the interface and the menu's are setup all confusing, as long as it's not a sys resource hog, no mem leaks is customizable and loads my pr0n then i'm happy. :george:

Also it has to be able to let me have tons of toolbars more the better as we all know the more toolbars your browser has the better it must be. :cuss:
September 21st, 2009, 03:30 PM
westin

I downloaded Google's Chrome over the weekend. The interface is nice, and I haven't come across any pages that it mangles yet. It does seem to be resource hungry though.
September 22nd, 2009, 11:50 PM
souleman

chrome is resource hungry, but that is intentional. Each tab is like a completely separate browser.

You know how in firefox/opera/whatever, if you run into a screwed up page, it will crash the browser? In chrome, it only crashes the tab that page was in.
September 23rd, 2009, 10:48 AM
The-Spec

I used netscape when I was a kid. All browsers seem fast by comparison.
September 23rd, 2009, 08:54 PM
westin

Quote:

Originally Posted by souleman

chrome is resource hungry, but that is intentional. Each tab is like a completely separate browser.

You know how in firefox/opera/whatever, if you run into a screwed up page, it will crash the browser? In chrome, it only crashes the tab that page was in.

I noticed that... Although FF is pretty good about reloading the tabs that you lost, but I understand Google's intentions... Not a bad idea really.
September 24th, 2009, 01:08 AM
t34b4g5

Quote:

Originally Posted by westin

I noticed that... Although FF is pretty good about reloading the tabs that you lost, but I understand Google's intentions... Not a bad idea really.

The really only difference that i've noticed is that if the browser is left open for long periods of time with multiple tabs left open, Chrome seems to still stay responsive and not give that lagg effect, were as in FF it starts to get a lil lagg and the mem usage slowly get's higher and higher.

If they were able to control the whole mem leak and sys resource part FF could be a stable browser.