# Firefox 4 is (almost) here



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

I guess the folks at Mozilla decided to push out a release candidate ahead of the anticipated IE9 release at SXSW, as the Firefox 4 RC has been officially released. It appears to still support profiles, and I was able to load up the AdBlock Plus, Xmarks, and LastPass extensions that I always use. (Yes, I run FF 3.5, 3.6, 4.0, and Minefield on the same machine).

Based upon the nightlies that I have been using, there are some definate UI changes from the 3.x series of Firefox. One big thing is that Firefox 4.x will still run on XP, unlike IE9.


----------



## gphvid (Jun 19, 2007)

I find that Microsoft blatant attempt to get users to go to Win7 if they want Internet Destroyer...Explorer 9 to be idiotic.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

According to the Microsoft Life Cycle Page, Windows XP is in extended support now, with end-of-life being April, 2014. In Microsoft's eyes, why support a product that is dead?

Of course, I can point to all of the installs and companies who are still happily running XP, and see no need to upgrade this year. (Maybe because they don't have a upgrade budget.... again... for the third consecutive fiscal year).


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I'll upgrade to Firefox 4, especially on the Mac, because you can start Firefox in private browsing mode on the Mac and you can't do that with Chrome. On the PC, though, I've pretty much migrated 100% to Chrome.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I have been running the Firefox 4 beta for a while now... there were some strange glitches with some Webs sites I frequent... but most of those seem to have been ironed out now.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Still no Multi-Rows Bookmarks for FF4. So I'll wait.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

gphvid said:


> I find that Microsoft blatant attempt to get users to go to Win7 if they want Internet Destroyer...Explorer 9 to be idiotic.


But it doesn't require Windows 7. It'll work on Vista as well, though some features do require 7. Honestly though, if you're on XP, IE 8 should be good enough.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

FF4 was released today. One less browser option for those still using PowerPC Macs.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I went to getfirefox.com and they are still offering up FF3.6. Where are you getting the release version of FF4?


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I went to getfirefox.com and they are still offering up FF3.6. Where are you getting the release version of FF4?


Try mozilla.com.


----------



## RandallA (Feb 4, 2005)

http://www.mozilla.com/products/download.html?product=firefox-4.0&os=win&lang=en-US

There's a green button labeled "Firefox 4 Free Download"


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Gotcha, thanks


----------



## naijai (Aug 19, 2006)

Download it yesterday and i still prefer IE9 to Firefox but i'll still use it because there are some sites that aren't IE9 freindly yet even with the compatibilty button but overall very good and i like the overall look of it. wish i could get the metro theme back though


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Just downloaded a little while ago. Loving it so far!


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Got it as well. Interesting way it handles javascript popups.


----------



## FYRPLG (Nov 11, 2006)

just downloaded..
Were did favorites go?

sorry found bookmarks over on top right thanks


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

FF4 fails Acid3 test


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Does V4 install over the top of V3 or can you run both?


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

I did an update on 2 PCs - one running WinXP Pro and the other running Win2000 Pro 
No issues so far.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

machavez00 said:


> FF4 fails Acid3 test


But does it really matter?

http://limi.net/articles/firefox-acid3/


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

klang said:


> Does V4 install over the top of V3 or can you run both?


Mine installed V4 along with V3, which is good, because I hate V4. Lots of quirks. Waiting for the release before I try it again.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

It upgraded on my Win7.

It does seem faster.

But I miss two addons that I got accustom to - Colorful Tabs and Multirow Bookmarks. I'll be satisfied when they're upgraded to v4.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

klang said:


> Does V4 install over the top of V3 or can you run both?


It upgraded on my two Win7


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

klang said:


> Does V4 install over the top of V3 or can you run both?


Yes, but you will have to set up profiles and use special command line parameters. An article describing how this is done can be found at http://lifehacker.com/#!231646/geek-to-live--manage-multiple-firefox-profiles .

For whats it worth, I've set up my work machine (which is running XP) to run Firefox 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 3.6, 4.0, and Minefield releases. This allows me to do regression testing as well as compatibility testing. I also use LastPass and Xmarks to share the bookmarks and passwords.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

Drucifer said:


> But I miss two addons that I got accustom to - Colorful Tabs and Multirow Bookmarks. I'll be satisfied when they're upgraded to v4.


Colorful Tabs - See https://www.binaryturf.com/free-software/colorfultabs-for-firefox/


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

Mark Holtz said:


> Yes, but you will have to set up profiles and use special command line parameters. An article describing how this is done can be found at http://lifehacker.com/#!231646/geek-to-live--manage-multiple-firefox-profiles .
> 
> For whats it worth, I've set up my work machine (which is running XP) to run Firefox 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 3.6, 4.0, and Minefield releases. This allows me to do regression testing as well as compatibility testing. I also use LastPass and Xmarks to share the bookmarks and passwords.


Thanks, I think I'll sit back and let others do the debugging for now.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

I was reading about the release when I read this statement:


> Mozilla is struggling to keep market share as rivals such as Google's Chrome browser are picking up steam in 2011.


"Market share" seems like an odd term in this context. According to Wikipedia:


> *Market share*, in strategic management and marketing is, according to Carlton O'Neal, the percentage or proportion of the total available market or market segment that is being serviced by a company. It can be expressed as a company's sales revenue (from that market) divided by the total sales revenue available in that market. It can also be expressed as a company's unit sales volume (in a market) divided by the total volume of units sold in that market.


Since browsers are not sold they produce no sales revenue nor is there any sales volume.

I like competition in this situation, so I guess each browser is like a team in a sport? Maybe they should start using sport metaphors rather than business metaphors in reference to how many people support a team.

And though I guess I wear a "Go Firefox" jersey, I'll wait for awhile. Maybe 4.1?


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

phrelin said:


> Since browsers are not sold they produce no sales revenue nor is there any sales volume.


Uh, not quite. By being linked to a search engine, they can generate revenue from pointing to that search engine.

And, yes, browser market share *does matter*. Based upon browser market share reports, I can look to see what is popular with browsers, and test my site for compatibility. I would also digest the logs from my own web sites to see what my visitors use, and thus ensure the compatibility. (And, thank goodness IE6's market share is slowly but finally shrinking)


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Mark Holtz said:


> Colorful Tabs - See https://www.binaryturf.com/free-software/colorfultabs-for-firefox/


Thanks


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Mark Holtz said:


> Uh, not quite. By being linked to a search engine, they can generate revenue from pointing to that search engine.
> 
> And, yes, browser market share *does matter*. Based upon browser market share reports, I can look to see what is popular with browsers, and test my site for compatibility. I would also digest the logs from my own web sites to see what my visitors use, and thus ensure the compatibility. (And, thank goodness IE6's market share is slowly but finally shrinking)


Hmmm. Ok. So it has meaning to commercial web sites, helping them to increase their "market share" as I understand the term.

I guess I understand the search engine thing. I'm guessing that most people download the browser and not choose to set their own search engine preference? ...Now that was a dumb question. On most computers I see, no one sets anything until a crash....

Anyway, I guess I get the general idea - it's all about context, not about the browser generating revenue from its sale.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

phrelin said:


> I'm guessing that most people download the browser and not choose to set their own search engine preference?


A friend of mine had so many toolbars on the top of his browser, he couldnt read the actual page he was trying to read anymore. I had to teach him that when he installed a program, to UNCHECK the free toolbar box. He just installed every one by default...


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

phrelin said:


> Hmmm. Ok. So it has meaning to commercial web sites, helping them to increase their "market share" as I understand the term.


It's not really that. It has meaning because despite adhering to standards, browsers have subtle differences in interpretation. IE doesn't handle CSS alpha transparency very well (well, didn't. i think 9 fixed it). It also has differences in how it renders box layout models. I know it's pretty much apocrypha to anyone not in the field, but knowing these percentages makes it a bit easier to know what moving target we're aiming for this month.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

RasputinAXP said:


> It's not really that. It has meaning because despite adhering to standards, browsers have subtle differences in interpretation. IE doesn't handle CSS alpha transparency very well (well, didn't. i think 9 fixed it). It also has differences in how it renders box layout models. I know it's pretty much apocrypha to anyone not in the field, but knowing these percentages makes it a bit easier to know what moving target we're aiming for this month.


YEs, that's what I'm trying to say. It's akin to American English verses British English. We fill up our cars with gas, they fill up their cars with petrol.


----------



## mpinales (Oct 9, 2010)

I downloaded for the Mac...BUT it dissabled 1PASS, and other add ones...I am sorry I downloaded. Seems now that I cajn't go back.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

Firefox 3.6


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Davenlr said:


> A friend of mine had so many toolbars on the top of his browser, he couldnt read the actual page he was trying to read anymore. I had to teach him that when he installed a program, to UNCHECK the free toolbar box. He just installed every one by default...


I got two friends like that. Think we all do.


----------



## klang (Oct 14, 2003)

mpinales said:


> I downloaded for the Mac...BUT it dissabled 1PASS, and other add ones...I am sorry I downloaded. Seems now that I cajn't go back.


I only use a handful of add-ons but a quick search shows none work properly yet with Firefox 4. Another reason for me to wait.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

klang said:


> I only use a handful of add-ons but a quick search shows none work properly yet with Firefox 4. Another reason for me to wait.


ImageRehost, Lastpass, Downthemall, Sync, FoxtoPhone, Greasemonkey...they're all running fine on FF4 for me.


----------



## Cholly (Mar 22, 2004)

So I downloaded FF4.0 last night. Lots of nice new features and only two addons that didn't work out of the box. Firefox kindly searched for updates and now only one doesn't work -- HP Smart Web Printing. But, then, it didn't work with Firefox 3.x either.
It also installed the newest Yahoo toolbar, which I don't really need, and a number of Google gadgets. I have a fair amount of cleanup to do. I also have to visit the Tour to check out the changes.


----------



## Chuck W (Mar 26, 2002)

I think I may finally make the switch from ie to firefox with this version. I tried ie9 the other day and hate it.

Once again Microsoft insists on trying to change things that aren't broken and giving you no way to change it back, essentially saying this is the way it is and you will like it(didn't they learn their lesson with the ribbon bar in office 2007?). 

They moved the favorite button to the RIGHT side of the screen. WHY? The favorites have been on the left for eons and everyone, including myself are used to it. Why not give the user a choice? But they didn't as there is no way to move the button.

Then they include a mini download manager. Nice idea but I don't like using them and I've seen MANY people with the same thought. Again, why not give people a choice to use it or not? And again, they didn't as there is no way to not use the download manager.

It's things like this that aggravate me. Give the user a CHOICE. Stop trying to force your ways onto others.

Anyway, I loaded up Firefox 4 and love it. I think it will finally get me to switch permanently. It's an impressive set up this time around with TONS of flexibility and I am able to set it up the way I like it, not the way they want me to like it


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

I'm using FF 4.0 now on my XP Notebook. It setup really fast and came to life with no problems except for for being incompatible with DivX. My customized tool bar, bookmarks and settings were all retained. 

A 'why did they change that' .. relocating tabs above the URL window. I didn't immediately see that but found myself moving the cursor to the old location. I do like the popup status bar because there's more screen for the web page. Otherwise, I really can't see much difference except the the icons not being very colorful. 

With my 700 kilobit DSL connection, I don't notice any rendering speed improvements.

--- CHAS


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

Firefox 4 is faster than Firefox 3.6, but Google Chrome is faster at loading pages than either of them. The real slowpoke on my machine is IE 8.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

From http://blog.mozilla.com/blog/2011/03/25/the-first-48-hours-of-mozilla-firefox-4/


----------



## Chuck W (Mar 26, 2002)

HIPAR said:


> A 'why did they change that' .. relocating tabs above the URL window. I didn't immediately see that but found myself moving the cursor to the old location.


If I remember right, if you right click on it, it gives you the option to put the tab bar above or below the URL window.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

phrelin said:


> Since browsers are not sold they produce no sales revenue nor is there any sales volume.


If you don't think there's a underlying motivations behind the "mindshare", you're sadly mistaken.

Google has a very keen interest in the success of Chrome as it feeds their search engine and targeted advertising monsters. It is also a key element of their multi-point plan to marginalize the Microsoft model of personal and corporate computing (these are surprisingly similar if you think about it).

Microsoft, as always, is trying to make something that should be free and open into something that is as proprietary and exclusive as they possibly can (see more at Silverlight). It was certainly easier than trying to compete on a level playing field. How many times have they announced that the next version of IE would be "more standards compliant" only to find out they were blowing smoke?

Mozilla is doing this mostly for bragging rights and for a certain class of people, slaying corporate dragons brings all the recognition, power and prestige that they need.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Mark Holtz said:


> Colorful Tabs - See https://www.binaryturf.com/free-software/colorfultabs-for-firefox/


It's even better on FF4


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

harsh said:


> If you don't think there's a underlying motivations behind the "mindshare", you're sadly mistaken.
> 
> Google has a very keen interest in the success of Chrome as it feeds their search engine and targeted advertising monsters. It is also a key element of their multi-point plan to marginalize the Microsoft model of personal and corporate computing (these are surprisingly similar if you think about it).
> 
> ...


I guess I'm in the Mozilla camp. That's why I likened it all to sports teams. Go Firefox!


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

Heh.... I just upgraded my Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, and Firefox still hasn't upgraded to 4.


----------



## Mikemok1981 (Jul 9, 2009)

I thought Ubuntu was on 10.10?


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

It is. 10.04 is a "Long Term Support" version.


----------



## kc1ih (May 22, 2004)

HIPAR said:


> A 'why did they change that' .. relocating tabs above the URL window. I didn't immediately see that but found myself moving the cursor to the old location.
> --- CHAS


You can change it back to having the tabs underneath in the preferences.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Drucifer said:


> But I miss two addons that I got accustom to - Colorful Tabs and *Multirow Bookmarks Toolbar*. I'll be satisfied when they're upgraded to v4.


*Multirow Bookmarks Toolbar Plus v1.0* came out today. It's nice, but it screws up Yahoo Mail Menus. The menus drop down for a spit sec and you're unable to select anything. So I had to remove MrBT+.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

Posted this question to them today:

Firefox4 Tabs and Bookmarks: work around for unhappy users

I have read the explanations of ease of use by dropping the bookmarks bar and moving the tabs to the top. If that works for some then great. The nice thing about personal settings, is that they need to be for ease of use to the individual. When I follow this advice; 

"How do I put tabs back on bottom like they used to be?

At the top of the Firefox window, click on the Firefox button, go over to the Options... arrow and uncheck Tabs on Top. "

First, I cannot find a Firefox button, so I right click in the blank area to get options. Then I check the bookmarks bar and uncheck the tabs on top. That works until I shut off my computer. And then I have to do it all over again when I reboot.

Can I get the permanent option for these choices?


----------

