Saturday, February 4th 2012

Firefox 11 Goes Beta

Don't worry if you just installed Firefox 10.0 cause there's a new Foxxy browser craving your attention, the Firefox 11.0 beta. This fresh build comes with an updated migration tool that can also import Chrome bookmarks, history, and cookies, and features add-on syncing capabilities, redesigned media controls for HTML5 video, and support for the CSS text-size-adjust property and the outerHTML property.

Firefox 11.0 also brings some goodies for devs like the Page Inspector 3D View, the new Style Editor tool, SPDY Support and more.

To download the Firefox 11.0 beta (for Windows, Mac OS or Linux) see this page.
Add your own comment

42 Comments on Firefox 11 Goes Beta

#1
95Viper
by: F1reFly
offtopic but has anyone checked out Waterfox? its based on FF but is faster.
I am an Opera user... mostly.
However, I am liking Waterfox's speed and stability.
Also, I have had not a single glitch, crash or any other problems, yet, while trying it out.

Waterfox 10 has been released and I plan to give that the try out.:)
Posted on Reply
#2
Moose
Anyone remember the huge difference between 1&2 and 2&3? It was like getting a wonderful new browser!
Posted on Reply
#3
enriquejmh
I can't wait until next week to see FF20 =)
Posted on Reply
#4
timmyisme22
by: Moose
Anyone remember the huge difference between 1&2 and 2&3? It was like getting a wonderful new browser!
I remember. Then they brought out 4 followed by 5... what a let-down. Hence, why I stayed with 3. Still getting updates and proud of it!
Posted on Reply
#5
ypsylon
As far I'm concerned anything after FF v.3.6 doesn't exist.

Using Opera primarily (one of older not bloated versions :rockout:) and FF as a backup. Every so-called "new" browser have the same problem. All of them are Chrome clones which = to me DEAD software, totally dead.

Really missing the times of Opera 3.0-6.05, 1st Netscape, hell even IE 6 was better [:eek:] than anything new on the market today. Proof that artificial progress is no progress at all.
Posted on Reply
#6
syeef
all these stupid update versions are getting on my nerves!
Posted on Reply
#7
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
the speed of firefox releases has now shifted from confusing to amusing... is there anything else in the software world that moves though releases this fast? we'd be at photosop 45 by now..
Posted on Reply
#8
cheesy999
by: wolf
the speed of firefox releases has now shifted from confusing to amusing... is there anything else in the software world that moves though releases this fast? we'd be at photosop 45 by now..
If other programs moved this fast we'd have a Microsoft word 2010 that wasn't named after the year :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#9
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
by: cheesy999
If other programs moved this fast we'd have a Microsoft word 2010 that wasn't named after the year :laugh:
what about cooledit? anybody use that back in the day? I'm pretty sure in 2002 odd I was using cool edit 3000... by now surely it would have been over 9000...
Posted on Reply
#10
Wile E
Power User
by: MikeMurphy
They did it for two reasons:
1- because both IE and Chrome numbers were suggestive of more advanced software; and
2- most importantly, Mozilla sought to reduce the deployment cycle of software updates.

Their next step is to blur the lines of version numbers with a mechanism of persistent updates.

Personally I couldn't care less. I suggest that if anyone gets too caught up with version numbers they need to re-evaluate their priorities.
That would be a valid point if the inflated version numbers didn't break some plug-ins.
Posted on Reply
#11
F1reFly
i think FF is trying to keep up with Google. i don't think its a bad idea to move fast between versions for web browsers, if nothing else, keeps ahead of those trying to find exploits. But MS and Apple seem to be drop dead slow.
Though if it wasnt for FF, we'd still have IE 6
Posted on Reply
#12
kid41212003
by: Wile E
That would be a valid point if the inflated version numbers didn't break some plug-ins.
true..

all my plugins that i've been using since Chrome 8 are still working
Posted on Reply
#13
lauri_hoefs
by: Wile E
That would be a valid point if the inflated version numbers didn't break some plug-ins.
And the version numbering isn't the only problem. The "faster" release cycle also means shorter support per release. Except for the few ESR-releases, which will have an also fairly short 54 week support.

This means that environments which require standardized software installations with long term support and reliability (large corporations, hospitals, governmental agencies, etc, etc.) can't really use Firefox anymore.
Posted on Reply
#14
H 3 L L S M A N
by: F1reFly
offtopic but has anyone checked out Waterfox? its based on FF but is faster.
At first I thought you were joking about the name but then I googled WaterFox and there it is, I will give it a try.
Posted on Reply
#15
Assimilator
I moved to Chrome after Mozilla went batshit insane with version numbers. I find Chrome a much better browsing experience, and of course it silently auto-updates without breaking addons.

Might give Waterfox a try - already used Palemoon but wasn't that impressed.
Posted on Reply
#16
Lipton
by: punani
As with winamp, they skipped version 4 as they felt the new version was atleast 2 versions more awesome than the previous :p

But Mozillas version frenzy is just silly... :banghead:
v5 unified v2 and v3 which were very different to eachother. Until v5 came along I stayed on v2, but nowadays I only use YouTube and Spotify. :p
Posted on Reply
#17
Moose
Everything said i still prefer firefox to any other browser
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment