Mozilla: Firefox 4 will be our last big release

Good Move

I'm no fan of Google whose approach often seems to be de-stabilising other players rather than ever delivering a final product, but the regular incremental update is a great way to go.


This approach has some limitations when it comes to delivering a major upgrade (you can't do a major update incrementally!)

By wittgenfrog on 28 Feb 2011

LTS Release

they could do with an Long Term Service Release like ubuntu then for those of us who move at desktop pace and IT departments who need a more stable release to roll out can opt for that one. otherwise you won't know when to put your stake in the ground.

By SimonCorlett on 28 Feb 2011

Google

(Particularly in response to wittgenfrog).

For all Google's "Beta" tags, I have rarely experienced issues, but primarily cutting edge features not available elsewhere - so why shouldn't they destabilise others?. If their "Beta" products are this good, why do they need to release a "final" one?

By halsteadk on 28 Feb 2011

LTS stands for Long Term Support.

By Lestibournes on 1 Mar 2011

How will this affect add-on/plug-in support?

With their previous releases I'd end up with 4-6 that weren't compatible with the new iteration and had to wait a couple of weeks for them to be updated.

By Phoomeister on 1 Mar 2011

Why LTS

Why do IT departments need an LTS release? The normal argument is that it is easier to support a single version, but auto update solves that.

By tirons1 on 1 Mar 2011

LTS

you may allow your PC's to run auto update but at enterprise level and in some medium sized business's with a proper IT policy and locked down machines auto update is not allowed. what happens if an update stops an internal system working as it should. granted the internal system may be badly written but it was working before. updates need to be tested and lists need to be checked off before rolling out into a live environment.

This is one of the reasons I.E. still has a large user base.

By SimonCorlett on 1 Mar 2011

@SimonCorlett - It's also one of the reasons why IE*6* still has such a large user base!

By halsteadk on 1 Mar 2011

You're not kidding

I work for a very large technology-based corp and, when one

By Throbinevans on 1 Mar 2011

Oooops, fat fingers. Carrying on....

When one of the corporate IT types visited my tech office the other day and came across a load of our development boxes running Chrome, IE9 Beta and (shock horror) Win7, his brains nearly jumped out of his ears. After some smelling salts, a nice cuppa and an explanation that the machines weren't on the corp network, but on our own fat pipe used for customer demos, he got his pulse back down to 200bpm.

By Throbinevans on 1 Mar 2011

Better security

Perhaps this means Firefox will keep pace with Chromes faster response to security threats too.

Secuina scans all last year showed Chrome to be most fleet of foot in this regard by weeks in some cases.

Overall though this seems to be a response to IE9 and Mozilla trying to re-focus toward staying well ahead. It makes sense because MS / IE tend to be tied to the longer LTS release principle.

By Gindylow on 3 Mar 2011

I LIKE IT!

I think MS's old formula is so tiresome and clunky, it deserves to be relegated to history: why must we re-learn how to use our browsers every time MS feels a need to look fresh and new? Frankly it’s a pain, all this shuffling the buttons around, for the sake of looking new. I hate it frankly, and the majority of user do - I suspect. Hurrah Google for thinking “convenience” par excellence.

By Steve_long on 6 Mar 2011