6 ms·

Flash video crashes constantly and it still doesn't work with netflix. Who cares about crappy 90's style GL demos? SOmehow, it seems priorities aren't quite r

by ezy 16y ago

Flash video crashes constantly and it still doesn't work with netflix. Who cares about crappy 90's style GL demos? SOmehow, it seems priorities aren't quite right at mozilla, IMO.

InclinedPlane 16y ago
Perhaps you misunderstand the purpose of software development. There is a stable version of Firefox (version 3.6), you can download it at http://www.mozilla.org/firefox/ http://www.mozilla.org/firefox/. Mozilla is also adding new features to Firefox in an effort to enable web developers to do new things in new ways. Development and stabilization of these new features is ongoing, which is why it's restricted to a beta program in the next version. What would you prefer? That Mozilla abandon innovation completely and concentrate utterly on stability? That you not be allowed to participate in beta testing the next version of the browser? If you don't want to test Firefox's new features in the unstable version then perhaps you can avoid running the beta and just stick with the older version.
- ezy 16y ago
  This made me laugh, WTF does "purpose of software development" actually mean? That phrase is itself a misunderstanding waiting to happen. :-) Yeah... Ok, I probably deserved a bit of a snarky reply -- I missed the 32-bit requirement for silverlight in the release notes (apparently their sandboxing for 64bit is broken). Just for that oversight, I'll take my lumps. I do think, however, that you're thinking in a binary way about this. It's possible to add new features and fix bugs at the same time, ya know. It's possible to prioritize stuff even in a beta... you don't just pile on the shiny new because you slapped a "beta" sticker on it. It's a beta release, not an alpha, and the eighth beta release. Right on the durn frontpage is says it should be stable enough for normal use in most cases. I would classify youtube as one of those cases. As soon as the 7th release came out, it was broken in an obvious way vis a vis youtube video on some platforms. They had months to fix it. Mozilla obviously decided that WebGL bling was more important... ...and that's fine, they can do what they want and yes, it's a beta release and webgl is cool, but I still think their priorities are screwed up.
  - code_duck 16y ago
    Okay, so it sounds like you misunderstand the process of software development. You can't completely rewrite various subsystems for performance and fix bugs at the same time. There is more going on than just 'adding new features'. New software is bound to be unstable while it is in development. If you have a problem with this, do not download beta versions. Personally, I haven't had any issues at all with stability or compatibility on Beta 6 or 7 (on Linux).
    - ezy 16y ago
      (Since I don't particularly care about my karma at the moment, I guess I'll continue beating this dead horse :-)) And here's my snarky rejoinder: Hey look! There are bug fixes and new features in the latest beta. How did they do that? Perhaps they misunderstand the software development process! What you have described is some ideal model of the development process based on something you think should happen. It doesn't exist, and it doesn't happen that way. No one is reading what I wrote: their priority is messed up (in my opinion). Software development is very much about priorities. You can decide that youtube functionality might be important for mac users for them to even continue testing the beta (e.g. no they(I) aren't(am not) going to keep launching another browser for every you tube video when they could just use safari). Or you can decide WebGL and audio (audio? really?) bling which a precious few will be using even in a year, is somehow more important.
      - eitally 16y ago
        I think their priority right now is to not fall so far behind Chrome that catching up becomes a serious challenge.
      - chc 16y ago
        Honestly, I think your priorities are messed up — or at least inconsistent with your actions. You seem to just want a stable browser for watching YouTube without regard for cutting-edge technology, but for some reason are using a piece of beta software that is currently focused on other things. As far as the final product is concerned, I'd bet that YouTube does have higher priority than WebGL. But that isn't the current focus of development.
ootachi 16y ago
Use the 32-bit version of Firefox for Netflix. See the release notes here: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/4.0b8/releasenotes/ http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/4.0b8/releasenotes/
sp4rki 16y ago
So you would rather they stopped trying to innovate and implement new features on the B E T A version because it doesn't play youtube FOR YOU? Mozilla's priorities are right where they should be, on adding features and fixing bugs. The fact that you found a bug should be reported. But who gave you the right to tell people what their priorities should be just because they don't fit your agenda? If you want to watch youtube videos or have a multitude of extensions at your disposal, why would you try a beta version of the software when the stable version suits you just fine? How about if you stop being a smart aleck and contribute by reporting your bugs, just make sure your not being obnoxious about it as you're being now.

by ezy 16y ago

Flash video crashes constantly and it still doesn't work with netflix. Who cares about crappy 90's style GL demos? SOmehow, it seems priorities aren't quite right at mozilla, IMO.

InclinedPlane 16y ago

Perhaps you misunderstand the purpose of software development. There is a stable version of Firefox (version 3.6), you can download it at http://www.mozilla.org/firefox/ http://www.mozilla.org/firefox/. Mozilla is also adding new features to Firefox in an effort to enable web developers to do new things in new ways. Development and stabilization of these new features is ongoing, which is why it's restricted to a beta program in the next version. What would you prefer? That Mozilla abandon innovation completely and concentrate utterly on stability? That you not be allowed to participate in beta testing the next version of the browser? If you don't want to test Firefox's new features in the unstable version then perhaps you can avoid running the beta and just stick with the older version.

ezy 16y ago
This made me laugh, WTF does "purpose of software development" actually mean? That phrase is itself a misunderstanding waiting to happen. :-) Yeah... Ok, I probably deserved a bit of a snarky reply -- I missed the 32-bit requirement for silverlight in the release notes (apparently their sandboxing for 64bit is broken). Just for that oversight, I'll take my lumps. I do think, however, that you're thinking in a binary way about this. It's possible to add new features and fix bugs at the same time, ya know. It's possible to prioritize stuff even in a beta... you don't just pile on the shiny new because you slapped a "beta" sticker on it. It's a beta release, not an alpha, and the eighth beta release. Right on the durn frontpage is says it should be stable enough for normal use in most cases. I would classify youtube as one of those cases. As soon as the 7th release came out, it was broken in an obvious way vis a vis youtube video on some platforms. They had months to fix it. Mozilla obviously decided that WebGL bling was more important... ...and that's fine, they can do what they want and yes, it's a beta release and webgl is cool, but I still think their priorities are screwed up.
- code_duck 16y ago
  Okay, so it sounds like you misunderstand the process of software development. You can't completely rewrite various subsystems for performance and fix bugs at the same time. There is more going on than just 'adding new features'. New software is bound to be unstable while it is in development. If you have a problem with this, do not download beta versions. Personally, I haven't had any issues at all with stability or compatibility on Beta 6 or 7 (on Linux).
  - ezy 16y ago
    (Since I don't particularly care about my karma at the moment, I guess I'll continue beating this dead horse :-)) And here's my snarky rejoinder: Hey look! There are bug fixes and new features in the latest beta. How did they do that? Perhaps they misunderstand the software development process! What you have described is some ideal model of the development process based on something you think should happen. It doesn't exist, and it doesn't happen that way. No one is reading what I wrote: their priority is messed up (in my opinion). Software development is very much about priorities. You can decide that youtube functionality might be important for mac users for them to even continue testing the beta (e.g. no they(I) aren't(am not) going to keep launching another browser for every you tube video when they could just use safari). Or you can decide WebGL and audio (audio? really?) bling which a precious few will be using even in a year, is somehow more important.
    - eitally 16y ago
      I think their priority right now is to not fall so far behind Chrome that catching up becomes a serious challenge.
    - chc 16y ago
      Honestly, I think your priorities are messed up — or at least inconsistent with your actions. You seem to just want a stable browser for watching YouTube without regard for cutting-edge technology, but for some reason are using a piece of beta software that is currently focused on other things. As far as the final product is concerned, I'd bet that YouTube does have higher priority than WebGL. But that isn't the current focus of development.

ootachi 16y ago

Use the 32-bit version of Firefox for Netflix. See the release notes here: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/4.0b8/releasenotes/ http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/4.0b8/releasenotes/

sp4rki 16y ago

So you would rather they stopped trying to innovate and implement new features on the B E T A version because it doesn't play youtube FOR YOU? Mozilla's priorities are right where they should be, on adding features and fixing bugs. The fact that you found a bug should be reported. But who gave you the right to tell people what their priorities should be just because they don't fit your agenda? If you want to watch youtube videos or have a multitude of extensions at your disposal, why would you try a beta version of the software when the stable version suits you just fine? How about if you stop being a smart aleck and contribute by reporting your bugs, just make sure your not being obnoxious about it as you're being now.