5 ms·

Announcing Firefox Aurora 10

55 points by maratd 15y ago

xtacy 15y ago
I am on the Nightly builds and I found that when Nightly was version 10.0 (now Nightly is 11.0), Twitter broke because LocalStorage did not work. Has it been fixed in v10?
- i_crusade 15y ago
  twitter seems healthy. btw you can download/use seperate build channels to see how they work for you.
BauerUK 15y ago
Good to see they have finally integrated developer tools natively. However, they're all over the place. Each tool sits in its own separate window, they really need to bring them altogether and implement something more like FireBug. Oh, the JavaScript scratch pad is a nice addition. A CSS version would also be nice.
- pbhjpbhj 15y ago
  >something more like FireBug. // I'd have thought a first iteration would simply be firebug simplified, optimised and built in.
- pcwalton 15y ago
  The CSS version is under development: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=583041 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=583041
LeafStorm 15y ago
The visibility APIs look useful. Why didn't anyone come up with that before?
- james33 15y ago
  Yeah, I hadn't even thought of that before, but right after I read that I started thinking of countless opportunities to put that to use.
  - Hovertruck 15y ago
    You already can in Webkit-based browsers by listening for the 'webkitvisibilitychange' event.
pgaurav1432 15y ago
new will be anounsed yet. . . .
suivix 15y ago
Why don't they automatically update yet like Chrome? Having to download something every couple of weeks is a huge annoyance.
- copper 15y ago
  But they do: my version of Aurora notifies me when there's a new update that's been downloaded, and if I don't click it then, it updates the next time I start firefox.
  - gcp 15y ago
    I suspect parent may have meant silent updates, where the browser updates without having to notify you. (Whereas now it still asks you each time) I think that can't work until "compatible by default" is enabled for add-ons, which hopefully will come soon.
- chaud 15y ago
  Take a look at Brian's blog post that goes through what is coming on this front: http://www.brianbondy.com/blog/id/125/ http://www.brianbondy.com/blog/id/125/
- starwed 15y ago
  Check Preferences -> Updates, you might well have disabled that option.
dylangs1030 15y ago
I downloaded and ran it. Here's a few observations: 1. Mozilla is stating that Aurora has focused on enhancements in HTML5, but aside from the new visibility API for tabs not being viewed, both Aurora and Firefox score 314 on http://html5test.com http://html5test.com (behind Chrome). 2. Aurora loads (warm, not cold) at about 2.1 seconds for me, from run to display. In context, that's about half a second faster than Firefox opening (again, warm) on the same computer, as Firefox opens in about 2.6 seconds. 3. This release seems like the kind of thing very easy to glaze over because it doesn't have immediately apparent differences with Firefox - power users and coders will find it useful and appealing.
- dvdhsu 15y ago
  > Aurora loads (warm, not cold) at about 2.1 seconds for me, from run to display. In context, that's about half a second faster than Firefox opening (again, warm) on the same computer, as Firefox opens in about 2.6 seconds. I really suggest getting a SSD if you can afford it. The amount of time it will save you everytime you boot your computer and/or start programs really adds up in the long run. Once you go SSD, you can't go back.
  - Tharkun 15y ago
    Getting faster hardware to improve performance of slow bloatware is a tad silly.
    - mgkimsal 15y ago
      But, it's about the only thing an end user can realistically do. Spend a few hundred dollars on hardware - install once - things run faster. Go about your business. or Learn to program in a variety of languages. Join multiple projects. Grab code, start hacking. Lobby to get your patches accepted. Deal with months of political infighting on various projects. Consider forking projects because patches aren't accepted. Deal with your contributions being removed or broken in future commits. Contend with slower hardware during the months (or years) it takes for this process to occur for all the major programs you run (and forget about the dozens of smaller programs you use daily). Hrm... yeah, I can see why getting faster hardware is a tad silly. Not sure what the OP was thinking. Given that it takes 2.1 seconds, can we assume that at least some of that time is physical loading from the drive, and has nothing to do with the actual program itself? Faster hardware does indeed work. And I'm saying this as someone with SSD lust, and can't quite justify the expense of a 256g or 512g SSD. :/
jvoorhis 15y ago
The inspector is a needed improvement over previous versions. It's responsive, and shows tag, id and class info as you hover over any element.
ebiester 15y ago
I'm looking at the page visibility API. On one hand, I can think of a dozen ways it could be useful. On the other hand, images in my head of interstitials pausing while they are in the background is enough to kill someone. (I prefer not to use adblock, oddly enough.)
Causification 15y ago
Seven major releases and yet there's not one single compelling reason for me to stop using 3.6. Mozilla can get back to me when it un-cripples the interface.
tommi 15y ago
Just in case you didn't know it: Firefox release stages are: nightly, aurora, beta, final. Had to look this one up. Lessons learned from this: always describe in release notes with at least one sentence what you are releasing.
ebabchick 15y ago
They really need to get developer Inspect working such that simply hovering over the HTML highlights the relevant part of the page, not only clicking on it. Chrome is crushing them here with that feature.
- pcwalton 15y ago
  If I understand what you mean, that's working in nightlies.
i_crusade 15y ago
I'm really really happy that mozilla keeps pushing firefox. I was for some time concerned that chrome's success would put mozilla in an less productive state. Kudos to mozilla and the community!
bokchoi 15y ago
> We fixed E4X syntax so that it is not accepted in ES5 strict mode. I kinda like E4X even with it's warts. Why remove it from strict mode?

55 points by maratd 15y ago

xtacy 15y ago

I am on the Nightly builds and I found that when Nightly was version 10.0 (now Nightly is 11.0), Twitter broke because LocalStorage did not work. Has it been fixed in v10?

i_crusade 15y ago
twitter seems healthy. btw you can download/use seperate build channels to see how they work for you.

BauerUK 15y ago

Good to see they have finally integrated developer tools natively. However, they're all over the place. Each tool sits in its own separate window, they really need to bring them altogether and implement something more like FireBug. Oh, the JavaScript scratch pad is a nice addition. A CSS version would also be nice.

pbhjpbhj 15y ago
>something more like FireBug. // I'd have thought a first iteration would simply be firebug simplified, optimised and built in.
pcwalton 15y ago
The CSS version is under development: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=583041 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=583041

LeafStorm 15y ago

The visibility APIs look useful. Why didn't anyone come up with that before?

james33 15y ago
Yeah, I hadn't even thought of that before, but right after I read that I started thinking of countless opportunities to put that to use.
- Hovertruck 15y ago
  You already can in Webkit-based browsers by listening for the 'webkitvisibilitychange' event.

pgaurav1432 15y ago

new will be anounsed yet. . . .

suivix 15y ago

Why don't they automatically update yet like Chrome? Having to download something every couple of weeks is a huge annoyance.

copper 15y ago
But they do: my version of Aurora notifies me when there's a new update that's been downloaded, and if I don't click it then, it updates the next time I start firefox.
- gcp 15y ago
  I suspect parent may have meant silent updates, where the browser updates without having to notify you. (Whereas now it still asks you each time) I think that can't work until "compatible by default" is enabled for add-ons, which hopefully will come soon.
chaud 15y ago
Take a look at Brian's blog post that goes through what is coming on this front: http://www.brianbondy.com/blog/id/125/ http://www.brianbondy.com/blog/id/125/
starwed 15y ago
Check Preferences -> Updates, you might well have disabled that option.

dylangs1030 15y ago

I downloaded and ran it. Here's a few observations: 1. Mozilla is stating that Aurora has focused on enhancements in HTML5, but aside from the new visibility API for tabs not being viewed, both Aurora and Firefox score 314 on http://html5test.com http://html5test.com (behind Chrome). 2. Aurora loads (warm, not cold) at about 2.1 seconds for me, from run to display. In context, that's about half a second faster than Firefox opening (again, warm) on the same computer, as Firefox opens in about 2.6 seconds. 3. This release seems like the kind of thing very easy to glaze over because it doesn't have immediately apparent differences with Firefox - power users and coders will find it useful and appealing.

dvdhsu 15y ago
> Aurora loads (warm, not cold) at about 2.1 seconds for me, from run to display. In context, that's about half a second faster than Firefox opening (again, warm) on the same computer, as Firefox opens in about 2.6 seconds. I really suggest getting a SSD if you can afford it. The amount of time it will save you everytime you boot your computer and/or start programs really adds up in the long run. Once you go SSD, you can't go back.
- Tharkun 15y ago
  Getting faster hardware to improve performance of slow bloatware is a tad silly.
  - mgkimsal 15y ago
    But, it's about the only thing an end user can realistically do. Spend a few hundred dollars on hardware - install once - things run faster. Go about your business. or Learn to program in a variety of languages. Join multiple projects. Grab code, start hacking. Lobby to get your patches accepted. Deal with months of political infighting on various projects. Consider forking projects because patches aren't accepted. Deal with your contributions being removed or broken in future commits. Contend with slower hardware during the months (or years) it takes for this process to occur for all the major programs you run (and forget about the dozens of smaller programs you use daily). Hrm... yeah, I can see why getting faster hardware is a tad silly. Not sure what the OP was thinking. Given that it takes 2.1 seconds, can we assume that at least some of that time is physical loading from the drive, and has nothing to do with the actual program itself? Faster hardware does indeed work. And I'm saying this as someone with SSD lust, and can't quite justify the expense of a 256g or 512g SSD. :/

jvoorhis 15y ago

The inspector is a needed improvement over previous versions. It's responsive, and shows tag, id and class info as you hover over any element.

ebiester 15y ago

I'm looking at the page visibility API. On one hand, I can think of a dozen ways it could be useful. On the other hand, images in my head of interstitials pausing while they are in the background is enough to kill someone. (I prefer not to use adblock, oddly enough.)

Causification 15y ago

Seven major releases and yet there's not one single compelling reason for me to stop using 3.6. Mozilla can get back to me when it un-cripples the interface.

tommi 15y ago

Just in case you didn't know it: Firefox release stages are: nightly, aurora, beta, final. Had to look this one up. Lessons learned from this: always describe in release notes with at least one sentence what you are releasing.

ebabchick 15y ago

They really need to get developer Inspect working such that simply hovering over the HTML highlights the relevant part of the page, not only clicking on it. Chrome is crushing them here with that feature.

pcwalton 15y ago
If I understand what you mean, that's working in nightlies.

i_crusade 15y ago

I'm really really happy that mozilla keeps pushing firefox. I was for some time concerned that chrome's success would put mozilla in an less productive state. Kudos to mozilla and the community!

bokchoi 15y ago

> We fixed E4X syntax so that it is not accepted in ES5 strict mode. I kinda like E4X even with it's warts. Why remove it from strict mode?