Firefox 3.6

Joined
Sep 23, 2006
Messages
893
Reaction score
20
Points
18
Location
Las Vegas, NV USA
Your Mac's Specs
iMac, and Macbook Pro
This version seems much better. It is a lot faster, and is working smoother on my Mac. I may be tempted to use it.
 
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
120
Points
63
Location
Belgium
Your Mac's Specs
iPad Pro 12.9 latest iOS
I have been running it for the past 3 hours and it is indeed a nice piece of work.

Cheers ... McBie
 

CrimsonRequiem


Retired Staff
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
6,003
Reaction score
125
Points
63
Your Mac's Specs
MBP 2.3 Ghz 4GB RAM 860 GB SSD, iMac 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7 32GB RAM, Fusion Drive 1TB
Thanks for the heads up. Didn't realize that they had a new version out. Going to test it out. Hopefully it works with all my add-ons. >_<"
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
I've been running 3.6 in either beta form or RC form for the last few weeks. It is a step up from 3.5 but really it's just an evolutionary update and not really revolutionary. So far in my experience, running 3.5 would be fine if getting 3.6 proved to be hard (for some reason). That said, I would recommend the update if you can get it (which shouldn't be too hard).
 

CrimsonRequiem


Retired Staff
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
6,003
Reaction score
125
Points
63
Your Mac's Specs
MBP 2.3 Ghz 4GB RAM 860 GB SSD, iMac 3.4 GHz Intel Core i7 32GB RAM, Fusion Drive 1TB
I've been running 3.6 in either beta form or RC form for the last few weeks. It is a step up from 3.5 but really it's just an evolutionary update and not really revolutionary. So far in my experience, running 3.5 would be fine if getting 3.6 proved to be hard (for some reason). That said, I would recommend the update if you can get it (which shouldn't be too hard).

It does seem a lot speedier, launch time as well. Only problem is that it doesn't support my tab preview add-ons. T_T"

Fast dial still works, so I'm somewhat still happy. >_<"
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
It is faster (don't get me wrong) and it does fix that annoying application focus problem (reason enough for me to update) but most people would be just as well served with 3.5. Especially if one avoids JavaScript heavy web applications, you're not going to notice much. Plus, if you're using a lot of JS heavy applications, you would be using Safari or Chromium anyway.

I just read this on the Ars Technica review of Firefox 3.6: "In a discussion about the Firefox roadmap, Mozilla informed us that they regard process isolation for plug-ins as a very high priority and hope to roll it out to users in a 3.6.5 update." That would get me to tell everyone to switch to 3.6 without a doubt.
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
3,494
Reaction score
204
Points
63
Location
Going Galt...
Your Mac's Specs
MacBookAir5,2:10.13.6-iMac18,3:10.13.6-iPhone9,3:11.4.1
It's running much faster than Safari and Opera on my system. I may have to consider switching if it turns out to be reliable as well. So far I'm optimistic and looking forward to seeing how well my add-on's function.
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
XJ, have you tried the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha? The new "Carakan" JS engine is in that build and it is ~ 10x faster than the current one in 10.1 (and the 10.2 alpha). It also has full Cocoa support so it integrates (fairly) well.

Last I checked, Safari and Chromium still had an edge on Firefox in terms of JS performance (the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha gives Safari a run for its money too) but as we all know, there is more to the web than just JS.
 
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
3,494
Reaction score
204
Points
63
Location
Going Galt...
Your Mac's Specs
MacBookAir5,2:10.13.6-iMac18,3:10.13.6-iPhone9,3:11.4.1
XJ, have you tried the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha? The new "Carakan" JS engine is in that build and it is ~ 10x faster than the current one in 10.1 (and the 10.2 alpha). It also has full Cocoa support so it integrates (fairly) well.

Last I checked, Safari and Chromium still had an edge on Firefox in terms of JS performance (the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha gives Safari a run for its money too) but as we all know, there is more to the web than just JS.

You know, I just switched to the Dev stream a few days ago and haven't had much time to play with it. I may mess around with the latest and greatest of the Safari-FF-Opera-Chrome releases this weekend though. Opera 10.5-pre is a bit sluggish right now for me, though every website I visit is it's first hit so nothing is really "broken in" yet so to speak.
 

dtravis7


Retired Staff
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
30,133
Reaction score
703
Points
113
Location
Modesto, Ca.
Your Mac's Specs
MacMini M-1 MacOS Monterey, iMac 2010 27"Quad I7 , MBPLate2011, iPad Pro10.5", iPhoneSE
XJ, have you tried the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha? The new "Carakan" JS engine is in that build and it is ~ 10x faster than the current one in 10.1 (and the 10.2 alpha). It also has full Cocoa support so it integrates (fairly) well.

Last I checked, Safari and Chromium still had an edge on Firefox in terms of JS performance (the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha gives Safari a run for its money too) but as we all know, there is more to the web than just JS.

I have had very good results with Opera 10.5 Pre-Alpha also. Very impressed with it overall and NIGHT AND DAY faster than older releases.

I have been using Firefox 3.6 like Van from the RC at least and I like it better than 3.5 for sure. Faster here both on the Java tests and seems nicer overall in normal use. I like it. It JS performance is a lot better than 3.5 but like Van said, it's still behind the WebKit engine in Chrome and Safari and the new Opera Pre-Alpha engine.
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
10.5 pre-alpha truly does deserve the title of pre-alpha. It's a bit of a rough browser and some of the features aren't incorporated yet into the Mac build such as HTML5 video (which is only in the Windows/Unix build). One thing I don't get about Opera is why the default theme is done in such a way that hovering over the toolbar buttons turns the button a light blue. I thought this would change with the move to Cocoa but evidently it didn't. Regardless, it looks like Opera is moving in the right direction with their browser and finally addressing some of my major concerns.
I have had very good results with Opera 10.5 Pre-Alpha also. Very impressed with it overall and NIGHT AND DAY faster than older releases.

I have been using Firefox 3.6 like Van from the RC at least and I like it better than 3.5 for sure. Faster here both on the Java tests and seems nicer overall in normal use. I like it. It JS performance is a lot better than 3.5 but like Van said, it's still behind the WebKit engine in Chrome and Safari and the new Opera Alpha engine.
It really is night and day isn't it? Like I said, the Opera team is really putting some work into the browser part of Opera as opposed to focusing solely on extraneous browser features like Opera Turbo and Opera Unite. As for the Firefox, it is a marked improvement but one question I'm still left with is, despite noticeable improvements, how come (in my experience) WebKit based browsers (and now the Opera pre-alpha build) are considerably better with JS?
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
256
Reaction score
10
Points
18
Location
United States of America
Your Mac's Specs
2.1GHz MacBook with 4GB RAM, Mac OS X 10.6, iLife and iWork ‘09
As for the Firefox, it is a marked improvement but one question I'm still left with is, despite noticeable improvements, how come (in my experience) WebKit based browsers (and now the Opera pre-alpha build) are considerably better with JS?
I'd say it has to do with WebKit's philosophy. While Firefox started with speed in mind (it was supposed to be a fast, lightweight version of the Mozilla browser, right?), it seemed to have lost that goal with time. So, even if speed is once again a priority for them, they'll have to make up for any regression that took place during their lax period(s). Having said that, I could have missed something in Firefox's goals along the way; it's just the way I see it from the bit I've followed.
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
Good find. I especially like this part:
Common excuses people give when they regress performance are, "But the new way is cleaner!" or "The new way is more correct." We don't care. No performance regressions are allowed, regardless of the reason. There is no justification for regressing performance. None.
They don't mess around do they? As for Firefox, yes, it developed as a lightweight browser out of the original Mozilla codebase (I believe). That said, over time, it appears to have gotten "quite heavy" which is a bit disappointing.

Many of you may believe that I don't like Firefox based on what I've said. On the contrary, Firefox is my primary browser with Opera in second.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
336
Reaction score
7
Points
18
Firefox 3.6 out now

Hi folks,

For those of you not aware, Firefox 3.6 is now out. :)

Release notes here

Enjoy. :D
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)

dtravis7


Retired Staff
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
30,133
Reaction score
703
Points
113
Location
Modesto, Ca.
Your Mac's Specs
MacMini M-1 MacOS Monterey, iMac 2010 27"Quad I7 , MBPLate2011, iPad Pro10.5", iPhoneSE
That was the point of this thread ;).

Van and others, I merged his thread into this one as he did not see it and posted the new one.
 

vansmith

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
19,924
Reaction score
559
Points
113
Location
Queensland
Your Mac's Specs
Mini (2014, 2018, 2020), MBA (2020), iPad Pro (2018), iPhone 13 Pro Max, Watch (S6)
Van and others, I merged his thread into this one as he did not see it and posted the new one.
That makes a lot more sense. My mistake.
 

Shop Amazon


Shop for your Apple, Mac, iPhone and other computer products on Amazon.
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon and affiliated sites.
Top