Fire Fox/

Every now and then when I start fire Fox, it has been trying to get me
to upgrade to their latest and greatest version. They take me to their
site ect, etc. I don't have any trouble with what I have now so I just
decline it.

Lately, when they alert me to a newer version, they
are now including in their message "your old version will soon be
attacked by viruses" or
"Soon be vulnerable to Viruses" I can't remember the exact verbiage
but that is the gist of it.

Has any one seen this in their campaign regarding fire Fox upgrades or
is there something I don't know about FF that I should?

Jamie

 

I'm using 3.6.10 and I have no problems.(xp pro sp3)

 

I dont upgrade because every new version is slower and more bloated.

 

This is not IE !!!

What make you think FF is slower and more bloated ?

Wait, are you still using a Pentium 1 ??

OK, your right.

h

 

I made the mistake of upgrading to v12 - it crashes on a regular basis.
In every one of the crash reports I put my contact info and explain I've
been using the product since the 0.x days and that the pinnacle was
3.6.26 and it's all been downhill since then.

I also find it interesting they're STILL pushing updates to the 3.6
product. It's a tacit admission that they fucked up.

 

Yes, the latest is 3.6.28 if you want both small and secure.

Go to the parent directory for other languages.

http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/latest-3.6/win32/en-US/

 

The main obstacle for me is that my favorite add-ons don't work with the
latest. I know how to force it to install, but still no-go for some of
them.

 

FF leaks memory big time. I only have about one dozen FF windows (for
each area of interest and/or customer), each with perhaps about a
dozen tabs in each, perhaps 100 tabs total.

At startup this consumes about 700 MB of virtual memory (7 MB/tab is
that reasonable ??). Opening new tabs and deleting them or some older
ones and the total number of open tabs still in the ballpark of 100,
the virtual memory consumption is up at 1500 MB. With 1 GB of physical
memory and other applications, the systems slows to a crawl.

And yes, the FF plug-in-container is even a worse memory leaker.

 

Mozilla created the Plugin-Container to prevent Flash and other player
memory hogs. But they instead created an application that will consume
more CPU over time than just about anything else.

 

1. Be sure your updater is set to never check. Options, advanced,
update.

2. Check your add-ons, extensions (or plugins, I forgot which) for a
Firefox add-on. This got mysteriously installed on one of my computers
which creates a nag when you launch FF which states that version 12 is
the last version for Win2k and XP sp1, maybe sp2. Removing this add-on
cured my machine. I was about to stop using FF until I just found
this. What the hell are they thinking coming up with a nag such as
this!?! This is an issue which hasn't hit the search engines yet.

 

Alternatively, you can use FF

Help | Start with add-ons disabled

but still it appears that the plug in container is started in some
cases and it is faster to abort the plugin-container with task
manager.

 

I'm running Firefox 12 and Silverlight 5.0.61118.0 - and the crashes are
spectacular! Now interestingly the reason for plugin-container was to
prevent Browser crashes and let the plug-ins crash gracefully. I think
Mozilla screwed the pooch on version 12.

 

I don't understand this. I am running FF 12.0 under Win7 and have had no
crashes or other problems. I don't remember which version of FF I
initially installed back in 2009, but I've had no problems whatsoever.
Maybe I'm just lucky?

 

Yikes.

Of course i do not experience that issue as i don't leave browsers on for
very long. Do my business and close it.

?-)

 

Yep. And cookies as well. Gotta love NoScript and Ghostery.

?-)

 

Couldn't have said it better.

?-)

 

I don't think that they have had a good version since the 3.6 series.

?-)

 

There is not a problem with crashes, it is the screwed user interface.
They took too much out of it to make it 2 inch screen friendly.

?-)