"Depending on which statistics you look at, about 2.5% of all Firefox users are still working with version 3.6 of the browser. That’s millions of users who are currently working with a version of the web browser that is no longer maintained or supported with security updates.
Mozilla recently ended support for the browser and tried to get Firefox 3.6 users to update through the browser’s automatic update feature. The organization furthermore published blog posts and information on its core websites to inform users about the the unsupported version, and recommended there as well to upgrade to the latest version of Firefox."
The HTML standard is evolving. New browser functions are emerging. You have to adapt, or stay with old versions.
On 28/05/12 9:19 PM, Bear wrote:
> "Depending on which statistics you look at, about 2.5% of all Firefox users
> are still working with version 3.6 of the browser. That’s millions of
> users who are currently working with a version of the web browser that is
> no longer maintained or supported with security updates.
-- @~@ Remain silent. Nothing from soldiers is real!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and farces be with you!
/( _ )\ (Fedora 15 i686) Linux 3.4.0
^ ^ 21:21:02 up 2 days 6:06 0 users load average: 0.26 0.44 0.42
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa
In article posted 28 May 2012 13:19:26 GMT to alt.comp.freeware, Bear posted this..
> "Depending on which statistics you look at, about 2.5% of all Firefox users > are still working with version 3.6 of the browser. That?s millions of > users who are currently working with a version of the web browser that is > no longer maintained or supported with security updates.
Many of 3.6 users were interprise users,
where prolonged support of FF 3.6 was maintained by Mozilla due requirements of enterprise support policies.
It is superseded by FF 10 ESR, and by future ESR releases in about yearly intervals.
> The HTML standard is evolving. New browser functions are emerging. You
> have to adapt, or stay with old versions.
I remember when I finally had to quit using Netscape 3.04 after several months of pages not loading and/or displaying improperly.
It took me awhile to get used to the different interface of IE, but in time I managed.
I'm finally back with Mozilla using FF, now that there is an add-on that substistutes for the "inline-autocomplete" feature which has kept me glued to IE for lo these many years. There's also a really good community around Mozilla, as well as a devotion to customization.
Jon Danniken <jonSPAMdanni...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote in news:jq03cj$esn$1
@speranza.aioe.org:
> I'm finally back with Mozilla using FF, now that there is an add-on that > substistutes for the "inline-autocomplete" feature which has kept me > glued to IE for lo these many years. There's also a really good > community around Mozilla, as well as a devotion to customization.
> Jon
Chrome's in-line autocomplete is much better than both IE & FF.
> Jon Danniken <jonSPAMdanni...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote in
> news:jq03cj$esn$1 @speranza.aioe.org:
>> I'm finally back with Mozilla using FF, now that there is an add-on
>> that substistutes for the "inline-autocomplete" feature which has
>> kept me glued to IE for lo these many years. There's also a really
>> good community around Mozilla, as well as a devotion to
>> customization.
>> Jon
> Chrome's in-line autocomplete is much better than both IE & FF.
It's the Chrome menu I can't get used to. I'm tempted to install it again because of all the excellent Google add-ons (and of course the resulting loss in privacy). I think I read that you can default to a File/Edit/View etc menu in Chrome. True?
Firefox 12 is great for some things like download management and some cool add-ons, but it gets bogged down with multiple pages opened and video caching. I seem to have better luck with Opera. I find Internet Explorer to be problematic for one reason - not enough adblockers for it.
>> Jon Danniken <jonSPAMdanni...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote in
>> news:jq03cj$esn$1 @speranza.aioe.org:
>>> I'm finally back with Mozilla using FF, now that there is an add-on
>>> that substistutes for the "inline-autocomplete" feature which has
>>> kept me glued to IE for lo these many years. There's also a really
>>> good community around Mozilla, as well as a devotion to
>>> customization.
>>> Jon
>> Chrome's in-line autocomplete is much better than both IE & FF.
> It's the Chrome menu I can't get used to. I'm tempted to install it
> again because of all the excellent Google add-ons (and of course the
> resulting loss in privacy). I think I read that you can default to a
> File/Edit/View etc menu in Chrome. True?
> Firefox 12 is great for some things like download management and some
> cool add-ons, but it gets bogged down with multiple pages opened and
> video caching. I seem to have better luck with Opera. I find Internet
> Explorer to be problematic for one reason - not enough adblockers for
> it.
Google Chrome has other features that web browsers have and doesn't have
like speed, easeof use, HTML5 support and better phishing and malware
blocker and most of all the speed, oh did I mention that?
> It's the Chrome menu I can't get used to. I'm tempted to install it
> again because of all the excellent Google add-ons (and of course the
> resulting loss in privacy). I think I read that you can default to a
> File/Edit/View etc menu in Chrome. True?
No. Thereis not and never has been a toolbar for File/Edit/View. The options those menus contain are under the wrench tool. Some don't like this non-standard approach, but it's only one menu versus three.
> Firefox 12 is great for some things like download management and some
> cool add-ons, but it gets bogged down with multiple pages opened and
> video caching. I seem to have better luck with Opera. I find
> Internet Explorer to be problematic for one reason - not enough
> adblockers for it.
Chrome doesn't bog down unless you run out of system resources. There are no memory leaks as met with FireFox.
There are no issues with extensions when you update and Chrome extensions have matured enough to rival and in many case exceed what's available for FF.
There is a reason Chrome has been the browser to surpass IE.
>> It's the Chrome menu I can't get used to. I'm tempted to install it
>> again because of all the excellent Google add-ons (and of course the
>> resulting loss in privacy). I think I read that you can default to a
>> File/Edit/View etc menu in Chrome. True?
>No. Thereis not and never has been a toolbar for File/Edit/View. The >options those menus contain are under the wrench tool. Some don't like >this non-standard approach, but it's only one menu versus three.
>> Firefox 12 is great for some things like download management and some
>> cool add-ons, but it gets bogged down with multiple pages opened and
>> video caching. I seem to have better luck with Opera. I find
>> Internet Explorer to be problematic for one reason - not enough
>> adblockers for it.
>Chrome doesn't bog down unless you run out of system resources. There >are no memory leaks as met with FireFox.
>There are no issues with extensions when you update and Chrome >extensions have matured enough to rival and in many case exceed what's >available for FF.
>There is a reason Chrome has been the browser to surpass IE.
> In article posted 28 May 2012 13:19:26 GMT to alt.comp.freeware,
> Bear posted this..
> > "Depending on which statistics you look at, about 2.5% of all Firefox users
> > are still working with version 3.6 of the browser. That?s millions of
> > users who are currently working with a version of the web browser that is
> > no longer maintained or supported with security updates.
> Many of 3.6 users were interprise users,
> where prolonged support of FF 3.6 was maintained by Mozilla
> due requirements of enterprise support policies.
> It is superseded by FF 10 ESR, and by future ESR releases in about
> yearly intervals.
> --
> Poutnik
I'm staying with 3.6 because 12 doesn't support certain Add-Ons I use
and have come to depend on.
>> Jon Danniken <jonSPAMdanni...@yaSMPAhoo.com> wrote in
>> news:jq03cj$esn$1 @speranza.aioe.org:
>>> I'm finally back with Mozilla using FF, now that there is an add-on
>>> that substistutes for the "inline-autocomplete" feature which has
>>> kept me glued to IE for lo these many years. There's also a really
>>> good community around Mozilla, as well as a devotion to
>>> customization.
>>> Jon
>> Chrome's in-line autocomplete is much better than both IE & FF.
>It's the Chrome menu I can't get used to. I'm tempted to install it again >because of all the excellent Google add-ons (and of course the resulting >loss in privacy). I think I read that you can default to a File/Edit/View >etc menu in Chrome. True?
>Firefox 12 is great for some things like download management and some cool >add-ons, but it gets bogged down with multiple pages opened and video >caching. I seem to have better luck with Opera. I find Internet Explorer >to be problematic for one reason - not enough adblockers for it.
> Google Chrome has other features that web browsers have and doesn't
> have like speed, easeof use, HTML5 support and better phishing and
> malware blocker and most of all the speed, oh did I mention that?
Chrome recently had over 8 bugs which allowed a couple of hackers to make some money off google. IE: Chrome could be tricked into running code it shouldn't be, outside the sandbox will full rights as chrome has. IE: the code can make new files, delete files, whatever the author wants. An uptodate chrome with a fully patched win7 machine.
Google hasn't fixed it completely yet either. they aren't diclosing over 4 of the bugs as they work to fix it. In the meantime, if it's taken advantage of, it'll allow code to execute outside of the sandbox with whatever rights the browser does.
You just keep preaching this browser. Google is taking days to fix it and hoping security by obsecurity (IE: not telling anybody) will keep users of it's browser safe until they fix it.
-- Character is doing the right thing when nobody's looking. There are too many people who think that the only thing that's right is to get by, and the only thing that's wrong is to get caught. - J.C. Watts
In article posted Mon, 28 May 2012 23:11:46 +0200 (CEST) to alt.comp.freeware, Nomen Nescio posted this..
> > Many of 3.6 users were interprise users,
> > where prolonged support of FF 3.6 was maintained by Mozilla
> > due requirements of enterprise support policies.
> > It is superseded by FF 10 ESR, and by future ESR releases in about
> > yearly intervals.
> > --
> > Poutnik
> I'm staying with 3.6 because 12 doesn't support certain Add-Ons I use
> and have come to depend on.
Yes, this is another reason. I always stayed at older release,
until all my major addons were compatible with new one.
> In article posted Mon, 28 May 2012 23:11:46 +0200 (CEST) to > alt.comp.freeware, > Nomen Nescio posted this..
>> > Many of 3.6 users were interprise users,
>> > where prolonged support of FF 3.6 was maintained by Mozilla
>> > due requirements of enterprise support policies.
>> > It is superseded by FF 10 ESR, and by future ESR releases in about
>> > yearly intervals.
>> > --
>> > Poutnik
>> I'm staying with 3.6 because 12 doesn't support certain Add-Ons I use
>> and have come to depend on.
> Yes, this is another reason. > I always stayed at older release,
> until all my major addons were compatible with new one.
I just don't get sticking with a browser like that and it also still has huge memory leak issues.
> > In article posted Mon, 28 May 2012 23:11:46 +0200 (CEST) to > > alt.comp.freeware, > > Nomen Nescio posted this..
> >> > Many of 3.6 users were interprise users,
> >> > where prolonged support of FF 3.6 was maintained by Mozilla
> >> > due requirements of enterprise support policies.
> >> > It is superseded by FF 10 ESR, and by future ESR releases in about
> >> > yearly intervals.
> >> > --
> >> > Poutnik
> >> I'm staying with 3.6 because 12 doesn't support certain Add-Ons I use
> >> and have come to depend on.
> > Yes, this is another reason. > > I always stayed at older release,
> > until all my major addons were compatible with new one.
> I just don't get sticking with a browser like that and it also still has > huge memory leak issues.
Personally I take Chrome as one of worst "malware",
due its aggresive bundling policy.
One never knows, when he gets it on his PC,
if he is not careful enough.
In article posted Tue, 29 May 2012 01:48:39 +0200 to alt.comp.freeware, Poutnik posted this..
> > I just don't get sticking with a browser like that and it also
> > still has huge memory leak issues.
> Personally I take Chrome as one of worst "malware",
> due its aggresive bundling policy.
> One never knows, when he gets it on his PC,
> if he is not careful enough.
Another thing is ( at least was ) it did not ask for folder to install into at all and even worse, installed itself into Appdata folder tree.
I have also seen Google autoupdate services too intrusive.
I cannot help myself, I do not like Chrome.
I am afraid Chrom is pushed mainly because being from Google,
not because being the best.
I have read interesting article, that people are flapping their hands for Google,
that is doing many same things as Microsoft years ago,
and people did not like MS for that.
I do not pretend I like Google company these days.
I liked it in very early period when they started.
But it is my personal choice. Pushing my opinion to others
as if it was the only right one would not be good thing.
Poutnik <pout...@privacy.invalid> wrote in news:MPG.2a2e8429844198035d2
@news.eternal-september.org:
> But it is my personal choice. Pushing my opinion to others
> as if it was the only right one would not be good thing.
It is the best browser currently for many factual reasons, not opinions. Synchronization is just one of them...were it IE or Firefox that contained them, I would be 'pushing' them.
In article posted 29 May 2012 10:24:56 GMT to alt.comp.freeware, Bear posted this..
> Poutnik <pout...@privacy.invalid> wrote in news:MPG.2a2e8429844198035d2
> @news.eternal-september.org:
> > But it is my personal choice. Pushing my opinion to others
> > as if it was the only right one would not be good thing.
> It is the best browser currently for many factual reasons, not opinions.
As they are evaluated by persons, they ARE opinions.
So does every trademark "BEST (R)" is based on opinion,
at least on opinion of authors of evaluation rule set.
> Synchronization is just one of them...were it IE or Firefox that contained > them, I would be 'pushing' them.
Hm, I did know I am not able to synchronize FF,
I have to stop doing that immediately.
On 29 May 2012 10:24:56 GMT, Bear <bearbotto...@gmai.com> wrote:
>It is the best browser currently for many factual reasons, not opinions. >Synchronization is just one of them..
Oh! wow. Like I need that. I hardly ever use bookmarks. I have this
thing built in called memory, and when that's lacking a search engine is
a click away. It's quicker, and more intuitive to the search process, or
at least it is for me. There are no surprises with bookmarks.
Not everyone thinks like you bully boy. Telling us how to think will get
you nowhere unless you back it up with some empirical evidence as to why
changing our view is advantageous to us.
To put it bluntly *** SHUT UPPA YOUR FACE ***
-- p-0^0-h the cat
Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker
