RejZoR's little secrets

Well, not officially yet on a official web page, but you can download it on their FTP. It's located in the releases folder which means it's the exactly same version that everyone will get later when it's officially released. It's a Mozilla practice where they don't release it until all the test channels are moved forward.

EN-US version:
EN-US Download

All languages:
Multi-language Download

What's new?
Mozilla is boasting greatly improved memory usage (which i can confirm on my netbook with loads of tabs opened that contain flash content), new rendering backend, improved rendering performance, faster syncing and they now also provide a memory usage statistics reporting (you can either opt in or opt out when you start Firefox 7). So far it looks good but i have to test some more to see if stupid laggy scrolling is still there on my main system...

EDIT:
Scrolling is still choppy as shit after a while on my main system. Mozilla, WTF!? Check with AMD what's going on because apparently it's an issue with hardware acceleration and AMD drivers. And Mozilla Firefox...

If you're a developer or a tech support staff you know how version numbers go for all the programs in the world. They do have their own minor ways of doing it but in the nutshell, they all do it in the same way.
First number is the major version, second is the minor version and the third is a build version noted in either numbers or letters. Major version numbers usually change when the program goes through significant changes either in interface or major "under the bonnet" changes. Minor version numbers usually changed when there were changes but not significant enough to justify a major version number increase. Major under the bonnet changes usually bump the version number by 0.50 which again makes a lot of sense. Build numbers are usually meant for hotfixes and minor updates. It was all well until Google Chrome arrived with its insane pushing of version numbers. First version and version 14 look pretty much the same. There are some changes and differences here and there but if you look at it briefly, the same thing. So what exactly is the point of doing big numbers for every bugfix they make? Just to show their gentlemen sausage is bigger than the one from Mozilla/Opera/Microsoft devs? Sure bigger is better goes nicely in computer world for everything (low end graphic cards with 5000000 gigabytes of memory, superduper dual processor 192 core computers with integrated graphics, 100 phase VRM motherboards etc), but this here is a complete lunacy and is apparently only dragging others into this nonsense. With zero benefit for anything.

Lets return to the Firefox issue. Most of you will say just: "Why do you even bother, it's just a number.". Well, yes, it's just a number but that number changes everything. Read on why...

Tracking of changes and features
Before this numbering nonsense, whenever a bigger number arrived, you instantly knew there were significant changes in the program. These changes usually involved major performance increases, drastic interface changes etc. Best example for this was transition from Firefox 3.6 to Firefox 4.0. And before Firefox 3.5 as well. But what has happened now? Firefox 5.0 was unofficially released to the repository. I've tried it and it looks exactly the same as Firefox 4.0. Does this justify a whole larger major version number? I think not. Also look back, i can easily tell you what each and every major and minor version of Firefox got new or extra. Can you remember what was new in Chrome 4 ? Or maybe Chrome 7? Do you know what will Chrome 14 offer? I doubt that you do. But when a bigger major version was announced, you got the info right away and remembered it.

Tech support nightmare
This part touches the last part of the "Tracking of changes and features". Some of us work as a support, either freelance or as professional. And with such flood of major version numbers there is no way to instantly remember what each had and what could be causing the issues with browser itself or some 3rd party program. It's a tech support nightmare as you'll always have to dig changelogs, version changes and stuff from the net just to help someone. I pretty much never had to so far, before Firefox 4 that is.

Extensions (Addons) hell
Apparently Mozilla simply jumped the numbering bandwagon but forgot that they aren't using Chrome framework. The major difference is that Chrome doesn't really complain if extension is not always up to date or latest version or updated for the very latest build. They just work. Where Firefox is much more strict in this aspect. Extensions often don't work with new releases and that was quite annoying even before when we got major updates here and there. But look at it now. New major version every few weeks or every month. And with the same extension management. It's a big fail as extensions will constantly stop working.
For example at the moment i can't go to Firefox 5 because FireGesture extension is not compatible with FF5. And i can't live without that extension. And there are loads of such examples. If you want to do it Chome's way you also have to have a proper framework and infrastructure (Addons in this case). Which Mozilla clearly doesn't have.

What was wrong with the old numbering scheme!?
Their (Mozilla's) excuse was that the numbers were holding them back. Sorry, but i haven't heard a bigger load of nonsense. Version numbers don't hold you back, you being lazy does. Firefox 5.0 could easily be called Firefox 4.1 and no one would complain over it. It would make a perfect sense. Mostly the same program with some significant enough changes. In fact i'm wondering why are they even using the minor version. Ie 5.0 instead of just 5. Why? They don't seem to have any interest in ever using minor version numbers. I really hope they will dump this idiotic idea and go back to the old numbering scheme that at least made sense. Unlike current one that makes none of it.

I'm a big fan of Mozilla Firefox, it's not perfect (what is?) but it works great, offers features that i need and is stable enough. But these version numbers are really pissing me off.

Browsing and shopping a lot but you're never sure if the webpage is safe? There are few tools that can help you make slightly better decisions. Either when you're just browsing, trying to shop online or when searching through your favorite search engine.
It's recommended to use any kind of antivirus, even free ones are always good enough to do the job, especially avast!, MSE, AVG, AntiVir or Panda Cloud. I'm talking about webpage rating tools that are all free and can greatly improve security on today's rather hostile internet.

AVG LinkScanner
Pretty good tool that's checking webpages for known and unknown exploits. Unfortunately is not compatible with avast! prior version 6.0. So if you want to use AVG LinkScanner along with avast!, make sure you have the latest avast! (currently v6.0). If you're already using AVG Antivirus (even free one), you don't have to install this as it already comes with it. Highly recommended.

Symantec Safe Web Lite
This one is coming from a well known security vendor Symantec. The check does have a small delay, but i found their ratings to be very accurate. Also provides additional security ratings for web shops and pops up with a big warning when you visit a bad website. Highly recommended.

McAfee SiteAdvisor
Similar as Symantec, this one is from McAfee. Maybe not as accurate but can be quite useful as a second opinion tool.

PCTools Browser Defender
Another webpage rating, this time from PCTools. Search results seem to be quite reliable, however there seem to be few smaller glitches where results might clash. Icon says unsafe, when clicking it, it says it's safe. I've reported that and waiting for feedback from the PCTools.

Web of Trust (WOT)
Community based web rating webage. May not be exactly accurate but can be a good second opinion tool.

Now, these tools are not 100% protection, in fact they won't prevent you from visiting the webpage, they will just notify you about their security. But if i says UNSAFE, then pay attention and try to avoid that webpage. It just might save your computer. Or your credit card.
Be smart, browse safely

Even though there wasn't much on the tech sites, Google's browser Chrome is now in final version 4 (stable, not beta anymore). And as much as i hate long Firefox startup, i'm not yet ready to migrate to Chrome just yet. Sure it's nice and very fast in tests and all, but i'll give you some insight why i can't use it yet as my main browser.

No password sync through Xmarks, AdBlock is still buggy, no Firefox like RSS feeds, no Unsorted bookmarks, it doesn't sync RSS feeds and no search keywords. Oh, and you can't add search keywords by right clicking inside any search box. That's really crappy. Speed is also far from their advertised 400% faster. Sure, in pure JavaScript, i can't deny it. But on real web pages, it feels even slower than Firefox. Maybe because of the still buggy AdBlock, but who really cares? Either i have to wait for crap ass slow advertisement servers to load their junk or the AdBlock to filter that junk out from the web page.

And there are other things that i've forgot to mention here. So, from the looks of it, i'll have to wait for extensions devs to finalize their work and wait for Google guys to release Chrome 5.
It's certainly a nice and respectable release, but it just doesn't fit my needs.

But i have to admit that including bookmark sync as default feature and really fast startup that's really really fast even on weak netbook and addition of extensions, it's looking good for Chrome.
And that's great. It forces other browser developers to improve their browser at a faster pace and also gives users a wider choice when it comes to web browsing. All this for better end user experience

So, give it a try, maybe it will be your next browser of choice.

Today is the day. The day when Mozilla Firefox is released. Improved TraceMonkey JavaScript engine, HTML5 support, enhanced and boosted rendering engine, better ACID3 support, native JSON, Private Browsing and so on. For more detailed changelog and download, visit:

http://www.firefox.com