Mozilla's FTP Now Hosting Firefox 5 For Windows, Mac And Linux

Mozilla's FTP Now Hosting Firefox 5 For Windows, Mac And Linux

It's here! It's here! Well, if you're brave! Firefox 5 isn't the official release listed over at Firefox.com, but that doesn't mean that it's not out yet. A few folks who poked and prodded within Mozilla's FTP listings find that v5.0 actually is out, officially, but you'll need to do a little undercover work to discover it. This newest version adds support for CSS animation, an easy-to-find Do Not Track setting, and not a ton of user interface tweaks. For the most part, it looks and acts like Firefox 4.


If you have nothing better to do on a Sunday, you might as well give it a go and see if drains fewer resources than past versions, or if it feels more stable. Otherwise, be patient and wait for the final-final version to hit the website. It'll be tough to resist, we're certain.
+2
+ -

yep cannot resist to check out for a bit today . the possibility of using less memory is interesting to me and likely experiment with some 'tweaks;' along the way .

+2
+ -

"I find myself using Chrome a lot more right now, FireFox is a resource hog. When F5 becomes available I will try it. Also, Chromes app store is a major hit, Love the games, Angry Birds, and Canvas Rider."

-Optimus

+2
+ -

been alternating with Chrome Browser and Firefox 4 ;lately just thought to dl and build up both of the source packages of the latest versions of Chrome & FF5 in my Linux install [Mepis]  this is almost like what game are you playing lately ? and have to see..& will still use both

+1
+ -

can't wait rrplay to see the results. If Firefox is even faster and uses less resources then Firefox 4 then I am so totally jumping on board.

+1
+ -

I used to be a huge advocate for Firefox until I started having all sorts of problems FF4, the biggest being :Server not found" messages. I got fed up and switched to Chrome, not one problem. If they don't have the bugs and problems in FF5 I might switch back, in the mean time I'm happy with my browser!

+2
+ -

heya Taylor got a fairly recent install with the Mepis distro and should be interesting to see the see the chromium-browers it's also in the sid repos and have to see what's what with the deb pack vs the tarball .Mepis already has FF not the Iceweasel default yeah !! anyhow interested in the config to trim memory on minimize working as hoped with FF in linux a bit better with the usual about:configs on both FF4 & FF% as apropo... may also get into a Trisquel /GNU Linux sometime this week leaving the Mepis and likely play around some more with the same the 2 browsers ...it's Fun and that's what java [the dark roast] is for.

+1
+ -

@rrplay. I'm using the Chrome browser at the moment (on the laptop) and while it has a nice feel to it. It can't beat out Firefox in my heart... The only thing that it has that keeps me coming back for more is 64-bit support, and browsing on a 64-bit browser just feels so much faster and securer then a 32-bit browser.

The only problem is, is that I'm using a mostly outdated version of flash, which seems to be the only version Adobe has avaliable. Seriously, I'm wishing that they release a new version of 64-bit Flash right now.

0
+ -

I have been using FF4 since it was a Beta and it is much better now than when I first got the Beta. The bad part is that it still uses more memory /resources than any other browser. I use all 5 browsers for testing. I use FF4 for general surfing , Explore 9 for my AOL mail ONLY, Safari for you tube, Chrome for general surfing and you tube and Opera for some general surfing and testing. If I had to choice one it would be Fire Fox 3 but since it is gone I would take FF4

0
+ -

I personally prefer Firefox and have never had and issues with running out of resources even on my 5 year old laptop. The main reason why I prefer it is that it still is the most secure browser available to the public. Also any browser where you are running 5 or more tabs + plugins such as flash are going to be memory hogs... Flash itself is a huge memory hog.

0
+ -

Just went on getfirefox.com and it would appear that version 5.0 is now officially released.

0
+ -

@ Taylor

took both the Chrome latest version and the Firefox beta 5 then updated to current stable FF5.built from source tarballs in my Linux Debian Sid box . and what I noticed with both was that the memory loads on both were about the same with any flash you tube stuff except that FF5 had a bit more snap when loading other pages / tabs with the videos playing.Still notice better performance in FF5 and prefer t use that. that flash plugin is the culprit you may want to check out htop to monitor and see as well

0
+ -

rrplay:
that flash plugin is the culprit you may want to check out htop to monitor and see as well

I wouldn't say that I think that Flash Player is the problem (certainly is on weaker systems such as the one I'm on now.) but same memory loads, that is completely awesome. It just gives off a sense that the two are on equal grounds and one is not better then the other. (save for Firefox.)

0
+ -

 

TaylorKarras:

I wouldn't say that I think that Flash Player is the problem (certainly is on weaker systems such as the one I'm on now.) but same memory loads, that is completely awesome. It just gives off a sense that the two are on equal grounds and one is not better then the other. (save for Firefox.)

oh it's been definitely more player related than plugins  ..still going to boot up the older Athlon linux box run both the Chrome 12 & FF5 install on those 'boots' that have much lighter desktops and see when I get a chance.a bit later tonight

Some folks are saying that there is not that much difference in overall performance  with FF 5 as opposed to FF 4 ..def not so .& I did have both FF4 and FF5 to load and compare with typical user  'surfs' loading the HH chill vid thread, FB, HH forum stuff, with FF4 ,FF5, and Chrome pretty simple stuff that's user noticeable with simple monitoring.FF5 >>>> FTW !!Smile

Login or Register to Comment
Post a Comment
Username:   Password: