Mozilla Stops Firefox 64-bit Development
Click here to post a comment for Mozilla Stops Firefox 64-bit Development on our message forum
Mikedogg
Well that's a kick in the nuts!
I wonder if this will include Waterfox.
(.)(.)
Well maybe they should just focus on one browser at a time instead of the many variations that they have. eg: Aurora, Waterfox etc.
Mikedogg
Waterfox is being developed independently, same source code, different development.
I think.
(.)(.)
Ah, cool. My bad.
Darren Hodgson
That is a bit lame really considering that 64-bit operating systems have been around for years now.
True, not that many games and applications are coded as 64-bit either but Internet Explorer and Opera are so it just highlights a weakness in Firefox IMO. Personally, I think the quality of Firefox itself has dropped somewhat since they switched to monthly release cycles. I now find more incompatibility issues and glitches than with any other browser, including Internet Explorer.
(.)(.)
True that, the amount of time FF freezes when i go to download something is a joke, and those muppets at Adobe need to sort out their flashplayer.
Why unless Muppet's has a capital M and a ' is it considered a spelling error
Mikedogg
Just a bit of speculation here: but does anyone else think the "tablet genera" is responsible for this?
I haven't had that much experience with tablets but do they even do x64?
(.)(.)
I dont know but imo tablets and the mobile sector have seen more change/improvements then any other tech of late, so yeah. Lost my trail of thought.
JohnMaclane
They don't, ARM has just recently been talking about developing a 64-bit series of processors.
The point however is that 64-bit is not a do or die feature of a browser, not that I use firefox prefer chrome for its clean interface.
chanw4
They don't and it doesn't matter. This just shows the firefox developers are not able to produce a working 64bit browser.
Neo Cyrus
Wouldn't even make a difference if they were 64 bit, they're mostly ARM based, not x86.
There's like one x86 Atom (Android) phone I've heard of and no tablets. Who knows, in 2 years from now when I'm phablet hunting maybe AMD or Intel will have a decent x86 based one available. Assuming AMD don't decide to quadruple the salaries of their CEOs while firing another 40% of their workforce.
schmidtbag
Firefox is quickly becoming the new IE, and I don't mean that in a good way. It currently seems to be the one with the most problems, the most arrogant devs, and making all sorts of weird decisions. This includes stuff like sloppy hardware acceleration, refusing to use the new Flash plugin API (which would make everyone's life easier if they did), the version number scheme, and repeatedly stating better CPU and ram usage when I hear there is no difference.
BLEH!
Sticking with FF, probably out of stubborn-ness but mainly due to Adblock, Chrome crashing on me every time I watch a Youtube video, IE being IE and Opera lacking Adblock.
Black_ice_Spain
you can disable chrome integrated flash so it uses the same one than mozilla (should stop crashing).
And chrome already added a good-way to their plugin API so adblockers can block everything.
Imo with that last thing which was missing for a long time (adblockers worked, but no perfect, many times downloading apps and hiding). Except maybe memory usage but well... i have 8gb :P
Redemption80
I’ve never had Chrome crashing on me with YouTube videos, and that’s on a laptop, both partitions at home and also my work PC.
I also use Adblock Plus with Chrome which works perfectly.
Firefox seems to be getting worse all the time, most people only still use it out of habit, I did the same for a while before giving up on it as I used to have it at the top of my browser list.
Now it’s fifth, behind Chrome, IE, Opera and Safari.
tsunami231
I tried Waterfox and saw absolute no difference speeds wise on my system. Only difference I saw was waterfox would crash and burn once week just trying to start the program up and screw up win 7 aero forcing me to reboot. Mean while Normal Firefox has never crashed on. Only problems its ever had was it would have plugin crash every once in while
rl66
2 point:
-is it usefull to use a X64 internet browser over a x86? i would say no as perf are nearly the same and it use nearly no resource on modern hardware.
-why don't use a x64 version of Firefox? just because you can and your computer is 64 bit :3eyes: (at least until now lol)
now my own personal pov: compared to "modern" internet browser, Firefox (even the last version) is a bit slow and heavy, becoming the n°1 in the XP era make it loose what make it shiny.
some said it is like IE, i would said it is worse nowaday.
JEskandari
well if you can find a plug in like "ErrorZilla Plus" for chrome that reload pages automatically if they fail to load then I'm Game .
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/errorzilla-plus/
dark_surge
I don't know that much about programming so bear with me but if Microsoft is pushing for 64 bit operating systems then wouldn't it be in Mozilla's best interest to follow suit for performance and compatibility reasons? I mean, wouldn't it be best if x64 was a requirement for all new programs?
Wouldn't the the x64 architecture as a whole run more smoothly/efficiently if everything was 64 bit, or is running x86 programs in a 64 bit environment not an issue at all? Are they keeping x86 around just so that people with older machines aren't SOL?
Cyberdyne
@BLEH!; https://addons.opera.com/en/extensions/details/opera-adblock/
I think most people who use x64 FF use Waterfox or some other unofficial group that compiles for it.
