Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

Firefox 1.5 Final Released

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

November 29, 2005, 1:44 PM

Firefox hit its second major milestone Tuesday with the release of version 1.5, arriving just over a year after the alternative browser debuted at 1.0. The update sports Mozilla's new Gecko 1.8 rendering engine to speed up Web surfing, along with a myriad of other fixes and improvements.

Notable changes in Firefox 1.5 include the ability to reorder tabs, faster back and forward buttons, a feature to clear personal data, improved accessibility and popup blocking, along with support for more Web standards such as SVG, CSS 2 and CSS 3, and JavaScript 1.6. Firefox 1.5 is available now for Windows, Mac OS X and Linux.

Add a Comment (158 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By thosr

edited Apr 9, 2006 - 12:51 PM

The usable screen area has declined when I installed 1.5 lots of wasted space at the bottom of screen. Any way to fix this

Score: 0

By bostonma

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 7:48 PM

Is Opera really faster than Firefox 1.5?
In which way is it faster?
(Does it use less RAM, for example?)

Score: 0

By jamesgecko

edited Dec 1, 2005 - 12:02 PM

How is it faster? Let me count the ways...

It loads faster
It uses less ram (100mb vs. 30 mb.)
It seems to render websites faster
It dosent quite support as much javascript as Firefox, but it can execute it faster.
It's about the same size as Firefox, yet it includes email, irc, and rss clients.

(I've used both on a 300MHz computer w/ 64 mb ram. The differences in speed become much more pronounced on a system like that.)

Don't get me wrong, Firefox is a great browser and I love using it. But Opera *is* faster.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Dec 1, 2005 - 3:20 AM

Opera is generally considered to be faster (http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html), and more efficient with resources than Firefox. After all, Opera's engine needs to fit on mobile so it has to be small and fast.

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 7:10 PM

adblock plus consumes 100% CPU on each refresh of this page. I've confirmed this on multiple PC's and operating systems.

Using adblock 0.5.2.0522 now, and it seems better.

Score: 0

By KSzostek

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 1:36 PM

Still way to many bugs for me.

Score: 0

By DonGato

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 11:06 AM

Opens page in IE 6.0. Ok.
Opens page in Firefox 1.5. Ok.
Opens page in Opera 8.5. Still doesn't work.

Yes, I see a pattern... Opera devs doesn't care about proper JavaScript support.

Anyway... it's nice to see a new version of FireFox with better speed.

Score: 0

By RADicalSatDude

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 12:11 PM

This news item is about FireFox, whats up with all the Opera bashing?

I'm an Opera user, all my family members use only Opera. We all know BOTH Opera & FireFox are excellent browsers. However do FireFox fanboys feel more secure and sleep better at night by bashing Opera?

Please people discuss your damn FireFox leave Opera Bashing OUT!

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 11:35 AM

I do see a pattern. I see another Firefox fanboy lying about Opera.

Fact is, until 1.5 Firefox couldn't even display Slashdot correctly.

Talk about caring about site compatibility...

Opera's JavaScript support is actually better and faster than Firefox. If something doesn't work it's most likely because it detects Opera and sends it broken code. It happens a lot for some reason. Probably because Opera 6 did have sucky JS (or rather DOM) support, and incompetent webmasters still think Opera 6 is used by anyone, so they end up breaking newer versions that have proper DOM support.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 11:38 AM

Now who is telling lies now?

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 11:53 AM

Maybe if you could actually point out specific lies, someone would take you seriously...

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 12:21 PM

"Opera's JavaScript support is actually better and faster than Firefox." Here's one. Do I need to copy and post others?

Score: 0

By Reckessie

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 2:45 PM

Actually gawd21, Opera consistently shows better JS performance than Firefox in tests.

Other than that they both support 100% JS so that's not really an issue anyway.

Score: 0

By PicAFlic

edited Nov 30, 2005 - 10:05 AM

FireFox is the best. WAY better then IE. I don't know if anyone has searched GOOGLE or DogPile in a while, but if you look around you can find Bill Gates plan for people to have to use his crappy browser in future versions of Windows! I currently have the new beta of windows Vista, thank God he hasn't screwed it up so we have to use it in that version!

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Dec 1, 2005 - 10:24 AM

of course FF is better than IE. IE released like 6 years ago, and have no update except fixes. You are like comparing your lousy celeron to my state of art p2 which I brough almost a decade ago.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 10:07 AM

I'll have to agree that Firefox is much better than IE. If only we had four browsers each with equal market share...

Not only would viruses have a harder time spreading around, but webmasters would be forced to write standards compliant code!

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 9:57 AM

GimieGimieGimie, you are completely missing the point. Opera isn't more widely used, indeed, because it doesn't have the overhype factor that Firefox does. It has always been payware, and people don't like that, so they stuck with IE, and when Firefox was released and was free they went there instead because it was hyped as if it were the second coming of the Messiah.

That doesn't mean that Opera isn't good enough. It's plenty good enough - smaller and faster and more functional than Firefox. It means that Opera had to think about the bottom line where Mozilla just received lots of donations from huge corporations. As the only really independent browser, Opera had to make its own money.

The point here, GimieGimieGimie (who had to start a new discussion rather than replying to the post he wrote a response to) is this:

"I agree, it doesn't *really* matter who did it first, but the point, again, is that Mozilla (Asa in particular) keeps lashing out with his low blows against Opera, and when Mozilla representatives speak to the press, they pretend to be extremely innovative, even going so far as to mention Opera just to put it down moments after listing "innovations" in, say, Minimo, that Opera had ages ago.

So again, the problem isn't that these features are added. The problem is Mozilla's attitude and actions."

Score: 0

By yleclerc

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 10:00 AM

Opera is no longer "payware.' Since version 8.5, it is free (with no nagging ad-wares!!)

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 10:21 AM

You are absolutely correct. However, that does not negate the point I was making, especially since it happened only recently.

Score: 0

By yleclerc

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 9:08 PM

Still, Opera loads faster than Firefoxx or Netscape 8. Only other browser that loads faster is IE, which is Windows.

Score: 0

By pjlasl

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 8:56 AM

very nice...using FF since the preview version...haven't looked back since! keep up the good work!

Score: 0

By iamtux

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 8:20 AM

I've been testing the RCs, I'm excited that the final release is here. I think the new features really add on to the browser. I'm starting to see Firefox pop up on more machines these days. At my college, alot of the computers have it. Even one of my professors, who was skeptical about it, is running it. Go go Firefox! :)

Score: 0

By GimieGimieGimie

edited Nov 30, 2005 - 7:42 AM

Can people PLEASE shut up about Firefox copying Opera already!?

This bulls*** is just getting boring now, i will never understand why people defend companies who done something first, it doesn't f**king matter who done it first, all what matters is that the feature(s) that have been carried on, work and have been accepted as a standard.

(Faster navigation, drag and drop tabs, clear private data, answers.com search, error pages instead of dialog boxes, icon in address bar, report broken sites, SVG and CSS3...)

ALL STANDARDS that have been accepted by companies and users a like as a must have for the browsing experience!

If they hadn't been, they wouldn't be included in today's software; people need to stop thinking inside of the box and start thinking OUTSIDE of the box for a change, start looking at the BIGGER picture people.

Things that work carry forward into other programs and become STANDARDS, it’s that simple!

So can people please stfu about who made something first, who ever made the features first deserves credit for their fine work of course, but just because future programs include their excellent handy work doesn't make them any less useful or invaluable.

It's simply giving the end users (YOU), what they want.

When was the last time someone accused a car manufacturing company of stealing another companies idea’s by including WHEELS on it’s vehicles?

Sounds stupid don’t it?

The fact of the matter is, when award winning concepts are first made, there is a limited time frame/window of opportunity to win over the users and make sure these features are integrated so well into it’s preparatory piece of software, features that are so amazing & useful over the competition, that they then become affiliated with the *first* particular piece of software they was designed for & then the company deserves to be viewed as top dog and will forever be remembered as the FIRST piece of software to feature such concepts

But for whatever reason this does not happen, then the features are still recognized as having a lot of potential and thus carried on to another program to carry on the excellent work from the first program that spawned these idea’s and when many new programs integrate these features into their work, the features now become something know as a STANDARD.

Even if the first program to feature these idea's is massively successful, this concretes the features that made it successful even more into future programs as a accepted recognised standard/must have.

Only immature, petty, undeveloped, childish people accuse other companies of stealing other companies work just because they see it in another piece of software from in which they first saw it.

Opera has had *years* to fill the massive hole of unhappy users who have desperately wanted an alternative to the only other serious internet browser in the market (namely Internet Explorer)

And Opera has still failed to dominate the market, despite all it's wonderful idea's Firefox has "apparently" stole.

I think this says everything for Opera really, as just "not good enough", whether it be lack of flexibility, customisation of the interface, bad ease of use or just plain old bad marketing (which is the most common reason a good product doesn't succeed as far as it people think it should have)

But up till even now, Opera has failed at it's mission to take a majority of users away from the widely accepted and populary referred to as the "loathed" IE, and now another serious contender (Firefox) has come along to pick up on what Opera started.

Even if Opera v9.0 turns out to be the best browser ever made a head of it's time, i doubt it will be the big cheese of web browsers, it doesn't have enough hype or publicity to truly be the dominate player of the market (and this is an essential part of success), this is what any excellent product needs and this is what Firefox has & this is the self awareness that is needed for all people on the internet to be upgraded to a superior piece of browsing software.

Which results in something we all want to see (and I know a lot of people would agree with me on this) and that is, a serious “alternative” piece of software that dominates the majority of the user share by being the best in it’s field (and not because it was bundled with the compulsory O.S) that isn’t made by money driven Microsoft ;)

Score: 0

By ogman

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 8:04 AM

A bit long-winded, but good point.

Score: 0

By ServerMechanic

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 7:54 AM

Wow.

You really need something better to do with your time.

This is a comment field not a "new article" field.

Um.....go do something and also learn to quit swearing.

Score: 0

By GimieGimieGimie

edited Nov 30, 2005 - 12:30 PM

My first reason I choose to swear to vent frustration, frustration is unavoidable & a perfectly human responce to bulls*** & has to come out some how, it's just a personal choice of how you relieve it.

People who deny this fact and think that you can have a perfect world without swearing or violence are delusional, a world without violence, (maybe one day when we have evolved a few thousand years more, that's if we don't kill each other first that is :P)

But till then, i'll choose the non-violent approach to releasing my anger @ non-constructive comments that only purpose is to destroy something good due to peoples short sightedness caused by lack of time spent thinking, thank you very much.

My second reason to swear is to include a side of my personality unmatured to aid me in communicating with the young undeveloped minds out there, such as the ones my "artical" was addressing.

I agree my statement could of been a lot more mature, but my statement is structed in a way to be mature for the most part, but also immature in some parts to allows both types of people, mature & immature alike can understand (if only in a limited fashion with the immature), at least they understand my language :P , even name calling can have a positive effect if used correctly (although i did not result to this, for this particular occasion.

Oh and i can write out my opinions as long as i like, ain't my problem your closed minded persona finds well explained (if maybe a little long winded opinions) upsetting ;)

Maybe you should put more effort into your listening skills instead of your "destructive comments" skills.

Score: 0

By -Viper-

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 12:48 PM

Actually all your swearing just shows that you have an extremely limited vocabulary and can't even articulate yourself without returning to crude language. If you want to swear fine but dont try to make it sound like your better because of it and we need to accept you.

Score: 0

By GimieGimieGimie

edited Nov 30, 2005 - 7:08 PM

I could write an essay on how wrong you are (in my particular case) on *all* your comments, but instead of wasting time & effort (both yours and everyone elses that read these useless comments) i'll just leave this thread at:

Kiss my a** ;)

Score: 0

By Dave_Cow

edited Dec 8, 2005 - 1:13 PM

Dude, get a blog... and a grammar book.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 4:30 AM

Faster navigation, drag and drop tabs, clear private data, answers.com search, error pages instead of dialog boxes, icon in address bar, report broken sites, SVG and CSS3...

Does anyone else notice a pattern?

Something like, almost ALL of the "fantastic" new features in 1.5 were "borrowed" from Opera?!

Score: 0

By Metshrine

edited Nov 30, 2005 - 4:41 AM

Yet you would probably whine if they didnt add support, so its like microsoft, they have a no win situation. How about you opera users get off your high horse and stop saying "OH WE DID IT FIRST! GIVE US CREDIT!" just because your browser isnt as popular. Whining about another product adding a feature that your's already has is an easy sign of an inferior product's (which i dont think opera is) users being insecure b/c their product doesnt hold anywhere near the same market share (1.2% compared to firefox's 19.6%). Stop giving opera a bad name by whining about "We did it first".

MARKET SHARE STATS TAKEN FROM http://www.w3schools.com...sers/browsers_stats.asp
Since no one ever posts a reference to their information on this site

Score: 0

By Mark Gillespie

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 6:33 AM

I beleieve that only recently Opera switched it's default User Agent string to be "Opera", it used to present itself as IE for compatability reasons.

This means real-world usage is actually considerably higher than any web stats site can portray, it also means it could be boosting IE's figures...

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 4:42 AM

First of all, I recommend that you read the disclaimer on w3schools.com. It is in no way representative of "the real world".

When it comes to whining, I just think it's ironic that Mozilla Corporation's marketing droid Asa keeps going on about how "Opera follows Firefox", and then they release another version of Firefox where most of the new and useful features were actually borrowed from Opera.

I don't necessarily think Opera needs "credit", but I wish the FUD from Mozilla would stop, and that they would stop pretending that they invented the modern browser.

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 4:46 AM

They added new features, I dont see on any site where they claim that any of the features are ORIGINAL to their browser. I know that site isnt indicative of all sites on the web, but guess what, find me one with another set of stats. They will be close to the same.

Again, I never said I disliked opera, it is by far a superior browser, but its users are doing it an injustice and making it look bad by whining everytime another browser uses a feature that they put out first. Its not about who put it out first, its about who makes it most usable to the end user, am i wrong?

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 5:10 AM

I agree, it doesn't *really* matter who did it first, but the point, again, is that Mozilla (Asa in particular) keeps lashing out with his low blows against Opera, and when Mozilla representatives speak to the press, they pretend to be extremely innovative, even going so far as to mention Opera just to put it down moments after listing "innovations" in, say, Minimo, that Opera had ages ago.

So again, the problem isn't that these features are added. The problem is Mozilla's attitude and actions.

Score: 0

By Mystiqq

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 6:52 AM

as long as mozillas attidude or actions dont break the browser, who cares?

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 7:06 AM

Oh, I don't know...

Here I was, naïve me, thinking that ethics matter to some people when it comes to running a business or organization (Mozilla is both).

That's why everyone loves Microsoft, isn't it? Because their business ethics don't matter, and it's a good thing that they have provided us with a monoculture in which everyone can agree on what to use, making things easier for everyone?

Yeah, who cares about ethics anyway? It's for women, children, and losers.

Who cares if someone's attitude or actions break the market?

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 7:42 AM

Where did mozilla's actions break the market? Explain that to me? I understand that yes, sometimes they might ACT like they invented something, but unless they come out and say it, what room do you have to say that they are CLAIMING to have invented/innovated it? Unless they actually say "We invented tabbed browsing" or "we invented X feature", then you cant say that they are. People read too much into what a company like mozilla says and as such they assume that they are making a claim that they invented something.

Score: 0

By plings

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 9:52 AM

http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/show.dml/7371
http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/show.dml/15396

Saying stuff like "Mozilla is more portable than Opera" is pure FUD.

Another example:

http://my.opera.com/haavard/blog/show.dml/58658

Here, Opera is "more worried about the bottom line, than you are about innovating new features", claims the very same Mozilla representative who lied about Opera's portability.

Do I have to mention Mozilla's Asa again? Read his blog for chrissakes!

Point is, Mozilla keeps lying about Opera.

Score: 0

By horsecharles

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 11:16 PM

Just tried it on a win98 system, updating from 1.5rc2-- no bugs to report, no broken extensions/plugins...on the contrary: it is WAY,WAY fast! May give Opera a run for the money.
I will hold off on updating the winxp on rc2 & the linux on 1.07 for now though....

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 10:45 PM

OMG!!! Come on now, this FF 1.5 is over 106MB for this one page alone? This has to be a bug, a Very large bug.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 11:46 PM

Sounds like you've definitely hit some really bad profile corruption, or else you have some really bad plugins...

I'm here with Fx1.5, Fasterfox 0.8.1, IEView 1.2.7, TabX 0.9.2, and AdBlock 0.5.2.056... Java, Flash and Shockwave, QuickTime, and Windows Media plugins and am using 24MB after an approx. 25 minute browsing session.

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 5:16 AM

One thing that seems consistent about this so-called memory bug is that people keep asking why isn't fixed yet after so long?

As far as I can tell because there seems to be no way to actually reproduce this and find what causes it. I myself have never observed this bug on my system and I've been using the browser since about 0.6!

Also, what's the problem really anyway? It's not like a PC shoud have "spare" or unused memory - it should all be in use - all of the time! Accessing something in memory is obviously far faster than waiting for the HDD to get around to it.

When you close FF, does it give the memory back to the system? If it does, then I don't see an issue here. Does it cause crashing or something?

Score: 0

By XiND

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 6:03 AM

> Also, what's the problem really anyway?

Because it's using memory OTHER PROGRAMS could use instead?

Score: 0

By ogman

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 10:40 PM

Breaks waaaaaay to many extensions. I'll wait til the extension authors catch up. Redownloading all of them was okay early on, but somewhere along the way the extension authors and the firefox developers need to get together.

Score: 0

By Jose

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 12:54 AM

Most extensions that claim they're not compatable with FF 1.5 actually are.

First, install the "Nightly Tester Tools" extension: https://addons.mozilla.o...ons/moreinfo.php?id=958

Then check the 'incompatable' extensions on Mozilla Update: https://addons.mozilla.o...ns/?application=firefox

If for the given extensions it says something like "Firefox: 0.7 - 1.5b1" then using NTT to 'force' tit to be compatable should probably work. If it says that the maximum is still 1.0.x then it won't.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 12:00 AM

Most extensions only break because the developer sets a maxversion parameter in the code so that they break on purpose. The logic, I believe, is that they assume that Mozilla's updates might break something and they'd rather trigger a disable-function until they have a chance to test or update them. Although I'm entitled to be wrong on this.

Score: 0

By ogman

edited Dec 1, 2005 - 8:21 AM

I think you are right on that, and thanks for the reminder. I remember having to change a version number a few months ago to get a badly supported extension to work. In spite of that, I think I'll stick with 1.0.7 for a few weeks and let most extension developers post updates. Call me lazy.

Score: 0

By JacenSolo

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 10:35 PM

Althrough I'm going to try this product, I'm still not convinced to switch from Opera.

Score: 0

By WhiteZero

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 10:01 PM

The only thing that dose work with it is my Hashing tool. And I'm sure that'll get patched.

Score: 0

By sn0wflake

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 11:27 AM

So, do you mean your Hashing tool will be patches to not work anymore? Weird comment.

Score: 0

By ServerMechanic

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 9:58 PM

Well, I like it so far. The page is finally updated and I downloaded and installed it.

Right now I'm just having issues with if I use the down arrow on the keyboard to scroll it goes all the way to the bottom instead of scrolling nicely.

:)

Score: 0

By ServerMechanic

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 10:39 PM

Well the scrolling issue I had was fixed by removing 1.5, rebooting, and reinstalling 1.5.

Now it works like a champ :)

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 8:05 PM

massive issues with this release in just my two hours of testing, and frequent testing on the RC's.

1. Unless you uninstall adblock, it will not load after install from 1.0.x. This is an issue as *ALL* my users all have adblock, so now I must research how to uninstall adblock and install adblock plus seamlessly.

2. Frequent crashes on java plug-ins, real player plug-ins (using latest java and K-lite mega) This happenens on any version of FF, so I was disappointed that this isn't addressed. PLUG-INS SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CRASH A BROWSER!

3. Frequent crashes still using java plug ins on my internal LAN and WAN. I basically must revert to IE for all web console administration.

So basically this one is a hearty "wait for the .1 and .2 releases to come out." I am advising everyone I advised to install FF to hold off on this version.

Score: 0

By sn0wflake

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 11:32 AM

I also had problems with Adblock until somebody mentioned Adblock Plus (http://extensions.geckozone.org/AdblockPlus) that is a rewrite of Adblock.
I don't know why Java doesn't work. Are you using Microsoft Java or what?

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 9:42 PM

Downloading the latest AdBlock version from the developer's site forums allowed my Firefox 1.5 to work perfectly fine... results may vary.

Not sure what's going on with the RealPlayer plugins or Java Plugins... both work perfect for me, although I use the true plugins, not the K-lite versions.

All that said, you can't blame Firefox for instability caused by a plugin, especially when the version posted on the addons.mozilla.org site explicitly states that it's not compatible. This reminds me of all the people on MSN Chat who used to whine that IE sucked because of a flaw in the ActiveX control used by MSNChat.

Use your heads guys.... check with the plugin developers for updates before you go blaming the browser.

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 10:43 PM

Go here and test your plug-ins:
http://www.cbs.com/daytime/price/
Click on any of the links on the right, like:
Million Dollar Spectacular Winner

Ive tested this on FF 1.5, 1.0.7, and both crash.

Again, I update my plug-ins, drivers, patches, updates religiously.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 11:50 PM

Curious... Does the site work in any non-IE browser?

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 1:03 AM

I don't know and I don't care. A site should not be able to crash a browser. At the least just force the tab closed, I would be fine with that.

Another bug I've noticed is If I refresh a page, just BEFORE the page has completed loading, there is this delay where I cannot scroll the window, or click on another link or drop-down. Very very irritating, and previous FF versions didn't do this.

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 1:07 AM

OK I've nailed this bug that I mentioned above to adblock "plus". For now I'm just using FF without extensions period. A stable browser is better than one without ads.

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 5:10 AM

I've just gone there with my extension-loaded FF1.5 (including Adblock Plus) and no issues in playing those media clips at all. Sorry.

(I use Real Alternative's plugin by the way, not Realplayer just for additional info. And Win98SE!)

Score: 0

By gawd21

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 8:19 PM

Sadly, I must agree with you. I think anyone that uses Yahoo, Cpanel, Vdeck, and serveral Linux based admin programs to wait. I just tired a few (some I listed) and they crash. Java and a few Vonage ads will crash the FF 1.5. There are ways around it, block the names of those files, but in a few cases you need to see them to click them. IE for me just isn't something I want to use, other than for Betaplace.

BIK_Loner. Only those who know should know!

Score: 0

By Frostek

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:48 PM

Please bear in mind that RC3 and 1.5 are identical.

There are no changes from RC3 to Final, as they were happy with it (for the moment).

Score: 0

By davidtb

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:27 PM

I got it, and they seemed to have fixed the bugs from the last vers.

Score: 0

By BklynKid

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 6:58 PM

< Opera 8.51

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 8:54 AM

But with extensions!

Score: 0

By 1uk3

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 6:41 PM

http://getfirefox.com/ has finally been updated with 1.5 :)

What a browser! Simply fantastic! :)

Score: 0

By Banquo

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 5:55 PM

Firefox has generated errors and will be closed." Sorry, that's it. I haven't had a browser crash since using Windows 98, certainly not on XP. I've been using Opera since they made it freeware and it's so much more stable and refined. Opera 9 is going to be sweet. I'm through with Firefox, it's just too amateurish and buggy.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 9:46 PM

**wonders how many of you with errors like this tried the Firefox (Safe Mode) option from the Start Menu's program group**

FYI, doing so disables plugins and uses default preferences to allow users to troubleshoot if it's a plugin or profile corruption that caused the problems.

I also can't help but wonder with an error like this... perhaps there is minor damage to the file system, and therefore a CHKDSK could be in order.

Hope it either works for you or else I hope you continue to enjoy Opera.

Score: 0

By twosheds

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 2:40 AM

'Safe Mode' in Firefox is really a developers or power-users tool, pretty much as it is with a Windows boot-up in safe-mode. The casual user would not know how to use it to troubleshoot, and the documentation about it doen't clear things up much.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:01 PM

I remember when you said you were going to remove Opera due to the bugs.

Score: 0

By Banquo

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:19 PM

That was true, before version 8.5, before it became freeware, etc. Version 9.0 Preview is more standards compliant than Firefox now and far more than IE, and is now much faster and more stable.

Score: 0

By lemonlovr

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:42 PM

Banquo, I agree with you - Opera 9 beta 1 is the best browser out there right now and it's not even done yet. I think the final version of Opera 9 will blow us all away.

Score: 0

By AntiochMedia

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:39 PM

Banquo: I've had Firefox crash on me before due to using Midas implementation with several plugins and having a ton of tabs open. Apparently Firefox didn't like some sort of combination.

Regardless, I've had IE crash on me several times as well and I'm not a huge fan of Opera.

I use Firefox as a web developer and benefit from the plentiful supply of Extensions such as Web Developer, Greasemonkey, IETab (Switch between rendering engines), Google PageRank Monitor (much nicer than having an entire search bar installed), Google Thumbnails, Colorzilla, and foXpose, which is like Expose on MacOSX.

The experience that I have with Firefox is unmatched in any browser, and with this many bells and whistles running, 3rd party plug-ins, etc. - I'm happy to live with a crash once in a blue moon.

I certainly wouldn't call a crash 'amateur' as I can have Quicktime, Microsoft Office, Windows Media Player and dozens of other applications crash for me if I am using them to their 'full extent'.

Silly.

Score: 0

By gawd21

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 7:38 PM

I am glad that you are getting good use out of Opera, but as for myself I like, no I love to be able to use the extensions with Firfox, and even if v. 1.5 isn't perfect, I am using it. I did get a little hash on it at first, but I found a work around. I reported the bug AGAIN, and will see if it is fixed. As I have said many times I am more that willing to use Opera when they support user made extensions.

Score: 0

By lemonlovr

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:46 PM

The issue of extensions in Opera is a contentious one. From what I've learned (and I'm speaking from experience because I'm one of them), Opera users are very...stubborn. You'd probably lose as many users if you started supporting extensions as you'd gain. It's almost like the Ctrl+N and Ctrl+T debate. Die-hard Opera users will tell you that to open a new tab it's Ctrl+N...I'm one of them having used Opera since 3.6. But keyboard shortcuts can be changed. Maybe if the extensions feature could be completely turned off or completely turned on that would be a compromise...but seriously I don't see it happening soon.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 8:59 AM

CTRL-T = New Tab
CTRL-N = New Window

Is it just me or does doing it any other way seem to spit directly in the face of intuitiveness?

I'm all for the "good ol' days" of Opera 3.x, but if something is being done wrong, it should be fixed.

Just because it's the way it's been done since...forever, does not mean it's right.

(sorry, I know this has nothing to do with the article...my bad. I'll be sure to whack my wrist with a ruler later today)

Score: 0

By naylor83

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 8:00 PM

Err... or else you maybe just DON'T INSTALL ANY EXTENSIONS? duh...

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 9:48 PM

That's an extremely ignorant comment considering that Flash, Shockwave, Adobe, Jave, and various media players are pretty much standard for a user's average web browsing experience.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 9:00 AM

lmao...

Plugins...extensions...they're all the same, right?

Score: 0

By naylor83

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 6:07 AM

Hmm. I thought we were talking about extensions, not plugins.

Score: 0

By gawd21

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 8:05 PM

I agree! I also want to point out that my ideas are not that of anyone else other than myself, unless stated. I like the options of changing my browser to what I want. Given, b4 FF, I almost never went to websites due to the chance of getting viruses and other malware. I understand that there were other fixes, but I didn't trust them as much as I do FF, I know FF is NOT perfect and can still get viruses such as on www.keygen.us and so forth. What I say is my opinion or close to unless otherwise stated!

Score: 0

By lmr0x

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 5:48 PM

Simply The Best!

Score: 0

By Chip1035

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 5:01 PM

Do a google search and you will find news results from MacWorld, InfoWorld and ZDNet UK, stating Morzilla will release it this afternoon PST. Right now, I believe it is 2PST and still nothing on the site.

Score: 0

By GeorgeSantayana

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 4:29 PM

Asa said that if no showstoppers were found, RC3 == Final.

Score: 0

By drumcat

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 3:30 PM

All that's publicly available from http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/ is RC3. What's up? For being final, they sure aren't making a big deal of it. Maybe it's sexier to be running a RC build...

Score: 0

By Matt Nordhoff

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 5:54 PM

They're not making a big deal about the release because THEY HAVEN'T RELEASED IT YET! They've just put the files on the FTP server in preparation for releasing it.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 6:29 PM

They have finally updated their mozilla.org pages and posted the mozilla.com pages as well. The download from mozilla.com is the 20051111 build, so it does indeed seem that RC3 has been declared as the final release. Such a pitty, as others on the mozillazine forums and here have mentioned, some of the more recent nightlies seem more stable. Anyone else foresee a 1.5.1 in the next month? *grin*

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 7:25 PM

Yeah, I did say that a few posts ago, however you put it kinder than I did.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 3:23 PM

Hmm... so, then am I to conclude that the Final Build of Firefox 1.5 is dated 20051111, the same as RC3? Because that's the file that is available from FileForum and from the releases/1.5/ folder on Mozilla's FTP site, but I'm just not buying into that.

I can appreciate wanting to be the first site to post the announcement and download, but come on guys... being second to the vendor (Mozilla) is a little more credible.

I think I'll redownload once I see the announcement on Mozilla.org.

Score: 0

By Metshrine

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 3:25 PM

The file on http://ftp.mozilla.org/p...eleases/1.5/win32/en-US/ is dated today. Dont know what you're talking about. By the way, this is the official directory, notice NO RC is in the directory name, just 1.5

Score: 0

By orizng

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 3:28 PM

He was talking about build ID, which indicates this final version was compiled on 20051111
check your UA, u will find out

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:30 PM

Then my apologies to you sir

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:39 PM

No worries... that's why I'm posting. I'm just finding it a little hard to believe they're using RC3 as the final, but maybe they are.

Score: 0

By orizng

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 4:27 PM

yes, they do like this alot. Mostly the final version is not the most recent nightly.

Score: 0

By Skyfrog

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 4:15 PM

That's what a release candidate is, of course they are using it. A release candidate is the build that will become final if no further bugs come up.

Score: 0

By cowgaR

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 5:58 PM

but actually there are a bugs, some more serious then other...So I am not going to replace mine FF, gecko 28 nov

but maybe no critical bugs were found, and they waited a very long with the release, I think they wanted it out before Christmas :-)

but some critical bugs still exist, I'll wait for 1.5.01 till then nighties :-), it feels odd to use something I used weeks ago

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:03 PM

Now don't get me wrong I love FF and all, but 1.5 still doesn't remove spaces where you remove the ads. It's not "final" quality yet.

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 8:21 PM

My bad for being stupid and posting junk without reading what I was posting. No exuses other than I am a retard.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Nov 30, 2005 - 9:03 AM

lmao...

But it takes a real man to admit it.

Score: 0

By GoodThings2Life

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 3:43 PM

If your complaint is regarding AdBlock, then your bug should be directed to its developer, not to the Firefox team. If it's an actual Firefox problem that you are not conveying to us very well, perhaps some screen shots of the problem and your options are in order.

But it does, indeed, sound like an AdBlock issue to me. Make sure you have the latest version from the developer's site (addons.mozilla is not the latest).

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:16 PM

Sounds like a problem with AD BLOCK not FIREFOX so I dont see how 1.5 isnt final quality

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:18 PM

You just wait and see. That is just one thing I listed. However they will be releasing a patch in less than a month.

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:19 PM

And that one thing you listed wasnt a firefox 1.5 problem. Why dont you list a problem with firefox itself as opposed to one of its extensions ;-)

Score: 0

By gawd21

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 6:58 PM

Something I have noticed over the past several minutes; FF1.5 has gone from 45mb to over 54mb with just this page loaded.

EDIT: Here is another bug that I reported in 1.5 beta 1 and it's still here; Some pages on Betanews won't render right and you have to refresh several times to get it to load correctly.

EDIT: Memory hole SS. http://www.getmyhelp.com/junk/wanttoseefull.bmp
Very large image.

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 8:10 PM

Have you ever heard of image compression, jpg/png?

Sheesh...

Score: 0

By gawd21

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 8:25 PM

LOL I wanted it to be 100% so no one could say I altred it. lol

EDIT: mjm01010101 Yeah I know, but I am not really in the mood for a fight tonight. I know, I know, damn the world has not ended nor has Hell frozen over, I am just not in the mode. :-)

Score: 0

By gawd21

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 3:26 PM

Um it's not the extension if it has a large space there even with the extension uninstalled.

Score: 0

By Metshrine

edited Nov 29, 2005 - 3:28 PM

You stated you are blocking ads, so why should a browser be forced to adjust for your manual removal of said ad? How will it know the ad was removed if you use your hosts file? The browser is doing what it should be doing. however, if you wish to change your comment to state that you are NOT blocking an ad and that white space is displayed where other browsers do not show it, then I will argue that point :)

Your exact words were, in case you choose to edit your post:

"but 1.5 still doesn't remove spaces where you remove the ads"

Score: 0

By gawd21

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:27 PM

All the other versions would and so does IE so why wouldn't FF1.5?

Score: 0

By Metshrine

posted Nov 29, 2005 - 3:29 PM

So, the browser knew that you were blocking the ad and edited the page accordingly to remove a white space? Show me a site where this occurs. And how exactl