Download All Versions of Mozilla Firefox 10 Here

[AMD X6850]

What I can't understand is why people are so whiny when it comes to version numbering.
Sure, the current increase in version numbering is excessive but think about this.

1) It's just a number. At the end of the day, its still Firefox right? Just newer and with a larger number. I rarely look at the title bar or go to Help -> About to check the version number so in general use, I don't even see it.

2) Mozilla develops Firefox. It's up to them how they want to increase the version number. They can ask the user base for their opinion but in the end, it's their choice. Similarly, it is your choice whether or not you choose to use Firefox.

If a number really does make that much of a difference to your Firefox experience, well that's your problem. The fact that you whine and complain at every release about the version number shows that the number is more important to you than the update.

Some people just comment that the version is increasing too fast and that's understandable. But stuff like "Firefox 10 already? I'm gonna keep using IE" is just stupid.
Keep using IE if the number scares you.

This also applies for Chrome (though Chrome seems to get less hate for its similar release cycle despite adopting it first)

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]belardo[/nom]My final version of ff is 4.0 that I will ever fracken use. Its more for development anyway (to how my pages look in the ff browser).Tomhardware and every other online publication should mock Mozilla for playing these stupid version games with everyone. Its bad enough that Google does it, in which it took them 3 years to hit version 16, but ff goes from 4~10 in 6 months?Let's call it what it is... Today, Mozilla releases ff 4.6! I browser that became a POS from its unimaginative marketing and programming teams. (PS: I call firefox "ff" instead of "FF" as an insult, and I will always refer to any current version of ff as 4.x or 4.?)A) the look of ff4.? is 99% Opera 10.x look which is about 2 years old... but without much of the functionality. Don't believe me? Download Opera 11.61 and give it a spin. Use it for a week or two and you'll know why ff has always blown chunks in most ways. Tab browsing, first on Opera. many features we see today on ff 4.0, Chrome and IE9 are copied from Opera.B) Marketing. Coming up with Major revise versions every month or so... Sorry brain-damaged Mozilla Team, how many times have you been dropped on your heads? A few bug fixes and changing a font DOES NOT warranty a major version number change. If MS did that, MS-Word would version 350 by now.There are more noticeable differences between Opera 11.50 and 11.61 than ff4.0~4.6. (Same for Chrome too). And when Opera does an update, there on the first welcome page is a link/listing of the changes made since the LAST update... which is great. And you can even very easily Download Opera 10~11 from the download page, click another link and even DL Opera 3.x for some strange reason.Opera 11.0 came out Dec 2010, there are updates almost monthly, rarely twice a month (big fix).Seriously folks, try out Opera 11 for a week or so. Its a 10MB download, its super easy to use and has very cool features. Speeddial, tab-grouping (kinda like Win7), tab thumbnails, zoom (which took IE / FF about 10 years to copy) and more.Tired of the ff game or the almost daily updates to Chrome? IE9 tabs look like the address bar and only has room for about 3~5 tabs, ugh. Stick it to them - try out something els.e[/citation]

i gave opera a real fighting chance, but out of the box, none of the commands that work in ff, ie, or chrome, work in opera and took extensive customizing to get even close to where i wanted to use it. i prefer the way ff handles tabs, and i love the fact i can force ff to look like 1.5 as its my prefered version of the ui. i also cant discount extentions, which ff has plenty of.

now as for the version change, the way i see it if it breaks plugin functionality, just increase the version number. version 7 and 8 had memory fixes that were 10% a version, 5 and 6 i wanst even paying attention to so i dont know what they added. now i also want to say i already know about the plugin forcing in firefox, but some times that still doesn't work, when a plugin breaks its better to just version increase to make it easier on everyone... i mean realistically you have to install the browser again with major patches, why not just version up?

i will never understand what people care so much about it being called ff8 or ff10 for...

[citation][nom]mortsmi7[/nom]Why go nightly when waterfox 10 is available tomorrow?[/citation]

im considering that as a secondary browser now... can you tell me if waterfox shares resources with firefox? like if i use it and i save a bookmark will it show up in ff the same way too?

given how i use fire fox, i could defiantly benefit from a 64bit version, memory wise.

 

[3BRP]

Currently on Ff 3.6.25 and running stable. Not planning on switching until they fix their Flash compatibility. The crashes I had while on Ff 9 made it unusable so I had to revert back to 3. Ridiculous!

 

[blazorthon]

Firefox is slower than other browsers but it is the best of the main three when it comes to huge numbers of tabs on a system with 2GB of RAM like my laptop. Main three being Firefox, Chrome, and IE.

I can't have 80-120 tabs open in Chrome on my machine but Firefox keeps memory usage below 1.8GB even though I also have two small programs running. I haven't tried this yet with Opera but Chrome didn't work even though I switched from Vista x32 to Server 2008R2 x64 to reduce RAM usage. With nothing running I have around 380-450MBof RAM in use, less than half of what Vista used.

IE isn't even an option since it's UI is horrible for many tabs and it fails to render properly with many tabs. That leaves me with Firefox, Opera, and lesser known browsers as my only options and Firefox has noscript & adblock so it's a clear winner. I also use other add-ons.

I haven't had any stability problems even though I leave my machine on 24/7 with Firefox still running with over 80 tabs (I'm at 88 right now), not with downloading, watching videos, or anything at all. Of course that could be because of my OS but even on my other computers I don't have problems running Firefox (a 2007 Mac book, a 2006 Desktop running Vista, and more). I play games on the old desktop use the Mac for work and I haven't had a problem on the Mac and the PC hasn't had a problem with Firefox in months.

I never had flash problems in Firefox, but I did have flash problems in Chrome occasionally (less than once a week) and even more often were problems in IE whenever I left it running for more than a few days (sometimes it didn't last that long). This was mostly before my OS change (I haven't touched IE besides using it to download Palemoon) but even before it Firefox never had problems besides somewhat worse performance. Having noscript and ab-block helps the performance problem so it's pretty much a moot point. I use the faster adaptation of Firefox called Palemoon so it's a little different than comparing standard Firefox and other browsers.

I also stopped using standard Chrome and now use Comodo Dragon, it doesn't seem to have a performance difference but Comodo claims that it's more secure and doesn't send browsing data to Google. Even if this isn't true, I like it's UI more and it gives me more security options anyway so I can make it more secure than Chrome. For all this, it still support's Chrome's app store. I have Angry Birds and a few others on it.

I've played with Opera but it isn't one I often use. It seemed fast but it didn't work with file hosting sites for some reason. Honestly, I think I screwed something up as I played with it's settings and it was probably my fault, but when it did work it had unbearably low download speeds. The same file would download several times faster with both Chrome and Palemoon.

 

[sunnk]

some time mozilla stops in middle thats why i m using opera its faster and better.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]Firefox is slower than other browsers but it is the best of the main three when it comes to huge numbers of tabs on a system with 2GB of RAM like my laptop. Main three being Firefox, Chrome, and IE.I can't have 80-120 tabs open in Chrome on my machine but Firefox keeps memory usage below 1.8GB even though I also have two small programs running. I haven't tried this yet with Opera but Chrome didn't work even though I switched from Vista x32 to Server 2008R2 x64 to reduce RAM usage. With nothing running I have around 380-450MBof RAM in use, less than half of what Vista used.IE isn't even an option since it's UI is horrible for many tabs and it fails to render properly with many tabs. That leaves me with Firefox, Opera, and lesser known browsers as my only options and Firefox has noscript & adblock so it's a clear winner. I also use other add-ons.I haven't had any stability problems even though I leave my machine on 24/7 with Firefox still running with over 80 tabs (I'm at 88 right now), not with downloading, watching videos, or anything at all. Of course that could be because of my OS but even on my other computers I don't have problems running Firefox (a 2007 Mac book, a 2006 Desktop running Vista, and more). I play games on the old desktop use the Mac for work and I haven't had a problem on the Mac and the PC hasn't had a problem with Firefox in months.I never had flash problems in Firefox, but I did have flash problems in Chrome occasionally (less than once a week) and even more often were problems in IE whenever I left it running for more than a few days (sometimes it didn't last that long). This was mostly before my OS change (I haven't touched IE besides using it to download Palemoon) but even before it Firefox never had problems besides somewhat worse performance. Having noscript and ab-block helps the performance problem so it's pretty much a moot point. I use the faster adaptation of Firefox called Palemoon so it's a little different than comparing standard Firefox and other browsers.I also stopped using standard Chrome and now use Comodo Dragon, it doesn't seem to have a performance difference but Comodo claims that it's more secure and doesn't send browsing data to Google. Even if this isn't true, I like it's UI more and it gives me more security options anyway so I can make it more secure than Chrome. For all this, it still support's Chrome's app store. I have Angry Birds and a few others on it. I've played with Opera but it isn't one I often use. It seemed fast but it didn't work with file hosting sites for some reason. Honestly, I think I screwed something up as I played with it's settings and it was probably my fault, but when it did work it had unbearably low download speeds. The same file would download several times faster with both Chrome and Palemoon.[/citation]

450+ tabs less than 1.2gb ram useage around 100 in chrome right now, up in the 4gb range... opera isnt much better with many tabs but i never tested it.

ff has problems with flash, but again, 400+ tab almost all the time, so thats what i figure the problem is, going 64 bit will probably help immensely.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]AMD X6850[/nom]What I can't understand is why people are so whiny when it comes to version numbering.Sure, the current increase in version numbering is excessive but think about this.1) It's just a number. At the end of the day, its still Firefox right? Just newer and with a larger number. I rarely look at the title bar or go to Help -> About to check the version number so in general use, I don't even see it.2) Mozilla develops Firefox. It's up to them how they want to increase the version number. They can ask the user base for their opinion but in the end, it's their choice. Similarly, it is your choice whether or not you choose to use Firefox.If a number really does make that much of a difference to your Firefox experience, well that's your problem. The fact that you whine and complain at every release about the version number shows that the number is more important to you than the update.Some people just comment that the version is increasing too fast and that's understandable. But stuff like "Firefox 10 already? I'm gonna keep using IE" is just stupid.Keep using IE if the number scares you.This also applies for Chrome (though Chrome seems to get less hate for its similar release cycle despite adopting it first)[/citation]

i say if the update breaks an extension, number update is necessary.

and chrome its accepted because chrome did it from the getgo, not years into the product.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]450+ tabs less than 1.2gb ram useage around 100 in chrome right now, up in the 4gb range... opera isnt much better with many tabs but i never tested it. ff has problems with flash, but again, 400+ tab almost all the time, so thats what i figure the problem is, going 64 bit will probably help immensely.[/citation]

I've read that natively 64 bit programs use more memory than their 32 bit counterparts, if so then I could run out of RAM.

Like I said, I never have problems with flash and I pretty much always have at least one Youtube tab open and often playing music.

 

[actionjksn]

[citation][nom]acyuta[/nom]Although I use FF at office, I find using it a problem at home especially I upgraded my GPU to GTX560. Sometimes, FF causes a crash in the display driver (display driver stopped working and has recovered). I am on FF10 now and upgraded my GPU from FF8/9beta (Nov 2011). Disabling Nvidia plugins in FF does work but sometimes does not. Any solutions.[/citation]

You need to try a clean uninstall of Firefox after backing up your bookmarks. Don't let it save anything on the uninstall and even use an advanced uninstall tool. Then reinstall it, might even be a good idea to uninstall-reinstall Flash too. This is probably your best chance of fixing it. I had a problem with images not loading and did it and it worked. If you don't do a clean-complete uninstall it will reinstall with the same problem that you were having.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]actionjksn[/nom]You need to try a clean uninstall of Firefox after backing up your bookmarks. Don't let it save anything on the uninstall and even use an advanced uninstall tool. Then reinstall it, might even be a good idea to uninstall-reinstall Flash too. This is probably your best chance of fixing it. I had a problem with images not loading and did it and it worked. If you don't do a clean-complete uninstall it will reinstall with the same problem that you were having.[/citation]

My solution is to use a portable version that doesn't get installed, I just download Palemoon Portable into a folder on my desktop, make a shortcut, and it's all good. If I want to get a new version I just download the new version and copy over relevant files (bookmarks) and done. Doesn't leave junk in the registry and such that needs a third party program to clean every time I uninstall something and it seems more convenient.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]I've read that natively 64 bit programs use more memory than their 32 bit counterparts, if so then I could run out of RAM.Like I said, I never have problems with flash and I pretty much always have at least one Youtube tab open and often playing music.[/citation]

they use a bit more ram, how much more depends on how its coded and how long the code is, there are some that only use 10mb more, there are some that can double their ram size... firefox at least for me, if it doubled its size i would be ok with it because it already uses less than 2gb, if it functions better and uses a bit more, i could dump chrome entirely, i use it now because it handles multimedia better and doesn't have short periodic lockups.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]they use a bit more ram, how much more depends on how its coded and how long the code is, there are some that only use 10mb more, there are some that can double their ram size... firefox at least for me, if it doubled its size i would be ok with it because it already uses less than 2gb, if it functions better and uses a bit more, i could dump chrome entirely, i use it now because it handles multimedia better and doesn't have short periodic lockups.[/citation]

I can't use x64 Firefox if it increases RAM usage much. I'm limited enough as is with only 2GB of RAM on my laptop, maybe I'll upgrade it to it's maximum (4GB) and then get x64 Palemoon.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]I can't use x64 Firefox if it increases RAM usage much. I'm limited enough as is with only 2GB of RAM on my laptop, maybe I'll upgrade it to it's maximum (4GB) and then get x64 Palemoon.[/citation]

dont know if you are still reading this, firefox has almost doubled in size, but on the good side, 600 tabs and not a single slow down... that and non of my settings or extentions i use all the time broke... really win win. im not able to cut out chrome for 90% of what i used it for, freeing up 3.5gb of ram, however, flash still plays like crap... not sure the problem, so chrome is still the multimedia browser for me.