ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Mozilla goes version number crazy

By | August 26, 2011, 11:38am PDT

Summary: By June 2012 Mozilla wants Firefox 13 to be in the hands of users and version 16 available on the nightly channel.

Just when Mozilla was starting to see sense over the whole nonsense about removing the Firefox version number from the place where everyone on the planet expect to find it, we now get word that there will be a new Firefox version every six weeks until June 2012.

Asa Dotzler, Firefox Product Manager, posted this over on his blog:

Click to enlarge

So, by June 2012 Firefox will be on version 13 with version 16 being available on the nightly channel.

What’s going to be in version 13? Who knows, because even Mozilla’s own roadmap only goes up to version 10!

So Mozilla has a plan to release a browser but as yet has no idea what will be in that browser, meaning that it has no reason to plan it’s release.

Whaaaaaa … ????

Mitchell Baker, Chair of the Mozilla Foundation, tries to justify Mozilla’s rapid release process in a post over on her blog:

Before Mozilla instituted the rapid release process, we would sometimes have new capabilities ready for nearly a year before we could deliver them to people. Web developers would have to wait that year to be able to make their applications better.

She does, however, acknowledge that there are difficulties that need resolving:

As my colleague Brendan is fond of saying, “There is no free lunch.” This means we need to listen carefully to those who are experiencing difficulties. We need to be creative and try to find practical ways of alleviating these difficulties if we can. This is true for the enterprise use case, and it’s true for the add-on experience. I know that’s not a perfect answer, and it’s not a promise that we can meet everyone’s needs perfectly. Despite this, I believe the rapid release process is the right direction.

I really don’t know what to make of this. The only explanation I have is that folks over at Mozilla have version number envy. Pushing this level of rapid development process (or rapid version number inflation, which is what I see it as) on users, developers and enterprise is just crazy. Sure, Mozilla has feature that it wants to push into the browser as fast as possible, but it’s also pushing new bugs to replace the old, fixed, bugs. Most of the time the new bugs and features don’t outweigh having the old bugs fixed. Most people are happy with having bug fixes drip-fed to them but don’t want to have new features and interface changes forced upon them every few weeks (those that do want continuous updates opt for Google Chrome). It’s also pushing out UI changes and updated rendering engines which cause hassles.

Another aspect that makes this version number race even more crazy/stupid/pathetic is that it extends well beyond the current roadmap … it’s version number bumping for the sake of version number bumping. Seriously, this makes no sense whatsoever. It seems like a crazy, frenzied release schedule that only benefits Mozilla’s desire to get Firefox in double-digit version numbers.

Here’s the deal … I don’t want the headache of an update every six weeks, especially is that extends out into mid 2012. Seriously. Maybe the best thing to do is wait until version 13 or 16 or whatever and hope that’s a complete browser that Mozilla is happy with and we’ll then have some stability. Alternatively, why doesn’t Mozilla adopt a rolling release schedule but offer long term support for certain releases?

It seems to me that Mozilla has a case of bad version number envy and nothing - users, developers, enterprise - will get in the way of boosting the version numbers into the stratosphere. Just as with the whole debate about removing version numbers, Mozilla seems to have forgotten that a lot of people have come to use Firefox, and is now pushing ridiculous hassles onto users that offer no benefit to the user.

I’m glad that Chrome and Chromium exists and that IE9 is pretty decent, because it means that I no longer need to bother with Firefox.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
35
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Hotel Südtirol 15th Sep
i agree, the frequent release and this running-battle of the updates! And rarely working well! It is not professional and it seems they play as redmond plays with the users! Hotel Lago di Garda
0 Votes
+ -
One way to beat google...
0 Votes
+ -
Until they knock it off I'm removing Firefox from my school network and requiring users to go to Chrome if they don't want IE.
0 Votes
+ -
@Bookmark71 Yup, switch to Chrome, another browser with frequent updates. This is getting insane alright...
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Michael Alan Goff 27th Aug
Until they knock what off?

And how will Chrome fix this?
0 Votes
+ -
@Bookmark71 that makes a lot of sense. Switch from one gEt updating browser to a bad browser that also has fast updates.
0 Votes
+ -
Errrm. It's just a number.
Dietrich T. Schmitz * Your Linux Advocate 26th Aug
Let the n'er do wells try to fuzz at that pace.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Cylon Centurion 26th Aug
@Dietrich

But those numbers break things.
0 Votes
+ -
Oh so well. An excellent reason to go back to IE, or never make the switch FireFox.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Michael Alan Goff 26th Aug
For now, but they're removing that from the addons soon. After that, why will you complain?
0 Votes
+ -
@Dietrich T. Schmitz * Your Linux Advocate

Way to miss the point. It's not the number, it's the frequent releases.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
LoverockDavidson_-24231404894599612871915491754222 26th Aug
They could have created a better number version system.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Rabid Howler Monkey 26th Aug
@LoverockDavidson_ How about using Fibonacci numbers? This way, Mozilla would get to 13 much sooner. Nah. That would be too much like Google.
0 Votes
+ -
What ever happened to the numbering convention that has worked so well for decades? Significant application change gets a full number (3.0). Major update gets a "decimal" increment (3.2). Minor update gets "second level" increment (3.2.5). If other major vendors can work within this structure, why does Mozilla feel they have to be different?
0 Votes
+ -
@TsarNikky

A lot of the "major" companies have stepped away from version numbers for the public or have dabbled in alternative user friendly public versions.

Microsoft started out that way with DOS and Windows but moved away from that Windows 95. Internally it had a build number but to the public it was a year date. Then they moved away from that to XP and Vista. It is only now that they came back to a version but to the public it is Windows 7 and Service Pack number (not 7601.17514.101119-1850 or whatever).

Google doesn't stress version numbers to the public at all. It is either BETA or not.

Ubuntu increments up the whole number each year (for the year date) and slaps a month number after the dot. This means that their very first released version was 4.10 (released October 2004). There should have been a big uproar over that since they didn't start at 1.0!

Frankly, It is just much easier for the average user to say I have Firefox 6 vs. Firefox 4.7 or 4.7.3.1a. When they see that 7 has arrived they know to update were 4.7.4.1 or 4.7.3.1b doesn't help them to understand that they need to update like a whole number release does.
0 Votes
+ -
AARRRGHHHHH! This is making my head explode for the first time since that "Obama wasn't born in America" thing. I think it's time I personally challenge Adrian Kingsley-Hughes, LoverockDavidson, Cylon Centurion and Dietrich T. Schmitz to an online debate over Mozilla version numbering and updates. To be debated: whether or not everything Mozilla is doing with releases and numbering makes perfect sense, why Mr. Kingsley-Hughes continues to make post after post calling Mozilla's practices insane after it's all been rendered sane, and whether or not Mozilla is doing nothing that Google isn't already doing. I await responses and suggestions as to venue, date and time. This madness must end.
0 Votes
+ -
Sweeping Generalization
dragosani Updated - 26th Aug
You seem to be under the assumption that raising the version number each release is bad. It is only a number used to keep track of the version of the software. They can use 12.0 or 12.5 or 12.5.6.7. It really doesn't matter in any way as long as they keep the number going higher for each release.

Then from this it looks like you arrived at an irrelevant conclusion. They have moved to whole number release versions so they must be version number crazy or jealous.

"Heres the deal I dont want the headache of an update every six weeks, especially is that extends out into mid 2012."

Ah let me tell you the deal. You don't have to update every 6 weeks. Go into Options and turn automatic update off. Then update whenever it is convenient to you.

"Alternatively, why doesnt Mozilla adopt a rolling release schedule but offer long term support for certain releases?"

Why should they? Firefox is a web browser. Microsoft got beat up because they took to long to update. It actually slowed the entire development of web technologies down for years. Browsers need to be current and modern so that we can move web technologies forward. Browsers need to continue to improve without leaving stalwart hold outs or we end up with circa IE6.
0 Votes
+ -
@dragosani
Thank you for the sane idea of turning off options. I didn't even know it existed, but now all 5 systems' Firefox is turned off.

I've said before, I'm not going to update again unless there is a major security hole fixed. I've got extensions (add-ons) that are invaluable, but cannot run because of these stupid insanely fast updates. I'm to the point now, to just abandon FF6 (lastest...wait...here comes another...) and go back to FF 4. The last one whereby the add-ons worked with.

I know for a fact too, that some STILL work, but Mozilla's turns off any they think doesn't work. Maybe as Mr. Kingsley-Hughes put it. By 2012, they'll have a stable version. Then lets upgrade.

- Kc
0 Votes
+ -
@kcredden2 Chances are nothing has broken. Mozilla Addons have a range of compatible software. If it's outside of that range, it doesn't even attempt to work. Wait for them to tweak the version number or hell, do it yourself. It's not that difficult.
0 Votes
+ -
What difference does it make if they were at version 10.2E+35? The browser has become so bloated, slow and unresponsive it's like an IE 5 Deja-Vu all again. The only thing that's going to make me go back to firefox is some blazing performance improvements which would make them, say, 1/2 as fast as Chrome or Opera?
0 Votes
+ -
@kraterz Sadly the things you say aren't borne out by objective external reality. Firefox is in no way bloated, slow or unresponsive as demonstrated in Toms Hardware's latest Browser Grand Prix competition. In fact, Firefox received the award for most stability - only Opera and Firefox were able to load a group of 40 tabs without errors or needing to reload pages.

Also, as much as I love Opera in general, how can you label Firefox as "bloated" when much of its functionality (even arguably required functionality) is to be had only via external plugins, while Opera includes a freaking e-mail program, bittorrent client and web server, among other things? happy
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
photomstr@... 27th Aug
@jgm@... firefox 6 is slow and bloated on my machines dude, took it off and reinstalled a backup of ver 5 and shut off auto updates.
0 Votes
+ -
@photomstr@... Quantify it or it isn't real. Firefox 6 became "bloated"? What does "bloated" mean? Is it using 6kb more disk space or...?
0 Votes
+ -
Why not use the year number (i.e. 11) plus a point for each release within the year (i.e. 11.1)?
0 Votes
+ -
@jetta1987 Same problem... people think 12.1 is a more significant improvement over 11.6 than 11.6 is over 11.5.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
photomstr@... 27th Aug
it?s not a promise that we can meet everyone?s needs perfectly - I think you have met my needs perfectly in ver 4 and 5. ver 6 is slow and chunky with features I never wanted. I can't imagine anything good by ver 10. I backed up a copy of ver 5 and shut off autoupdates. Have at 'er you idiot programmers have at 'er.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Michael Alan Goff 27th Aug
Features you never wanted like what?

>_>;
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Rabid Howler Monkey Updated - 27th Aug
@goff256 wrote:
"Features you never wanted like what?

I'll give just one example: WebGL. More on WebGL and web browser security here:

"WebGL - A New Dimension for Browser Exploitation - FAQ
http://www.contextis.com/resources/blog/webgl/faq/

Starting with Firefox 4, WebGL is supported in Firefox and is enabled by default. I will be staying with Firefox 3.6.x until it is no longer supported by Mozilla. When I do upgrade Firefox from 3.6.x, I will disable WebGL.

ZDNet had a good article and discussion thread on WebGL here (including some reasonable comments from yourself):

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/microsoft-is-right-to-label-webgl-harmful/13354

And is WebGL just a Windows problem, really? LSM is not enabled by default for Firefox on most Linux distros. Exceptions *may* include Mandriva (Tomoyo) and Fedora/Red Hat (SELinux). And Firefox is not yet sandboxed on Mac OS X; although, if Apple is to be believed, Firefox downloaded via their Mac OS X App Store will be sandboxed for Lion later this year.

P.S. Context recommends that users either disable WebGL in Firefox or use the NoScript add-on to selectively allow WebGL for whitelisted sites.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Michael Alan Goff 27th Aug
WebGL.

Yeah, that's one thing. I don't think it has made Firefox any slower, really. It doesn't seem clunk to me.
0 Votes
+ -
@goff256 Good luck getting folks to make quantifiable (hence testable and verifiable) claims. As I've said around here to no avail, "Quantify it or it isn't real". Usually it's to Mac fans who can only explain their OS experience is "better" without being able to give a single reason how, but now it's extending to people who hate Firefox for no rational reason.

There was an experiment performed where people were shown faces really quickly and asked to choose the most attractive. Later, they were shown a picture and asked to explain why they chose that face. However, it was NOT the face they had actually chosen. Regardless, they began to tell the researcher how much more attractive that face was than the other one, etc. Many of our decisions are made by our subconscious for irrational reasons and then the subconscious confabulates and weaves false memories for our conscious selves to use to give rational cover for our actions and choices.

In another experiment cola taste tests were done with brain scans. If a die-hard fan of cola A picked cola B and was told this, they'd get confused for a moment and the scans would show active memory formation occurring. The subject would then say things like, "wait, you know, the one I picked had a bad aftertaste," etc. They weren't lying... confronted with a factual challenge to the mind's internal worldview, the subconscious was actually REWRITING MEMORY to be consistent with the belief system and introducing false doubts into the subject. Wild stuff. And ZDNet's becoming a laboratory into that very phenomenon recently. happy
0 Votes
+ -
@photomstr@... The only significant new features in 6 were for developers only, and unless you access the developer tools you won't even see them. Meanwhile 6 improved startup times, stability and added some bug fixes under the hood.

I'm sorry you'll miss out on Firefox 7 for no quantifiable reason ("chunky"??? Are you confusing your browser with your peanut butter?) because 7 reduces memory use by at least 20%. You can continue to pout because evil Mozilla gave you updates and fixes faster than they used too... it's not like Mozilla will lose a sale.
0 Votes
+ -
"...nothing - users, developers, enterprise - will get in the way of boosting the version numbers into the stratosphere."

Oh, yes it will. In their short-sightedness, greed, hubris, and the employment of idiot prima donnas such as Asa Dotzler, loss of users will take care of the problem.

Dotzler should have been fired on the spot--and would have been, had he worked for a more sales-oriented company-- for his rant directed at IBM. Instead, he was obviously rewarded, at least by inaction on the part of Mozilla. He should, at the very minimum, never be allowed, in any venue, out in public again.
Mitchell Baker? There's another example of problems at Mozilla, and at the very top. She's the CHAIR of the Mozilla Foundation, and SHE doesn't understand that major corporations such as IBM ARE Mozilla's customers, and provide a very large share of Mozilla's revenue? Totally unforgivable attitude for someone in her position. She ought to be shown the door right behind Dotzler.
Hubris is the problem, and a general house-cleaning is the answer.

You provided the answer to Mozilla's fate at the end of your article when you stated "...I?m glad that Chrome and Chromium exists and that IE9 is pretty decent, because it means that I no longer need to bother with Firefox."
Me? I immediately switched to Opera as soon as I read Asa Dotzler's "UP YOURS, IBM" irrational, infantile tirade.
This phenomenon is going to be Firefox's fate, as all the little guys such as you and me do not suffer well the fools at Mozilla.

"We often provide our enemies with the means of our destruction". --Aesop

Mozilla is going to find out just how perishable loyalty is.
0 Votes
+ -
@ckmb Geez, are you really the CEO of IBM or something? wink

Firefox is open source... you can't kill it so long as there's one human on earth left willing to develop it.
"...nothing - users, developers, enterprise - will get in the way of boosting the version numbers into the stratosphere."

Oh, yes it will. In their short-sightedness, greed, hubris, and the employment of idiot prima donnas such as Asa Dotzler, loss of users will take care of the problem.

Dotzler should have been fired on the spot--and would have been, had he worked for a more sales-oriented company-- for his rant directed at IBM. Instead, he was obviously rewarded, at least by inaction on the part of Mozilla. He should, at the very minimum, never be allowed, in any venue, out in public again.
Mitchell Baker? There's another example of problems at Mozilla, and at the very top. She's the CHAIR of the Mozilla Foundation, and SHE doesn't understand that major corporations such as IBM ARE Mozilla's customers, and provide a very large share of Mozilla's revenue? Totally unforgivable attitude for someone in her position. She ought to be shown the door right behind Dotzler.
Hubris is the problem, and a general house-cleaning is the answer.

You provided the answer to Mozilla's fate at the end of your article when you stated "...I?m glad that Chrome and Chromium exists and that IE9 is pretty decent, because it means that I no longer need to bother with Firefox."
Me? I immediately switched to Opera as soon as I read Asa Dotzler's "UP YOURS, IBM" irrational, infantile tirade.
This phenomenon is going to be Firefox's fate, as all the little guys such as you and me do not suffer well the fools at Mozilla.

"We often provide our enemies with the means of our destruction". --Aesop

Mozilla is going to find out just how perishable loyalty is.
0 Votes
+ -
FireFox is losing control over their browser with its constant updates. To the end user it is getting ridiculous to update every few weeks or months. FireFox is on the path to loose the market share that they created. To me I am getting tired of trying to keep up with their versions. Update to another version and then you loose the addons that you are use to using to make your life easier. I have prevented FireFox to check for new updates due to this reason. Mozillia needs to create a game plan and only change to a new version if it is a major change for the browser otherwise make the change and still keep the version at the same number if it is not a major change. With this in mind, they make everyone happier and keep the market share.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Mozilla goes version number crazy
Hotel Südtirol 15th Sep
i agree, the frequent release and this running-battle of the updates! And rarely working well! It is not professional and it seems they play as redmond plays with the users! Hotel Lago di Garda

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix