Mozilla plans to release Firefox 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0 in 2011

By on February 7, 2011, 10:03 AM
Mozilla is planning to release four new versions of its open source browser by the end of this year. That means that Firefox 4.0, Firefox 5.0, Firefox 6.0, and Firefox 7.0 are all slated to ship in 2011.

The four new versions is just one of the company's goals for this year. Here are seven points that the company currently has listed as its Product Priorities for 2011 on its Firefox/Roadmap wiki page:

  1. Ship our new technology to users in smaller bundles, more frequently: four technology shipment vehicles in 2011 (including Firefox 4) and achieve a regular cadence for shipping
  2. Develop a product that is responsive from "click to render": no more than 50ms delay between user action and application reaction, provide optimizations to hide network latency, and obtain metrics from users in addition to our test infrastructure
  3. Expand the Open Web Platform to include Apps, Social and Identity: Design and implement open systems for Identity and social interactions, design and implement Web Application Framework, and implement missing pieces of CSS/HTML required for compelling Web Applications
  4. Never lose the user's data or state: continue to improve stability, mitigate the cost of application failure, and interact with cloud-based storage to allow users to "take it with them"
  5. Shine the primary UI until it gleams: determine and optimize top 5-10 user interaction flows (ie: search for restaurant), improve tools for customization/restoration of old functionality so we can remove it from primary UI, and improve user interface polish so that Firefox feels modern, graceful and elegant
  6. Support modern operating systems and platforms: Windows 64-bit, OSX 10.7, Android 3.0, and ARM CPUs
  7. Plan for a future where Desktop, Mobile and Web Apps run on a common platform: need to design and architect towards this eventual outcome though implementation of this is not a priority

Mozilla was originally planning on having Firefox 4 out by the end of last year, but it had to delay the release. The last release was Beta 10 but there are still probably two more betas, at least one release candidate, and of course a final build. It's clear the company no longer thinks this model is a good one, and wants to accelerate its release cycle, much like Google did with Chrome.





User Comments: 31

Got something to say? Post a comment
hojnikb said:

I like the corrent release cycle and version naming but i defenetly dont like the way Firefox is turning into Chrome.... well mostly ;(

fpsgamerJR62 said:

I'm glad they're finally moving to a more frequent update cycle. I use Firefox 4 beta as a secondary browser and it's like taking forever to shed its beta tag.

RandyN said:

Sounds great, now prove it by releasing v4.

Staff
Rick Rick, TechSpot Staff, said:

Sounds awful -- version numbers are now meaningless. At this rate, we'll be using Firefox version 32.5.2 in just a few years.

Guest said:

It's the same as Chrome, and it isn't that big of a deal. I actually think that having more version numbers will spur people to update more frequently since the most up-to-date version could be a few version numbers from theirs. Who knows?

Mozilla's top priority should be bringing down the memory usage with FireFox 4. I've tried all of the betas since 1 and their memory usage is always higher than Chrome's. Chrome 9 is a speedfreak too.

bugejakurt said:

Firefox is getting Chromer in every release. Although in my opinion Google Chrome is far better than Mozilla Firefox 4.0.

Regenweald said:

Chrome keeps changing numbers and keeps gaining marketshare, Looks like mozilla is willing to try anything now....

Cota Cota said:

srry Firefox, you had proved you are desperate to fail :\ and besides you have no chances to survive to Skynet.

princeton princeton said:

I just switched over to chrome yesterday. I miss the tree style tabs but it is indeed faster then Firefox. And I can sync it with my galaxy S.

Mizzou Mizzou said:

Sounds awful -- version numbers are now meaningless. At this rate, we'll be using Firefox version 32.5.2 in just a few years.

I'm with you on that, should be Version 4, 4.1 and so on until some major new functionality is added.

madboyv1, TechSpot Paladin, said:

"Ship our new technology to users in smaller bundles, more frequently: four technology shipment vehicles in 2011 (including Firefox 4) and achieve a regular cadence for shipping."

Derp, I don't feel like small Bundles = complete projects. If firefox was version 4.4 by the end of the year for whatever reason, and they released version 5 next year, that'd make a little more sense in terms of naming conventions, assuming they really REALLY mean a browser by deliverables.

Jibberish18 said:

Hah! Mimicing a certain other gigantic tech company with a very up and coming browser much?

MrAnderson said:

All this means is that developers are converting what would be a point releases or updage to being a version race.

IMHO, It seems like Firefox feels pressured to adopt Googles haphazard update as full release, as not to look like they are far behand in development over their competition. When product A has more full relseases than you do, you have to be worried that the average on looker might consider your software slow to improve when you competition is moving so fast.

Yes we are in an iterative development cycle when it comes to free or low cost software, but that cannot happen so freely in the standard software market, unless there is some subscription service business model in place or the developers have another revenue stream that can fund continued development.

Guest said:

nice to know how many beta versions mozilla are making. but how many finals will come this year ?

doradhorror said:

You people who only look on the outside are fools. Firefox 4 is by far superior to Chrome. Speed-wise Firefox 4 has taken a huge leap to catch up to Chrome and Opera. Feature wise, it remains the top king. Chrome still needs to fix its extension api. Until then it will always remain below Firefox; unable to "block ads", only hiding them also unable to block all video ads such as the ads in livestream, incomplete userscript support, no download managers, inferior browser hijacking prevention (noscript > notscript) and a severe limitation to all extensions. For the UI, Firefox has finally been updated to be more fluid and smooth. They released a video about WHY they chose to switch to tabs on top. Just a big FYI, Chrome or Opera did not invent the idea of tabs on top.

Guest said:

Just give me Firefox 4.0!

Guest said:

I've been using Firefox and its predecessors since the Gecko engine was in pre-alpha stages, the one that would fit on a 1.44 mb floppy disk (remember those?). I've tried the alternatives (Chrome, Opera, Safari) and have come to the conclusion that Firefox is the only browser I really want to run. Chrome exists primarily to spur Microsoft to improve IE. Opera has a lot of features but it is too quirky for me to really feel comfortable with. Apple is not interested in letting anyone customize Safari to work the way the end user feels it should. Mozilla has whole-heartedly embraced the concept of letting me make the browser into my own personal Swiss army knife for the web. I welcome their decision to push harder for updates. The beta versions are a lot more stable than one might expect, and Google has largely killed the idea of beta as a test version to begin with. Ubuntu pushes out twice-yearly OS refreshes. There's no reason to think Mozilla can't be just as productive with their browser.

nismo91 said:

just quickly release the final version 4. no point adding so many versions if you keep the beta for few months.

i use both chrome and firefox. chrome wins at immediate startup, however I prefer firefox for the extensions and other feature, including printing. no, i don't select tabs on top either. cmon they're both free just download both and enjoy.

Archean Archean, TechSpot Paladin, said:

however I prefer firefox for the extensions and other feature, including printing.

I agree with you about the printing thing, FF is bit more 'complete' browser IMO, also people I know who use chrome are involved in two things 1) tax dodging 2) being on internet just for the sake of porn ............

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

I agree with you about the printing thing, FF is bit more 'complete' browser IMO, also people I know who use chrome are involved in two things 1) tax dodging 2) being on internet just for the sake of porn ............
Let's suppose you were on the internet for just two things, porn and Techspot. Which would you pick first?

I disagree with your premise about people who use Chrome. IMHO, they're merely Google fanbois, who like to have their personal information harvested, constantly.

"My browser opens faster that your browser...."! Who in their right mind cares....? Oh wait, almost forgot,12 year old pre teen boys, that still think that pro wrestling is real. Or perhaps the self proclaimed, "power users", that have deluded themselves into thinking that a second of their time is important. Trust me, it's not! Not to to you, and certainly not to the rest us.

Leave it to this forum to make a big deal out of the numbering of browser releases, and feel empathy for The Mozilla Foundation, feeling that have have to change their numbering system, to keep up with the search giant, whose main interest is invading people's privacy. Google is lying right up front, when they issue browser update.numbers. Everybody else issues "updates". There isn't enough change in each version of Chrome to warrant a whole number incremental bump, period.

Archean Archean, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Well Captain, I was talking about 'people I know who use Chrome' ....... and they fall in two of these categories.

Secondly, you've asked a very difficult question to answer ...... hmmm, when I use internet, I usually go through all the sites I generally visit, TS, Toms, Anand, GSMA, ARST, BBC + other news sites, LinkedIn etc. and if there is some time left after all these unnecessary incursions ......... I may think about other things

red1776 red1776, Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe, said:

A 4.0, 5.0,6.0, and a 7.0?? how are we to keep track!?

Thats it...I'm switching to Krohmme.

Guest said:

Oh, look, the reload icon is now blue... they must have made a new release since I turned on the computer!

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Well Captain, I was talking about 'people I know who use Chrome' ....... and they fall in two of these categories.
My, my, you certainly do run with a fast crowd....

Secondly, you've asked a very difficult question to answer ...... hmmm, when I use internet, I usually go through all the sites I generally visit, TS, Toms, Anand, GSMA, ARST, BBC + other news sites, LinkedIn etc. and if there is some time left after all these unnecessary incursions ......... I may think about other things
IMHO, you've got certain priorities backwards. But, my advancing years have tended to make me not really care about the news. To me, It's just a source of unnecessary emotional turmoil. Much as Techspot has proven itself to be at times. Although yesterday, the Philadelphia Police rammed suspected carjackers, got into a gun battle with said carjackers, turned the stolen car's windshield into Swiss cheese, killed one and hospitalized the other. Now there's news that was positively uplifting. Then about 5 miles from my house, some woman got a silicone injection, (to make her a** bigger)** at an airport hotel, and then promply died. I thought I was seeing the news from Mexico City, but noooo, it was Filthadelphia, my home town.

(**) I thought you just needed to eat several boxes of chocolate donuts, and be a little patient. Besides, how big a dent do you think Kim Kardashian's a** would make in a cheap mattress? Every morning, you'd try to get out of bed, and windup rolling into the sinkhole. Why would anybody want that?

With that out of the way, there's less advertising at a reputable porn site than there is here. And with that saId, the only script blocking that I still have to do at said sites, is blocking those damned "googleanalytics" tracking cookies.

So I'm going to use "Chrome" why, because it sets adware much faster than Firefox?

A 4.0, 5.0,6.0, and a 7.0?? how are we to keep track!?

Thats it...I'm switching to Krohmme.

Realistically, the numbering shouldn't be a problem until it hits eleven, then you just need to take off your shoes and carry the one.

Und by der vay, vat an un-you-shoe-al spelling of zee vord "Krohmme". Vee'r onto you, Herr Red.....

Archean Archean, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Well at least whoever that woman was brought it 'unto herself' ........ however, the most disturbing story which I was following was about an 'undercover agent' of a certain superpower, who murdered two people by shooting them in their backs (the poor folks never knew why they were killed, though they were carrying 'licensed weapons for their own protection', through his car's windshield and claiming he killed them in 'self defense' and his accomplices ran over (read murder again) a third one trying to 'rescue' him. So now this certain superpower is trying to get him free through 'hook and crook' ...... lets see how this plays out.

By the way, why on earth the women folks over there want to have everything just bigger, hence, 'siliconization' trend of the general population.

Edit: By the way I forgot to add Bnet, G3d, HBR etc. from my earlier list)

Edit 2: Captain I heard 'directing porn' is a 'financially rewarding job' so I guess .... may be you can become one and perhaps be gracious enough to give free access to it to all the TS members, just a suggestion

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

By the way, why on earth the women folks over there want to have everything just bigger, hence, 'siliconization' trend of the general population.

We of the "hip generation", used to call someone who was disingenuous or fake,"plastic"

Now, rather disturbingly, it's no longer a metaphorical term. Women's breasts and backsides are made of plastic. Oddly, I find it rather difficult to become aroused by a pair of implants sitting on the table. Yet, when you slam them into something as skanky as Pamela Anderson, men begin to droll all over themselves because of it.

Anyway, to get back on topic, IMHO, "Chrome", is a "plastic" browser, just concocted to inflict "Google dependency", upon its adopters.

disingenious

Edit 2: Captain I heard 'directing porn' is a 'financially rewarding job' so I guess .... may be you can become one and perhaps be gracious enough to give free access to it to all the TS members, just a suggestion
Why on earth would I need to give"free access" to porn. for the members of Techspot? At least a great majority would pirate it, then tell me, "it wasn't worth paying for, so I took it"!

Archean Archean, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Anyway, to get back on topic, IMHO, "Chrome", is a "plastic" browser, just concocted to inflict "Google dependency", upon its adopters.

Kudos Captain, I couldn't put it any better.

Frankly, sometimes, I am perplexed at this as people bring such dependencies unto themselves, and do nothing to avoid being in such situation, perhaps, it is implicit acceptance of 'corporatization' of our society.

Why on earth would I need to give"free access" to porn. for the members of Techspot? At least a great majority would pirate it, then tell me, "it wasn't worth paying for, so I took it"!

They will say that just to avoid paying, and yet they'll keep pirating, hence, it would mean they like it secretly.

captaincranky captaincranky, TechSpot Addict, said:

Frankly, sometimes, I am perplexed at this as people bring such dependencies unto themselves, and do nothing to avoid being in such situation, perhaps, it is implicit acceptance of 'corporatization' of our society.

OK, I'm going to try a rewrite of that last phrase, (with your permission, of course). Let's see how it flows, shall we?

...[ ]..."perhaps it is complicit assistance with the corporatization of our society". (brought on by the need to belong, and bolstered by sheer stupidity).

Archean Archean, TechSpot Paladin, said:

Fair enough, sometimes, I feel as if people are 'recklessly recusant' when it comes to realizing this sort of change in their own behaviors, and end up creating a monstrosity which they then regret. Also I just noticed something I think your TMS title was very refreshing and suitable for kind of 'Anonymous' crowed we attract at TSF.

Any way, back to topic, I don't care if FF reaches version XXX by the end of the year as long as it make sense to have a new version number.

Guest said:

Sounds like some lovely goals, but as a once fervent follower of Bugzilla, the amount of WONTFIX issues that still persist even from back in the Firebird days... I don't believe they will ever ship a complete product, without an entire changing of the old guard, which will have it's own idea of what features aren't important enough to implement.

I'm done with the browser wars. It either works or it doesn't.

Guest said:

If you don't like the way Firefox 4 looks, you can make it look like Firefox 3.x (the classic look) by following the instructions posted here at http://hacktivist.tumblr.com/

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.