Six years ago, the first FCS release of Firefox showed up on the virtual doorstep of the Internet, wanting to be loved and adopted by people worldwide. And it was: it offered a credible alternative to the status quo and shared a proud tradition with Web browsers of yesteryear.

Much has changed since that day, including the availability of new and other updated Web browsers, but Firefox continues to maintain a utility and cultural mindshare around the world. In addition to the browser itself, it popularized the concept of add-ons for browsers, allowing for a modular approach to the browsing experience.

The folks over at the Mozilla Foundation continue to work on the software, and a new version 4 is currently available in a beta form.

Happy birthday, Firefox!

N.B.

Here’s a link from the Mozilla blog about the sixth year anniversary:

• Happy 6th Birthday Firefox!

A couple of Firefox personas featured by Jane...

So you love using or publishing on WordPress, and you also enjoy using Firefox. So why not add some WordPress-themed bling to Firefox?

That’s the premise behind various Firefox personas. Jane Wells highlights a few options for those of you who really like WordPress and Firefox together, and not just from a functional level but also an appearance level.

There’s a separate site created to feature Firefox personas, so if you’re interested, you should check it out. And if you’re so laser-focused on WordPress-themed Firefox personas, check this out.

If you’re like me and sometimes really tax your Mac (this is assuming you are, in fact, a Mac owner), you may experience a kernel panic.

They’re not fun.

Some people have observed that they have occurred while using seemingly innocuous applications like Firefox 3.0.x, or a mixture of PowerPC-based and Intel-based applications. But, unfortunately, the causes for kernel panics may not be so obvious. And just as unfortunate, there are some disagreements about what causes or leads to kernel panics.

Here’s an example: a seemingly straightforward tutorial for identifying kernel panic causes. While the article presents itself as somewhat authoritative, you may notice that there are several points of contention in the comments section. Curious, eh?

Just in time to close out the end of the 1st half of 2009, Firefox 3.5 was officially released yesterday by the Mozilla folks, amidst a surprisingly small amount of fanfare.

Is it because of the “.5″ portion of its version number? Or is it because many people who were previously enamored with Firefox 2 were significantly less thrilled with Firefox 3, particularly the frequent mysterious crashes? Whatever the case, a major new “feature” of this release is its improved speed in loading Web pages. While some of the rendering speed issues may historically be due to the client, there is also often some degradation of the user experience due to transmission rates and the server-side portion of the Web applications. As a result, under real world situations, many people may not notice a significant speed improvement in sites that they frequent.

There is also a new privacy feature that prevents the browser from storing information from or about a site you visit. Some of you will undoubtedly try the feature and then decide that maybe it would’ve been nice to be able to browse your cache for the now-missing content; others will find this feature quite useful under certain circumstances.

Additionally, there are other improvements to the app. It certainly warrants trying, if for nothing else than to replace Firefox 3.

Later today, around 11:00 AM PT (that equates to 2:00 PM ET), Google will be announcing the availability of their Google Chrome beta product.

Is this something brand-new and innovative? No.

Is this something of interest to Web and enterprise developers? Yes… and here’s why:

… But first, a little context for this strange tale…

The Setup

What I was doing…

Yesterday, around 2:00 PM, I was rummaging around a local Best Buy, trying to choose whether to acquire the Call of Duty 3 Xbox 360 game or the Lost Planet: Extreme Condition – Colonies Edition Xbox 360 game.

Now, as many of you know, the recent price reduction in the Xbox 360 console (for the 20 GB Pro version) has encouraged a lot more people into jumping on the bandwagon, and that has led to more people crowding into Xbox LIVE. This translates to a greater impact on the Xbox LIVE service but also greater opportunities for playing a whole cavalcade of gamers worldwide in games that I’ve acquired. 

Getting back to the choice between COD3 and LP: I’ve enjoyed the Call of Duty franchise on the Xbox 360 immensely, but primarily from the Infinity Ward development studio in both Call of Duty 2 and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. I’ve been hesitant to acquire a game made by a different studio (Treyarch) than the initiator. On the other hand, the Lost Planet franchise is new to me, and as a Capcom title, it has somewhat of an unproven lineage, which gives me pause. But while both games sport multiplayer action via XBL, I wonder whether LP offers a distinctively different gameplay quality that may be appealing…

Eventually, I decided to go with filling in the evolutionary gap between my COD2 and COD4: I snagged COD3, and headed home. I’m comfortable with the franchise, and the developer has promised to have kept a lot of the controls identical to, or as close as possible to, the original controls developed by Infinity Ward. And this leads me to…

What Google was doing…

Google [GOOG] had announced around the same time that they’re going to release the beta version of their Google Chrome browser. 

Earlier in the day, I saw some hintings that they would be announcing (and presumably launching) their foray into platform launching, masquerading as a Web browser, in the cute form of a Webcomic. Gleaned from the Webcomic are the “evolutionary” changes made to Chrome, as well as optimizations introduced to help support existing and upcoming Google apps…

The Premise

Google has been attempting to push into the hybrid application arena for several years now, with mixed results. Rather than using the heavyweight distributed technologies in this established field, like CORBA and Java, they’ve been focusing on “lighter” technologies that are stitched together via the network: DHTML/AJAX/Java-as-scripting on the client connected to a variety of server-side apps.

Other players in this field have eventually progressed toward delivering either persistent components that fit into existing apps (like browser plugins, OS plugins, starter apps, launching point apps, etc.) or entire replacement apps (like heavy-duty app suites, browsers, app frameworks, code modules with thin UI’s, etc.).

Google has finally taken this second route, after participating quite a bit with the downloadable-runners and the persistent components: it’s Google Chrome, and it is intended to provide an app platform for other Google products to be delivered upon. 

The Action

For developers, having yet another app platform to code to may be problematic… but it may also be an opportunity.

As mentioned in the Wikipedia article, Chrome is supposedly composed of both Webkit and Mozilla app framework pieces, so if you’re already familiar with either (or both) of these, the transition toward manipulating Chrome is most likely going to be fairly smooth. Also, to produce apps on top of Chrome, you probably won’t have further to look than Google’s own code labs.

From a technical product release standpoint, the Windows beta version of Chrome is due out first; ongoing work on the OS X and Linux versions is proceeding. Obviously, given the histories of both Webkit (hint: Apple Safari for Windows) and the Mozilla app framework (let’s not forget XPCOM!) and the recent Windows releases, and the available developers, getting a Windows version out the door first, especially for a beta, is a bit easier. But once the UNIX/Linux standardization completes for Chrome, future development should be smoother. But timing is everything, and rushing out a Windows version first helps to target the majority of known consumer Web browser users.

Keeping Track of This…

Since a lot of media outlets, both online and broadcast, are starting to report on this, I’d imagine that Google will start trickling out tidbits leading up to the product announcement that was rescheduled for today (instead of September 3rd).

So, let’s hurry up… and wait.

N.B.

A lot of you know what “chrome” is, at least from a user’s perspective. But do you really know chrome?

When applied to Firefox and the XUL concept, there is a more specific and significant meaning: it applies to the UI components and effects found in the Firefox browser and, in a related sense, applications built upon the Mozilla application framework.

So, here are some useful chrome URLs for Mozilla and Firefox apps:

• (Standard) Chrome URLs (Mozillazine)
• Developer notes for Firefox chrome URLs (Mozillazine)

More Reading

Here are some Javamancy posts that are related to this one, in reverse chronological order:

• Xbox 360 Console Price Reduction Finalized
• Xbox 360 Console Price Cut

Here are some additional related reading materials you may be interested in:

• “A fresh take on the browser” (Official Google Blog)
•  Google Chrome (Wikipedia entry)

True to their word, the Mozilla folks have made good on their threat to broadcast the Firefox 3.0.1 upgrade to current Firefox 2.0.0.16 users: 

If you haven’t seen the modal dialog pop up on top of your Firefox 2.0.0.16 browser screens yet, you’re going to, especially if you have the auto-update checking on.

This is an uncharacteristic move for the Mozilla bunch, which has historically prided itself on providing reasonable alternatives to browsers such as Microsoft’s Internet Explorer and Apple’s Safari. But Firefox 3 has found itself fighting a battle against itself: Firefox 2 has currently a larger active installed base than Firefox 3, despite its record-making release event. 

Dr. Lin

Is this a blatant attempt to move past the successful Firefox 2 in order to get more users to help debug Firefox 3 (now at version 3.0.1)?

Fortunately, the modal dialog does allow you to postpone or reject the upgrade action. So:

• Intrusive :: YES
• Mandatory :: NO

Whew! Disaster averted!

More Reading

These other related Javamancy posts are listed in reverse chronological order:

• Cautionary Tale of Firefox 3.0 Memory Shenanigans
• Firefox 3.0 Guinness World Record
• DIY: Make (Firefox-Guinness) History
• Firefox 3.0 Released

Just when I think Firefox 3.0 may be something fun and exciting to explore is a somewhat “safe” way (“safe” being relative for the downright nasty hackers of us in the crowd), here comes the potentially scary news: that at least one commenter is reporting that FF3 is a memory hog…

Argh! Am I running back out to OWC for more FB-DIMMs?

Congratulations to All-of-Us-Who-Participated-in-the-Massive-Download-Event!

(And, let’s not forget the Firefox team and the Mozilla bunch for releasing Firefox 3.0 in the first place!)

According to the Spread Firefox webpage, the record for most downloads in a 24-hour period was summarized as:

From 18:16 UTC on June 17, 2008 to 18:16 UTC on June 18, 2008, 8,002,530 people downloaded Firefox 3 and are now enjoying a safer, smarter and better Web.

Of course, YMMV with regard to the “safer, smarter and better Web” part of the above statement, but still… it’s plenty o’ fun!

…

Now, I need to get back to working on resolving my Firefox 2.0 conundrum… and that does include trying to get both Firefox 2.x and 3.x to coexist peacefully (and concurrently) on the Mac Pro…

Remember my rant (post-memory upgrade on the Mac Pro) about Firefox 2.0 bombing around 900 MB-ish RAM utilization level?

Here’s a quick update:

It looks like Firefox 2.0.0.14 is still hanging on, without crashing. Thus far, it’s pushed to the 1.18 GB RAM utilization level, and there’s still 1.33 GB of free system memory not yet touched.

Excellent!

Lately, I’ve been noticing a disquieting issue with Firefox 2.0. It typically seems to die around 850 – 892 MB RAM utilization (total RAM utilization will vary); sometimes, I get lucky enough to get higher, toward almost 1 GB RAM utilization before it croaks.

When I got my Mac Pro as a stock configuration, I was thinking, “Gee, is 2 GB RAM enough?” At first, things were fine: I was able to launch plenty of different apps and run them concurrently without a hitch. True, some things ran a bit slower than others, and I wasn’t really putting a serious demand on most of the running processes. But, inevitably, I began to push the machine harder and harder as my computing needs escalated. Finally, I acquired additional much-needed RAM, and voila! Fun times, folks, fun times.

The Exception (Duh-Duh-DUH!)

That is, except for Firefox 2.0.

Even after the RAM upgrade, Firefox was still max’ing out around the 900 MB-ish limit on RAM utilization before crashing and taking all of its windows and tabs with it (‘natch).

So now I’ve gotten into the habit of running both Firefox and Safari concurrently and dividing the tabs and windows between the two apps, so that if something happens to Firefox, I’ll still be able to keep running with Safari while Firefox is restarting and reloading all of its contents. This workaround has saved me quite a bit of time, because it frequently takes quite some time for Firefox to relaunch all of the last known windows and tabs.

The Next Step

Quite fortuitously, Firefox 3.0 was released on June 17. I even reported on it, as the Firefox folks were attempting to set a Guinness world record for most software downloads in a 24-hour period.

I’ve downloaded Firefox 3.0 and am now contemplating the best way to operate both Firefox 2.0 and 3.0 concurrently (and perhaps even with Safari also running). Once I’ve determined that Firefox 3.0 is more stable, then I can retire Firefox 2.0.

Hopefully, the Curse of the Memory Limit will be lifted!

N.B.

As of this writing, I haven’t heard any further news about whether Firefox has made a Guinness world record. The note on the “Spread Firefox” page for the world record attempt mentions that it may take a few days to come up with the results. So, like you, I need to practice some more patience.