<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: Firefox 3 RC2&#8230; We&#8217;re almost there!</title> <atom:link href="http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/</link> <description>Technology News</description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 07:03:20 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: Ryan</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138770</link> <dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 00:55:12 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138770</guid> <description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138724&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;netster007x wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;I’ve been thinking, the whole purpose of a Release Candidate is it acts like the release, calls itself the release, and if it turns out stable enough, it is simply declared the release.  But they’re trying to get x downloads of the release.  If I (and many others, who likely would be the ones supporting Fx and it’s quest for the record) jump the gun with release candidates, we will already have the released Fx3 installed when it is released.  So, contributing to the record would mean re-installing exactly what you already have installed, right?  So Mozilla is relying on us doing what is illogical because we are so passionate about Mozilla and their record?&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt; In so many words, yes. Even if it is the exact same thing as RC2 I&#039;m sure most people will download it if only for the reassurance that it IS the final release.&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138728&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;BritSwedeGuy wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;“English” is US English, real English is further down. Racists ;p&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt; Oops, my bad. I&#039;m the one that created the drop down list a few months back, and I had forgotten that there were two different releases for &quot;English&quot;. :oops:</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138724" rel="nofollow">netster007x wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>I’ve been thinking, the whole purpose of a Release Candidate is it acts like the release, calls itself the release, and if it turns out stable enough, it is simply declared the release.  But they’re trying to get x downloads of the release.  If I (and many others, who likely would be the ones supporting Fx and it’s quest for the record) jump the gun with release candidates, we will already have the released Fx3 installed when it is released.  So, contributing to the record would mean re-installing exactly what you already have installed, right?  So Mozilla is relying on us doing what is illogical because we are so passionate about Mozilla and their record?</p></blockquote></div><p>In so many words, yes. Even if it is the exact same thing as RC2 I&#8217;m sure most people will download it if only for the reassurance that it IS the final release.</p><div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138728" rel="nofollow">BritSwedeGuy wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>“English” is US English, real English is further down.<br /> Racists ;p</p></blockquote></div><p>Oops, my bad. I&#8217;m the one that created the drop down list a few months back, and I had forgotten that there were two different releases for &#8220;English&#8221;. <img src='http://cybernetnews.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_redface.gif' alt=':oops:' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Michael Dobrofsky</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138731</link> <dc:creator>Michael Dobrofsky</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 09:27:57 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138731</guid> <description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138728&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;BritSwedeGuy wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;“English” is US English, real English is further down. Racists ;p&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt;Don&#039;t you love how alotta software companies always zone English to be associated with the US. Quite arrogant.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138728" rel="nofollow">BritSwedeGuy wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>“English” is US English, real English is further down.<br /> Racists ;p</p></blockquote></div><p>Don&#8217;t you love how alotta software companies always zone English to be associated with the US. Quite arrogant.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: BritSwedeGuy</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138728</link> <dc:creator>BritSwedeGuy</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 08:25:32 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138728</guid> <description>&quot;English&quot; is US English, real English is further down. Racists ;p</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;English&#8221; is US English, real English is further down.<br /> Racists ;p</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: netster007x</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138724</link> <dc:creator>netster007x</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 05:30:53 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138724</guid> <description>I&#039;ve been thinking, the whole purpose of a Release Candidate is it acts like the release, calls itself the release, and if it turns out stable enough, it is simply declared the release.  But they&#039;re trying to get x downloads of the release.  If I (and many others, who likely would be the ones supporting Fx and it&#039;s quest for the record) jump the gun with release candidates, we will already have the released Fx3 installed when it is released.  So, contributing to the record would mean re-installing exactly what you already have installed, right?  So Mozilla is relying on us doing what is illogical because we are so passionate about Mozilla and their record?Kinda odd.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been thinking, the whole purpose of a Release Candidate is it acts like the release, calls itself the release, and if it turns out stable enough, it is simply declared the release.  But they&#8217;re trying to get x downloads of the release.  If I (and many others, who likely would be the ones supporting Fx and it&#8217;s quest for the record) jump the gun with release candidates, we will already have the released Fx3 installed when it is released.  So, contributing to the record would mean re-installing exactly what you already have installed, right?  So Mozilla is relying on us doing what is illogical because we are so passionate about Mozilla and their record?</p><p>Kinda odd.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Ryan</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138708</link> <dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 03:00:44 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138708</guid> <description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138693&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Cody wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;From what I’ve read on different tech sites, and from the Firefox meetings notes that I have read in various sites, it seems that there won’t be a RC3.And even if there is one, it is clear from the above sources that Mozilla has agreed to release the final version of Firefox 3 mid-June. Apparently non-fixed critical bugs will be fixed in Firefox 3.0.1.PS. Opera is also approaching its release of Opera 9.5 final. Something tells me it will be either a bit sooner than, or around the same time as, Firefox 3 final.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt; It&#039;s hard to believe that the two browsers are already coming up on their final releases. It seems like we&#039;ve been following their every move for so long now. :roll:&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138705&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;apex2000 wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;The download link takes me to a page where you can d/l FF2!! What’s up?!?!  :( Never mind! natmaster’s link took me to the correct page! thanks all.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt; Our downloader took you to Firefox 2? Are you sure you just weren&#039;t confused because it said &quot;Firefox 3 RC 2&quot;?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138693" rel="nofollow">Cody wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>From what I’ve read on different tech sites, and from the Firefox meetings notes that I have read in various sites, it seems that there won’t be a RC3.</p><p>And even if there is one, it is clear from the above sources that Mozilla has agreed to release the final version of Firefox 3 mid-June. Apparently non-fixed critical bugs will be fixed in Firefox 3.0.1.</p><p>PS. Opera is also approaching its release of Opera 9.5 final. Something tells me it will be either a bit sooner than, or around the same time as, Firefox 3 final.</p></blockquote></div><p>It&#8217;s hard to believe that the two browsers are already coming up on their final releases. It seems like we&#8217;ve been following their every move for so long now. <img src='http://cybernetnews.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif' alt=':roll:' class='wp-smiley' /></p><div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138705" rel="nofollow">apex2000 wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>The download link takes me to a page where you can d/l FF2!! What’s up?!?! <img src='http://cybernetnews.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /><br /> Never mind! natmaster’s link took me to the correct page! thanks all.</p></blockquote></div><p>Our downloader took you to Firefox 2? Are you sure you just weren&#8217;t confused because it said &#8220;Firefox 3 RC 2&#8243;?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: apex2000</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138705</link> <dc:creator>apex2000</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:37:01 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138705</guid> <description>The download link takes me to a page where you can d/l FF2!! What&#039;s up?!?!  :(Never mind! natmaster&#039;s link took me to the correct page! thanks all.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The download link takes me to a page where you can d/l FF2!! What&#8217;s up?!?! <img src='http://cybernetnews.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /></p><p>Never mind! natmaster&#8217;s link took me to the correct page! thanks all.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Max</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138704</link> <dc:creator>Max</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:27:06 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138704</guid> <description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138703&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;natmaster wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138702&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Max wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;I’m curious: I have a portable version of Firefox 3 RC 1. If I go to Help&gt;Check for Updates and it finds this one, will it update and keep it portable or will an update this way install Firefox 3 RC 2 on my PC? I once upgraded a Firefox 2 portable version via Check For Updates and it installed a second Firefox on my PC (ie: in Add/Remove programs I had 2 copies of Firefox). But maybe I just did something wrong then.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt; The newer Firefox Portables will do in-place updating, so don’t worry about that. I run Firefox Portable for Nightlies and update every day.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt;Awesome, thanks!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138703" rel="nofollow">natmaster wrote:</a><br /><blockquote><div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138702" rel="nofollow">Max wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>I’m curious: I have a portable version of Firefox 3 RC 1. If I go to Help&gt;Check for Updates and it finds this one, will it update and keep it portable or will an update this way install Firefox 3 RC 2 on my PC?<br /> I once upgraded a Firefox 2 portable version via Check For Updates and it installed a second Firefox on my PC (ie: in Add/Remove programs I had 2 copies of Firefox). But maybe I just did something wrong then.</p></blockquote></div><p>The newer Firefox Portables will do in-place updating, so don’t worry about that. I run Firefox Portable for Nightlies and update every day.</p></blockquote></div><p>Awesome, thanks!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: natmaster</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138703</link> <dc:creator>natmaster</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 23:16:57 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138703</guid> <description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138702&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Max wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;I’m curious: I have a portable version of Firefox 3 RC 1. If I go to Help&gt;Check for Updates and it finds this one, will it update and keep it portable or will an update this way install Firefox 3 RC 2 on my PC?I once upgraded a Firefox 2 portable version via Check For Updates and it installed a second Firefox on my PC (ie: in Add/Remove programs I had 2 copies of Firefox). But maybe I just did something wrong then.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt;The newer Firefox Portables will do in-place updating, so don&#039;t worry about that. I run Firefox Portable for Nightlies and update every day.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138702" rel="nofollow">Max wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>I’m curious: I have a portable version of Firefox 3 RC 1. If I go to Help&gt;Check for Updates and it finds this one, will it update and keep it portable or will an update this way install Firefox 3 RC 2 on my PC?</p><p>I once upgraded a Firefox 2 portable version via Check For Updates and it installed a second Firefox on my PC (ie: in Add/Remove programs I had 2 copies of Firefox). But maybe I just did something wrong then.</p></blockquote></div><p>The newer Firefox Portables will do in-place updating, so don&#8217;t worry about that. I run Firefox Portable for Nightlies and update every day.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Max</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138702</link> <dc:creator>Max</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:59:54 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138702</guid> <description>I&#039;m curious: I have a portable version of Firefox 3 RC 1. If I go to Help&gt;Check for Updates and it finds this one, will it update and keep it portable or will an update this way install Firefox 3 RC 2 on my PC?I once upgraded a Firefox 2 portable version via Check For Updates and it installed a second Firefox on my PC (ie: in Add/Remove programs I had 2 copies of Firefox). But maybe I just did something wrong then.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m curious: I have a portable version of Firefox 3 RC 1. If I go to Help&gt;Check for Updates and it finds this one, will it update and keep it portable or will an update this way install Firefox 3 RC 2 on my PC?</p><p>I once upgraded a Firefox 2 portable version via Check For Updates and it installed a second Firefox on my PC (ie: in Add/Remove programs I had 2 copies of Firefox). But maybe I just did something wrong then.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: natmaster</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/firefox-3-rc2-were-almost-there/#comment-138700</link> <dc:creator>natmaster</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:25:47 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12962#comment-138700</guid> <description>Digg it: http://digg.com/software/Official_Firefox_3_RC2_released</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Digg it:<br /> [<a href='http://digg.com/software/Official_Firefox_3_RC2_released' rel='nofollow'>digg.com</a>]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching using disk: basic
Object Caching 308/327 objects using disk: basic

Served from: cybernetnews.com @ 2012-02-13 03:38:37 -->
