Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 23 Jun 2011 10:35:15 -0400
From:      Ryan Coleman <editor@d3photography.com>
To:        Joshua Isom <jrisom@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Mozilla retires Firefox 4 from security support
Message-ID:  <7C70B394-4C08-472C-9084-312141E0BD74@d3photography.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E034ECD.2030505@gmail.com>
References:  <20110623075223.3b439423@scorpio>	<19971.11087.811956.446957@jerusalem.litteratus.org>	<20110623083030.2afcccfd@scorpio> <4E033AD7.2010600@cyanide-studio.com> <4E034ECD.2030505@gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Jun 23, 2011, at 10:33 AM, Joshua Isom wrote:

> On 6/23/2011 8:08 AM, Admin Cyanide wrote:
>>=20
>> The major difference is that when updating Microsoft's OS from a =
major
>> version to another you have to pay.
>> I'm not flaming, I just want to focus on the fact that this products
>> have not the same constraints.
>>=20
>> What is surprising is why it is not a 4.1 release, I'm not following
>> Firefox development but I'm surprised how fast they've gone from a =
major
>> release to another.
>> What has been changed in FF 5 that needs this release number change ?
>>=20
>=20
> Blame Chrome.  Just like there was no Netscape 5 because of IE6, the =
version number is marketing to make it look like Firefox is updating =
more often and faster than competitors.

IMO Netscrape 6 was no better than IE6 :)




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7C70B394-4C08-472C-9084-312141E0BD74>