<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/20620/Mozilla_Firefox_3_1_Beta_2_Released</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 04:08:54 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>download</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339611</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339611</guid>
			<description>Download link missing from post (you'd think it is something important...):<br />
  <br />
   Linux - <a href="http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.1b2&amp;os=linux&amp;=en-US" rel="nofollow">http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.1b2&amp;os=linux&amp...</a>   <br />
   <br />
   Windows - <a href="http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.1b2&amp;os=win&amp;=en-US" rel="nofollow">http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.1b2&amp;os=win&amp;=...</a>  <br />
   <br />
   Osx - <a href="http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.1b2&amp;os=osx&amp;=en-US" rel="nofollow">http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-3.1b2&amp;os=osx&amp;=...</a> Edited 2008-12-08 21:14 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (maaxx)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Not for XUL?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339612</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339612</guid>
			<description>Why is it not turned on for XUL?</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:33:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (unclebob)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Not for XUL?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339613</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339613</guid>
			<description>XUL (&quot;chrome&quot;) JIT is prone to crashes because of extensions; much work is still being done on it, but don't expect it for 3.1 ...and don't complain if, after turning it on, Firefox crashes and you (or whoever does it) have two dozen exotic extensions.<br />
OTOH BetaNews has jumped the gun again, since the builds named 3.1beta2 are just the first test builds for localizations (which are not built daily, so they have to be tested before getting released) and not the final beta builds, which are still to be announced.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:01:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (xfranky)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Not for XUL?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339615</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339615</guid>
			<description>...and the official release can be tracked here:<br />
 <a href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/Firefox_3.1b2" rel="nofollow">https://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/Firefox_3.1b2</a><br />
<br />
There it actually seems that the build should be final, even though they might not be on all the mirrors, yet.Edited 2008-12-08 22:13 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:11:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (xfranky)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339621</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339621</guid>
			<description>I just downloaded Firefox 3.1 beta 2 and on the first welcome screen it says &quot;Watch a video in your browser without needing any plugins or external media players.&quot;  So me being the curious spud that I am decided to give it a shot.  I was able to get the video to work.  My question is how does the video work?  Will Firefox 3.1 now include codecs like ogg or is it using some type of bittorrent to stream it to the player?<br />
<br />
On a side note, it gets 92/100 for acid3 test.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:42:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (TaterSalad)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339622</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339622</guid>
			<description>try <a href="http://www.tn.com.ar" rel="nofollow">http://www.tn.com.ar</a> if you get a real-time stream on Linux, I'm interested; otherwise, no.</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:52:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (nbensa)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>lol</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339623</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339623</guid>
			<description>They should call it the &quot;Chrome Catchup&quot; releaseEdited 2008-12-08 23:00 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (google_ninja)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Tab switching</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339625</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339625</guid>
			<description>Awww... they removed the new, MRU-order tab switching! <img src="/images/emo/sad.gif" alt=";)" /> <br />
 In Beta1, ctrl+tab would cycle between tabs in most-recently-used order. So if you're repeatedly switching between two tabs, you only need press ctrl+tab once each time regardless of where the tabs are positioned in the tab bar. But &quot;based on feedback from users&quot; [release notes] they removed it in Beta2. Now it's back to moving linearly through the tab bar.<br />
 I preferred the new behaviour - which matches alt+tab. Guess I'll have to install Ctrl-Tab extension after all.<br />
<br />
Tip: disable extensions.checkCompatibility in about:config before upgrading to prevent Firefox from disabling your 'incompatible' extensions (Adblock, flashblock work fine on Beta2 despite the warning).Edited 2008-12-08 23:22 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:20:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Morph)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339629</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339629</guid>
			<description>Theroa<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/2008/07/theora-video-backend-for-firefox-landed.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/2008/07/theora-video-backend-for-firef...</a> <br />
<br />
We all adore Theora</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:18:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Michael)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Tab switching</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339631</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339631</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">But &quot;based on feedback from users&quot; [release notes] they removed it in Beta2. Now it's back to moving linearly through the tab bar.<br />
 I preferred the new behaviour - which matches alt+tab. Guess I'll have to install Ctrl-Tab extension after all. </div><br />
<br />
Not surprising, really - even if some people prefer the new behaviour, it has to be a fairly big improvement to win over the majority that don't like it when things change unexpectedly. And in this case, the majority doesn't seem to be convinced.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:32:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Delgarde)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Javascript + DOM getting slower</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339639</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339639</guid>
			<description>I was pretty excited about the new tracemonkey javascript engine when it was first announced.  It looked to be a big improvement in the synthetic benchmarks they showed.  And a big step in catching up to Google Chrome in speed.<br />
    <br />
    But testing Firefox 3.1 Beta 2 with the jsBalls  fight timedemo ( <a href="http://www.jsballs.com/benchmark.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.jsballs.com/benchmark.html</a> ) it seems slower than Firefox 3.  Safari 3.2 and Opera 10 alpha 1 both were much faster than their predecessors in this benchmark, I was hoping Firefox would keep pace.Edited 2008-12-09 00:52 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (theorz)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Comment by RawMustard</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339643</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339643</guid>
			<description>When are they going to get with the times and offer 64bit downloads?<br />
<br />
If Adobe can do it, I'm sure Mozilla can do it also!</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 01:46:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (RawMustard)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Comment by RawMustard</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339644</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339644</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">When are they going to get with the times and offer 64bit downloads? </div><br />
After GA is out, it should just come with your 64 bit distro.  If not, you can just &quot;yum install&quot; or &quot;apt-get install&quot; it.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 02:16:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Javascript + DOM getting slower</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339650</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339650</guid>
			<description>I'm not seeing any speed increase at all, in fact it's much slower than v3.0.  Am I missing something?<br />
<br />
I tried this site: <a href="http://www.dhteumeuleu.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.dhteumeuleu.com/</a> to test both and 3.1 just choked?</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 05:24:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (RawMustard)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Comment by RawMustard</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339652</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339652</guid>
			<description>Yeah and Photoshop CS4 is 64bit on OSX right?<br />
<br />
Seriously, like OSX Photoshop CS4 users, <b>patience grashopper</b>. It will come to those who wait.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 07:12:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (shotsman)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Gopher?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339655</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339655</guid>
			<description>Did they remove gopher support in this one? I am currently re-experiencing gopher, and a browser with no support is a no-go <img src="/images/emo/grin.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 09:14:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (liber)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Gopher?</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339657</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339657</guid>
			<description>That's scheduled for Mozilla/2.0 (Gecko/XUL 2.0, current is 1.9.1). Firefox 4 timeframe, possibly.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:07:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Kroc)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339658</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339658</guid>
			<description>I get a live stream with firefox 2.018 in BeOS using the VLC plugin on that page, works great. But firefox3 isnt available for BeOS or haiku yet so i cant test that.<br />
<br />
BTW: what is the point of elimminating the need for plugins? I thought customization and simplicity to port was one of the strong points of gecko nad other mozilla products?<br />
Maybe im wrong but shouldnt this make it harder to port the stuff.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:19:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (judgen)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Tab switching</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339659</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339659</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">"<i>But &quot;based on feedback from users&quot; [release notes] they removed it in Beta2. Now it's back to moving linearly through the tab bar.<br />
  I preferred the new behaviour - which matches alt+tab. Guess I'll have to install Ctrl-Tab extension after all. </div><br />
 <br />
 Not surprising, really - even if some people prefer the new behaviour, it has to be a fairly big improvement to win over the majority that don't like it when things change unexpectedly. And in this case, the majority doesn't seem to be convinced. </i>"<br />
<br />
I myself hate it (the new style), since I can't really know in which order the tabs are going to be selected, so Ctrl+Tab switching then becomes slower to use for me.<br />
 <br />
 It might be OK for a big number of randomly ordered tabs, but Firefox anyways already supports manual positioning, so I don't see anything good in it. If one needs to cycle between same two tabs, there always exists the Ctrl+Shift+Tab for backwards cycling.Edited 2008-12-09 10:45 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:45:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (SJ87)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339663</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339663</guid>
			<description>I'm on Arch Linux and I get a real live stream via the mplayer plugin on that page fine.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:44:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (doublec)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339665</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339665</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote"><br />
BTW: what is the point of elimminating the need for plugins? I thought customization and simplicity to port was one of the strong points of gecko nad other mozilla products?<br />
Maybe im wrong but shouldnt this make it harder to port the stuff. </div><br />
<br />
The point is to provide an easy way for people to add video and audio to their sites, with a defined JavaScript API allow them to build their own video controllers.<br />
<br />
The video element is in the midst of being standardised and other browsers are implementing it.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 11:47:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (doublec)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: lol</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339676</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339676</guid>
			<description>The only &quot;catchup&quot; that Firefox 3.1 is doing is with tracemonkey that has been in development for 2 years and private browsing that has been in development for the past year.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Fergy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Tab switching</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339677</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339677</guid>
			<description>I hated the new behavior. I use ctrl+tab to go to the next tab without using the mouse. If I want to go between 2 websites I use a second window.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:04:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Fergy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Comment by RawMustard</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339678</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339678</guid>
			<description>Why would you want a 64 bit version? It doesn't speed it up. You can't use 32bit plugins anymore. And the only benefit you get is Firefox 64bit would be able to use more than 2GB memory.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:12:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Fergy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339680</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339680</guid>
			<description>the point was to get it working _without_ plugins <img src="/images/emo/wink.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:19:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (nbensa)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[4]: Here is a silly question</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339682</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339682</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">the point was to get it working _without_ plugins <img src="/images/emo/wink.gif" alt=";)" />  </div>As soon as that site starts streaming in Theora format, no problem <img src="/images/emo/wink.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (doublec)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Comment by RawMustard</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339688</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339688</guid>
			<description>Running a 64-bit browser on a 64-bit system means you don't need 32-bit libraries installed just for your browser.<br />
<br />
Besides, now that Adobe has released a 64-bit flash plugin for Linux, is there any reason to not use 64-bit browser? Java, sure, but that is not too common anymore via regular browsing. Were there any other 32-bit only holdouts?</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 15:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (ChrisIrwin)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Fixes google maps</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339691</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339691</guid>
			<description>Google maps was broken in 3.1 beta 1. But it works now in the second beta. I also experienced  several crashes in the previous beta, which have yet to occur. So it looks like my bug reporting has payed off. Google Chrome is still faster on more limited hardware, but on my current core two duo two gig desktop I prefer having the firefox extensions available.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:07:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Bill Shooter of Bul)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: Comment by RawMustard</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339693</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339693</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">Running a 64-bit browser on a 64-bit system means you don't need 32-bit libraries installed just for your browser. </div><br />
  Nobody seems to do this, but there is really something to be said for installing a 32 bit distro and running it under a 64 bit kernel.  This combines the nice flat memory model of 64 bit in kernel space with the memory efficiency of 32 bit in user space.  You miss out on having the extra x86_64 registers available to the user space code, but save significantly on memory.  And, of course, the whole 32/64 bit browser plugin issue is side-stepped, along with any duplication of 32/64 bit libraries.Edited 2008-12-09 16:33 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:18:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Javascript + DOM getting slower</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339694</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339694</guid>
			<description>Sorry if I worded my message funny.  I was complaining about it getting slower.  So yes, no speed increase at all.  Just a marginal decrease.<br />
<br />
That site is really cool.  People are doing some really neat things with javascript.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:29:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (theorz)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: Tab switching</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339714</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339714</guid>
			<description>Except that MRU is the order most operating systems use with ALT-TAB, so it isn't entirely new behavior.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 18:34:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Michael)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>mixedloving</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?339762</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?339762</guid>
			<description>**********Welcome to------www.Mixedloving.com------the first, largest and most-trusted interracial dating site in the world. <br />
This is the best place for looking for interracial dating relationship or marriage. We bring together interracial-dating minded singles from all races, ethnicities and cultures, whether they are in your own neighborhood or around the world.</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 02:53:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (nikky123)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Tracemonkey 64-bit</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?340003</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?340003</guid>
			<description>Does anyone know if tracemonkey is working in a 64-bit browser yet?  Last time I tried tracing wasn't available in a 64-bit browser and I haven't found any information saying that it is now working.</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:48:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (abraxas)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
