It is an article from Cnet
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20074590-264/rapid-release-firefox-meets-corporate-backlash/
Strange how there is no corporate backlash about the chrome release cycle, which is on steroids.
I guess because it’s so new that corporations never got around to installing it on their machines. That and the fact that they’ve always updated it frequently.
We had rolled out FireFox 3.6.x to the clients we support. However with the current rapid release cycle we will no longer be able to test and deploy before the new release come out (many customers, many webapps to test. Takes 2 weeks to test and a further 2 weeks to deploy). Its back to IE for us :
I’m listening this over and over again… I can’t understand why Mozilla is shooting its own foot :
Makes no sense to me. However, I do deploy Firefox via Group policy (with the aid of: http://www.frontmotion.com/Firefox/) in one of the schools that I manage because the computer teacher wanted to show students how to use a different browser other than IE.
I still update it as frequently as I can, but we don’t have “web applications” that need to be tested with each release. The kids just view websites and play educational flash games online so this doesn’t bother me a bit, other than having to update it more frequently that is.
Blood in the water, http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/06/27/a-browser-for-all-windows-customers-it-s-about-and-not-or.aspx, so come the sharks.
Mozilla asked for that. What would we expect from Microsoft? :-* :-*
slight change of stance: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/firefox-release-cycle-firefox-5-firefox-4-mozilla,news-11704.html
Very good reading. Seems the image of Firefox needs to be recovered.
I’m one of Firefox users loyal in the last 5 years I think. But I need to fight with my IT guy all the time…
In my opinion, there’s no reason why Mozilla has to change it’s philosophy to serve the greater good, rather than cater to a bunch of IT “professionals” who over complicate the adoption of new programs, to justify, mystify, and confuse management so they can keep their jobs. As far as I’m concerned, Asa Dotzler’s response (read smack down) to the complainer, was right on.
Orange, as an user, I share your opinions… But we won’t convince the IT guy
That’s true.
My opinion on this matter:
http://my.opera.com/rejzor/blog/2011/06/21/mozilla-firefox-new-version-scheme-is-a-big-fail
If it is such a potential failure in the rapid update process, why is Chrome gobbling up market share with an update cycle that is on steroids. Doesn’t seem to have harmed it.
Fully agree.
We stay with avast 4 for years… from 4.1 to 4.8 with a lot of minor versions in between. At the same time, other companies run from 1 to 12…
But now what is happening, avast has gone from avast 5.0 to 5.1 to 60 in very short order and avast 7 is in the works. Is this so different, no it isn’t.
Avast, I have always been saying gives a 0.1 version increment where others would have had a whole 1.0 version increment. Many others have a different version number every year and we all know why that is to get people to buy the latest version.
These however, are somewhat different to these browser wars, battle of the version numbers.
You’re right regarding to the interface. But quite some features were added.
I’m not advocating avast as they start to follow a new version each year and could be “forcing” that way. Do you remember version 6 rush to be released? 
I don’t think comparisons between different browsers can be made in this regard.
Since it’s original release, Chrome has always had a quick version increase, whereas Firefox was always slower…
I think it is simply the change in policy that is causing upset…and really, all it is, is a change in the numbering policy. 5 is the equivalent of an incremental 4, so probably would still have been released, just under a different number.
They have also followed with Thunderbird, releasing a new version 5 which is equivalent to 3.x.x or something like that…
Maybe I am missing something, but the only change I see is the number, so this whole release schedule thing is a bit odd…
I think the problems are the addons… The incompatibility kills them. A lot of users take Firefox precisely because of the addons.