Ask Slashdot: Life After Firefox 3.6.x? 807
Mooga writes "I am a hard-core user of Firefox 3.6.x who has chosen to stick with the older, yet supported version of Firefox for many years now. However, 3.6.x will soon hit end-of-life, making my life, and the lives of similar users, much more complicated. 3.6.x has been known for generally being more stable and using less RAM than the modern Firefox 10 and even Chrome. The older version of Firefox is already having issues rendering modern websites. What are others who have been holding onto 3.6.x planning on doing?"
Re:Hard-core user? (Score:5, Funny)
One whose head is too hard to upgrade to a newer version.
Re:Fucking fusspot nerds (Score:4, Funny)
Oh come off it mate.
We all know what you REALLY want to do with that buttery screwdriver.
You nasty bastard.
Re:Sounds familiar (Score:4, Funny)
Doesn't seem too long ago that I was having the same questions about Netscape Navigator 4.5.
So how did you get a coma in the first place?
Re:As users, we're getting fucked over. That's why (Score:5, Funny)
Once they start advertising, the whole 'you get what you pay for' argument is useless.
True. If it doesn't work as advertised you're entitled to a full refund.
Re:As users, we're getting fucked over. That's why (Score:2, Funny)
Too bad adding RAM for me would mean one of the following:
1) Installing a different version of windows (and having the PC not work right for weeks).
2) Buying a SATA (or PCIe) RAMdrive and putting the pagefile there to emulate having more RAM (costs more and is slower, but more convenient than #1).
3) Somehow transplanting files from Windows 2003 to make xp recognize more than $GB or RAM without actually installing 2003 or a 64bit version of Windows (costs less than #2 and is most convenient, but may not actually be possible).
Switch to IE 5.5 (Score:4, Funny)
Low RAM usage, pretty stable on Windows 98 & 2000. Yeah, IE 5.5, that's the ticket!