Plea to continue FX 3.6 security updates for Mac PPC

[Omega X]

No Mozilla products for PPC Mac OS X, but Ubuntu (and other distros?) seem to provide PPC Linux builds of the latest version. How does this work?

Linux Distros compile their own version of Firefox. Since PPC is no longer supported, distro makers have to provide any fixes that might affect PPC Linux distro versions.

[diderot]

have you explored the idea of running FFx 3.6 in a sandbox when it is no longer supported

So, on the Sandbox thing: There is actually a shell application designed to sandbox Firefox that seems to work:

http://www.romab.com/ironfox/

The latest version is Intel-only (sigh), but I am successfully running version 1.0.2 on my 10.5 PPC system. I emailed the developer, who warned me that:

The sandbox (a.k.a. seatbelt) functionality built-in into earlier
versions of MacOS X, such as 10.5 is somewhat limited, and there is
some experimental support for it in some of our earlier releases. It
should work, but it will not provide all the functionality.

It doesn't work on 10.4. So...on the one hand, it might make me a little more comfortable running FX 3.6 if support gets dropped--thanks for the suggestion, Jayhawks. Something (in the realm of security) is definitely better than nothing, and I'm posting the link for the benefit of others in my situation. On the other hand, 10.5's sandbox capability seems limited, and ironfox is obviously not going to have any more PPC versions. And as Ironfox's developers point out on their website (http://www.romab.com/iron/):

-it is not a replacement for noscript + friends. A nasty javascript that does something INSIDE your browser might still be able to hurt you. The objectives of IronSuite is to restrict what an application can do to the surrounding environment, other applications and data

-It is not a replacement for patching. Some types of bugs are hopefuly catched by the sandbox. Other bugs, in the interfaces that we permit from a sandboxed program might still hurt you.

...so it's not really a substitute for actually patching an exploit.

[the-edmeister]

t's not the OS but the hardware (PPC) that is outdated (PPC introduced in 1996 and killed in 2006 because, among other reasons, IBM stopped building it).

I know, I know--I am unfortunately aware of the problems. Even 2005-2006 isn't that long ago, though. I mean, Windows 2000! If I had an 11-year old operating system, I wouldn't be complaining about the upgrade. Do you guys get Windows 3.1 support, too?

An 11 yo Windows PC probably wouldn't meet the hardware requirements for Firefox 4+ versions. I doubt if many P4 PC's were made that came with W2K in the 9 months between the release of the P4 in Nov 2002 and the release of WinXP the following August.


Ed

[Michael Goff]

Yeah, it's a shame that OSX systems are considered "out of date" so quickly.

It's not the OS but the hardware (PPC) that is outdated (PPC introduced in 1996 and killed in 2006 because, among other reasons, IBM stopped building it). The cycle on the actual OS is about 18 months and is inexpensive to do; my last OS update 10.6 -> 10.7 cost me $29.95 for all my home computers; and, even Office X (circa 2001) still runs on it although I was "forced" to upgrade because of the change in file formats (doc -> docx, xls -> xlsx).

EDIT: In talking to my Win expert he says to think of MS Service packs like OSX updates. I don't know if this makes sense.

.

Okay, okay, you're right and I used the wrong word.

I meant to say that Macs become outdated quickly, with the makers of the OS throwing backward compatibility away every few years. Also, a lot of people equate OSX versions to Service Packs. They're wrong. The differences between them are, for the most part, enough to warrant versions unto themselves.

[diderot]

By the way, there was a PowerPC ITunes update today. Not the same as a security update, but a small indication that Apple isn't completely abandoning support for PPC 10.5 users.

[Elbart]

By the way, there was a PowerPC ITunes update today. Not the same as a security update, but a small indication that Apple isn't completely abandoning support for PPC 10.5 users.

Well, of course not, as iTunes is the "hub" to 75% Apple's of revenue. You don't throw it under the bus for no dire reasons.

[diderot]

By the way, there was a PowerPC ITunes update today. Not the same as a security update, but a small indication that Apple isn't completely abandoning support for PPC 10.5 users.

Well, of course not, as iTunes is the "hub" to 75% Apple's of revenue. You don't throw it under the bus for no dire reasons.

That is probably true, but since us PowerPC users just got another Itunes update a few days ago (mid-November 2011) it means that Apple DOES see us as a continuing source of revenue--meaning that there are still a lot of us out there, Apple is still acknowledging 10.5 PPC users as worth their time to make the occasional update, and we still need a secure browser!

[patrickjdempsey]

Firefox 3.6 will probably EOL in April when/if the Extended Support Release is deployed.

[diderot]

Firefox 3.6 will probably EOL in April when/if the Extended Support Release is deployed.

Just saw this. Why "when/if"? I didn't realize that it was a tentative thing. And does that mean 3.6 will be supported until whatever/whenever next phase is happening? I guess April would be marginally better than, say, now. I'd still like to see the "Extended Support" extend to PPC users, obviously.

Actually, does anyone know if it's still being maintained? The official page still says it will be supported for "a short amount of time", but that has been posted for a while.

[patrickjdempsey]

None of us here are really on the inside track of the Extended Support discussion... I just read what they post in their meeting notes all of which still has a tentative sound to it. It's a big debate inside Mozilla and not everyone within Mozilla is happy about it because it will mean more work during security releases. It is still the best idea they have about how to deal with enterprise deployments. (Although I suspect it will also end up on many a tech-guy's mom's computer).

[Stefan2]

Actually, does anyone know if it's still being maintained? The official page still says it will be supported for "a short amount of time", but that has been posted for a while.

According to this page, Firefox 3.6 will be supported until the ESR system has been deployed. Note that the document only is a proposal which is subject to change.

[KWierso]

(Although I suspect it will also end up on many a tech-guy's mom's computer).

I'm hoping the background/silent updater stuff is deployed in normal release Firefox by the time the ESR is pushed out (or at least landed in Nightly). That would make things much easier for tech-guy's mom's computer.

[muhahaa]

Hopefully extension makers and website makers won't start considering the rapid release versions bleeding edge when the ESR version is released.

[the-edmeister]

If or when an ESR version comes out, I doubt if Mozilla is going to make it available to the "public" on the regular Firefox downloads page. I would expect it to be available from the FTP server only - you gotta know where to look for it to be able to download an ESR. I doubt if the number of downloads will be very high, more along the lines of 1 download for every dozen or every hundred installations.




Ed

[patrickjdempsey]

In some of the ESR discussions there was even talk of "barriers" to entry, but no specifics on what kinds of barriers... FTP links that get distributed on every tech blog site in the universe aren't much of a barrier... but hopefully enough of one for Mozilla.

Alternatively, does Camino still support PPC?