I guess I can understand it from both sides of the fence:
- users do like to stick with what is known and proven to work. Early adoption and upgrading are minefields for all your older favourite apps.
- and as for the developer, having to maintain several different versions of their product is time-consuming. As a one-man band developer myself, such an effort is something I'm not always willing to do.
In the end, it is Wladamir's project.
End-of-life for Firefox 1.0 and Mozilla 1.7
-
Wladimir Palant
It isn't about early adoption. Firefox 1.5 and SeaMonkey 1.0 have been around for almost a year, all major bugs are fixed and all extensions are compatible by now. And now the old versions won't even get security updates - I really don't see a reason why I should support them.
And yes, supporting Gecko 1.7 requires a significant amount of time, given the huge differences to Gecko 1.8. It also makes Adblock Plus potentially less secure because it can only rely on security mechanisms that were present there. Whatever reasons people might have for using browsers based on Gecko 1.7 - they are stuck with Adblock Plus 0.7.0.2, sorry about that.
And yes, supporting Gecko 1.7 requires a significant amount of time, given the huge differences to Gecko 1.8. It also makes Adblock Plus potentially less secure because it can only rely on security mechanisms that were present there. Whatever reasons people might have for using browsers based on Gecko 1.7 - they are stuck with Adblock Plus 0.7.0.2, sorry about that.
Source: http://www.bit9.com/press061906.html
quote:
Bit9 Identifies the Top Applications with Critical Security Vulnerabilities
...
Five of the top applications with known vulnerabilities include:
1. Mozilla Firefox 1.0.7
2. Apple iTunes 6.02 & Quicktime 7.0.3
3. Skype Internet phone1.4
4. Adobe Acrobat Reader 7.02, 6.03
5. Sun Java Run-Time Environment 5.0 Update 3, JRE 1.4.2_08
unquote
Apart from the weird fact that they do not include in the list IE 5.0 or WXP without SP2, this classification is really true with regard to people that "stick with what works".
quote:
Bit9 Identifies the Top Applications with Critical Security Vulnerabilities
...
Five of the top applications with known vulnerabilities include:
1. Mozilla Firefox 1.0.7
2. Apple iTunes 6.02 & Quicktime 7.0.3
3. Skype Internet phone1.4
4. Adobe Acrobat Reader 7.02, 6.03
5. Sun Java Run-Time Environment 5.0 Update 3, JRE 1.4.2_08
unquote
Apart from the weird fact that they do not include in the list IE 5.0 or WXP without SP2, this classification is really true with regard to people that "stick with what works".
Maybe that's because IE without SP2 does not count as a 'Top' Application? 
Anyway, I just read from slashdot today that while something like 65% of their visitors uses Firefox, 18% of them needs to update their browser. So that's quite a sizable poportion. Maybe new, more powerful extensions will finally get some of them to upgrade?
Anyway, I just read from slashdot today that while something like 65% of their visitors uses Firefox, 18% of them needs to update their browser. So that's quite a sizable poportion. Maybe new, more powerful extensions will finally get some of them to upgrade?
The Bit9 press release is about popular software that's installed and maintained by the users instead of by the sysadmins.sheepy wrote:Maybe that's because IE without SP2 does not count as a 'Top' Application?
That second characteristic, "is not classified as malicious software by enterprise IT organizations", and the fact that I'm a Firefox zealot make me dislike the press release, though.
Matt Nordhoff
Then the only explainaion is... even the users share a mutal hate against IE. XD
This world would be a better place if that's true. (Sigh)
I checked Bit9's definitions of applications on the list, and two of the rules are:
# is well-known in the consumer space and frequently downloaded by individuals;
# relies on the end user, rather than a central administrator, to manually patch or upgrade the software to eliminate the vulnerability, if such a patch exists.
Both requirments would exclude IE (and windows). I think. I'm not exactly a typical consumer/end user. (shrug)
This world would be a better place if that's true. (Sigh)
I checked Bit9's definitions of applications on the list, and two of the rules are:
# is well-known in the consumer space and frequently downloaded by individuals;
# relies on the end user, rather than a central administrator, to manually patch or upgrade the software to eliminate the vulnerability, if such a patch exists.
Both requirments would exclude IE (and windows). I think. I'm not exactly a typical consumer/end user. (shrug)
-
Wladimir Palant
And as I said - it is their choice. There is still Adblock Plus 0.7.0.2, it can be downloaded from AMO for example: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1865/history