Firefox 64-bit development for Windows gets 'turned off' by Mozilla

[lefty]

Looking to browse with the full weight of your 64-bit (http://www.engadget.com/tag/64-bit/) hardware? Well, if you're a Firefox (http://www.engadget.com/tag/firefox/) and Windows user, you're going to have to look elsewhere, as Mozilla (http://www.engadget.com/tag/mozilla/) has announced it's closing the development of Firefox for the bigger computer architecture. Mozilla manager, Benjamin Smedberg outlined several reasons for the decision, including limited access to 64-bit plugins, a higher propensity for the browser to hang when using available plug-ins and difficulty distinguishing between 32- and 64-bit versions when dealing with stability complaints. After posting the announcement at Bugzilla, it riled plenty of nightly testers, with one Mozilla dev suggesting that around half of them were currently using the now defunct 64-bit version -- presumably due to the fact that an official release never made it out of the gates. What are the options then, if you need your browsing 64-bit? You could return to Internet Explorer or give Opera a try -- both offer a higher bit version, or make a switch to either OS X or Linux, both of which have fully-fleshed versions of the 64-bit web browser. Check out some of the (surprisingly vigorous) debate at the source below.

[leemajors]

firefox sucks.

[lefty]

Well it's a great browser

The only problem is that the recent version has issues with Youtube/Flash videos

[TDMVPDPOY]

seriously there is only a handful of useful apps and plugins only...so i dunno whats teh hassle of not going 64

[leemajors]

Well it's a great browser

The only problem is that the recent version has issues with Youtube/Flash videos

imo Chrome is waaay better

[lefty]

imo Chrome is waaay better

at least Firefox is compatible with all websites

The same cant be said for Chrome



Ans it's not as if Chrome was much faster than FF either

[leemajors]

at least Firefox is compatible with all websites

The same cant be said for Chrome



Ans it's not as if Chrome was much faster than FF either

much less bloated, i got pissed at all the FF memory leaks with every other release. i haven't run across any sites that won't run in chrome, even internal work websites.

[lefty]

much less bloated, i got pissed at all the FF memory leaks with every other release. i haven't run across any sites that won't run in chrome, even internal work websites.

I dunno havent used Chrome in a while, so the compatibility issue may have been fixed

[Drachen]

I have never had a problem with Chrome and compatibility. Now Chrome for android on the other hand, that shit is unusable.

[baseline bum]

much less bloated, i got pissed at all the FF memory leaks with every other release. i haven't run across any sites that won't run in chrome, even internal work websites.

As bad as FF is there, I still like their UI 100x better.

[leemajors]

As bad as FF is there, I still like their UI 100x better.

i thought ff went with a chrome style look a year or two ago. i also like that it syncs with chrome on my ipad with no hassle. psst grab that sierra narwhal stout if you can see it, really good and limited.