17.0 is the new, stable branch. It is intended for all users,
which is why it is marked Featured. The 7450 build is the
appropriate build for both of your machines.
If you still need or prefer to use 10.x, or have add-ons that
have not been updated for 17, 10.0.11 is available as a legacy
build. However, there will be no further releases of 10.x barring
something extraordinary between now and January 2013. All further
planned updates will occur to the 17 series. If you have no special
need for 10.x, you should use 17.
I am having trouble. I have an iBook G4 with the 7450 build with
Mac OS X 10.5.8. I have TenFourFox 10.0.10 installed, but every
time I try to install 10.0.11 for G4 7450 or 17.0 for G4 7450 it
says that it isn't supported on this architecture. I'm not sure
what to do and help would be greatly appreciated.
Hello Mark, a common reason for this is that the zip file wasn't
downloaded completely. "TenFourFox7450-17.0.1.app.zip" is exactly
24387101 Bytes. Another resaon might be that you're using an unzip
application that messes up applications bundles or otherwise
doesn't like our zip files. Try right-clicking>Open
With>Archive Utility.app on 10.5.
I know that 17.0.2 is the latest stable version, but the
graphics portion (YouTube, etc.) runs almost 25% slower on my
machine that version 10.0.11.
I am running a PowerMac Quicksilver 2000 with a Sonnet 1.34 gHz/256
level 2/2048 level3 caches, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128, using 1250
megs of cl3 ram.
Even at these powerful speeds ;-) You can see the difference.
Is there a way to speed 17.0.2 up to 10.0.11 speeds? I like the
thought of 17.0.2's security, but I enjoy the 10.0.11's speeds
What to do?
Thank you for any help with this.
Chris, I would be interested to know your numbers and where your
25% reduction comes from. On just about every benchmark I test
with, 17 is significantly faster than 10. If you can demonstrate a
reproducible performance regression in a benchmark, that would be
If you will tell me how and/or what benchmarking test to run, I
will certainly perform them and send the resulting data. The video
performance is such that you can actually watch one video on
YouTube in 10.0.11 and then watch the same video in 17.0.2 and see
the difference, it also works vice versa - ie, watch video first in
17.0.2 and then in 10.0.11. It doesn't appear to matter whether the
video is cached first or not.
Sorry, the 25% number was just my perceived "value", most
assuredly not accurate. There is just quite a visual
difference~somewhat more noticeable jerkiness and stuttering...
I apologize if I caused confusion here.