Home → Questions →

Current STABLE TenFourFox for my computers

• Edit

Lance Klein

22 Nov, 2012 06:09 PM

I have been using TenFourFox on my Titanium PowerBook G4 1GHz and PowerMac Dual Processor G4 1.25 GHz since version 10.0.4. Having linked to automatically notify me of updates, I just received notification for version 10.0.11.

The link to the TenFourFox download page showed "TenFourFox7450-17.0.app.zip" as being "featured." I downloaded 10.0.11 AND TenFourFox7450-17.0.app.zip.

• I have no clue whether the 7450-17.0 version will function with either of my computers.

• I do I know whether this version would be stable with either of my computers.

• I do not know whether version 7450-17.0 is to what I should migrate - were it stable and functional with my computers.

1. Support Staff 1 Posted by Cameron Kaiser on 22 Nov, 2012 06:52 PM

   

   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.

   • Edit

2. 2 Posted by Lance Klein on 23 Nov, 2012 05:15 PM

   

   Mr. Kaiser:

   Many thanks for your reply. Series 17 has replaced "legacy" version. Step #2 is to identify changes and how/whether the changes affect my usage.

   • Edit

3. 3 Posted by Mark W. on 04 Jan, 2013 04:06 PM

   

   Hello,

   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.

   • Edit

4. Support Staff 4 Posted by Chris (chtrusch... on 04 Jan, 2013 04:25 PM

   

   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.

   • Edit

5. 5 Posted by Mark W. on 08 Jan, 2013 04:05 AM

   

   Chris,

   Thanks for your help. It was an unzip application interfering. Your suggestion worked. I was able to install the 17.x version. Thank you for your help.

   • Edit

6. 6 Posted by Chris on 20 Jan, 2013 03:47 AM

   

   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 more.
   What to do?
   Thank you for any help with this.

   • Edit

7. Support Staff 7 Posted by Cameron Kaiser on 20 Jan, 2013 04:44 AM

   

   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 very noteworthy.

   • Edit

8. 8 Posted by Chris on 20 Jan, 2013 04:54 AM

   

   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.

   • Edit

9. Support Staff 9 Posted by Cameron Kaiser on 20 Jan, 2013 04:56 AM

   

   Yes, but you cited a specific reduction. Where did you get that number from?

   • Edit

10. 10 Posted by Chris on 20 Jan, 2013 05:00 AM

    

    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.

    • Edit