I don’t think there’s any denying that Firefox 3.5 is late to the party concerning other browsers have had features (like private browsing) FF is only getting now. Regardless, here’s my real-world review on it.

Instead of getting into the super-techy details on this I’m going to concentrate on what most would care about.

Will 3.5 break add-ons?

Unfortunately yes, and a lot of them. This has been widely reported to be true, and it even broke a few of the ones I use so you can count me in as well. When I say "broke" it means "incompatible with 3.5".

Fortunately the 3.5 installer will tell you which will break before actually installing the software. So if from what you see there are add-ons you can’t live without, wait a bit before upgrading. Run the installer again in a week, have it check your plugins, and once everything checks out, then go for the install.

Is the Private Browsing feature any good?

Yes, but unfortunately it’s not very user-friendly. In all other browsers that have this feature you know you’re using it. IE 8 has a blue "InPrivate" notice in the address bar. Chrome has the detective-with-hat graphic. Firefox has nothing other than a notice in the title bar that says (Private Browsing). This is far too easy to dismiss once you leave the initial notice page. There should be something more obvious, such as a different-colored address bar, a graphic.. something.

The way in which it works is not exactly intuitive either.

Here’s the deal:

Let’s say you have three tabs open. This is very typical for Firefox users because they use multiple tabs often. You want to open a Private Browsing session, so you click Tools/Start Private Browsing. You get the notice you’re going Private, so you click OK.

*Poof*, the tabs you had open are gone. Not cool. Did they disappear? No. You can get them back by stopping the Private session via Tools/Stop Private Browsing and ta-da, then they return.

A Private session should always, repeat, always launch a new window so you don’t lose the tabs you currently have open.

If you’re saying, "Couldn’t a private session be opened as, say, a private tab with color indicating it’s a private session?" I wish. That would be a super-cool feature. But it doesn’t exist as it would require two independent sessions operating within the same browser window. This is not outside the realm of possibility as Google Chrome does technically do that sorta/kinda with separate processes for the way it does tabs, but even it launches a separate window at present for the way it does private browsing. Tabs which can be separated as private or public is nothing but pipe dream territory at this point.

Is the TraceMonkey engine any good?

TraceMonkey is the new JavaScript rendering engine in Firefox. If you use any kind of web-based email you will immediately notice a speed increase as all webmail sites use heavy scripting.

I tested this with a few site I know to be script-heavy and yes I did notice it was faster on load. I’m not going to say it was a night-and-day difference, but it was noticeable. As far as I’m concerned, any speed increase is a good one.

Did any web sites I normally use break?

Not a one. Firefox isn’t like IE where on any major version change stuff breaks on certain web sites. In fact I’ve never known FF to be like that. Quite the opposite, actually.

The deal-maker or deal-breaker is add-on compatibility

If you’re a Firefox user, this above all else will determine whether you use it or not. I personally went ahead and did it and switch to IE 8 for the stuff that broke in FF 3.5 (such as the LogMeIn add-on), so it’s not a big deal for me. Developers will also be playing catch-up in short order in the next coming weeks, so the broken add-ons will be fixed in due time.

Using a beta edition web browser is something most people don’t want to do, especially when it comes to Firefox. Why? Because there’s a risk it may break one or more of the add-ons you have installed in the browser. And it’s a pain to do all that install/uninstall crap because it’s not just for the browser but all your add-ons as well. This can prove to be irritating in short order.

Is there a way to use the new Firefox without actually installing it on your hard drive? Of course there is. You can install it to your USB stick where it will stay self-contained.

Firefox 3.5 Beta 4 does have a PortableApps version, and said honestly this is the absolute best way to try out the browser without messing with your existing 3.0.10 that’s on your hard drive now. Not only can you use it but also test your add-ons to see which will work or bust.

For those that haven’t used PortableApps before, here’s how to use it:

First, find a USB stick you’ve got lying around somewhere. Even if it’s an ancient 128MB stick, that’s fine. Erase/format the stick to free up the space.

Second, after installation, make note of the drive letter assigned to the stick. For most people this is drive E or F.

Third, download PortableApps and install it. When it asks where to install to, use the drive letter assigned to the USB stick.

Note: I suggest downloading the "Platform Only" version of PortableApps, especially if you have a stick with a minimal amount of space on it.

Fourth, download FF 3.5 beta 4 from here. Run the installer (the installation directory should point to the PortableApps directory on your USB stick).

Run the browser from PortableApps afterward, and that’s all there is to it.

Looks like this when finished:

On launch:

Confirmation it is 3.5 beta 4:

To those wondering, no, you cannot run FF 3.0.10 and 3.5 at the same time. That was the first thing I tried. Regardless of that, it was cool I can run this browser without having to actually install it to the hard drive.

Once launched it’s quite speedy even though it’s running off USB.

If you want to try out add-ons, go right ahead; they will be installed to the stick directly.

To those with slower PCs and/or (gasp) USB 1.1, there is the option to not store session information when you first run FF. Otherwise if you’ve got USB 2.0 and a relatively decent PC speed-wise, you can have it store sessions and it runs just fine.

Firefox, while a great browser, is a bit behind the times at the moment because it’s the only major player that doesn’t have a private-browsing mode. I personally think this is an important feature to have because of the enhanced security. Some jokingly call this feature "porn mode", but where I would use it most is for online banking.

So, you’re a big Firefox fan and want to see what’s in store? Firefox 3.5 beta 4 is available now for download right here.

What’s new in 3.5?

Gecko 1.9.1 rendering platform. It supports new web technologies and has improved performance.

Private browsing mode. This is what the browser needed most to keep up with the competition.

A new JavaScript engine called TraceMonkey. This adds in better performance. Webmail users (Gmail, Hotmail, etc.) in particular should notice a notable speed improvement from this.

And lots of other stuff too.

However..

Be sure to read the Known Issues portion of the link above. It’s important to know things like:

Occasionally Google Mail will fail to respond when creating a new filter, showing advanced search options, or clearing the spam folder. Reloading Google Mail fixes the issue (see bug 477101 and bug 478778)

If you’re a Gmail user, this is a deal-breaker until that’s fixed. Take the time to read over the other known issues as well. If there’s nothing listed that sounds too bad, give FF 3.5 a shot, you might like it.

The best advice I can give for those who want to try out the bleeding-edge version of Firefox is to backup your add-ons first. Either copy the add-on XPIs directly from your associated folder, or alternatively re-download them to a backup folder in case you need to uninstall and go back to FF 3.0.10.

To re-download add-ons manually: Launch Firefox, click Tools then Add-ons, a small window will pop open listing them all. Right-click the add-on you want to re-download and from the small menu that appears click Visit Home Page. This will take you directly to the web site for that add-on where you can download it.

The browser install/uninstall isn’t the bad part, it’s always the add-ons. Having them backed up is mandatory. After all, who uses FF without add-ons anyway?

There are those who need big honkin’ hard drives and those who don’t.

Typically, those that need the big-big drives do one or more of the following:

• Video editing. Camcorder, DV, DVR, Tivo, DVD ripping, etc.
• Multitrack audio editing. The raw WAV files are quite large.
• Gaming. Many newer games require a significant amount of space.
• Photography. Even on point-and-shoot digital camera photos, each photo can easily be over 3MB in size. If you take a lot of photos this can add up in size rather quickly.

Those that don’t do any of the above or only on a semi-regular basis typically don’t need the big-big drives (or just use an external when required).

With that being said, here are the numbers as of now for what you’d pay if you decide to add on a hard drive.

All prices are listed in US dollars. All drive types are standard 3.5-inch form factor with SATA connector. Links provided are lowest price offerings from NewEgg. Always remember to do your research with hard drives before buying one. Just because something is lowest price doesn’t mean it’s the best offering (obviously).

80GB: $35

It makes no sense to purchase a 40GB any longer because the 80GB versions are cheaper by a few bucks. This is the smallest and cheapest available offering for SATA.

If you are still going super-old-school with Windows 98, this is the drive you want because the 120GB versions are tough to come by new and that is the maximum ‘98 will recognize (technically it’s 137GB but you obviously can’t buy a 137GB drive).

160GB: $42

I have no idea why this size is still even offered. It’s too big for old-school operating systems and to small for newer ones. I’d skip it.

250GB: $50

I wouldn’t bother with this one either. See next listing.

320GB: $50

It’s amazing that for just 8 bucks more you double the size from 160GB to 320GB.

500GB: $55

Yes, you can go for the big guns for just 55 bucks. Most would agree that this is the start of big-big territory by current standards.

640GB: $70

The 640GB size is a bit of an oddity because the 750GB version is just 5 bucks more (see next listing).

750GB: $75

We started at $35. Forty dollars later we’re in 750GB territory.

1TB (1000GB): $100

Twenty-five bucks after that we’re in terabyte territory.

1.5TB (1500GB): $120

Twenty bucks beyond that is one-and-a-half terabyte territory.

…and this is where we end.

For now.

NewEgg currently doesn’t stock 2TB internal hard drives – but I’m sure they’re right around the corner and waiting to be sold in ‘09.

Is the terabyte range worth the price?

Yes. When it broke $200 it was worth the asking price.

However for most people that don’t do a ton of video stuff (be it DV and/or DVR, etc.), 500GB will fit the bill nicely.