HI, 61 fixed issues with 60 as well as Security which can be checked here or in Help --> About --> What's New. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/releases/

So you say you are screwed but do not mention anything you need help with so how screwed are you ?

Had to drop back to older laptop running firefox 43 to get basic functionality!

60 was stable for me. 61.0.1 is NOT. Where's the REFRESH button??

YAHOO complains: "Yahoo works best with the latest versions of the browsers. You're using an outdated or unsupported browser and some Yahoo features may not work properly."

WHERE IS MOZILLA QUALITY CONTROL and PRE-RELEASE TESTING??

Hi, and why would Yahoo's site design be a Mozilla issue ?

As Volunteer Support we can make suggestions that are correct but if choose not to follow them or fight through to fix a issue like you were having then not much we can do when you are running a Unsupported Browser that was not made for modern websites and it is a Security Risk also.

• https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/refresh-firefox-reset-add-ons-and-settings

BillM said

YAHOO complains: "Yahoo works best with the latest versions of the browsers. You're using an outdated or unsupported browser and some Yahoo features may not work properly." WHERE IS MOZILLA QUALITY CONTROL and PRE-RELEASE TESTING??

IMO, Yahoo has had it in for Mozilla since Yahoo was sold to Oath, Inc (which is owned by Verizon) and Mozilla canceled their agreement where Yahoo Search was the default search engine for Firefox in the USA. They are lying when they say that Firefox 61.0 is outdated - just a "sour grapes" stunt which may cost Yahoo in the end, even more than the contract with Mozilla provided for.

Yahoo / Oath is stuck continuing to pay Mozilla under the contract that was signed with Yahoo back in 2014; $375 million per year through 2019 if Mozilla didn’t want to work with the buyer. And Mozilla didn't want to continue with Oath as the new owner.

Meanwhile, users get screwed. I've had to roll back to another laptop that's running Firefox 43 to get the basic Firefox functionality I depend on. Whose bright idea was it at Mozilla to DISABLE, in 61.0, the saved-passwords feature??

It is not disabled. You had a bad install I would guess.

FYI, 62 was FORCE-FED to me (NO opportunity to review the 61-62 deltas, before 62 was pushed). Is there no way to REQUIRE positive consent by the user... BEFORE PUSHING automatic major-version updates?

Unfortunately, this is not new behavior from Mozilla - it's been occurring on-and-off for years.

THAT IS THE POINT. I was auto-updated to 62 WITHOUT ASKING ME if I wanted it (or providing any other way to consider the risks in detail).

THERE IS NO OPT-OUT - no way to CONSIDER the pros and cons of a new MAJOR RELEASE -BEFORE- installing it.

Firefox and Mozilla USED TO BE user-friendly. Now it's apparently "our way or Chrome," to hell with users..

Hi Bill, You can turn off auto-updates in the Options page.

1. Click the Firefox menu button at the top-right corner.
2. Select the Options menu item. A new tab will open.
3. In the General panel, scroll down to the Firefox Updates section.
4. Under Firefox Updates, select Check for updates but let you choose to install them.
5. Close the Options tab. Your new settings will be saved.

If the problem still occurs, we'll need some more info about your Firefox setup.

1. Go to [=] > Help > Troubleshooting Information then click Copy text to Clipboard.
2. Go to https://pastebin.com and go to Edit > Paste to paste the info from your Troubleshooting Information page.
3. In Firefox, click on the three dots to the right of the address, and select Copy Link.
4. Open a reply to this post, and go to Edit > Paste to paste the link to your troubleshooting information.

As footnote to Chris's post, that's my setting. Screenshot attached for reference (I used search instead of scrolling).

"Check for updates but let me choose" has "always" been my setting ... but that's what, nonetheless, force-fed 62 to me.

How do you spell "bug?"

I suspect some defect related to the *combination* of "let me choose" AND "use a background service" ... which are NOT, logically, mutually-exclusive.

I -wanted- "let me choose and, when I do choose, use a background process to download the new version ... but DON'T *INSTALL* it unless/until I EXPLICITLY authorize installation." Example: at bedtime I want the download to start... but I don't want to INSTALL it without my physical presence to observe the behavior. (And to read Release Notes, describing the deltas!)

In other words, "What download mechanism to use" (real-time or background) and "When to INSTALL the new release" are two distinct questions.

Folks with SLOW networks, in particular, will want to do the download completely independently of the installation. I'd *like* to see a method to validate the download, BEFORE launching the install.

Please note jumping forward or backward your profile and or bookmarks may have issues so please backup :

• https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/back-and-restore-information-firefox-profiles
• https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/export-firefox-bookmarks-to-backup-or-transfer

Please let us know if this solved your issue or if need further assistance.

[Enterprise recommendation removed by moderator.]

Hi Bill, Could you please do the follow for us, so we can get more info about your Firefox setup:

1. Go to [=] > Help > Troubleshooting Information then click Copy text to Clipboard.
2. Go to https://pastebin.com and go to Edit > Paste to paste the info from your Troubleshooting Information page.
3. In Firefox, click on the three dots to the right of the address, and select Copy Link.
4. Open a reply to this post, and go to Edit > Paste to paste the link to your troubleshooting information.

BillM said

"Check for updates but let me choose" has "always" been my setting ... but that's what, nonetheless, force-fed 62 to me. How do you spell "bug?"

That's not a "Bug". let me choose has always had a timer on user response in a timely manner when using that preference. If the user fails to respond in time the download of the update without waiting any longer. Basically a "you snooze, you lose" situation. And that goes back to Firefox 3.0 when I was befuddled by "Check for updates but let me choose" and learned to just not doing anything in Firefox during the first launch of each day - to wait for Firefox load completely and check for the availability of a Firefox update; to wait for that message when I was on the Nightly update channel. Works very similar in the Release version, but with far fewer updates.

That said there has been a huge improvement recently where the notification that an update is available does not get easily hidden as I had experienced so long ago; the notification "window" does not get hidden behind the main browser window as before that "huge improvement " - it stays in your face per the screenshots I have seen; I assume that there is still a "timer" on that notification "window", so if the user is absent from the keyboard / monitor they can get "caught with their pants down" and automatically get an update that they don't want.

Sorry, but what you are looking for just isn't possible with the selection of "Check for updates but let me choose", where Firefox waits for you (basically) forever!

From just another user who has been using Firefox since Aug 2002 and who expresses his opinions and insights unabashed.

the-edmeister said

...I assume that there is still a "timer" on that notification "window", so if the user is absent from the keyboard / monitor they can get "caught with their pants down" and automatically get an update that they don't want...

Really? I don't like that. How long is this 'timer'? Since FF 62 was released, I've been closing the pop-up FF Update notice.

~Pj

And a pop-up update notice that I CANNOT SEE (when I'm AFK) is USELESS. VERY UNFRIENDLY DESIGN.

Apparently Firefox ass*u*mes the user is ALWAYS awake at the keyboard: you snooze, you lose, BIG TIME.

ANY automated deployment of a new release in (effectively) a single-user environment is HOSTILE. I have not noticed other browsers exhibit this, "We're in control and we'll push releases when we want to" philosophy. (But I keep Google Update disabled for other reasons, so it's quite possible that their default is similar.) Perhaps an obviously-controllable Mozilla Update service would be the solution that matches the most-common user expectations; updates are disable-able, users could easily monitor what's about-to-be done to THEIR machines by the great and power-hungry Moz.

My "classic" Firefox 43 machine NEVER auto-updates... which is THE single most predictable, least hostile update *option.*

In a corporate environment, "stuff it down EVERYONE'S pipe" is obviously the rational choice. Not all of us run our browsers in that setting. (Even Windows Update gives the user more control than Firefox.)

"Check for updates but let me choose" should do EXACTLY what it says: CHECK FOR updates - but NOT forcibly-install them (in a non-corporate environment).

Hello BillM,

Would you please take a look at this (scroll down some) :

https://www.technipages.com/enable-disable-automatic-updates-in-firefox

Any good  ?

McCoy said

Hello BillM, Would you please take a look at this (scroll down some) : https://www.technipages.com/enable-disable-automatic-updates-in-firefox Any good  ?

That isn't 100%, the Mozilla Maintenance Service (MMS) can bite a user in the ass. Been there, done that - ONCE.

the-edmeister said

That isn't 100%, the Mozilla Maintenance Service (MMS) can bite a user in the ass. Been there, done that - ONCE.

Giving it a try won't hurt .....