Announcement

Firefox 3 is not supported in Shoretel at this time, They will not test or come under compliance until a product is General Available to the public (NOT AS A BETA)

(I'm the original poster for this thread)

Firefox 3 is no longer in beta at this time. I'm running the full (non-beta) version of it.

My version string (from help about) is as follows:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.9) Gecko/2008052906 Firefox/3.0

More information available at:

Firefox web browser | Faster, more secure, & customizable

Thank you in advance for any help on this issue.

Understand, It was in Beta, if it is not, that changed as of a few weeks back or sooner. QA has probably not tested it yet. ShoreTel (And I say this with Experiance) will not stop the presses for a Browser. If you look under Help of PCM, it will show you the Browsers it does support

Sorry, your just going to have to either move to FF 2 or IE

Feel free to open bugs and or enhancement requests with shoretel, that is the proper thing to do

Why does the browser (beta, full release, anything) effect his PCM?

Jlorenz, you spent a nice amount of time telling the user how Shoretel won't support a beta release of a browser, etc.... YET, you never answered his question!!! (or did so in very poor manner.)

WHY does Firefox 3 (or any browser for that matter) slow down his PCM. This is not an issue of Shoretel supporting Firefox, this is an issue of why does a BROWSER slow down the PCM?

Does this mean if I install other software that Shoretel doesn't support, that I should expect problems from the PCM? How about OpenOffice, do they support OpenOffice? What about Quicktime? If they don't support Quicktime, will my PCM run slow?

Browser

I agree that every effort must be made by a company to ensure that its software does not depend or will not be affected by updates to other applications.

Shoretel has to try and make sure that the new version of acrobat reader doesn't take down the phone system.

However, they have no control over the other companies so it is a very hard task to really accomplish. We have had many windows updates trash 3rd party applications.......

now for the real question, I have not seen this issue. I don't normall leave my browser open for a long time. I usually surf and close. I will try and leave my browser open for a few days and see what happens.

How much memory do you have in your workstation? Just asking because it almost sounds like something that could be as simple as an app leaking memory and when it is closed it frees up for the PCM.

The new PCM is a memory hog as well. Mine is using over 100megs of memory now and counting.

The good news is all our new workstations are coming with 3GB. I could see even a 1GB workstation with office, firefox, the PCM, etc struggling. 512MB would damn near be out of the question.

I have been running firefox 3 all the way through beta and now the general release, no issues with my PCM.

Rob I worked in TAC for three years, I believe I know what the answer will be from TAC "Uninstall FF3"

What part of Contact ShoreTel and open a bug did you miss :_cool:

And no ST dosn't support Quicktime or OpenOffice

On a personal note Rob, if your going to attack the advise I give, then do so with the proper information from my post. You deliberately twisted the information I stated, Not Cool.



One last Item I would add is make sure you are not unsing XP SP3 on your work station, there is a known issue with SP3 and PCM and I do not believe they ave fixed it yet

I am interested in what the problem is when using PCM on XP with SP3. I am currently using PCM (Build 13.9.3506.0) on XP Pro with SP3 for a while by now but unaware of any significant issues.

I would check and make sure that your Build is supporting SP3

There was an alert that went out (By ST) to uninstall/Not Use SP3 it was causing PCM issues.

I would uninstall SP3 before I uninstalled FF3, I do not think your Build 13.9.3506.0 Supports SP3 yet ops:

Issues where disconnects, TAPI locks and other various issues

Sp3

Not to drag this further off-course but.......

Wouldn't one have a reasonable expectation that a company like Shoretel who bases the majority of their business model on integration with Windows PC's, have an obligation (or desire may be a better term) to try and say test things before they hit the street? Not every dinky program, but ones that are major, and have a reasonable expection to be installed on a large percentage of your customer base....

CONVERSATION AT SHORETEL:

MANAGER
"Hey, I hear Windows XP sp3 is in Beta testing/pre-release right now. How about we get one of our engineers to like say...... join the beta program and install the damn thing and test our software with it?....."????

ENGINEER
"Hey guys, I installed the Beta of Sp3 for XP last night, since it completely trashed our PCM software, you think we may want to get someone to say.......... fix the problem BEFORE sp3 goes live and gets pushed to 50% of our customer base?"?????

MANAGER
"You are right mr. engineer. Since half of our customer base will probably have this software (or should have it) shortly after release, we may want to get cracking on this one."

MR BEAN COUNTER:
"I think we should just wait, let people install SP3, let their systems crash, tell them we don't support Sp3, and hope microsoft re-writes their software to accomodate us".

MANAGER
"Terrible Idea, mr bean counter"

BEAN COUNTER
"But we would save $100,000 dollars by not testing". "We would then meet our Q3 profit projections"

MANAGER
"What about future sales being damaged by unhappy customers?"

BEAN COUNTER
"That is sales problem"

MANAGER
"Excellent Idea, mr bean counter"

Absolutely, that's a reasonable expectation. But there are a thousand reasons this might not be done yet. Technical problems, priority issues, resource issues come to mind off the top of my head.

I agree that ShoreTel should be more on the ball than this. They should also be attempting to fix an issue that affects 20% of the Windows user community (Firefox users). But I also understand you can't always do everything.

I'm more tolerant because I've encountered other bugs with SP3.

LOL...some times I think that (Server 2008)

Simple questions

How many times have you come in, in the morning to find Microsoft has rolled yet another SP or fix out that has totally hosed your server(s) from auto updates?

How many installs of 3rd party OEM products have you installed or have experienced doing the same to your users PC?

What Testing do you do, prior to ensure everything is working before rolling a new SP out a new Office product, a new Browser as a site admin? (IF YOU ARE NOT, WHY ARE YOU NOT TESTING BEFORE MAJOR ROLL OUT)

I am only asking because what your expecting from ShoreTel is unrealistic to assume they will have compliance or certification in every version of software out there or the main version people use. It takes time, and from an economical point of view lets use FF3 for example It just got released

Would you as a project manager put time and effort into a GNU product that is under Beta, when there are more pressing issues at hand and limited resources and time to do it? Or would you wait for GA to come then test and certify

SP3, FF3 who knows where the issue lies, since we know ST is not running well with SP3 and has yet to offer a build, why not uninstall it as recommended, instead of kicking at a door that is closed?

Very well possible it may correct the FF3 issue, maybe it wont, but as I stated the best approach is to open an SR at Shoretel and pursue it there.

I can gaurntee I am no fan of ShoreTels internal process or management I am a fan of the folks I worked with and know first hand the battles they fight on a daily bases, with customers and internals. they are :donatello: warriors and deserve respect not :hang: out to dry

I've been in IT for 20 years. I've used NT since version 3.50 (not 3.51). I've seen this happen ONCE.

What's unrealistic is to expect it to be done immediately. It's absolutely reasonable to expect it to be done at some point. FF3's beta was VERY long, and since Shoretel was developing a new version themselves at the same time, it would absolutely have been in their interests to attempt to achieve FF3 compatibility, if feasible.

We just don't know if it was feasible. We don't know what was going on internally, and maybe they did run into issues. Or maybe it was a matter of just not prioritizing for that user base. We don't know, and it doesn't do much good to speculate.