I've tried to stay with Firefox, but after using Chrome for any period of time it becomes a total pain to use a browser with a separate search box.
Firefox 29 has left beta to become the latest stable release for desktop PCs and Android devices. The new version sports a long-promised user interface overhaul, new customization options, and an improved data sync feature. In a blog post on her personal site on Monday, Mozilla senior user experience designer Jennifer Morrow …
I stand corrected! By Mozilla leaving the search box on by default even on new installations I assumed they wanted to keep things separate.
So I've tested it, and it doesn't work as well as the Chrome one. If you type a single word there is a noticeable pause before it hands off to a search engine. I guess this is to try and find a LAN resource with the same name. Chrome doesn't try to do this, but you can force it by typing a qualifier at the start like / or http://
Also, there is no autocomplete like the full search box.
Still a nearly for me.
If you want one word to search instead of resolve, go to about:config and set network.dns.ignoreHostonly to true.
If you want the address bar to autocomplete searches like the search box does, try https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/instantfox/.
I've tried to stay with Firefox, but after using Chrome for any period of time it becomes a total pain to use a browser with a separate search box.
I've tried to stay with Chrome, but after using Firefox for any period of time it becomes a total pain to use a browser with a combined location/search box.
Especially when you type a host name on your local office network and it decides to "Google search" it. As if that was going to work!
I prefer Firefox, but now it seems I don't have much of a choice.
Mozilla, if I liked the look and feel of Chrome, I would have downloaded Chrome, not get a new skin for Firefox!"
Install an extension called "Classic Theme Restorer". It turns Firefox 29 back into a usable web browser.
Isn't that the tail wagging the dog?!
When Firefox first started, it was built on a wonderful premise - there would be a small basic browser at the core, and then a selection of add-ons (which anybody could write) so that users could decide exactly which features they wanted in their browser.
I hate the new Tabs-On-Top design in 29, and now I'm being told that the only way to get back to the previous mode is to use an add-on.
The arrogance of the Firefox developers (you just need to look at their responses to anything criticising the new interface on the Mozilla forums, and there are reports of them deleting Facebook postings that are critical) will be their downfall.
I really don't like Google very much, and they already know FAR too much about me, but I fear that a move to Chrome may be on the way for me :-(
The arrogance of the Firefox developers (you just need to look at their responses to anything criticising the new interface on the Mozilla forums
Is that like the arrogance of the Opera developers vs. anyone criticising that Opera on a mobile (uniquely among mobile browsers) requests every single existing permission, and possibly even some non-existing ones? Hmmm, I remember an old quote broadly along the lines of "nobody willing to become a politician should ever be allowed to" - I'm starting to wonder if the same applies to leading a software project...
Funny how little quirks can destroy a browser.
I really like Chrome as a browser, and would use it as my default browser everywhere (I already use it on Android). There is one simple reason why I don't. I HATE how the application closes when the last tab is closed. It's so unnatural. Sure there are nasty hacks that can work around this, but for this one reason alone, I use Opera, which behaves as I expect (I also much prefer Opera's speed dial which works the way I want it to, rather than the constantly changing one in Chrome).
Have they sped it up so it doesn't take half hour to load (on an SSD)?
Have they fixed the constant crashing issue every time you load a page with flash in it?
I stopped using FF grudgingly because of these issues specifically. Not really tempted to go back since Chrome just works so much nicer.
Have they sped it up so it doesn't take half hour to load (on an SSD)?
yes. it seems on first reload a fair bit snapper
Have they fixed the constant crashing issue every time you load a page with flash in it?
Never been a problem for me.
I did the same thing for the same reason about a year and a half ago. Then got sick of chrome's inability to handle disqus and a handful of other near-ubiquitous parts of the modern web and reinstalled firefox for 'those few sites' and discovered the old problems had been solved, so switched back. And will happily go the other way again if needed..
OTOH while chrome is good, fast and resistant to shitware add ins I just cannot bring myself to trust it. I don't go anywhere near any google services at home and only use search at work in private mode (Contractor so if they build up a profile on me at one place I don't care because I'll be somewhere else in a year at the most). Would Chrome report everything I do to the chocolate factory and blow my privacy? I don't have the patience to wireshark it for a month to see. Not that I'd likely be able to tell because its E.T. moments would be encrypted meaning I couldn't tell the difference between a profiling report and an update check.
I dont understand why Chrome is particularly "untrustworthy"... weren't Google the company that did no evil at one point? (disclaimer: I dont buy into that personally, but you gotta draw a line somewhere between paranoia and sense).
Also, my issues were obviously exaggerated. Except the Flash problem.
I also noticed it wasnt suffering the same issue on all of my computers, particularly with the speed thing. But that's part of the experience I guess - Chrome behaves the same no matter what machine I'm on.
> weren't Google the company that did no evil at one point?
Yes, but good intentions and billions of dollars don't mix.
That said, people are holding Google to much higher standards than other companies, even Microsoft, partly because it's seen as dominating, partly because it's the hip and happening thing to do if you're a conspiracy theorist.
Nowerdays, Chrome, Firefox & Safari (with Internet Explorer 11 in 2nd place and catching up fast), rendering engines and performance are all going in the same direction, so it all comes down to which UI you prefer
My preference was Firefox (With a few customisations for tabs and Status bars), but if they're going to Copy Chrome - And not bring something better to the party (Key detail) - IE's old skool menu bar and stability between version upgrades is looking pretty tempting...
Well, it seems they've s*****d up bookmarks. The "new" star button just bungs the bookmark in "unsorted bookmarks", it doesn't give you the option of putting into the correct folder, like you used to be able to.
So now it seems to be a 2-step process, 1. save bookmark, 2. open bookmark manager and move bookmark to the correct folder. Before you could just click the star and select set bookmark and it offered you the opportunity to say where the bookmark belonged.
Am I missing something obvious, or have they royally messed up?
If you click on the star <29, it opens up the Bookmarks menu and you have the option to add a bookmark or you can see all bookmarks. With the add bookmark option, it opened a dialog and you could select which folder it was stored in.
Edit: I've found out that Ctrl+D does bring up the old dialog... Not so useful on my tablet, where I don't have a keyboard.
...but no one is bothered about being embraced and extended? Again? C'mon haven't you learned?
But Mozilla, please stop tarting around with the UI for no good reason eh? I've had a menu bar at the top of the window (or better, screen) since forever. I know where it is, as do all the people who really couldn't care less how a PC works, or have spent many hours begrudgingly learning how to use the browser because they have to. Leave the stuff in the place people expect to find it will ya?
They would clearly argue it is not "for no good reason". UX, ease of use and intuitiveness are all pretty important - as important as the functionality hidden behind the interface even (because many users will not invest time understanding how to use the functionality even if it's amazing)
Whether FF's old UX was bad I cannot comment but in principle an overhaul is quite worthwhile.
Quelle surprise... the open source Linux crowd don't value UX. That's probably the one remaining drawback of so many otherwise excellent projects - the interface is cobbled together by programmers who think that there's nothing wrong with requiring users to know dozens (or hundreds) or key shortcuts.
I understand things are improving in big-name projects though; tools like Blender and Gimp used to be prime examples of this problem and I seem to recall OpenOffice had a bit of "just put options under a menu, it doesn't matter which one".
UX IS important. Unless all your users are nerds.
>>Yes, UX is important, which is why you don't go changing it unless you absolutely have to.
>That's the stupidest argument I heard for a while.
Familiarity with an interface is a very large proportion of the usability that interface ie. usability is a function not solely of UI, but of both UI and user.
I shouldn't have to spell out out the totally utterly absolutely bleedin' obvious but... if that's not enough I have a degree in ergonomics, including UI design. Et tu?
You. A bit dizzy I think. -------------------------------------------------------------------->
"Yes, UX is important, which is why you don't go changing it unless you absolutely have to. "
Oh $deity, yes!. I've had a few calls already from non-techy/nerdy friends and family asking where the menu options are. They all have auto-update on and naturally just closed the tab which told them about the new features as most users have been "trained" to do by so many "irritating, are you sure?" type pop-ups they've experienced over the years.
UX is important, that's why everyone's complaining; they've removed toolbars, the status bar, buttons, and configurability (tabs on top/bottom and the download window with its API which was needed by some add-ons) and you're not getting them back unless you install an ever-growing list of add-ons which might not be supported forever.
All of this latest overhaul could also have been achieved by hiding elements instead of removing them completely and asking older users if they want to change to the new look or keep their old look when the new version is run for the first time. And everyone would have been a lot happier.
I'm not really looking forward to my father-in-law asking what's happened this time.
Firefox is still the best of a bad bunch so there's not really any other choice, but I'm tempted to look at Opera now when I've got time to waste.
They also removed the Refresh button. I do a web page. When I update it, I like to see the results. I already have the mouse in my hand clicking on buttons to upload the changes, bring the browser page to the front and before I could move the mouse a short distance and refresh the page by clicking the Refresh button, to see what I did. No more. Now I have to use the keyboard to press F5. Not a smooth move.
Not everybody just surfs the web and sends/receives E-mails of cute cats and/or forwards the latest PT Barnum style 'common wisdom'. Some of us do actual work on PC's, involving the web browser. Stop making things harder already, by removing needed tools.
I dislike the combined stop/reload for a very specific reason: you move to click on it, it switches from being one to the other, you press the mouse button. Now, either you've just stopped a reload whwn you wanted to reload (consider pages with auto-refresh) or reloaded when you wanted to stop fetching of page content.
Two separate buttons. Two different (and unrelated) functions. That's basic UI stuff.
(Another user of the Classic Theme Restorer.)
I may be wrong about this but my understanding is Ice Weasel is still on 24 (or was when I uninstalled it this week) because its a Debian/Mozilla project and the only thing it doesn't get is proprietory components, so it will get to v29 eventually.
Pale Moon, otoh - just up to 24.5 - is extremely unlikely to follow Mozilla blindly as it shuffles into the Chocolate Factory for it's free shower.
Works great for me in multiple distros: https://www.mediafire.com/folder/n2l9a3njk1094/pminstaller#o3b2xuhyamt93
They would clearly argue it is not "for no good reason".
Would they? Apparently they're willing to claim that, but I've yet to see an actual argument, which is not at all the same thing. "How you use the web today" is not an argument; it's facile nonsense.
UX, ease of use and intuitiveness are all pretty important
Spoken like someone who's never studied the subject. "Pretty important" is sophomoric - there's no actual content there. And no software UI is "intuitive". Software UIs can be familiar, they can be consistent, and so forth; they cannot be intuitive. Real UI/UX/UIM scholars and professionals noted that years ago.
in principle an overhaul is quite worthwhile
No. In principle an overhaul can be worthwhile, but it comes at tremendous cost, in both development resources and in cognitive load and acquisition cost for users. That cost is not easy to justify, so the "overhaul" has to be significantly better for a majority of the users to have any hope of being "worthwhile".
This is the most basic UX theory - the sort of commonplace you could pick up by reading a random Garrett blog post or the like. Drastically overstating the probable return on a radical UI investment, as you did, only shows that you either don't understand the field or you can't be bothered to construct a cogent argument.
>UX, ease of use and intuitiveness are all pretty important
The problem is that all software companies use the same usability consultants, resulting in all the software looking the same, so you end up with Ubuntu looking like Windows 8, and Firefox looking like Chrome. Which is a bummer if you don't agree with the current fashion trends in UI, like for instance I don't.
> as important as the functionality hidden behind the interface
That has always been my main gripe with Firefox: the condescension and stupidity of hiding nearly all configurability in an intentionally hidden, poorly documented, and intentionally obfuscated webpage.
"But Mozilla, please stop tarting around with the UI for no good reason eh?"
The interface reminds me of the standard pop-up/drop-down "menu" button on Android. I think that's their plan. Make the UI common across all platforms. Copying MS strategy with Win8/Metro/Tifkam/Modern/WTF it's called this week.
"Make the UI common across all platforms."
It is far more useful to make the UI conform to the idiom of the local platform. That's what it is running on, after all. Of course, it's hard to say what the idiom of the local platform *is* on most desktops these days, since every half-wit programmer and his mate seem to feel empowered to re-write the rule book for their app because their app is "special".
Earth calling half-wits. No it effing aint.
"menu appears unchanged to me. extra menu top right, menu bar where it always was."
This appears highly dependant on your existing profile. If you're installing from scratch, you'll get the Mozilla defaults they're talking about.
My profile is very much 'old skool mozilla', even pre-Vista fancy transperant menu head. As such, I just don't notice any new UI changes with regular upgrades. This is a good thing. It means the Mozilla team observe and preserve old choices stored within your profile.
In contrast, not mentioning any names Microsoft Visio, changing menus, workflow and how you reconfigure things isn't a good thing, especially if you have people upgrade over various versions and still expect to do work.
...well my profile has most of the same things showing but looks radically different and I'll be spending a few days just guessing which anonymous glyph does what. Haven't worked out yet how to push the tool bar back down to the window bottom where it belongs.
Too early to tell if they've fixed the backend annoyances but the front end is feeling gratuitously downgraded right now. Have to hope they don't break it as badly as the Android build.
Was having a teacher unload on me about the total arse-pain that OFSTED is, and observed that from what it sounded like, they were a bureaucracy that were needing to find more ways to justify themselves by extending their reach, making loud noises, changing things etc. simply to show to themselves they were important.
Sounds an awful lot like the moz interface team: "I'm here! I'm still here, look, look!, notice me!". I actually emailed their UI guy about the last major change that affected me and about a squillion others - he never replied. Perhaps if others did instead of compaining here..? Probably not though, easier to gripe.
So I sidestepped. I installed and have stuck with Firefox ESR and I'm frankly very happy. If everyone did that they might notice.
I use Firefox because it's not like Chrome. I hate these "modern" minimalist designs where it seems to be considered an improvement to get rid of colour and make it difficult to find things. I remember the old days when there was no colour and the huge improvement that came when IBM introduced colour VGA screens. Long live Qute!
I hate this. I've always used a specific layout where the navigation (back, forward, stop, refresh) are on the left side in that order then another icon or two for some addons before the address bar. This new version has the back button glued to the address bar and the stop / refresh button is now embedded in the address bar at the far right. It's small things like this that annoy me because someone has decided how everyone else must use it from now on.
Since this is El Reg I'm going to ask if anyone can tell me a way, short of rolling back a version, to bring back the old layout? IE gives you the option of moving the Stop / Refresh button to the beginning of the address bar yet a browser built on customisation is lacking this option. It isn't ideal but it's a hell of a lot better than no option at all.
Thanks for the link to that sanity restorer.
I now have text on my icons again (I can neve remember which is which by the "picture"), and have the add-on bar at the bottom again.
It also allows me to have an Additional Toolbar, so I can move the url bar into one of its own. Without this extension it seems to be locked to the Menu Bar.
It looks like you can select a small selection of "complete themes" that add some of the old styles back, looks like you can go the way back version 2, someone will probably release a theme with the buttons in version 28 locations in the next day or so.
Just noticed though, with the disappearance of the orange Firefox button, how do we find out what version we're on and also force the update?
Scrap that, just found it in the small question mark at the bottom of the menu graphic.
You can move icons around the toolbar by clicking the new hamburger menu icon on the far right and choosing "customise" at the bottom. This makes the toolbar "live" and you can drag the icons all about the place. You can add icons too.
Have not foun a way to get the refresh out of the address box. But there's probably a switch for it in "about:config"
I've been using the Linux Pale Moon fork for a while on various distros and have had no problems. At one point I had Firefox 28, Aurora, Ice Weasel and Pale Moon all installed (on Mint KDE) and there were no apparent performance differences or issues (given little real difference between 24 and 28 - and 29 beta using Classic Theme Restorer, Setting Sanity, Menu Filter and a dollop of userchrome.css and about:config changes).
The few problems you do see reported on the forum are afaics light compared to the problems you see reported on all the major disto and DE forums, about pretty-much everything; so for me - no problems whatsoever; for some others - at worst, par for the open source course.
First thought I had when seeing the curved tabs was Chrome and, kind of preferred the previous square finished ones, also, my screen layout from the top was; address bar above favourites above tabs and then the browser window, although I can swap address bar and favourites around, it looks like we're now stuck with tabs on the top? nice that the orange Firefox menu has gone, so, my browser window is slightly bigger. Just noticed as well that I can no longer double click anywhere on the tabs row to open a new tab, I have to click on the '+' although this did randomly happen during the previous versions as well, so maybe that will come back. I'll have to look at the Complete Themes maybe and see how things are.
It does score 467/555 on the HTML5 test page though, compared with IE11 getting 369/555.
Seems to pass the Acid3 test okay and scored 1315 on the Peacekeeper Futuremark tests, which tests for WebM, the gif replacement?, meaning hi res cats animations, great...
My FF setup is about the same, except that I have the main menu laid out in the old standard File-Edit-View.... format. I new this change was coming and locked all of my PCs down to non-update at version 28. My tabs belong immediately above the web page. Anywhere else is seriously inefficient!
I'm not quite willing yet to load v29 and trust in the classic themes add-on to save me. It's just too easy for FF to kill the functionality of an add-on later. For the security of updates, I'll probably be giving PaleMoon a more thorough examination.
It appears that not all FF29 installs are the same.
According to the HTLM5 test page, comparing "Your browser" with their default FF29 gave my FF29 on Ubuntu a score of 443 compared to the "standard" score of 467. It seems some FF features rely on the OS and/or other installed software or libraries.
Firefox doesn't need to become a clone of Chrome. I like having the menu bars on the top in the traditional FILE EDIT VIEW style. Moving the pull down menus to the side like Internet Explorer isn't that great of an idea. Keep Firefox similar to the way it was before or at least have it as a theme. I like the web the way I used it yesterday or at least to be able to have that option.
Maybe it's my imagination, or just a view jaundiced with cynicism that comes with advancing age, but the IT industry does seem to be locked into a rather silly game of follow-the-leader. So as soon as any one programme/application/device becomes a success everyone else has to try to become a poor imitation of it, rather than thinking of a way to do something better.
And when they aren't cloning each other's ideas they are finding other silly bandwagons to jump onto, hence Microsoft's stupid idea to make its OS work on touchscreen devices at the expense of the computers that people actually use.
You are not alone. Exactly the same arguments are going to apply to this as apply to the W8/Unity changes - things worked as they were: change them if you will, but leave the option to return to a familiar UI.
I don't have any great problems with Chrome, and in some ways I found it better than FF - except that NoScript or Adblock (can't remember which) didn't have working equivalents when I last looked. I don't want a browser tied to an advert-pusher, thanks.
If some of you people cannot accept or adapt to change then you need to get out of I.T and take a job in Asda or Tesco. Then you can have the same boring steady routine day after day after day.
Me? I like progress. I like learning new things and Firefox has adapted their browser to suit the masses. You moany old farts must be the most boring people in your work place.
"If some of you people cannot accept or adapt to change then you need to get out of I.T and take a job in Asda or Tesco. Then you can have the same boring steady routine day after day after day."
Give us your IP address and we'll all randomly send a new keyboard map to your devices every now and then. Don't worry about actual letters on your keycaps just use pictograms heiroglyphs or whatever.
It's not that people aren't open to change, it's enforced change with no percievable gain that's the pisser. Or if you prefer we have a well developed muscle memory that makes us productive..
Old Guys Rule ( and we're very inventive when it comes to retribution)
Firefox is still Firefox. When I click on the new Menu button on the right I get everything I need in my face. This is GOOD.
I can't believe how some of you spaz out just because of a few minor (and they are minor) UI changes. How do you lot ever cope when you are dealing with a critical issue?
With all this worry, some of you are going to be turning your beards even greyer.
See a gentleman in the rougher end of the town; perhaps he is in the car park outside Aldi; he is wearing clothes in clashing colours so bright they make your stomach feel like you have eaten a whole 2 litre tub of ice-cream? He talks to people like a spaz would,, even ones who aren't really there; and he smells like an old lady's undergarments, which she hasn't washed for three weeks; and his willy is sticking out?
It is so bad that on my 8GB quad core 3200 MHz Linux desktop, I have to restart Firefox a couple times a week now because it takes up 3 or 4GB by itself! I've also noticed certain pages (like news.com) can peg one core for nearly a second after it has been running for a while.
Chrome is, amazingly, even worse. It is sad that I find myself wishing that there was a version of IE for Linux I could try to see if it is less of a POS!
So of course FF has loads of plugins which is nice. Chrome is faster although I have noticed that the number of websites side-loading their content makes both of them less than optimal.
So are there any good ways of forcing webpages to render *without* all the slow stuff. Opera does a bit of this (giving a running count of what is loading), but waiting for ad this, scorecard that, google thing, makes the whole browsing experience highly variable.
I use privoxy and ad block for just about everything in firefox (El reg is quicker this way too...), but chrome/chromium are starting to slowdown without the adblock/privoxy feeds...
So I mean a "don't wait for non-url origin pieces to render", although perhaps it will be messier the text should appear....
I'd be happy though if FF didn't crash flash so much. Yes I'm running Linux and Adobe doesn't care about us Linuxes.
As much as I want a flash free web, some places I visit require it....
@phil dude: I use Adblock Plus under Chrome as well, it works just fine. Also, both in Chrome and FF, ABP can be set to block basically all "social media / sharing" buttons and such, basically most of the off-site stuff that often takes many seconds to load. The easiest way to get it is to go directly to ABP's website - the "social" blocking thing is listed under "features" (it basically installs a specialized blacklist).
Menu bars were "modern UI concepts" once you know.
Exactly comparable to music, IMO - most people get 'stuck' at some point and from then on, new music is crap. Prior to that, you rolled with changing genres and styles. It must be a natural part of life - I personally believe that unless you consciously fight this it will happen with music and technology. Whether that's a bad thing or not I can't comment but it's why I quite deliberately expose myself to new music and tech, and try to watch out for myself wanting to dismiss some new website as a "stupid fad".
Fair enough, what you say makes sense, but what Mozilla have done here is to tell you that not only is your taste in UI out of date, but you can no longer have the style that you consider decent.
Kind of like banning you from listening to anything pre 19(whatever year the person thinks music died)
@JDX "Really? What about the ability to apply themes and customize things?"
But why impose shit on people that does not by any stretch of the imagination make for a better user experience. If I was to come round your house and hang your door from the top and not the side and tell you its better that way cos it works for the cat you'd rightly have a fit.
But you're saying it's not better for the majority of people because it's not how you want it to be. That's a very bad assumption. Look at what you're using the main menu bar for in FF, and ask yourself if that's what a regular user who just wants to browse the web would be doing.
For instance I reckon I click the Chrome menu button about once every couple of days, to re-open a recently closed tab or look in my history. That doesn't make a permanent menu bar particularly useful and to me, the Chrome approach IS a better experience.
Neither you or I are typical users though. Our opinions are equally worthless :)
I totally hate the look and feel of Chrome .. that's why i use Firefox .. Maybe we see a second Gnome event of sorts. Don't listen to the users , make something totally different and that does not fill the needs tastes of your users and tank. Clearly noone listens to the users, again , and is getting set for a major drop in popularity imho. Some people just don't know when to stop and totally spoil the sauce.
Windows 3.11 worked. Wearing a suit and tie every day worked. The world moves on, either you accept this and move with it or you get left behind, talking about the Old Days and becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Nobody should work in IT if they can't accept a rapid rate of change, regardless if it seems justified.
since the dawn of time it has been possible to close windows programs by double clicking the top left corner of the window, a hang over from when that was the way you closed windows. In firefox when the orange button arrived we lost this option. I had hoped that when the orange button went and some blank space appeared next to the tabs that this would return but no such luck. Firefox will remain the only browser that needs to be closed from the top right.
In about:config, set browser.tabs.drawInTitlebar to false (you can also use an option in Classic Theme Restorer to do the same thing, called 'Tabs in Titlebar' on the first tab of options). This brings back the standard windows titlebar to FF, along with the normal application icon to let you close by double clicking.
How hard is it for pinheaded developers to allow users to have a choice? Why must all users receive a one-size-fits-all treatment like we're idiot children that don't know any better and someone else has to decide things for us?
FFS, you don't know better for me any more than I do for you or anyone else. Give us options, you fucktards!
Because most users don't know any better. That's why when you buy a typical camera it has auto-focus and auto exposure settings turned on.
I might not know better for you individually, but as an experienced software designer it is my role to know better than the average user. If you ever worked with your customers and ask them "what do you want" the last think you do is implement what they ask for, or you end up with some god-awful mess of an interface.
Maybe you missed the part where they allow you to change it using themes. So what exactly are you complaining about - to typical users they are trying to present a one-size-fits-all "auto-focus" approach but for expert users you CAN configure it to behave as you prefer.
Do you suppose the browser developers have drawn on studies in Psychology labs and extremely expensive medical scanners to determine that the optimum place for tabs is at the top?
I remember about a decade ago, maybe more, when Janet Street-Porter was boss of, iirc The Indy, and their once-comprehensive review of the football on the telly was replaced with a short piece about Man Utd. Chelsea were playing that night in the Champion's League - against Lazio, I believe - and there wasn't a single word about it. I wrote to her and complained and she wrote back and said the new format had been decided on by 'a focus group' (and, between the lines 'tough shit').
it's not hard to click the big red X once, in fact it's easier than double clicking the top left corner. However, if your mouse pointer is already near the top left corner of a windows then it's quicker (particularly on a laptop) to double click the top left corner. When you have one program out of all the programs on your computer that responds differently then this is a pain.
Chrome and IE both have similar tab layouts and have both removed the application icon from the top left but they have both maintained the double click to close functionality.
since the dawn of time it has been possible to start cars usinga crank shaft ... a hang over from when that was the way you started your car....
no matter how often programs get rid of crank shafts, there are always lots of cranks left around who want it back... when all they have to do is click abutton on the righthand side instead of the left.
Apart from the Nissan Leaf, Mazda RX-8 that experimental Rover thing and a few others I've missed, the crankshaft has always been that thing that makes the pistons reciprocate. The computer equivalent is the CPU master clock.
I suspect you mean crank handle, and cars haven't had those for many, many years. The last one I had that did I sold over 25 years ago, and it was pretty ancient then.
As an ancient greybeard myself, I feel a lot of modern programs would benefit from having an easily available XY cascading text menu system on top of whatever pretty UI is available. It would assist helpdesks if nobody else. Keystroke combinations are fine for "power users" but expecting the average user to remember them is impractical nowadays.
They did a study/poll/whatever and asked people if the X close box should stay on the left or move to the right.
Half the people said leave it where it was, half said they didn't care, so when Windows 95 came out they moved it over where it's easy to hit when you're actually going for the maximize or minimize button.
Overall, if you were pleased with the design decisions Google made with Chrome, you'll be happy with Firefox's new direction, which Mozilla says was designed "to reflect
how you use the Web today.the ennui of our newly-minted ADHD Millenial developers, who always think any idea they have is better and don't give a fuck about history or how things actually work."
There. Fixed it for you...
It is clear that the UI designers are stuck in their little Mac bubble. This new UI might make sense and look aesthetically OK on a Mac but it is horrendous on Windows.
Before you could just throw your mouse to the top-left to access the menu -- much more efficient than a small squashed button on the right. Now everything, including add-ons are now cluttered into the top-right corner (with no other toolbars without dicking around with addons) -- the very reason I DIDN'T use Chrome.
I guess thought that's what to expect when these people seem to value fashion over meritocracy. If Brendan Eich were in charge of UI would this mess have gone ahead?
Doesn't feel horrible and the tabs now match thunderbird. (Snow Leopard) Also feels a bit less glitchy on nasty pages.
But isn't the whole point of windows modern UI to look horrendous? (Or are you still using 'dated and cheesy'?)
I mourn the change to a Chrome-like interface. Browser developers have forgotten what makes a desktop great--generous screen resolution.
With a desktop's high resolution screen, developers have the ability to offer a lot of icons and menus that make the browser's options and tools readily accessible with no need to memorize or learn any series of mouse gyrations. With a menu, I can do anything. With Chrome, I can do nothing.
Chrome is a step backwards in time to a primitive browser with limited options. Where is the history icon in Chrome? Where is the home icon? Where is the download icon? Where is the back icon? Where is the forward icon? Where is the search box? Where is the menu? To say that things are unnecessary is to pretend we live in a different world, or that my screen resolution is the size of my hand. My screen resolution is 1920 x 1080, and I want to use it. Which browser will let me use it on Linux besides the old version of Firefox?
I wish that Opera would support Linux again with their latest versions. I'd be willing to give Opera a try!
I disagree. The browser is a window to the internet, a container to let me view the website. I don't want distracting... 99% of the time I only use one button and one text field so why show me stuff I hardly ever use? In fact for non-techy users, all that stuff is just confusing.
Plus, in Chrome you can stick loads of extra stuff under the tab bar if you so desire. So I'm certain you can do to even greater levels in FF.
"Plus, in Chrome you can stick loads of extra stuff under the tab bar if you so desire. So I'm certain you can do to even greater levels in FF."
Sorry. I'm part of that group that wants to know why the heck you'd want anything under your tab bar except the page your browsing?
Anything else is just annoyingly inefficient.
On my Mac I have the standard OS X menu bar, then
>Address and search boxes, complete with back/forward arrows
>Web Developer Toolbar
I don't want to search the heavens for the tab bar.
Now implemented via Classic Theme Restorer. Thanks to all who recommended that.
If I am reading you correctly, you are bemoaning the lack of a menu, and I agree. Not having a place where ALL options are available and discoverable, without going into some configuration screens and discovering options there, can be annoying. But with Firefox you CAN have standard menus (though they appear right at the top of the screen):
Press <ALT> <V> then under the <Toolbars> option check-mark <Menu> and there you go! All options readily available again!
Personally, in this case, I prefer to keep the menus hidden till I need them, which isn't often. A simple key press pops them up...
Quote: Press <ALT> <V> then under the <Toolbars> option check-mark <Menu> and there you go! All options readily available again!
Nope, they aren't. In fact if you " Press <ALT> <V>" absolutely sod-all happens. No " <Toolbars> option" nothing, nada, nix, nowt, zilch, zero, f all !!!
But the latest versions of Opera use the Chrome engine - so it's even more Chrome than the FF UI redesign. At least Firefox still has about:config. I'm still running Opera 12.16 - the last version to use the Opera Presto engine.
Unfortunately this means I find myself having to reach for Firefox more and more often as there won't be an update to 12.16.
And Firefox here= ESR. Always ESR. I don't need browser updates every 10 days thank you.
I was a bit miffed when they changed the name. I preferred 'Firebird', still do. But today it became academic. Been running Pale Moon alongside in Windows and the Linux version looks pretty good too. I was running Aurora too, for a few weeks, and just got fed up with all the work getting rid of the Chromified shite and getting back the features I adopted it all those years ago and have stuck with it ever since for.
Mozilla are now like a politician who changes party.
<sigh> Yet another group/company that believes desktop GUI should look/behave the same way as Tablet/phone GUI. Why would I want to waste screen real-estate on finger-friendly icon when I use a keyboard/mouse on my desktop/laptop? And don't use the argument that most laptops have a touch-screen these days: that's because Win8 basically made it mandatory - cart-before-horse time.
By all means develop a finger-friendly GUI, BUT STOP FORCING EVERYONE TO USE IT!!!
The UI changes are really disruptive . . . if you have no tolerance whatsoever for change. On the plus side, the page rendering seems dramatically faster, just based on my subjective experience. The update does seem to have broken the StatusBar4Evar add-on, so we'll see if I can live without that.
....for showing leadership in browser design...oh wait...
"Gone is the familiar orange Firefox menu in the upper left of the desktop browser window. In its place is a new menu to the right of the URL bar (just like Chrome) that's activated by clicking an icon of three lines stacked on top of each other (just like Chrome).
""""(just like Chrome)""""
m(_ _)m ...head desk....
Seems to work fine. Installed really fast. Not having as many crash problem as 28. (in fact, none so far, knock on wood)
All add-ons worked from the start and stayed pretty much where I wanted them. Had to re-install FVD, but my biggest concern was the security add-ons and so far, they carried over without a hitch.
Nice part was I got a little more screen headroom on the browser, yet options and security settings are all right up front on single row menu bar with room to spare!
It's almost like old times!
I stopped using Firefox when they let a special interest group dictate their internal affairs because they didn't like when someone else expressed an opinion contrary to theirs. I don't have any other complaint about said group.
I'm about this close >< to uninstalling it from all my machines and going full Chrome/Chromium
This seems like it might be a good argument against auto-update... I'm not going to hate on the new UI without using it (although I prefer Firefox's layout to Chrome....). I'm sure I'm going to update my gentoo and Ubuntu systems very soon and end up with Firefox 29, but it's always a rude surprise when you didn't even do an update (because it was automatic), you come in to start up your software and everything's a bit different.
Real geeks use Vimperator, an add-on for Firefox that changes the whole UI.
The only downside is that you will never be able to switch browsers again. No other browser has such a rich and clean vi-based add-on module (and yes, I've tried them all). It's more like a cult. Or the Hotel California maybe. The point is it's so f*cking good you'll put up with anything else that goes wrong in Firefox. Vimperator FTW!
Funny, made me laugh (and I'm not being sarcastic).
Disagree though. Ah, the joy of disnmissing a tab with a single keystroke 'd', following links with 'f' or 'F' (in a new tab) and opening new pages with 'o' or ''O' (in a new tab). And those are just my most commonly used ones.
Search for plugins 'vimperator' or 'pentadactyl'. There are also plugins that don't change the ui. VimFx, Vimium, and vimkeybindings.
Since at least the 20th Century, Firefox has at least one option that Chrome does not, afaik :
Let the reader rather than the writer/designer choose the font of the text on the webpage.
( So call me sick for preferring my own rather thn anyone else's ).
Also an option to let the browser rather the website choose the colours.
On a page with lots of text, this means black text on a white background,
which is as it should be rather than, say, brown text on black background.
( Yes, I'm referring to you, arstechnica. )
So what numpty decided it would be a great idea to eliminate the address bar and all navigation buttons?
Do we no longer use URL's? Do we no longer need to say, go back a page or reload a page?
Have I been asleep for a long time and these things have all changed and I missed it?
So, it would appear, that unless you already had it bookmarked you can no longer navigate to anywhere.
Oh and I used to have infoRSS feed running along as a ticker in my add-on bar, but that too has been eliminated. Been through all the 'customise' options and nothing in there to get any of these things back.
I am not a person normally given to swearing but this ********* ****** *********** has just ******** me right off.
If I wanted Chrome I would use Chrome, I have it installed alongside FF for Chromecasting sites that don't have apps and testing web sites. But I really don't like the Chrome interface. Give me a main menu, tabs, location/search boxes and a navigation toolbar so I can actually get some work done without having to spend time figuring out how.
While I'm complaining about browser UI make the refresh button bigger, it is far too small to use.
I spent a while trying to get FF29 to operate the way I want it to. Installing Classic Theme Restorer helped quite a lot but there are still a lot of features in the new UI that I hate.
I have just installed Pale Moon and ran the migration utility to copy my setup from Firefox and it's looking very good. As far as I can see most of the add ons I had in Firefox appear to be working fine in Pale Moon, if everything checks out OK, I will make the switch and forget about Firefox and its clunky new look.
Bah! Still a horrid blue colour on win7. The only add-on I found that gave me proper nice grey with aero support (Aero Improved) slowly stopped working with every new update. Poo. I hate that blue. Themes I like never work for more than a few versions with both Chrome and FF.
It's pretty much the only reason I switched to Opera. Grey by default.
I don't have any problem with change - I've spent some time changing Firefox the way I want it. I do this partly because I have a number of add-ons set up the way I like, partly because I prefer it laid out the way I want and partly because the onset of cataracts means that I'm obliged to customize colours and font sizes and set up short-cuts to deal with sites with unreadable colour schemes.
Ironically I was actually reading this thread as the update downloaded. Just as well really because the hour or so getting Firefox back to how I like it would have taken far longer without the useful advice. Cheers commentards. (It wouldn't have taken as long as that if one add-on ('RSS Icon') hadn't choked on the upgrade and stuck every available icon into the address bar). Now if my eyesight was worse than it already is, or I hadn't been pointed to the add-ons I needed, then I would still be struggling with things.
I'm resigned to Firefox changing things periodically and my having to do some housekeeping. At least unlike Opera or Chromium I have that choice. And it's good to have a tidy up once in a while. Nonetheless there are a couple of aspects of this upgrade that are more than a little tiresome. I understand perfectly well that Mozilla feels I should prefer tabs on top - but I don't. If an upgrade is going to retain some of the choices I have made in the past why does it always override others - tabs on top being a case in point. Similarly colours. Having customized the default background colour because of my eyesight why does it insist on resetting it.
And most tiresome of all if you're going to remove the Add-On bar and any custom toolbars that have been set up why keep all the shortcuts they contain and stick them into the remaining toolbars - in my case making the browser temporarily unusable while I got to grips with the new customization screen. Very dumb.
Be the best! Copy your competitor?
I prefer the look and feel of the older firefox. I liked having a main menu as default and not squashing all the icons to the right of the address bar. I like big square monitors because wide screen is for watching films after a certain age for some unknown reason (probably subtitles). I hate the assumption that everyone has bought into the idea of having short but wide monitors, some of us like to see some content on our screens without losing the application functions.
I've been running firefox with the Chrome look for years now anyway (FXChrome theme). In fact I re-installed it over the top of 'chromified' FF29, and it looks nicer :)
Also installed "The Addon Bar (restored)", which meant I could recover Forecastfox (had to root around for a version which would install), and happily discovered that the much-missed Download Statusbar has reincarnated as "S3.Download Statusbar".
So yeah, I want the look of Chrome with the customizability of Firefox. And I've got it.
Absolutely hate it!
Thank goodness for 'Classic Theme Restorer' and 'Hide Caption Titlebar Plus' add-ons.
Current Moz FF feedback graph:
Leave your own feedback here:
Or possibly leave a comment on the blog of the person responsible:
A final thought on UI polishing (cf XP->Vista->Win8, iOSnn, Australis etc etc.)
On a contract in a job far far long ago.. ( A DOS Clipper app to be precise) We had the ability to do drop shadows on dialog box frames, a simple parameter allowed a shadow to be or Left, Centred, or Right.
Because our app was well written all frame handling was in one function, so someone realised it was dead easy to check the clock and make all the shadows follow the sun. Left in the morning down at noon right in the afternoon. He even considered a southern hemisphere switch (sunshadows go the other way.) Total development time about a minute.
The grief and genuine anger we got from the client and project managers because we had done that rather than fix bugs in the app,
Moral never be seduced by shiny stuff cos, and I hasten to add Firefox is not Poo, a polished turd is still a turd, just lick it to confirm.
I've had a go with v29 for about half an hour as a test user and I think I'll install it for my own account. It's not as awful as I feared (or as different). The Linux version still has a menu bar - File Edit History Bookmarks Tools Help - and you can move buttons on the address bar to where you want them.
That includes the Bookmarks star and drop-down, although it seems that the two will only move as a unit. Having the bookmarks on the right is one thing that bugs me about Chrome, and when I looked at the code I found that, for some reason, it was the only GUI element hard-coded to a specific location.
Status-4-Evar doesn't seem to work any more, but maybe it will get an update. Or maybe I'll get used to not having a separate status bar. By default, the status text was in the address bar in an element too small to show enough content. It would show a link when hovering the pointer as "http://fo...sign/" for example. Call me paranoid, but I like to see the full address of a link before I click on it. However, you can move the element elsewhere and let it expand to the size required.
I refuse to use Chrome/Chromium because I just don't trust it. Any browser that "suggests" you "log in" on their opening screen "for a better user experience" is a browser I immediately close and delete from my hard drive.
And besides, Google is in the business of wanting to know your browsing habits so they can sell that information to other "interested" spamme... advertiz... err... parties. So, why in blazes should I use a browser Google created for that very purpose?
Firefox isn't much better (anymore), and this whole Australis interface on their latest version made me see red. (Where did those IE back/forward buttons come from? Why is the bookmark star joined at the hip with the Bookmark editor, and out of the URL bar?? Why is the refresh page icon at the end of the URL bar, and not next to the Back/Forward buttons?? I'm in Customize, but why can't I move those buttons around?! WTF IS THIS $#!+??? "Easily customizable" my left nut! This is all broken!) Thank goodness I found out about that Classic Theme Restorer, I was ready to switch back to Opera (which makes me wonder if Opera fixed that Speed Dial bug that was in every version after 10).
PunkTiger says: "this whole Australis interface on their latest version made me see red. (Where did those IE back/forward buttons come from? Why is the bookmark star joined at the hip with the Bookmark editor, and out of the URL bar?? Why is the refresh page icon at the end of the URL bar, and not next to the Back/Forward buttons?? I'm in Customize, but why can't I move those buttons around?! WTF IS THIS $#!+??? "Easily customizable" my left nut! This is all broken!"
Exactly! There is no design here, just pointlessly random controls in random dumbed-down places 'coz someone thought "they looked nicer that way". Function subordinated to form, and even the form isn't anything to write home about. The UI has been deteriorating slowly for years, now it's no better than Chrome's - which is harsh criticism indeed. This is what you get when kids graduate from graphic design school without learning anything about practical usability. Firefox was a good, practical girl once, but now some idiot disciple of the Steve Sinofsky School of Bork the Interface has given her new lipstick and subjected her to footbinding.
I'm uninstalling it.
In the same vein:
I got my first taste of lower case instead of UPPERCASE ONLY back in the late 70s
I got my first taste of affordable colour terminals in about 1987
Fast forward to last year and Visual Studio brings back block capitals and near-as-dammit monochrome
More like a fault of those drones, particularly omnipresent in the Bay Area bubble, who worship the cult of the shiny rotten fruit, no matter the meritocratic value of anything it does.
It's rather obvious that his whole design has an aesthetic (as well as function, such as removing the menu from the easily accessible top-left corner on Windows) tailored by someone using a Mac for religious purposes.
So this morning was doing some actual work on a long ongoing email with my nephiew...
Saved his bookmarks, and, noticed something very interestinng when clicking on that Star...
??? crawls out of the star and goes into the storage box... and this warm dejavu feeling...
IMHO= those Star Trek gaming glasses that almost overtook the Starship Enterprise w/subliminal messaging telling the user to give up when attacked...look n feels a lot like clicking that new Star...
or have I not had my coffee yet this morning (just cold tea leftover from last nite's session) ??...RS
The "Classic Theme Restorer" did a reasonable job, but here in LinuxLand, this did even better:
Synaptic Package Manager.
Search for Firefox.
For each item that says Installed Version is 29.xxxxx, click on it and choose Package (that's in the menu bar, remember menu bars? They're the things FF29 doesn't have) and Force Version. Choose an older one (FF24 in my case). Repeat for each item at 29.xxxxx
Then click on Apply. Wait for the downgrade (snigger) to finish.
Then for each of the changed packages, click on it, then Package, Lock Version.
Voilà! FireFox looking like FireFox and updates won't update it.
And on the missus's PC, I managed to lock it at FF28.
I'm sure that's only a temporary fix (the next major Linux version upgrade might be a problem). But maybe by then, there'll be a fork of FireFox that isn't FireFuxedUp.
Paris, because I want a browser that hasn't been shagged beyond all recognition, and where the appearance has had a lot of time spent on it, but it still ain't pretty.
I was wondering where the arrogant know-it-all fuckwit developers went after the demise of Gnome. Now I know. They went to Firefox. Want to customize where the tabs are located? You can't any more - because "the developers know best". Several other formerly popular options have been removed, and require either add-ons or extensive manual about:config customization to restore.
Either the Firefox developers get their head out of their arses and start giving people a CHOICE of how they want to configure things, or they're going to find themselves in the same pickle as Gnome did. Which, admittedly, might be their goal. I don't know.
"Gone is the familiar orange Firefox menu in the upper left of the desktop browser window."
FireFox has always been a rather crappy browser, off the shelf. They have no original thought to design and function of their product... which for me, makes it a rather useless browser to use... other than testing website design, just like I do with IE.
When FF went from 3 > 4 and started this monthly updates to version 29?! First, they copied IE 8/9 with 4.x Then they quickly COPIED Opera 10 with FF 5.x.... and so today they have gone Chrome?!
It sucks that Opera has gone to shit using Chrome as its engine. Now, that wouldn't be ALL BAD if Opera 20~ at least FUNCTIONED like Opera 12!! Which many of us are STILL using that out-dated browser. Thus, making modern Opera is somewhat pointless!
Features from Opera 11~12 that is missing:
- Stacking Tabs into groups (SUPER handy)
- Great zooming controls
- The most UI customization! You can put your buttons anywhere. Zoom sliders where you want, etc.
- How it handles browser/tab history is awesome. IE/FF totally suck in this area and Chrome is weak.
Opera 12s weakness is that its out-dated (but otherwise reliable). It doesn't print out pages very well (compared to IE and Chrome).
So my browser of today: Chrome and Opera... and I use Opera for work & management because of its tab-grouping function. If Opera WOULD make these features work on their Chrome-Opera version, then I'd be happy to "upgrade"... otherwise WHY BOTHER.
There are many reasons why people may use 3 different browsers at the same time... if they all LOOK like Chrome, it would be rather confusing.
Ooops. My FF updated to 29.0! Its not so bad... and hit the CUSTOMIZE button on the bottom of the menu box... and you can turn ON / OFF the title bar and Menu Bar. There is some user customization... its weak, but its more option than Chrome. FF 29 Tab Grouping is VERY weak and crumble-some to use compared to Operas... which is elegant, smooth and easy to use.
wrt the Tabs on Top business. has anyone mentioned Fitts' Law yet?
Fitts's law (often cited as Fitts' law) is a model of human movement primarily used in human–computer interaction and ergonomics that predicts that the time required to rapidly move to a target area is a function of the distance to the target and the size of the target.
That was my gut reaction. As far as I'm concerned, the best user interface for Firefox would be one that resembles Netscape 3.1 as closely as possible. I've tried Chrome, but I didn't like it. I noticed that even Version 28 includes a Chrome feature I find uninteresting: a new tab doesn't feature my home page, but instead thumbnails of recently-visited sites, though, so I'm not terribly surprised they're going this way - particularly as Firefox has been losing market share recently to Chrome.
I suspect that Version 29 will still be better than Chrome in many key areas, so I don't expect to switch, or avoid upgrading. IE, of course, currently has a serious vulnerability - but it's often had problems in that area in the past, and so it's hardly an option even after that's patched (although of late it's been doing better, or so I've heard).
As it happens, though, now was a better time to bite the bullet and upgrade than later, so I did it, and I see it still has the regular old-fashioned menu along the top too. So initially it looks like there's not much to worry about.
I presume this new default SKIN will enable more add-on writers to provide classic style UI add-ons.
Mozilla - stop screwing with what people are using. We don't want it, we don't need it. All we want is for Firefox to run quicker and to not crash. That is all. You, Mozilla, have lost the plot just like Microsoft has.
Anyone remember 123? Word for DOS? blank screen and no idea what to do next UNLESS YOU KNEW. Word came with keyboard strips to explain what each Function key could do (plain, or with shift, ctrl or alt added).
Then menus were invented -- a way to tell users what actions were available and how to get at them. Also stopped them hanging or crashing the program by giving the wrong keyboard command at the wring time.
Now the fashion is to hide this information, make people remember keyboard shortcuts again (but it is still too easy to hit the wrong keys by mistake). Grey down any text to invisible. Replace text with icons which are meaningless unless you already know the feature they represent, 0or make these only show up if (accidentally) moused over.
And then slag off "amateurs" who don't use all the "rich features". How would they know these exist, if you've hidden every way for them to discover them?
This new(ish) google-inspired flat mono interface is a step back to the DOS days.
Palemoon is what FF used to be while it was still good. Waterfox is another, for 64 bit machines. Iceweasel also. They all run all FF add-ons.
For safe computing, the first two things to do are
* turn off all automatic updates and searches for updates (even if you need hack the registry to achieve this).
* remove caps lock key from any new keyboard
I too was taken aback when first exposed to the FF 29 look. The dark blue menu + tab bar + address bar background was just plain jarring. Not a wise choice, IMO. Since I use Opera 12, Opera (now up to) 21, Firefox and Iron kind of interchangeably I just backed off using FF for a while. Then eventually I stuck my toe back in the water and started exploring theme choices, and found that the "Opera like" FXOpera was acceptable enough. The one that attempted to replicate Maxthon was OK too.
Thanks to the commenters on this forum I found Classic Theme Restorer and got back the non-disappearing round forward/backward buttons. I took a look at Palemoon and decided what I really wanted back was the classic pale grey background at the top of the browser. FWIW, the Tema Gris theme restored that to FF 29. You have to get used to having inactive tabs having no borders at all, but now I actually like that scheme.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019