Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Firefox 13 Released, Debuts Brand New Tab Page and Homepage

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the lucky-thirteen dept.

Firefox 320

MrSeb writes "Mozilla has officially released Firefox 13. Unlike Firefox 12 (or 11, or 10, or indeed many of the recent Firefox versions), Firefox 13 is an important release with a handful of much-needed features that are long overdue. There's a new New Tab Page launcher, with your favorite and most-used websites, and a new default home page with one-click access to Bookmarks, Settings, Add-ons, etc. SPDY is on by default, too, which should help ameliorate the perceived speed difference between Chrome and Firefox. Finally, the developer tools (Page Inspector, Style Inspector, etc.) have been tweaked and updated!"

cancel ×

320 comments

The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (5, Insightful)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222501)

I've seen this news all over the web since yesterday, however, the "new tab" page as it is, isn't a Chrome feature, it actually comes from Opera, which had it way before Chrome existed.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222549)

Opera doesn't count, the only reason anybody used Opera was to say the used Opera, then turn their nose up and storm off in a huff. Everybody who knew better used a real browser like Netscape Communicator.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (-1, Flamebait)

wed128 (722152) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222731)

Seriously. Who pays for a web browser?

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (2, Informative)

eternaldoctorwho (2563923) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222825)

The last time I checked, Opera was free...

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (3, Interesting)

Tyler Eaves (344284) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223385)

It wasn't during the time period that they were actually innovating.

Friday, December 24, 2004

Tyler Eaves
--edited address out--

Order receipt from BMT Micro, Inc.
Order ID: 2275341
Order Number: 2004-1224-1543-51-678

Qty Product Description Price Shipping Subtotal
  1 3100023 Opera 7 for Desktop 39.00 0.00 41.73

Sales tax: USD 2.73
Total bill: USD 41.73

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223619)

So, that payment was completely voluntary, as using an ad supported Opera for free became an option in 2000. It went free with no ads in 2005. For the record, Speed Dial, the innovative feature in question, was released in 2007. Nice troll though.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (5, Funny)

Cl1mh4224rd (265427) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223203)

Seriously. Who pays for a web browser?

A couple things have changed while you were in your apparent coma: nearly 3,000 people were killed and World Trade Centers 1, 2, 3 and 7 were destroyed in a terrorist attack on the United States 10.5 years ago and desktop Opera has been free for roughly 12 years now.

Welcome back.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223645)

False flag op by the US government. Planes were radio controlled, passengers were agents. Planes were landed and the agents got off the plane. Planes were put back in the air and flown into the buildings. Real civilians were killed here. Missile at the pentagon. There were no passengers aboard the plane that crashed in the middle of nowhere. That plane was aimed at the Pentagon, but crashed somehow. So they shot a missile at the Pentagon, confiscated all surveillance camera footage, planted wreckage that didn't even have an burn marks, and an engine that didn't go with the plane that supposedly crashed. And the hole left by the missile was not big enough for a plane. And the plane didn't even touch the grass or the power lines, and that is simply impossible based on the hole and the size of the plane.

It was actually a stuttering clusterfuck of fail. Many people speculate that the buildings had been wired for demolition earlier, and that the planes weren't even enough to bring them down. Had the one plane not crashed, most of the evidence for the false flag op would not be there. Whatever the fuck it was they were doing, they just HAD to put a hole in the Pentagon. Maybe there was someone working on that side of the building that needed assassinated. I would have aborted the Pentagon operation after the plane crashed, because the attack on the towers was enough for the false flag op. The guy that decided to fire a missile at it was a fucking moron with a small dick. They all have small dicks in DC.

Really, you've got to be a fucking tool if you believe the story that a plane hit the Pentagon. There is simply too much evidence that it was not a plane that hit the Pentagon. Believe the government's story, because you can trust everything they say.

And if you were involved in it, you'd probably keep your mouth shut when your life and/or family's lives were threatened. And it wouldn't matter now, anyway; because no one would believe you.

Some of the recordings of the passengers in the plane even had the child identifying themselves by first and last name to their own mothers. What kind of shitty acting is that? How did we find a passport of one of the supposed hijackers within the rubble? That's unlikely bullshit. Fucking tools. All of you.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222911)

It's still the fastest IMAP client available, and it's actually quite nice (they seem to have learned from Entourage and improved on it). This is incredibly useful for those "noms in the cantine!" mails, I always get there first.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222691)

Did you ride your fixie from a Ron Paul rally while drinking a PBR to tell us this?

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223493)

Hey now, some of us liked PBR before it was cool with hipsters!

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222787)

What? Speed Dial is nothing like this. Chrome, Safari, and now Firefox show your most frequented websites/pages, Opera's new tab page is just a bookmark grid.

Why do Opera fanboys feel the need to convince everyone that Opera invented the web?

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (5, Informative)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222867)

Why do Opera fanboys feel the need to convince everyone that Opera invented the web?

Because they did, more or less. Tabs, mobile browsing, CSS support, built-in adblocking (which no other major browser even has, as far as I know), speed... yeah, Opera pretty much pioneered everything important about modern web browsers, and they deserve a lot of credit for that.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (1, Insightful)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223039)

They didn't invent tabs, and FF has adblock. It may not be built-in, but it still works pretty much the same, and more flexible.
Remember FF makes profit out of ads (indirectly), so a built-in ad blocker is a bit of a suicide.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223079)

You're right about the adblock, but wrong about the tabs which were part of Opera since the early 2000s (or possibly as early as the 90s... I'm not certain).

And Opera's speeddial can be adjusted to show most-frequent websites, rather than a fixed list. Chrome copied the idea. (And then Firefox copied Chrome.) Please note I'm not saying anything's wrong with copying; more competition is always better.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223187)

Early 2000s, and there were indeed other browsers that had tabs back then. In fact, a commit was made to Mozilla a few months before Opera 5 was released that added tab support.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (-1, Troll)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223547)

>>>In fact, a commit was made to Mozilla a few months before Opera 5 was released that added tab support.

So you're saying Opera 5 was first.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223063)

Opera wasn't the first browser with tabs (not even the first with an MDI), they didn't make the first mobile browser, they didn't invent css, konqueror had built in content blocking before opera, and Opera had been lagging behind others in terms of speed until very recently since Chrome woke everyone up.

Opera are not gods of the web. Not everything is their invention, and it's tiring to hear fanboys in every god damn browser article saying "OPERA HAD IT FIRST" when not a god damn person cares.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223529)

Opera was so indy, it was not caring about Opera before everyone else didn't care about Opera.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (0)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223017)

I can barely stand using Opera, but I still feel it's right to give credit where it belongs.
Chrome just allowed the speed dial to have dynamic websites, instead of always the same, but the base idea is pretty much the same "9 big previews pointing the the 9 most used websites in a grid".

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (4, Interesting)

fafaforza (248976) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223591)

No, it isn't a bookmark grid. It is a list of sites you most frequently visit, albeit set manually.

I don't think I would want one that changes dynamically based on the past 3 days of my surfing. When I open Opera, I hit Ctrl+3, Ctrl+5, Ctrl+6, Crtl+2 and have the pages I want to see at the outset. I remember what spot each page is and can open it in a new tab blindfolded.

As is, Firefox's version is a bit gimmicky, trying to one-up Speed Dial in order not to make it seem like a feature copy.

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222797)

I just posted to say that not all ACs are Opera haters. However, Opera keeps doing stupid stuff to their browser and all these new features are making default FF more usable for me...

Re:The new-tab page isn't a chrome invention (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222813)

"isn't a Chrome feature"

Funny, my Chrome has it. And I don't see anywhere saying it was ONLY in Chrome, or was in Chrome first, so , you're wrong that "it isn't a feature" and apparently complaining about something that wasn't said.

Huh?

NOOOO (5, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222519)

Now it looks like Safari.

Last week it looked like Chrome.

I'm going back to Internet Explorer. Or maybe Mosaic.

Either that or I'm going to wait another week for Firefox 16 which will likely imitate Facebook.

Re:NOOOO (4, Informative)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222707)

If it helps, I use Firefox 15 (Nightly), and its UI hasn't changed much since FF13, except for the inclusion of a new pop-up list download manager. I don't know of anything else that this resembles, but I find it really efficient; much better than trying to make do with clumsy "clear and close" extensions for the classic FF download manager, which itself hadn't changed since the dawn of the Firefox project.

Re:NOOOO (5, Funny)

al.caughey (1426989) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223297)

I use Firefox mainly during the day

Re:NOOOO (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223419)

IE mostly comes at night...

Mostly.

Re:NOOOO (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222833)

Just installed it, and I can't see any difference from 12. I have it set pretty minimal, just tabs at the top, no menu bar or skins. I haven't seen a reason to switch yet, either to IE or Chrome...

Re:NOOOO (1)

Zephyn (415698) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223215)

Now it looks like Safari.

Last week it looked like Chrome.

I'm going back to Internet Explorer. Or maybe Mosaic.

Either that or I'm going to wait another week for Firefox 16 which will likely imitate Facebook.

23 will imitate Lynx

Re:NOOOO (1)

ArundelCastle (1581543) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223283)

Either that or I'm going to wait another week for Firefox 16 which will likely imitate Facebook.

Oh, you mean Firebook?
(Ray Bradbury is not amused.)

Re:NOOOO (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223287)

>>>Either that or I'm going to wait another week for Firefox 16

If you're still using the LTS version, then you are still on Firefox 10 and won't have to worry about upgrading until Firefox 17 (about one year of constancy).

Go Firefox! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222527)

Very glad to see Firefox improving all the time. Now if they would drop the silly numbering that would be the icing of the cake. I don't trust Google one bit so it's good to have alternatives to their proprietary Chrome crap.

--

Sundar Pichai is the utter asshole whose incompetence has resulted in the shutdown of Google's Atlanta office. Great work!

Re:Go Firefox! (1)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222593)

You could use Chromium, the FLOSS browser on which Chrome is based (and Chromium doesn't include flash or other crap most /. users won't want).

Re:Go Firefox! (2)

uigrad_2000 (398500) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223345)

Finding the download page for the latest binary can be tricky, although it's much easier now than it used to be. Here's a link for the lazy [appspot.com] .

For the extremely lazy, here's how to install, assuming that you're using linux, and it went into your Downloads folder:

unzip ~/Downloads/chrome-linux.zip
sudo mv ~/Downloads/chrome-linux /usr/lib64/
sudo ln -s /usr/lib64/chrome-linux/chrome-wrapper /usr/bin/chromium

Re:Go Firefox! (0)

jones_supa (887896) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222985)

Now if they would drop the silly numbering that would be the icing of the cake.

If it helps, you can now run the Extended Support Release [mozilla.org] . Currently it's FF10 which gets just security updates, next ESR will be version 17, and so on.

Brand New Tab Page... (0)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222551)

New for Firefox, old for users of browsers like Opera since 2007.

Re: Brand New Tab Page... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222717)

Yes, it's new to Firefox. If they changed their logo to a blue "e", it would be new to Firefox, and still just as relevant to the topic at hand. Stop being a pedantic whore and shut up.

Re: Brand New Tab Page... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223027)

Actually, your comment is more pedantic than his.

One Man's Feature is Another Man's Bloat (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222597)

More bloat. The only feature that I want that is long overdue is a setting wherein the browser will make HTTP GETs only to the original domain. So, if I go to slashdot.org, I want my browser to only fetch things from slashdot.org. Not scorecardresearch, not doubleclick, not gstatic, not google, not facebook, etc etc etc.

Re:One Man's Feature is Another Man's Bloat (4, Informative)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222681)

That would break every website that uses CDN or have multiple domains. That's probably half of the web right there. Not even wikipedia will load under those draconian rules.

Re:One Man's Feature is Another Man's Bloat (5, Informative)

kesuki (321456) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222839)

"So, if I go to slashdot.org, I want my browser to only fetch things from slashdot.org. Not scorecardresearch, not doubleclick, not gstatic, not google, not facebook, etc"

you want noscript then.

Re:One Man's Feature is Another Man's Bloat (4, Informative)

cerberusss (660701) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223311)

Or Ghostery [ghostery.com]

Re:One Man's Feature is Another Man's Bloat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223505)

Or request policy. My only fault with it is that you can only do one domain at a time.

Re:One Man's Feature is Another Man's Bloat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223473)

You want NoScript AND RequestPolicy. Noscript is great for scripting, but RequestPolicy will actually stop any traffic not going to/from the URL requested, unless explicitlly whitelisted. One of the extensions that is Firefox only that has me not even considering a switch to another browser.

Re:One Man's Feature is Another Man's Bloat (5, Informative)

magic maverick (2615475) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223479)

That'd be RequestPolicy actually. NoScript doesn't stop images from external domains being loaded (the 'traditional' way of tracking across the web).

Yes, but... (5, Funny)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222613)

"There's a new New Tab Page launcher, with your favorite and most-used websites, and a new default home page with one-click access to Bookmarks, Settings, Add-ons, etc."

Okay, that's great, but what are the much-needed features that they added?

Re:Yes, but... (4, Interesting)

Daetrin (576516) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222995)

Okay, now that i've actually tried it.... dear gods what is that thing? In Chrome the new tab page has smallish pictures of your most recently/commonly visited sites, with borders between them and titles underneath each one. I just opened up a new tab in FF and practically burned my eyes out.

There are no borders between the pictures, it's just a three by three grid of screenshots mashed together. Two of the images are of www.google.com (why two? I dunno) but it only shows the top left corner of the page. For all the other sites it shows the whole page, and then repeats the first third of the page along the right side. And then on top of the messed up images, in very small letters that still somehow manage to clash, is the name of the page/site. When you mouse over one of the images two small grey boxes appear at the upper left and upper right corners. The boxes are blank, but if you mouse over them you see that one is to "pin" the site, and the other is to remove it.

Maybe one of my plug-ins is breaking stuff (even though i told NoScript to allow "about:newtab") but there's just something messed up if what is supposedly a fundamental part of the browser itself is broken that easily. And if that's actually how it's supposed to look... they really need to fire whoever they have in charge of UI over there.

In short, i don't think the page launcher in Chrome is necessary (i'll use it sometimes just because it's there, especially since there are only a couple sites i visit with Chrome anyways, but i never felt the lack in FireFox) however at least that one doesn't hurt to look at.

I Finally Gave Up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222633)

I have been using Firefox since the first beta versions, and I held out for a very long time since I liked the feel of Firefox, some of its features (like open in tabs, bookmarked RSS feeds, etc.) and the fact that it is open source. But with the last couple versions, it just is starting to get unstable. Half the time when I would close a tab that had a YouTube video, the last video I watched would inexplicably start playing again. When I open ReverbNation, half of the time the panels won't load without a refresh and the song player has stopped working entirely. Meanwhile Chrome handles all of these things without a hitch and still seems faster (yes, it is still faster when compared with version 13). Now that they have an "Open All Bookmarks" extension, I have had enough. I'm switching to Chrome until there is a compelling reason to switch back.

Re:I Finally Gave Up (1)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222709)

I liked the way that Firefox 12 would open a new page at precisely the point you don't want it to open at (typically, it seems, displaying the first button on the page) rather than the top. I was about to give up on it until I managed to find the about:config option to turn off retardo-mode.

Have they fixed that, or is adding a new home page more important than actually being useful for web browsing?

Laugh (4, Funny)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222651)

I'll wait until tomorrow and get FF14

Re:Laugh (2)

Skapare (16644) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222805)

Sorry, it's been delayed. You'll have to wait until the end of the week.

Re:Laugh (3, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223369)

It's already available [finalfantasyxiv.com] .

users rejoice ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222687)

More unexpected behavior changes that you did not see coming because we abandoned that archaic version numbering system !

Too late (0)

Snotnose (212196) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222739)

Switched to Chrome about 2 weeks ago because FF was just too bloody slow. Now I have no desire to switch back.

Re:Too late (2)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223021)

Switched to Chrome about 2 weeks ago because FF was just too bloody slow. Now I have no desire to switch back.

There's a speed difference? I switched about the same time and didn't notice any difference at all. It must be pretty small or only weird corner cases.

I will say that "chrome to phone" sounded like the most exciting development in computing for the year 2012, installed it, tested it, and haven't used it once since. Oh well.

Addon installation is much smoother, I never realized how annoying restarting the browser was until I didn't have to anymore. Like moving from windows to linux.

The start page web apps page was the greatest disappointment. Basically you use the app store to install a bookmark with a big icon. Thats about all it does. Boo.

I found it amusing that if you want something like "adblock plus" and "flashblock" from firefox on chrome, you install "adblock plus" and "flashblock" on chrome. Yeah, it is the same name. Firebug lite is sooo close to firebug on firefox.

I'm still looking for a way to improve the UI and move the tabs below the address bar. I certainly switch tabs a lot more often than I do address bar stuff. There must be some extension that'll fix that.

Re:Too late (0)

hendridm (302246) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223459)

Switched to Chrome about 2 weeks ago because FF was just too bloody slow. Now I have no desire to switch back.

Lol, you just switched to Chrome?

Version 4.9 (2, Insightful)

Skapare (16644) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222759)

In the normal scheme, its really just 4.9.

***YAWN***

Re:Version 4.9 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223115)

Then there would be complaints about how they make big changes without incrementing major version number :)

Okay... (1)

Ignacio (1465) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222767)

But have they fixed the memory issues yet?

Re:Okay... (1)

edxwelch (600979) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222965)

Re:Okay... (2)

krupicka (230451) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223205)

Firefox 12 still has a memory leak in it. Nothing like getting back from the weekend to see Firefox has a 1.5 GB RAM footprint and making my system crawl to a halt. Always amusing to turn on the task manager and just watch the memory getting sucked up in real time.

Re:Okay... (1)

magic maverick (2615475) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223607)

I'm running Firefox 12 (Ubuntu build). I don't shutdown my computer very often at all, I hibernate. I close my browser only slightly more often. My current session of Firefox has been running (including time in hibernation) for at least five days. I regularly open tens of tabs (like 50 or more) at a time. I often leave some of these open forever (until I restart the browser, after weeks).

Firefox never uses more than 500MB of RAM, and is currently using less than 250MB with 25 tabs open. Ooh, it went down, below 200MB. I can't remember a Firefox memory bug, ever.

I do have some extensions though, NoScript (though a number of websites, including Slashdot, are whitelisted), RequestPolicy, Cookie Monster, Brief (feed reader) and Status-4-Evar are the notable ones. I also don't have Flash installed (and Gnash rarely runs, 'cause of NoScript).

Maybe you should switch off MS Windows?

Anecdote power!

Re:Okay... (3, Insightful)

nmb3000 (741169) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223417)

If by fixed you mean browser usability was sacrificed in order to make the apparent memory usage drop, then yes. My biggest complaint with these memory "improvements" is in regard to image handling:

- Images are now decode-on-draw meaning they display slower and background tab images are not decoded. Browsing an image gallery or some other image-heavy site is now obscenely painful in Firefox.

- Decoded images on background tabs only live for 10-20 seconds and then are discarded at which point they must be re-decoded when the tab is activated. Long-lived tabs like Gmail now flicker every time you switch back to them as images are re-decoded.

These are just the two that come to mind right away. Luckily they can be fixed by tweaking some about:config settings (image.mem.decodeondraw and image.mem.min_discard_timeout_ms). Unfortunately many cannot be fixed so easily.

I'm really tired of the Firefox devs choosing (usually wrong) user complaints over good design and usability practices.

Re:Okay... (1)

Ignacio (1465) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223651)

"We now suck less" is rarely something to be proud of. It's a means, but hardly an end. Let me know when it stops storing what seems to be my entire browsing history since I first starting browsing, back in the 90s.

Still nothing on the memory issue? (1)

NoSalt (801989) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222811)

Of course, no browser is good at handling memory. I am always hopeful, though. "and a new default home page with one-click access to Bookmarks, Settings, Add-ons, etc." This is a "feature" of Chrome that I really hate. I wish I could disable it.

So. Still no out of process tabs. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40222815)

Lame. That's one of the most important features needed right now to prevent a tab from taking down the OS.

Tab launcher garbage was first thing I turned off (4, Insightful)

dstyle5 (702493) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222831)

after I updated to 13. Sorry, I'm not using a tablet or smartphone Firefox guys. Please design it for the platform I'm using.

Re:Tab launcher garbage was first thing I turned o (1)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223275)

How did you turn it off? I've been digging around the options for awhile now and can't find it. Is it in the about:browser settings?

Re:Tab launcher garbage was first thing I turned o (2)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223423)

Nevermind, I figured it out. You just click the little grid image in the upper right hand side.

No option to turn back on "new tab opens to home page." Lame. Stuck with "about:newtab" on every new tab I open. So annoying!

Re:Tab launcher garbage was first thing I turned o (5, Informative)

d3ac0n (715594) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223497)

Aaaand i just figured out how to disable that.

In about:config, just type in "newtab" and search

You will get 3 choices.
First one is the URL for new tabs. Set it to what you want (I use about:blank)

Set the other two settings to false and the fancy schmancy crappy new tab is gone.

Re:Tab launcher garbage was first thing I turned o (1)

CrackerJackz (152930) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223565)

address bar -> about:config

find the: browser.newtabpage.enabled setting and set it to false

It will grant you the nice clean, fast white page for new tabs.

Why there's not a checkbox somewhere for it ... I have no idea.

Smooth Scrolling (3, Interesting)

Luthair (847766) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222889)

is terrible and they turned it on by default? I immediately noticed that scrolling was sluggish and at first I mistook that for a performance problem...

Re:Smooth Scrolling (3, Informative)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223091)

Smooth scrolling makes it extremely hard (impossible actually) to read as you scroll. It's the sort of eye-candy which REDUCES functionality, I don't really understand why anyone would want it (honestly: how often do you scroll and don't want to read as you scroll down. AT ALL.

Re:Smooth Scrolling (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223249)

I love smooth scrolling and to me I go crazy when I see the flickering of images and pictures when I hit up and down. For disclosure I have an ATI 5750 graphics card so maybe it rocks on my computer but sucks if you use an intel GMA 915 or something similiar.

My Andriod phone is smooth when I scroll up and down and it makes it feel more modern than a desktop browser for these reasons. Go to about:config and turn on GFX and hardware acceleration. Together it will make everything look better.

Just leave me out of it (0, Offtopic)

JDG1980 (2438906) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222913)

I don't use browser tabs at all. Never have, never will. The OS already has a perfectly fine task-switching mechanism. I don't care what they do with tabs as long as my existing style keeps working and I can continue using the FF3/IE6 look and feel with classic full-size buttons and menus. And a real home page, none of this "new tab" garbage.

Re:Just leave me out of it (3, Funny)

Thavilden (1613435) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223047)

The OS already has a perfectly fine task-switching mechanism.

Let me guess, a GIMP developer?

Re:Just leave me out of it (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223099)

Let me guess, a GIMP developer?

Hell no. GIMP is one application, so it should have one taskbar entry per instance - not three or four. A web browser is also one application, so it too should have one taskbar entry per instance - not one entry for 30+ separate instances. My position on this is consistent.

Re:Just leave me out of it (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223065)

Tab Groups though are a bit more organized than most OS features.
Have you tried it? (ctrl-shift-e in firefox)

Re:Just leave me out of it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223071)

To be fair, no one cares what you want or use. You are an insanely tiny and insignificant minority.

Re:Just leave me out of it roxy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223351)

Tabs are now!
Just imagine this, friends, Firefox Social Networking Tabs!
Make a tab, add your friends, contacts, etc.
Different tabs for family, co-workers, hobby groups.
Totally decentralized, full privacy by default and always under your control.
No information about you can be sold or stolen.
Firefox will be cool again!
Now the geeks can have a massive IPO of their own!
Don't just dream it, make it happen!

About time... (1)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222943)

Its about time that FireFox 13 gets the features of Chrome 21. Also congrats to Microsoft for finally hitting double digits with IE 10.

Any browser not in double digit version numbers is not trying hard enough, I am talking to you Safari 5, pfft!

Re:About time... (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223665)

Awww. I'm using Mozilla Seamonkey 2.1..... (whimpers)

Weekly posting on FF release (1, Insightful)

houghi (78078) | more than 2 years ago | (#40222961)

Seriously? Is each and every new version being posted on /.?
Perhaps every 10 versions would be interesting. Every one? Not so much.

FUCK (2, Insightful)

paramour (110003) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223081)

Fuck Mozilla's fucking releases every fucking other fucking week. Want me to pay attention to a new release? then don't bombard me with requests to update, or call versions barely worth an increment to the patch level a fucking release. Buy a clue and stop ruining what was a pretty decent browser. As ColdWetDog already joked, only for real, you're actually making IE look good again. The level of fuckitude necessary to reach that level of fuckedupness is almost unfuckingbeliveable.

Short version: slower version of Chrome (2)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223143)

So, in other words, it's like Chrome, but slower?

When they started breaking forms on various sites web pages, we started switching.

I'm 10 Versions Behind Using Firefox 3.6.28 (0)

Ron Bennett (14590) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223163)

I'm running Firefox 3.6.28 with no significant issues. Sure javascript is sluggish, which new versions address, and lacks some of the latest technical stuff, but so far not a showstopper - all the sites I regularly use work fine.

Re:I'm 10 Versions Behind Using Firefox 3.6.28 (2, Insightful)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223353)

If you are fine with 40+ security vulnerabilities with it!

Remember Firefox is the only modern browser with no sanboxing still either. Seriously even IE 9 is better than 3.6 as it is old. There is ESR extended support for corporations which is based off of FF 10 and is much slimmer and gets regular security updates. I left Firefox after 4 and use Chrome and IE 9, but I have to say FF 12 is very slim, and very light even compred to FF 3.6.

Can't please everyone (3, Insightful)

ubergeek65536 (862868) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223171)

Speed dial is one of the first things I disabled when I tried Opera. Now I need to get rid of it in Firefox too.

Dear Mozilla (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223189)

Please fix all the garbage you put in that utterly breaks any ExtJS sites rendered in FF. This has been broken since FF 10.

FF is getting good again (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223197)

Kudos to Mozilla!

I am still not using it, but I opened FF 12 up and was shocked it used so little memory compared to IE 9 and Chrome. It was smooth, fast, and less buggy than in previous versions.

Before I switch I need to know if the following are fixed
1. Sandbox support
2. Mozilla update breaks permanently after Windows Restore

I fear webmasters will be dealing with Firefox 12, 13, and other obsolete versions many many years from now as anyone who has done a Windows Restore Point will have Mozilla update disabled and wont even know it. Security it scares the crap out of me to run flash unsandoxed with full control over my own computer. I know IE gets bashed a lot here, but Firefox is the weaklink in security for the past year or two as both other browsers are sandboxed and Chrome even has an additional sanbox for flash with its pepper API.

Fix those 2 things I and I may use Firefox again.

Extended Support Release. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223233)

This rapid development and deployment of flavor-of-the-month changes or borrowed features just drives me nuts. I switched to the "Corporate" line of Extended Support Release a while ago, and I don't feel I'm missing anything by holding steady at 10.0.X for the foreseeable future.

Maybe if enough folks switch, the Mozilla folks will notice that there's a demand for a slower, "stable" line of development, instead of perpetually pumping out SOMETHING NEW for the sake of being NEW AND EXCITING!!!

Nah, they'll probably just institute some hoops to jump through to make it hard for non-corporate use of the ESR...

Keywords! (1)

cyberchondriac (456626) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223241)

The one thing I hope they included was the ability to assign a keyword to a bookmark when you make it. I love the keyword feature, but you have to create the bookmark first, then go hunt it down, open it's properties, and then assign the keyword. There used to be an extension for that but it hasn't been compatible in like, forever.

Questioning (2)

fluffythedestroyer (2586259) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223321)

On their site (Mozilla Dev Center), one of the reasoning which is #3 states :"qualified by QA as being of sufficient quality to release to hundreds of millions of people". I don't think they include wanting feature in their list of quality when QA people test it. If so, we would see way less firefox release and more testing. I would vote for the latter.

Happily using 10 ESR (1)

caseih (160668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223399)

And in the meantime I'm quite happily using the ESR version of Firefox with no plans to ever use the fly-by-night version. That said, version 10ESR is quite a bit slower than 3.6, the last ESR. Progress for you.

Re:Happily using 10 ESR (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223627)

It is hell of alot faster to me than FF 3.6.

How much ram do you have? I have 8 gigs and maybe that is the difference. FF 12 uses less ram than Chrome and IE 9 when I have 30 tabs open. I still use Chrome for other reasons but for me at least it seems Firefox is improving.

CSS3 background-position (1)

partsbs (2655493) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223407)

From the most interesting to developers: according to the CSS3 Backgrounds and Borders module now it is possible to specify an exact space of background-position not only from the left top corner.
For example:
background-position: right 20px bottom 15px;
Such record is already supported by Opera browsers, since version 10.5, and Internet Explorer 9. On turn browsers on the basis of Webkit.

Who cares lmao firefox sux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223587)

firefox sucks, IE sucks, Oprera sucks, Chrome sucks but only because of the tracking crap that comes with it.

SRWare Iron FTW.

Who cares lmao firefox sux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40223663)

SrWare Iron= Chrome without the tracking bs.

Nice, but they broke live bookmarks. :( (1)

dskoll (99328) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223611)

Live bookmarks no longer show favicons for bookmarked sites, and "Open All in Tabs" no longer seems to work.

/me is sad... [mozilla.org]

How to disable the newtab page (5, Informative)

Golden_Rider (137548) | more than 2 years ago | (#40223625)

First thing I did was to look for an option to disable the "Newtab page" (the feature that Firefox shows you your most used websites including little pictures of them whenever you open a new tab). Seems the Firefox devs decided that this is such an important function that there is no option to disable it in the settings dialogue, or at least I could not find one. But you can disable it via about:config and then setting "browser.newtabpage.enabled" to "false". Guess that is handy if you do NOT want your boss/colleagues to find out about your "hotponysex" fetish whenever you want to open a harmless Intranet page while somebody standing next to you.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...