Beta
×

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 29: Redesign

Soulskill posted about 5 months ago | from the take-cover,-mozilla dept.

Firefox 688

An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla today officially launched Firefox 29 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. This is a massive release: Firefox Sync has been revamped and is now powered by Firefox Accounts, there's a new customization mode, and the company's major user interface overhaul Australis has finally arrived. 'The tabs are sleek and smooth to help you navigate the Web faster. It’s easy to see what tab you’re currently visiting and the other tabs fade into the background to be less of a distraction when you’re not using them. The Firefox menu has moved to the right corner of the toolbar and puts all your browser controls in one place. The menu includes a “Customize” tool that transforms Firefox into a powerful customization mode where you can add or move any feature, service or add-on.' Here are the full release notes and a demo video."

cancel ×

688 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

more downgrades (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869461)

Firefox becomes less usable and less configurable with each release. Might as well use Chrome at this point, it's virtually indistinguishable.

did you checked the video? (3, Informative)

JcMorin (930466) | about 5 months ago | (#46869549)

According to the video you can select the icons and menus you want to display in the toolbar... that include all the addons/plugins/extensions too. What customization has been dropped?

All lies (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869623)

These: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?p=13350353&sid=cee01d7621130bd32543a5154b4419c9#p13350353

Re:did you checked the video? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869647)

According to the video you can select the icons and menus you want to display in the toolbar... that include all the addons/plugins/extensions too. What customization has been dropped?

How about a status bar? :)

Seriously, UX folks, just stop.

Your profession's insistence on itself has destroyed Digg, Flickr, Yahoo's message boards, Yahoo's email interface, Slashdot, Firefox, GNOME, and even Windows 8.

Your profession is a cancer upon this industry worse than marketing.

Re:did you checked the video? (5, Funny)

znrt (2424692) | about 5 months ago | (#46869753)

you're just not ready for a future dominated by retards.
but resistance is futile. you will be UXed.

Re:did you checked the video? (0)

Blaskowicz (634489) | about 5 months ago | (#46869777)

I actually love the lack of status bar. I can see more of the page. It has allowed me to see more of the page while still spending vertical space on a title bar, menu bar and the desktop environment's panels. When hovering hover a link, the target is still displayed on the bottom, mimicking the way it looked when it displayed in the status bar. It's perfect except in fringe cases (a javascript IRC client where the pseudo status bar pop-up thing would display over the input area, masking it)

Re:did you checked the video? (4, Insightful)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 5 months ago | (#46869927)

Can't wait for Cinnafox and FireMate forks! Why do design guys always want to follow everyone else? For a while, everyone made a car that looked like a Honda. And that helped Honda. Suddenly these new cars come out that do not look like Honda and they do very well. Now it is Follow the Chrome. Guess what? If people want a browser to look like Chrome, they will download... (Wait for it) Fucking Chrome! This UI fascination with playing "Hide the Menus" is not appreciated. And much like the infamous "Hide the print button" Microsoft played with the original Office ribbon, guess what is back?

Re:did you checked the video? (4, Informative)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 5 months ago | (#46869751)

According to the video you can select the icons and menus you want to display in the toolbar... that include all the addons/plugins/extensions too. What customization has been dropped?

The video is deliberately misleading and the claim of "a powerful customization mode where you can add or move any feature" is a complete lie.

A few examples:

Tabs On Top -- No thanks, I want my tabs below the URL bar, where God intended them to be. First, they removed the menu item a while back. No problem, I can just go into about:config and change it. But just removing the menu item and burying the setting in about:config isn't enough. With Australis, even if you go into about:config and change the setting, it does nothing. Firefox says: Fuck You. You're getting Tabs On Top whether you like it or not.

There are only 2 toolbars - Menu bar and Bookmarks toolbar. No more Add-On Bar, which means the Status Bar Extension doesn't work because there's no place to put it. Firefox says: You want a Status Bar? Fuck You. Sure there's probably some hidden fiddling you can do to work around the problem, but that just proves my point -- A user should not have to spend copious amounts of effort just to restore the standard and expected UI.

In Australis the Back and Forward buttons are now glued to the URL Bar, so you can't arrange your buttons any way you like. The Reload Button has been replaced with a swirly arrow that is glued to the far right side of the URL Bar and can't be moved, and the Stop Button is gone completely. Want text labels with your buttons? Firefox says: Fuck you.

There's a lot more, but I give up. If I wanted a browser with a lousy UI that can't be changed, I would use Internet Explorer or Chrome.

Just as I feared -- Firefox has joined the growing list of applications that can never be updated because the new version sucks.

Re:did you checked the video? (5, Informative)

compro01 (777531) | about 5 months ago | (#46869989)

You might like the Classic Theme Restorer [mozilla.org] addon. Tabs back down, multiple bars, back/forward separated and arbitrarily movable, reload next to them, addon bar back at the bottom, and text labels on everything.

Re:more downgrades (1)

Cenan (1892902) | about 5 months ago | (#46869591)

I would, if Chrome supported a NoScript type plugin.

Re:more downgrades (2)

gstoddart (321705) | about 5 months ago | (#46869639)

Well, it's called ScriptSafe, and I'm running it right now.

It certainly does exist.

Re:more downgrades (5, Insightful)

jfengel (409917) | about 5 months ago | (#46869755)

I run with NoScript on Firefox, and unfortunately I'm finding more and more web sites are unusable without Javascript enabled not just for them (and the cloud provider, who could be serving up god-knows-what) but for zillions of "partners". I don't know what those partners are providing, either: probably mostly ancillary crap but the page won't render until it's downloaded.

I keep a NoScripted Firefox for any time I'm visiting web sites that I don't know beforehand; if they don't render then I don't need it that badly. But on my work computers, where I'm browsing only sites that I have reason to believe have things I need and aren't too terribly likely to be hijacked, I've found I just had to turn NoScript off.

That sucks, because the fact is that the vast majority of sites do shit with Javascript that the site would be just plain better off without. I don't object to their need to earn a living by feeding me ads, which is why I don't run with an ad blocker, but Javascript is very easy to abuse, and too many of them create abusive design.

Re:more downgrades (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869953)

Have you tried Request Policy? It complements NoScript in a very useful way: giving fine-grained control over what 3rd-party sites can be accessed by a particular site's pages. This affects regular embedded images, included scripts, etc.

The end result is that you can fine-tune the permissions if you want. Allow that annoying partner site from one site you really want to see, without accidentally enabling it for all other sites you might visit some day.

But I agree the web is getting worse. Rather than spelling an end to NoScript or Request Policy, I think it may spell the end of general web browsing for me. If they refuse to show me a useful and usable site on my terms, I refuse to visit them. Frankly, as I cross into my 40s, I realize that much of what we consume on the web is just as unhealthy as junk food, and I feel better for not stuffing it into my body.

Re:more downgrades (4, Informative)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 5 months ago | (#46869837)

I would, if Chrome supported a NoScript type plugin.

Actually Chrome allows you to selectively disable Javascript by domain. Chrome's only good feature and a feature that I wish Firefox would copy.

NoScript blocks all Javascript by default and forces you to manually whitelist everything. Unfortunately, that's now the exact opposite of what we need. NoScript was created back in the old days when you could completely disable Javascript and most websites would still mostly work. Now, more and more sites won't load at all -- you literally get a blank page -- without Javascript.

Re:more downgrades (3, Informative)

ChronoReverse (858838) | about 5 months ago | (#46869905)

There's a called YesScript that lets you do that in Firefox. Extensions is still the reason why I use Firefox/Pale Moon.

If you don't like Australis, there's an extension to make Firefox look like classic. If you think the Australis buttons are too large (like me) then you can install an extension to make them smaller.

Re:more downgrades (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 5 months ago | (#46869635)

FireFox with the self-destructing cookies plugin is the first Android browser I've found with a cookie-management system that seems to be designed for users and not for advertisers. I tried one of the early versions of FireFox for Android and wasn't impressed, but the latest ones are very nice. I've now switched to using it as the default browser for my phone.

Re:more downgrades (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869687)

Firefox becomes less usable and less configurable with each release. Might as well use Chrome at this point, it's virtually indistinguishable.

So replace an uncustomizable piece of shit browser with another one ?
No thanks, I'll take Seamonkey or even old Opera pre 15.

Re:more downgrades (5, Insightful)

Arker (91948) | about 5 months ago | (#46869769)

"Firefox becomes less usable and less configurable with each release. "

True, and it not just configurability. It's been on a persistent and unshakeable course of deteriorating functionality and usability for years. Even sticking to the long-term releases and avoiding the newest breakage it's still awful and obviously only getting worse. I think there is a real need for a fork of firefox and a sane team to maintain it, and I would be happy to contribute to some form of crowdfunding to bring it about, but...

"Might as well use Chrome at this point, it's virtually indistinguishable."

Sorry, I still think you are off-base here. As horrid as Firefox has become, it still has a ways to go before it can compete with Chrome for worst browser. It still uses the file system more-or-less correctly, and it's still possible (with extensions, at least) to disable javascript properly.

Firefox is horrible but it's still the best general purpose browser available, that's what makes the whole situation so horrific. If there were any other browser that were better I would be happy to switch, but these days it seems they all aspire to become adware just like chrome.

Re:more downgrades (4, Informative)

StarFace (13336) | about 5 months ago | (#46869931)

Have a look at SeaMonkey. It is the way Firefox used to be before it all started to go to shit when Chrome came out. It is as far as I know, the last real browser being maintained, since Opera died.

You get extension compatibility with FF, too.

Re:more downgrades (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869799)

It doesn't respect the "tabsontop" boolean anymore, and the addon bar at the bottom has been deleted. I can't even add the addon bar back using the customization settings.

Is it going to break the API? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869473)

Ah, the days of having to wait weeks to upgrade until my addons did.

Re:Is it going to break the API? (1)

Mumford (5197) | about 5 months ago | (#46869677)

I'm not a fan of the new firefox UI, but

> Ah, the days of having to wait weeks to upgrade until my addons did.

This, along with the standard "Firefox uses too much memory", have not been even slightly relevant for years now. Firefox solved those particular issues, thanks mainly due to competition from Chrome.

Re:Is it going to break the API? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869733)

"Firefox uses too much memory",

FF uses MORE memory in comparison to Chrome when profiling on OSX x64 and Windows 7 x64. The memory footprint rises faster in FF than Chrome, on the mentioned platforms, indicating the sentiment still holds true.

Re:Is it going to break the API? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46870001)

No, chrome uses up to four times more memory than chrome with only a fraction of the tabs open

Re:Is it going to break the API? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 5 months ago | (#46869743)

This, along with the standard "Firefox uses too much memory", have not been even slightly relevant for years now. Firefox solved those particular issues, thanks mainly due to competition from Chrome.

Oh, when did Firefox (or Chome, or Safari) fix the issue of using too much memory?

In my experience, all three of them gradually grow over time, suck up more and more memory, and eventually need to be restarted to reset them back to something sane.

I hate to break it to you, but in my experience, this complaint has been more than slightly relevant for years now.

I currently have twice as many chrome.exe processes running as I do open tabs, and closing tabs doesn't always seem to free memory.

Firefox gets bigger when it's sitting idle, as does Safari, as does Chrome.

So I have no idea of what you're basing this notion that they don't consume too much memory comes from. Because it sure as heck doesn't match what I see.

Re:Is it going to break the API? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869915)

>Oh, when did Firefox (or Chome, or Safari) fix the issue of using too much memory?

Around the time that memory became $8 per fucking gigabyte, you fucking tool.

Re:Is it going to break the API? (1)

gerf (532474) | about 5 months ago | (#46869757)

They still break addons. Just look for Download Status Bar.

Wow Looks Just Like Chrome ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869481)

Maybe I'll just use Chrome instead.

Re:Wow Looks Just Like Chrome ... (1)

Control-Z (321144) | about 5 months ago | (#46869533)

Yeah if I wanted a browser with no conventional pull-down menus and no title bar I'd use Chrome.

Unless you change it (2)

sjbe (173966) | about 5 months ago | (#46869555)

Yeah if I wanted a browser with no conventional pull-down menus and no title bar I'd use Chrome.

So enable the pull downs and title bar. They're still there and still available. I'm using it that way now.

Re:Unless you change it (1)

Control-Z (321144) | about 5 months ago | (#46869707)

That's good to know, nice that's an option.

Re:Unless you change it (2)

dstyle5 (702493) | about 5 months ago | (#46869839)

Not a UI/UX designer so I have to ask, why have designers hidden these basic menus in most browsers these days? Is it because they want their browser to be "cleaner" by default? For me the 20 or so pixels that are saved by hiding the menu bar isn't worth the inconvenience of always having to turn these menus back on. I can't recall anyone I know mentioning how they hate the file menu and wish it were hidden by default on a PC.

Re:Unless you change it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869947)

I'd guess because they're a bit more informed regarding browser usage habits than you are and found that nobody fucking uses that shit.

Re:Unless you change it (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869979)

why have designers hidden these basic menus in most browsers these days?

Because HDTV ruined our computer monitors. They have no vertical space anymore.

as fast as Chrome? (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46869845)

is it anywhere near as fast as Chrome?

Firefox's bookmarks system is infinitely better than Chrome's "pile in the corner" system, but i am one of those that has 150+ tabs open at the same time on occasion and on my machine FF just can't handle that, only Chrome

I used to use Camino...**sigh**

Addon: Classic Theme Restorer (4, Informative)

V for Vendetta (1204898) | about 5 months ago | (#46869493)

For those that want the old GUI back: Classic Theme Restorer [mozilla.org] .

Re:Addon: Classic Theme Restorer (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869575)

I'm just about over it. Now I need something like 10 different add-ons and a shitload of about:config editing just to get it back to square one. Honestly, if firefox has made any improvements since the 3.x series, I don't know what they are. All I see is regressions. OK, maybe the security is better. That's one point for firefox, and 100 points against.

We need a new "phoenix" -- one that I can simply install and begin using, not one that I need to work for hours on before using.

Re:Addon: Classic Theme Restorer (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869809)

"if firefox has made any improvements since the 3.x series, I don't know what they are."
Like, pretty much anything that is not visible at first glance? Standards support, memory management, add-on handling, JavaScript performance, responsiveness, developer tools, networking, etc

Re:Addon: Classic Theme Restorer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869993)

You might be ready to try SeaMonkey now... for me, it is the sleek and lightweight browser that Firefox claimed to be.

Re:Addon: Classic Theme Restorer (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869657)

Why should I have to use an add-on to get the classic theme back? This should be an option out of the box!

Re:Addon: Classic Theme Restorer (1)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 5 months ago | (#46869893)

Why should I have to use an add-on to get the classic theme back? This should be an option out of the box!

Exactly right.

The bigger problem with the Classic Theme Restorer extension is that it only works with the default Firefox theme. Since the default Firefox them has sucked shit since sometime around version 4, it doesn't really solve most of the problems with the new Assholio version of Firefox.

Heresy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869667)

Change is progress. Art is functionality.

Fuck all human interface researchers with George Carlins proverbial Big Rubber Dick, then bring us The Shiny.

Re:Heresy! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869833)

Change is progress. Art is functionality.

From TFA:

Nightingale told TNW the single menu not only makes using Firefox simpler, but it actually brings the browser closer to a mobile UI, which helps the team develop the app across platforms.

There.

That's the real reason UX people have destroyed this industry. Mobile has been where the money is for the past couple of years. Develop the UX designed to be used by large-pawed morons, and backport to desktop.

It's why a grid of 10 icons and 2 blank spaces [tnwcdn.com] that can't be scanned as rapidly as a compact menu of text items is somehow "better".

UX people aren't trying to make the product easier to use. That's just a lie they tell themselves to make their own fucking jobs easier.

It's why websites where you used to hit PgDn or the spacebar to page through content no longer work - some UX fucktard has to put position:fixed into the CSS, so that -- remember, these are the same fucktards who told us we didn't need a status bar to save precious vertical space -- I can see a big static red bar saying "TIME Magazine" or a big black "NYTIMES!" logo. Meanwhile, what used to be a single keypress (PgDn or spacebar) is now "PgDn,Uparrow3x to make visible the part that's hiding under the fucking fixed-position-menu.

Fuck all human interface researchers with George Carlins proverbial Big Rubber Dick, then bring us The Shiny.

We went through this during the i18n/l10n wars. Indecipherable glyphs were better than UIs with words. No they weren't. They were cheaper to localize than UIs with word-based menus. Hence the fucking Ribbon.

This, but fuck the shiny too. The browser was done 5 years ago except for security enhancements and Javascript performance.

Re:Addon: Classic Theme Restorer (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 5 months ago | (#46869987)

sudo apt-mark hold firefox firefox-locale-en

that's my fix.

fuck you, firefox. your 'upgrades' have broken so much over time and costed me 'fix it back again, time' that I'm done with your upgrades.

I'll take my chances with security bugs; I prefer that problem to your endless 'change for change sake' attitude.

I value my plugins on FF and I will not risk losing any more time having to re-fix what you guys broke.

Whole Browser Crash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869497)

Big deal, yeah another version, where real issues aren't fixed. Remember when just one tab would crash and the rest of your tabs stayed open and the browser was "stable"? Now if Firefox doesn't like something the whole damn browser crashes based on the one tab that couldn't handle a webpage with something odd on it.

Re:Whole Browser Crash (1)

Blaskowicz (634489) | about 5 months ago | (#46869881)

Maybe you remember wrong? Partial crashes is a Chrome feature. I've always had total crashes with firefox (at least it lets me know instantly that something has crashed)
It was worse in old times as you would always lose the session, unless you installed an extension for that.

Don't care (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869513)

After "pushing out their CEO" for political / free speach reasons, I uninstalled FF. If that is what their board is capable of then who knows what crap they pull with their software.

Re:Don't care (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869613)

After "pushing out their CEO" for political / free speach reasons

Free speach [sic], you say? Obligatory xkcd [xkcd.com] . The CEO has a Constitution-enshrined right to say whatever he wants without fear of criminal prosecution, but Mozilla also has a right to boot him out of the company for it.

Re:Don't care (1)

Nutria (679911) | about 5 months ago | (#46869719)

No, actually, they don't. In CA labor law, it's illegal to fire someone for donating to a political cause.

Re:Don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869759)

Only directly firing him would have been illegal. Raising a scandal across the web and making life miserable for him until he resigns is perfectly fine and is what happened.

Re:Don't care (1)

Trailer Trash (60756) | about 5 months ago | (#46869823)

Only directly firing him would have been illegal. Raising a scandal across the web and making life miserable for him until he resigns is perfectly fine and is what happened.

If by "Perfectly fine" you mean "legal", then, yes. But "morally and ethically proper" is a different concept.

Calling your mother a whore and you a bastard might be legal, but it's not something polite people do.

Re:Don't care (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869951)

But "morally and ethically proper" is a different concept.

It has been a good while now that a significant percentage of the American public has supported ostracizing company heads for instances of racism. It looks like the tide is turning towards also taking a stand against those who refuse to affirm two people of the same sex expressing their love for one another through the same bond that straight couples have always had access to. At this point, suggesting that the campaign led against Eich is immoral or unethical, is a bit like impugning the civil rights struggle in the 1960s.

Re:Don't care (1)

TheCarp (96830) | about 5 months ago | (#46869981)

Sure its legal, but think of what you are asking for when you raise such a scandal. You are effectively saying "I want employers to ask their employees about, keep tabs on, and base promotional consideration on what personal campaign contributions they decide to make".

Is that REALLY the world you want to live in? Would you accept that you were denied a promotion because you donated your personal monies to a cause you believed in? If they asked you why you made the donation, would you even feel you should have to answer them?

This was all very childish. I think very poorly of the anti-marriage equality crowd but, that doesn't mean I want them to have to answer for their politial beliefs in the workplace any more than I want to have to answer for mine. Lets not forget how many times and places this very same stance could have been used against gay activits. How many people would have decided against an HRC donation if they worried about having to answer questions about it at work?

Re:Don't care (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869775)

Agreed. Here in the South, if you want to get up an speak in favor of Barak Hussein Obama or some liberal faggot cause, then you're perfectly free to do so. And we're also perfectly free to fire you from your job and refuse to do business with you for it. THAT'S the kind of free speech we like down here.

Glad to finally see support from so many liberals for our right to do this. Thanks, queers!

Re:Don't care (1, Insightful)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 5 months ago | (#46869917)

After "pushing out their CEO" for political / free speach reasons

Free speach [sic], you say? Obligatory xkcd [xkcd.com] . The CEO has a Constitution-enshrined right to say whatever he wants without fear of criminal prosecution, but Mozilla also has a right to boot him out of the company for it.

When you can have your ability to earn a living taken away from you, even though you have done nothing that violates any law, then you have effectively created a society where there is no free speech.

Re:Don't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869649)

What a silly reason.

This kind of protest works when you're a paying customer, which I bet, you're not.

Re:Don't care (1)

Nutria (679911) | about 5 months ago | (#46869679)

So what pure-as-the-driven-snow browser did you install? Epiphany? Links2? Konq?

Hear hear (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869701)

Nearly lifelong firefox user.and I dropped it after that.

Is it going to notify me to the proper authorities if I go to a non-politically approved website next?

Still has a nasty bug on Private Browsing (1)

opusbuddy (164089) | about 5 months ago | (#46869517)

Since 28, if you open a Private Browsing window, no problem, but go to a bookmark and it switches screens back to the normal browsing mode!

Re:Still has a nasty bug on Private Browsing (1)

fermion (181285) | about 5 months ago | (#46869593)

I don't understand. Where is the privacy if you bookmark? Is the idea to not save cookies? I use a plugin to automatically reject all cookies. Privacy mode does not prevent suites from tacking you movement and IP.

That's not how it should ebhave (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869661)

That may be a bug or a malfunctioning/misbehaving add-on: try standard diagnostics: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Standard_diagnostic_-_Firefox

It sucks (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869525)

I hate the redesign, and spent far too long this morning dicking around with my browser. As an english reading individual, putting the main menu in the upper right corner feels stupid and non-natural. In general, the changes are too abrupt for my liking. It also COMPLETELY resets any customizing of your UI that you did in the past so you have to start from scratch again.

Thankfully, you can find an add-on called Classic Theme Restorer. Feels a little bit different, but it's close to what I had before.

On the heels of MS IE Exploit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869529)

How Friggin Convenient for mozilla.. This maketh me more suspicious this giant Firefox release coming on the second known day of IE 6-11 exploit.

no no no. (1)

jythie (914043) | about 5 months ago | (#46869539)

All,... I,.... want,.... is,.... an,.... expletive,.... web,.... browser!

Seriously, I just want to access web pages, I want to think about the browser itself as little as possible.

Popcorn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869565)

It's going to be an entertaining evening watching slashdot frothing at the mouth about anything that has changed in Firefox.

More of the same. YaAaawn

No combined address/search bar? (1)

rolfwind (528248) | about 5 months ago | (#46869567)

Then I'm not interested. Seriously, chrome has gotten me way to lazy in this regard. And FF has frustrated me on this since (and yes, I know there is an add-on).

Re:No combined address/search bar? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869607)

Combined address and search is a terrible idea that should have been taken out behind the woodshed and shot years ago. Search in the address bar is like making DNS cache poisoning a browser feature.

It has a combined address/search bar (4, Informative)

sjbe (173966) | about 5 months ago | (#46869615)

You can search in the address bar. I do it all the time. No special add-ons needed either. It will search your default search engine very similar to Chrome. Why they have an additional search bar I don't really know. I never use it because I don't need to.

Re:It has a combined address/search bar (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869791)

I disabled the search in address bar because of typos are then searched. I don't want that. If i need to search something, i use the searchbar in which i can also easily choose the search engine.

Re:It has a combined address/search bar (5, Interesting)

_bug_ (112702) | about 5 months ago | (#46869813)

Type a single-word search query into the address bar in Firefox. Instead of searching for the word right away the browser attempts a DNS lookup. With the search bar that DNS lookup step is removed. For the more privacy-conscious this is an important thing. Especially if you've got an ISP that redirects a failed DNS response to their own search engine.

Re:It has a combined address/search bar (2)

shabble (90296) | about 5 months ago | (#46869961)

You can search in the address bar.

Sorta - if your favorite/memory-muscle way of searching for stuff on websites is specifying the website first, then I'm fairly certain that searching for (e.g.) site:slashdot.org firefox will not give you what you'd get in the search bar in 29 - I'm seem to recall getting bitten by it in 29 way back when I couldn't figure out how to get the search bar to be visible (reset the UI was the solution) - it's certainly still broken in 31.

Re:No combined address/search bar? (1)

vux984 (928602) | about 5 months ago | (#46869709)

Then I'm not interested. Seriously, chrome has gotten me way to lazy in this regard.

Maybe not all of us want every single thing we type into the address bar sent to google or bing?

Re:No combined address/search bar? (1)

koan (80826) | about 5 months ago | (#46869939)

I agree, how about a different approach... let the *user* choose, frankly I'm tired of having software ducks making my UI choices for me.

Re:No combined address/search bar? (1)

RJFerret (1279530) | about 5 months ago | (#46869765)

Heck no, why do you think Chrome is avoided?

No sympathy for complainers, especially those who are aware there are add-ons that do what they want, but invest energy in a complaint rather than having their customizable tools perform how they desire. That's not being lazy, that's being obstinate. Lazy is not capitalizing "Chrome" or including all the letters in the word "too". One would imagine you, of all people, would know the difference! ;-)

SubjectsInCommentsAreStupid (2)

lesincompetent (2836253) | about 5 months ago | (#46869609)

FF (as well as JavaScript, that shit) needs heavier multi-process and multi-threading in this day and age of multicore, multithreaded CPUs.
I switched to chromium just for that. FF just feels much more ponderous.

Re:SubjectsInCommentsAreStupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869749)

Multi-threading is implemented for several things, multi-process Firefox is under construction:
http://billmccloskey.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/multiprocess-firefox/
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis

No, just NO. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869665)

Stop redecorating my desktop. If I wanted a browser that looks like Chrome, I would install Chrome. If I wanted a browser that looks like it's meant to be used on a touch screen (just where did that menu of icons come from...), I would use a tablet. This is my NON-TOUCH DESKTOP you're ruining.

Why does everybody seem hellbent on killing the traditional desktop? Are you bored? Running out of bugs to fix?

Stop moving things around! Every time you do that, I lose something that I've become accustomed to for no good reason at all. That's like moving a table a couple of inches, making me bump into it for a couple weeks, and then you change it some more. Or changing the height of the stair steps. Don't do that. It's at best irritating.

I am seriously fed up with this shit.

woo (5, Insightful)

vux984 (928602) | about 5 months ago | (#46869675)

The tabs are sleek and smooth to help you navigate the Web faster.

Well that's a fucking relief. I've been slogging awa with these slightly squarer tabs for months and my productivity has been in the toilet as a result.

Seriously, do they have any actual metrics that the new tabs actually help anyone "navigate the web faster" ?

Itâ(TM)s easy to see what tab youâ(TM)re currently visiting

It was already easy.

and the other tabs fade into the background to be less of a distraction when youâ(TM)re not using them.

Tweaking the relative brightness between current and other tabs hardly counts as revolutionary. I'm indifferent at best.

The Firefox menu has moved to the right corner of the toolbar and puts all your browser controls in one place.

I get how this different, but how is this, in any way 'better'?

I can't wait for this to get into cars. Who doesn't want a perfectly empty dashboard with all the controls crammed into the right corner.

In all seriousness, whoop-dee-doo so they moved the top left menu to the top right, but now its got that newish 3 bar icon which has come to mean "we stuck the menu here".

I guess people who heretofore have only ever used a twitter app will will finally be able to find the firefox menu that had been eluding them, hidden away in the top left.

The menu includes a âoeCustomizeâ tool that transforms Firefox into a powerful customization mode where you can add or move any feature, service or add-on.'

All it needs is to say "Don't Panic!" in large friendly letters.

Re:woo (5, Funny)

koan (80826) | about 5 months ago | (#46869929)

Rounded tabs help you get through the Internet tubes faster.

tabs on bottom have been removed (1)

postmortem (906676) | about 5 months ago | (#46869703)

Well agenda to force tabs on top (next to title bar) upon all users has won... you no longer even have option to move them between address bar and web content. Last few versions had at least configuration option buried in about:config. Maybe not a big deal, but to me it requires more mouse movement from content to tab switching - which is opposite of what good UI design is.

Forcing bad UI to users : how did it work for Microsoft, Mozilla?

Re:tabs on bottom have been removed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869829)

Me too. "tabs.onTop" option in about:config doesn't work anymore. I had to install https://addons.mozilla.org/es/firefox/addon/classicthemerestorer/?src=api

Re:tabs on bottom have been removed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869921)

thanks for the heads up. i'm really tired of seeing how firefox turns into a big piece of shit and doesn't even give you the option to stick to what you know and like. you want to disable javascript easily? then install an add-on because we feel like you are too stupid to know what you want. you want the same look and feel you had in previous versions? there is an add-on for that too. now if you upgrade you need a ton add-ons to have the same features and look and feel you had in the prvious version, whats the point in upgrading then? i always stick to the oldest possible version, in one workstation i had firefox version 2 until a few weeks ago. now i got upgraded to version 10 and i'll stay using it until i have no other option than to upgrade, but it works fine for now. it's like when we had to upgrade to kde4, do not want..

Re:tabs on bottom have been removed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46870005)

You want the Classic Theme Restorer [mozilla.org] add-on. It puts Firefox back to close to the old way, including tabs below.

OCSP FTL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869705)

Firefox is the only browser checking OCSP by defaults. Bad for performance, and doesn't solve any security problems.

Use Pale Moon instead. (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869721)

It's a fork of FF engine with the older interface (from around version 26 I believe).

Re:Use Pale Moon instead. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869855)

Pale Moon uses code from Firefox ESR, which is currently version 24. Either way, it's a great way to escape Australis. Switched in November 2012, and never looked back.

Re:Use Pale Moon instead. (1)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 5 months ago | (#46869977)

It's a fork of FF engine with the older interface (from around version 26 I believe).

I think Palemoon is based on version 24 which is the latest Extended Service Release, and he is selectively patching in bug fixes and security updates but leaving out the big UI changes. I've been using it for a couple of months now and it works fine.

Another Firefox redesign... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869779)

And Seamonkey just keeps looking better every day.

Re:Another Firefox redesign... (1)

koan (80826) | about 5 months ago | (#46869909)

Which is why comments are disabled on the video *smirk*

UX idiots... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869821)

"the other tabs fade into the background to be less of a distraction"

Sure, I'm just SO 'distracted' by those damn tabs... Fucking idiots. I'm sick of GREY text and GREYING out shit all over the place, because some braindead, sheep-like asshole of a 'designer' thinks that being able to actually SEE everything on the screen properly is 'distracting'. Morons.

Thanks. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869825)

Hmm... so after years of hard work the Mozilla Foundation makes me want to use IE, regardless of the current issues. I mean if I WANTED chrome, I would use it.... but I DONT!

Re:Thanks. (1)

koan (80826) | about 5 months ago | (#46869901)

Yep, I agree with the idea that Chrome sucks because of its "simple" (lack of user control) interface.

Bookmark buttons a bad UI change (1)

_bug_ (112702) | about 5 months ago | (#46869843)

The button to quickly bookmark a page, and the button to pull up your list of bookmarks, are now paired together. This is not a good UI design choice. Now when I try to pull up my bookmarks I'm bookmarking pages and vice versa. I wish they were separate. I also wish that the button to bookmark a page was back in the address bar where its position provided better context.

If I wanted a Chrome interface, I'd use Chrome (2)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 5 months ago | (#46869853)

I haven't gotten this update yet but it looks like they turned the user interface into a Chrome rip-off.

I am going to be very upset if all of my userChrome customization work breaks as a result of this. I don't want tabs; I want traditional Windows-style menus, not an all-in-one dropdown; I want the toolbar (including Back and Forward buttons) on its own line. A couple of releases ago I had to add some extra userChrome lines so it wouldn't show 1 useless tab, because they removed the setting for that. And now these genius "UI designers" are screwing everything up again.

Dammit, just leave it alone. I hate UI designers. They break everything they touch.

So much effort... (5, Insightful)

koan (80826) | about 5 months ago | (#46869883)

Yet not one "feature" gives me what I really want, the ability to leave my UI the same while upgrading all the "under the hood features" and security fixes.

Great, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869899)

And the first thing i find after using firefox again in 3 years absence: A new Interface bug that doesn't let me move the window on OSX once i drag the FF window below the screen center (cropping the window in the process as the lower half is out of view), the mouse pointer immediately goes whack when i try to click the title bar to drag the window around. really? this is what you call release quality?

firefox gets worse every release (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 5 months ago | (#46869941)

They should hardcode the [not responding] in the titlebar. It would save everybody's time.

What is this fucking shit?!? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46869967)

You god-damn arrogant sons of bitches have fucked me for the last time! I do not want my fucking tab bar above my address bar. I do not want you to break my themes and extensions without warning! Why did you make a fucking configurable browser only to break the fucking user-configuration during upgrade? Was it too much trouble to put in a "Hey, if you choose to upgrade, we are going to totally wreck your shit. Hope you didn't like any of your custom changes, because that's all going away. Kthxbye!"

I also do not want my whole setup to be completely fucked when I downgrade this sorry piece of shit back to v28 (WHY ARE THERE 28 FUCKING VERSIONS???) I could spend the rest of my morning trying to fix the hash you made of my v28 or I could spend the rest of my day trying to fix the shitstorm you've conjured up in v29, but why should I fucking bother? I'm sure I'll just be doing it again in v42 next month. Fuck you, Firefox!!! You've sucked ass on Linux for years, and I am through!

I still use Firefox...on a Mac, occasionally (2)

BLToday (1777712) | about 5 months ago | (#46869997)

I still use Firefox...on a Mac, occasionally. Actually, I don't use it but my wife does once in awhile. Her work requires either IE or Firefox. I miss the original Firefox philosophy: speed, stability, and security. OK, Firefox was never that stable (always leaking memory) and rarely the fastest. But it generally worked well and did the job.

It autoplays videos at random! (-1, Troll)

greenwow (3635575) | about 5 months ago | (#46870003)

Seriously, fuck the Republicans that have taken over Mozilla. They hate gays, and apparently they also hate their users. Shoving random videos down our throats shows they have no respect for us. It also sucks that their kind always takes advantage of minority children. Fuck them for exploiting an African American child in this way.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>