Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox Release 89.0

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 487 posts

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#361

Post by acqq »

n3k5 wrote: post #340
acqq wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After I move the mouse over the back "button" at first nothing happens, it's surely nothing happening "as soon as the pointer" enters the area. Then after some delay, the "area" of the button is shown, but not inclunding the newly "empty" space, which you claim is clickable. But what is highlighted starts to the right. If my mouse is already close to the edge, it visually signals that it's not over the button, that i…

Hmm, it seems like what I've observed (I only tried MacOS so far) is what's supposed to happen, and what you got is bugged; hopefully they'll fix that soon. In the case when the button does light up the instant it becomes clickable, I don't get the perception of ‘I've moved the mouse too far’ — instead, it's easier to see why the highlight isn't bigger: I don't just get a “hint of the area I can target”, I see exactl…

That was a long text claiming the opposite of what is clearly visible and repeatable:

https://postimg.cc/ThCLM7mK

The button area is visible as soon as one hovers with the mouse over the button.

Above: when the new code is turned on.

Below: when the new code is turned off.

The problem is: the area covered on hover should match the clickable area. If left of the button can't be clicked, the button is wrongly positioned. If it is intentionally bigger, the visual feedback should match it. The new code doesn't do that.

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#363

Post by wodenokoto »

kbenson wrote: post #307
myfonj wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find Page Info (Ctrl+I, [1]) dialogue pretty useful: especially list of all loaded media and information presented in Security tab is something that you could dig in devtools quite cumbersomely or not at all. [1] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-page-info-windo...

You can get to the security tab of it by clicking the lock to the left of the URL, the right caret in the popup menu, and then clicking more info, in case you wanted another way.

Not on 89 on macOS at least ...

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#364

Post by karmakaze »

Don't like how the inactive tabs are 'connected' to the window plane and the active tab is an island.

The scrolling feels smoother and slower. Maybe it's updates in general, even switching between already rendered tabs appears a bit slower. OTOH, maybe it's always been this way since I updated to Big Sur but didn't pay attention. No it's certainly slower, even as I'm typing this comment the cursor is lagging behind trying to show characters. This is the worst FF update that I ever recall.

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#365

Post by ksec »

geenew wrote: post #316
ncann wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same, I definitely don't like the new tabs with no border around them.

I agree, inactive tabs need to have a border around them. At the same time I like how the tab bar is separated from the address/bookmark bar. Makes it much easier to identify the active tab.

I am not too sure with border. Especially when you have on mouse over the Tab are floated out with different colour.

Especially when you have dozens of tabs, the current style make it cleaner.

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#367

Post by gary_0 »

myfonj wrote: post #293
sharps1 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can’t remember the last time I used ‘View Page Info’, I usually just bring up the dev tools and click the mouse icon to get to the area I want to see.

I find Page Info (Ctrl+I, [1]) dialogue pretty useful: especially list of all loaded media and information presented in Security tab is something that you could dig in devtools quite cumbersomely or not at all. [1] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/firefox-page-info-windo...

I wish you could enable/disable JavaScript from that dialog.

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#368

Post by gary_0 »

dralley wrote: post #121
aschampion wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UX community seems to value rather than avoid breaking changes, and it's infuriating. Novelty and surprise are rarely usability virtues.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." I guess it's unsurprising that UX designers would want to continue having work to do.

It's the "broken window fallacy", only they get to break the digital windows of millions of people all over the world instantly.

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#369

Post by conradfr »

mrweasel wrote: post #329
duped wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm wrong, but the difference is about 2 pixels on Linux.

Okay, I was way of. The tabs just seem much bigger, but if it's only two pixels I won't complain again.

12px on my Windows 7 computer.

https://i.imgur.com/yb6t2tX.png

Re: Firefox Release 89.0

#370

Post by jamienicol »

earth_walker wrote: post #290
matsemann wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why does the UI change with every single Firefox release? It doesn't. Maybe small parts of it get tweaks here and there. But your argument about having to re-adjust every update is just dishonest.

I disagree. These small unnecessary tweaks can really disrupt regular users' workflows. For example, they just changed "Undo close tab" to "Reopen closed tab". Not only is it difficult to justify how this is clearer (any casual computer user should be familiar with the concept of 'undo'), but for a regular user: - There's a period where you have to adjust, scanning for the correct menu entry each time; - This change…

> Imagine if your editor changed its key bindings, or renamed features with each minor update?

I honestly wish my editor did. Emacs very deliberately does not do such things, and the result is a complete mess of weird keybindings, and many duplicated commands and modes which are just slightly different to each other. It's so scared of disrupting an existing user's workflow that the product as a whole definitely suffers.

Post reply on HN