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

Firefox 29

firefox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 517 posts

Re: Firefox 29

#401

Post by nailer »

chc wrote: post #392
nailer wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I'm baffled. There seems to be a recent trend where non controversial things: - the documentation and character support issues can be 'bugs' - defaults that fit most users are good - reminding someone being personal of the HN guidelines ...get moderated up, then down to -3 or -4, then back up to 1 again.

I think it's that your response sounded like a lazy dismissal. Reasonable defaults are good, yes. That's pretty uncontroversial. But nobody has established that Firefox's behavior is less reasonable than the alternative — for example, the comment you were replying to noted that both approaches have their fans — so your out-of-hand rejection on behalf of "users-on-street" sounded imperious.

The only reason I didn't question the behaviour is that the parent didn't either: they just mentioned that most users could customise. Which, as mentioned, they wouldn't want to do.

Noticing the folk in the conversation there's lots of newish accounts, and some are replying before they've actually read what they're replying to. Downmods for 'I disagree' are more popular now as well.

Re: Firefox 29

#402

Post by Gracana »

lurkinggrue wrote: post #396
Gracana wrote: post #43

Hmm, I think the separators between tabs in the new tab bar are too subtle, and overall it is too dark. The curved appearance of the selected tab also seems out of place. edit: also, transparent elements with text on them? Noo! Maybe I am just sensitive.. I don't have the best eyesight, and I don't have the best monitors. In any case, I am thankful for Classic Theme Restorer, which someone mentioned elsewhere in this…

What I find weird about the design is the idea of "Getting the other tabs out of the way" idea. I don't care about the selected tab as I can see what page it it. When I go looking for another tab to go to they make it harder to read! The hell?

That's a very good point. I wonder if that design decision came from user studies, and if so I wonder if the study was flawed, because I can't identify with that need at all.

Re: Firefox 29

#403

Post by User7198 »

dilap wrote: post #63

I love Firefox -- for what it's done, what it represents, and what it helps guard against. I have fond memories of those early versions of Firefox (nee Firebird) that busted open the IE monopoly, and where hands-down the best browser going at the time. But it's never felt very good on the Mac to me, and it still doesn't. Here's a few early thoughts on this release, from the perspective of a happy Safari user, w/ a pr…

Agreed with a lot of the above. The biggest concerns for me...

1. The rounded tabs are simply ugly, and remind me of web design from a decade ago. It's also weird how they go from square to round on rollover. Poor design choice in my opinion.

2. It's far more difficult to find the active tab now. For comparison, the old style (http://static.filehorse.com/screenshots/browsers-and-plugins...). In the new version, I have to scan the toolbar to find the active tab based on the rounded or square edges. It's a lot easier the old way to find a bright active tab on darker, faded out inactive tabs. That's UX 101. It doesn't stop there, the entire toolbar, tabs, search, etc, blends together in a blob of light grey and white right now. Very little distinction between anything.

3. I never liked the orange Firefox button in the top left, it always seemed out of place and forced. Replacing it with an icon and menu is fine, but that icon should be on the left, before the first tab. The menu opening to a grid of icons is also awful. How it transitions to the right when you click something like 'History' is extremely bizarre. I have no idea why they tried to reinvent the wheel here, a typical list menu that everyone is familiar with would work best. That's great you can customize it, but 9/10 people will never use that feature, so it's a step backwards for them.

Overall, I see it as a change for the worse. It's not rocket science here, and nailing down a proper browser interface should be a walk in the park. We're talking about some tabs and a toolbar, there's no excuse for it to be anything but perfect after more than a decade. I'm 100% confident I could knock out a better design, that would be better received by people in a weekend. They have some nice features and design choices, but they got it 90% there, and keep tripping over polishing the remaining 10%.

Re: Firefox 29

#404

Post by jamespo »

dubcanada wrote: post #385
conductor wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Separate address and search bars is old-fashioned. As a user, I don't want to have to make this distinction, and it's hard to imagine most users-on-street wouldn't find this confusing As a user, I want separate edit bars for separate functions. I don't want Google know everything I type (or mistype) in the address bar. When I type foobar in the address bar please give me anything that returned the web server at foo…

Unfortunately you are not the average user, if you want Firefox to succeed it needs to do what is common, both IE, and Chrome the two most popular browsers have a single address/search bar. In regards to the whole tinfoil hat comments about Google knowing everything you type, well I hate to burst your bubble but they probably already know everything about you, including but not limited too your inability to spell duc…

I think firefox has already succeeded

Re: Firefox 29

#405

Post by WatchDog »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #248
cookiecaper wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I encourage Chrome users to go check the search history attached to their Google account. It exposes a lot of data that you didn't realize you were sending to Google (including letter-by-letter entry of search terms/urls) and may give a newfound respect for Firefox's separation, whether you personally care enough to make the switch or not.

This was a big deal on /. when Chrome launched. As several /.ers pointed out, there is a setting for that in Chrome, so it isn't a good reason to prefer one browser over another. http://www.thechromesource.com/how-to-turn-off-search-sugges...

If you find letter by letter search useful but only want to use it would you are searching, not while using the address bar. Then it can be a good reason.

Re: Firefox 29

#406

Post by dilap »

newscracker wrote: post #191
dilap wrote: post #63

I love Firefox -- for what it's done, what it represents, and what it helps guard against. I have fond memories of those early versions of Firefox (nee Firebird) that busted open the IE monopoly, and where hands-down the best browser going at the time. But it's never felt very good on the Mac to me, and it still doesn't. Here's a few early thoughts on this release, from the perspective of a happy Safari user, w/ a pr…

Nitpicking on you - it's Firefox (née Phoenix) for the public, not Firefox (née Firebird). :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Firefox Edit: Fixed typo as pointed below. :D Thanks for nitpicking the nitpicking. :)

Ah, right you are, Phoenix (because it was a browser rising from the ashes of Netscape), then Firebird for .5 seconds, and finally Firefox. (Surprised I forgot that, since I actually lived the history. :)

I think it worked out for the best -- Firefox is an excellent name and brand. It's hard now to imagine it being something else!

Re: Firefox 29

#407

Post by lomnakkus »

CyberShadow wrote: post #365
sentenza wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So imagine you are a person that stopped browser hygiene during a few months while finishing their PhD and now _still_ carries around about 900 open tabs waiting to be sorted into bookmarks and junk. (Yeah, that's me.) I have to re-start Firefox every 48 hours or else its resource consumption starts affecting the overall system. This is my primary issue with current Firefox versions, although I am aware that I'm an n…

Right-click the tab bar, select "Bookmark all tabs", save them all to a new folder (name it after the current date or whatnot).

Or just close all those tabs. Realistically you're never actually going to get around to reading them and they're just there weighing you down. Seriously, close them. Forget they were ever there. If you haven't looked at them yet it means that they're not that important!

Re: Firefox 29

#408

Post by 3rd3 »

k2enemy wrote: post #345
mblakele wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds interesting. What sort of things do you do with AppleScript and the browser?

Nothing too crazy. I have a keyboard shortcut that grabs the URL from chrome, then passes it off to a script that interfaces with pass [0] to have a rudimentary, but secure and cross platform password manager. [0]: http://www.zx2c4.com/projects/password-store/

Try this:

    tell application "Firefox"
       activate
               
       set pb to the clipboard
               
       tell application "System Events"
           keystroke "l" using command down
           keystroke "c" using command down
       end tell
               
       set page_url to the clipboard

       set the clipboard to pb
    end tell
It’s kind of hacked together and I haven’t tested it with rigor but until now it did its job. If you use it, please let me know if you could enhance it or whether it breaks for certain pasteboard contents.

Re: Firefox 29

#409

Post by core1024 »

a3n wrote: post #229
mrec wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because it's the Windows standard, and they think there are more Windows users than vim users?

It wasn't the n for vim search I was missing, it was the next function with a keypress, which happened to have been done with n in FF's searchbox, and coincidentally n in vim. I didn't know that they replaced it with F3.

C-G is still working so I'm fine with it :)

Re: Firefox 29

#410

Post by 3rd3 »

3rd3 wrote: post #97
BrownBuffalo wrote: post #94

Just a question, but why is the interation cycle so extreme with Mozilla? Version 29? What is so different from version 3.x.x ... where we had normal interations I could wrap my head around. The whole number upgrades are insane. I know its such a simple thing, but trying to relate with software interation steps on such a fast moving number, just is mind boggling.

Because of Chrome: http://krzysiu.net/misc/history_version_numbers_internet_bro... I think it's a marketing strategy to convey active development.

Another possibility might be usability, since whole numbers are easier to deal with than longer version names. Otherwise, I find Paul-ish’s theory above the most plausible one.
Post reply on HN