My biggest issue with Firefox is that it is hard to copy the html of a form or table, using the developer tools.
Firefox 23 is available
91–100 of 114 posts
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#92I'm surprised the tag was removed, just for historical reasons.
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#93I'm really looking forward to the overhaul on the road map that moves more things off the main UI thread. I keep switching from Chrome to Firefox for reasons of principle ... and keep switching back to Chrome for reasons of performance. I hate myself, but can't help it. Firefox will briefly freeze scrolling a long page. Firefox will beach ball for 15 seconds after resuming laptop from sleep. And so on. None of it is…
Really? I switched from Chrome to Firefox because the Firefox is way faster on my MacBook. Do you have any heavy mods installed?
For me it has been the same, happy to be back in Firefox.
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#94My biggest issue with Firefox is that it is hard to copy the html of a form or table, using the developer tools.
Is the following what you are doing? Is there a dev tool that makes that flow better?
* inspect the element
* right click on either the element in the breadcrumb view or in the source view
* select copy outer html
* paste into your document
fixed formatting
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
By what definition of compulsory?
In that inexperienced users are not well-informed of the option to disallow it, and might not understand that indiscriminate, promiscuous execution of JavaScript as a default behavior can be hazardous. ...at least as hazardous as connecting to unencrypted Wi-Fi. To whit: http://beefproject.com/ New users aren't even readily informed that JavaScript is a thing.
Didn't ever hear of pure JS browser exploit, only a mix of Flash or Java.
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could've written this myself. I love Firefox and I used it for years but at some point it became rather unusable and after it forgot which tabs I had pinned as app tabs for the fifth or so time (because I had to kill a completely unresponsive Firefox, this happened often) I was angry enough to actually give Chrome a try. It is SO much more responsive, even just the UI. I've kept Firefox up-to-date but I don't want…
Firefox has come so far from the memory hogging 4.0 days. Like others here, I give it a shot ever few month and UI responsiveness always sends me back to Chrome. The resurrected electrolysis project can’t come soon enough. The irony is what use to be its greatest flaw, memory usage/leaks, is now it's greatest strength. Around Chrome 15+ memory usage started ballooning and was too much for my 2GB netbook. A laggy UI i…
Yeah, I don't mind big memory usage per se. I have tons of RAM, 8GB in fact. Take 1 if you need it, if it results in a responsive application. Chrome uses something like that right now. But if I hit ctrl-t on Chrome, I INSTANTLY get a new tab. Firefox lacks that. You see Firefox moan and sweat for a few seconds, and then poop out that new tab you ordered. But that's not the worst thing: the worst thing is that it would occasionally (say once every 2 weeks) crash and upon restart completely have forgotten what tabs I had open and that is a pet peeve of mine. I want it to be more reliable.
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea is that non-technical users shouldn't have options in preferences that will break the web for them, and that technical users will use about:config or an add-on (e.g. NoScript). I find it difficult to argue with that. edit: clarity. total rewrite.
"Non-technical users" is a contradiction in terms. If you're using technology, you're a "technical user". If you don't know how certain options work, you should leave them alone; but if you don't leave them alone and something breaks, it takes only common sense and not specialized knowledge to suspect that the thing you changed has some relationship to the thing that broke. De-featuring software for the presumptive c…
It's true that users should not break things without some mind as to how to fix them, but it's also irrelevant. If a user breaks your product, it makes no difference to him or her who broke it. It's still broken. Users will have a bad experience.
This doesn't mean advanced options shouldn't exist, but it does mean that they should be out of the way for non-advanced users. In this case, the setting is moved to about:config or to add-ons, so I don't see how we've lost anything.
Are you opining that some users may not be able to find the setting in about:config? Would they not just enter "How to disable JavaScript in new Firefox" into a search engine?
>"Non-technical users" is a contradiction in terms. If you're using technology, you're a "technical user".
This is a debate about semantics. "Non-technical" is a colloquialism. I see no benefit to this train of thought.
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox has come so far from the memory hogging 4.0 days. Like others here, I give it a shot ever few month and UI responsiveness always sends me back to Chrome. The resurrected electrolysis project can’t come soon enough. The irony is what use to be its greatest flaw, memory usage/leaks, is now it's greatest strength. Around Chrome 15+ memory usage started ballooning and was too much for my 2GB netbook. A laggy UI i…
On Nightly it's even better, it's aggressively compacting memory, it was running around 30% (2GB total) instead of 40+ a few weeks ago. Kudos for their effort. I wish they could replicate a tiny bit of it toward the GUI.
If you don't know already, a huge UI overhaul is planned to land sometimes between Firefox 25 or 26 [0]. As far as I know, better performance is a big reason for the change as well.
[0] https://people.mozilla.com/~shorlander/ux-presentation/ux-pr...
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox will beach ball for 15 seconds after resuming laptop from sleep. That really doesn’t sound like normal behaviour? Have you tried the ‘Reset Firefox’ button on about:support? More info at https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/reset-preferences-fix-p...
Reset is not really an option when you have your chosen extensions installed and customized.
Considering extensions are the #2 reason (behind Flash) that Firefox crashes/beachballs, perhaps one would be wise to audit the (presumably) tons of extensions they have installed locally, to see if they conflict with other extensions?
Re: Firefox 23 is available
#100I see that Mozilla is now signing hashes of Firefox downloads with a 4096-bit RSA key. But the key used to sign firefox-23.0.tar.bz2 (id 0x057CC3EB15A0A4BC) is only self-signed and was created three weeks ago. It's not on pgp.mit.edu. Is there any actual way to "validate the authenticity of these keys in an out-of-band manner" as the KEYS file recommends?
the primary key is 2B90 598A 745E 992F 315E 22C5 8AB1 3296 3A06 537A not 5445 390E F5D0 C2EC FB8A 6201 057C C3EB 15A0 A4BC if you search for the primary its there (at least it's on pgp.mit.edu as far as I can see) it's the primary that you need to trust for the trust to work For FF 23: gpg --verify SHA1SUMS.asc gpg: Signature made Tue 30 Jul 2013 09:32:39 PM PDT using RSA key ID 15A0A4BC gpg: Good signature from "Moz…
Thanks; I had searched on pgp.mit.edu for the primary key but forgot to add the hex prefix 0x.
Curiously, the 1024 bit DSA key used for some previous releases (0x7f4d66451ebcab3a) has been signed by "Someone at Mozilla Should Sign the Release Key (so users can verify the key's owner!) ".