herme3 Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I've tested the new Firefox 2.0. I believe it loads web pages well, but the user interface looks very bad. It still has the old "File" and "Edit" toolbar buttons at the top. Look at the interfaces of Firefox 2 and Internet Explorer 7: Why did Firefox keep the old interface of IE6 and Firefox 1? None of the upcoming Windows Vista programs I've seen have the "File" and "Edit" toolbar buttons anymore. Firefox needs to update their interface by next year or they are going to appear very outdated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 This isn't exactly the best place to make suggestions to the Mozilla developers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dak Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 file edit etc are familiar. change for the sake of change sucks, cos then you dont know where anything is. also, the file edit etc layout is the norm for most OS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 I might point out that Vista compatibility is on the list of things to do for Firefox 3.0. Given that 3.0 is due to come out in early 2007, it should be in time for Vista (if perhaps a few months behind). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan2here Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 Firefox > IE Fact! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 One of the things I REALLY dislike about the new IE is the removal of the file etc. menus. But herme3 the interfaces in firefox is fully user changeable, if you don't like them, remove them... Talking about user interfaces though: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6345836888710765277 http://www.saguratus.com/nick/beryl/layers/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremyhfht Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/01/firefox_vs_internet_explorer.html QED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 what's wrong with 'file' and 'edit' buttons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 None of the upcoming Windows Vista programs I've seen have the "File" and "Edit" toolbar buttons anymore. Yes, they do - they are simply not visible by default on some programmes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herme3 Posted November 27, 2006 Author Share Posted November 27, 2006 Since I've become more familiar with the new interfaces on some of the Windows Vista programs, I would never want to go back to the old "File" "Edit" and the other old menu buttons. I often receive phone calls from people who have a question about their computer. If I'm not in front of a computer, I usually have to ask them to check under every menu for the option they are looking for. If they are using IE7, I just tell them to check under "Page" if it's related to the web page or I tell them to check under "Tools" if it's related to the browser. Other options, such as the printing options, are easy because they are all under the printer icon. If someone has a question about an option in Firefox 2, we usually have to go on a scavenger hunt to see which menu button they threw it under. Yes, it might take a while to get used to the new style of interfaces. I'm still having a little trouble getting used to the new Office 2007 applications. However, I'm sure people will prefer an organized interface once they get used to it. In the meantime, most of the programs will temporarily display the old options if you press the "alt" button. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 27, 2006 Share Posted November 27, 2006 It sounds like you are saying "Firefox 2 shouldn't have a menu bar because I prefer it to not be there." It takes a while before conventions take time to be adopted, never mind become a de facto standard. Let's not forget Vista is not even on general release yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herme3 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Share Posted November 28, 2006 I'm not saying this only because of my opinion. Interfaces with a more organized menu bar will be the new standard in Windows Vista programs. Even though Windows Vista is not available to the public yet, Internet Explorer 7 has been released to the public. Since Internet Explorer has already adopted the new standard, Firefox needs to do the same if they wish to stay competitive. The reason many people, including myself, downloaded Firefox 1 was because it was more modern than IE6. It featured tabbed browsing and other features that made IE6 appear obsolete. Now, IE7 is making Firefox look obsolete. I believe that Firefox 2 was a huge mistake for Mozilla, and they are really going to have to play catch-up with Firefox 3. Firefox 3 should not just adopt the new standard, but they should improve it. Firefox 1 adopted the features of IE6 and they added tabbed browsing and extra security features. Now, IE7 has adopted the features of Firefox 1 and they added better interface. So Firefox not only needs to adopt the new interface, but they should be thinking about a new feature they can add to the browser. In a browser war, the goal is to stay one step ahead of the competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 I might point out that Vista compatibility is a major goal for Firefox 3.0. In case you didn't read my previous post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herme3 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Share Posted November 28, 2006 I might point out that Vista compatibility is a major goal for Firefox 3.0. In case you didn't read my previous post. Right, but what do they consider to be "Vista compatibility"? Do they mean just having the browser work properly with the operating system, or do they mean redesigning the interface? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=352420 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herme3 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Share Posted November 28, 2006 Is that form for making suggestions to the Mozilla development team or just reporting bugs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 That's the Vista support tracking bug. Look at the list of bugs that it depends on to see what they're doing for Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herme3 Posted November 28, 2006 Author Share Posted November 28, 2006 That's the Vista support tracking bug. Look at the list of bugs that it depends on to see what they're doing for Vista. Ok, thank you Cap'n. In Windows Vista (Beta 1)' date=' there is a dedicated Downloads folder in the%USERPROFILE% folder. It would probably be a good idea to change the default from Desktop to Downloads. I'm not sure if there is an environment variable for Downloads...if there is, it would probably be a good idea to use it.[/quote'] This is something that I don't like about Windows Vista. What is the purpose of the "Downloads" folder? When you download something, you need to open your user profile folder, and then open the downloads folder, and then open the file your downloaded. What's wrong with just downloading a file directly to the desktop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 Ask Microsoft. All Mozilla is doing there is conforming to the standards supplied by Microsoft, just like you want them to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Demosthenes- Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 But herme3 the interfaces in firefox is fully user changeable, if you don't like them, remove them... You could do this. I like most of the menus though, I did take down edit and help, they weren't of much use. I've got everything into one bar (plus the row where the tabs go). Don't have any navigation buttons, use mouse gestures for that You can really customize it any way you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dak Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 This is something that I don't like about Windows Vista. What is the purpose of the "Downloads" folder? When you download something, you need to open your user profile folder, and then open the downloads folder, and then open the file your downloaded. What's wrong with just downloading a file directly to the desktop? the desktop gets cluttered, and takes longer to display. given windows track-record with malware, it might be to allow for the auto-scanning of anything written to the folder, or setting the os to auto-sandbox anything run from that folder, run them with limited privelages etc. maintainance programs could auto-delete/archive the contents of the downloads folder every now-and-then... who knows? i guess m$ just thought it'd be a useful convention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesmudge Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 If FF had been released with the vista style interface it wouldn't fit in with the rest of XP - which is all they need to care about untill vista is released. If they adopted the Vista standard it would look as unatural to its environment as IE7 does . . . as pretty as you may think it is it doesn't match your current XP environment. The one thing that makes FF absolutely brilliant appart from its security, tabbed browsing, useability etc etc is the fact its not made by people who like IE which is fine by me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 If FF had been released with the vista style interface it wouldn't fit in with the rest of XP - which is all they need to care about untill vista is released. If they adopted the Vista standard it would look as unatural to its environment as IE7 does . . . as pretty as you may think it is it doesn't match your current XP environment. The one thing that makes FF absolutely brilliant appart from its security, tabbed browsing, useability etc etc is the fact its not made by people who like IE which is fine by me. Or all the other os's it runs on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cap'n Refsmmat Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Firefox already has two (or three) separate default styles, each customized for a different operating system. They're mostly the same though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Interfaces with a more organized menu bar will be the new standard in Windows Vista programs. But it is not the standard now, and even if it becomes a de facto standard through sheer market force that does not behove other developers to follow suit. Now, IE7 is making Firefox look obsolete. Looking obsolete is not the same as being obsolete. Hiding the menu system that you have been training people to become accustomed to for the better part of two decades is a massive gamble in terms of usability, and it remains to be seen - by a LONG way - if it will pay off in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now