Register - Login
Views: 99799842
Main - Memberlist - Active users - Calendar - Wiki - IRC Chat - Online users
Ranks - Rules/FAQ - Stats - Latest Posts - Color Chart - Smilies
05-03-22 06:28:46 AM
Jul - Computers and Technology - Firefox 4.0 early screenshots released New poll - New thread - New reply
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 3918/12211
EXP: 99320905
For next: 552666

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years

Posted on 12-23-09 09:55:25 PM Link | Quote

Time/Date

12-23-09 03:55:25 PM

Posts

3918

Days Here

904

Level

91
Metal_Man88
Local Moderator
As seen in the comments of the UI update thing, people do dislike the destruction of the UI.

It is my hope that if they destroy it, people will abandon Firefox, so as to show it the error of its ways. Otherwise, why not just use IE instead, if they're going to look the same?

____________________
Original Layout © Tobias Kelmandia
Peardian

  
Magikoopa

16/3/1: KvSG #479 is up!

Level: 157


Posts: 2751/7597
EXP: 48602806
For next: 976427

Since: 08-02-07

From: Isle Delfino

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 12 hours

Posted on 12-23-09 10:34:29 PM Link | Quote
Of course, if they get enough of this kind of feedback, they might change it back for the final release. From what I heard, Safari 4.0 was going to have its tabs on top as well, but they changed that sometime before the release.

____________________
-Peardian-


"Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see." -Mark Twain


Transforming cats into robots since 1989!
Posted on 12-23-09 10:55:00 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by hydrapheetz
Why the hell is everything trying to imitate Chrome?

When Google Chrome was released, they said that they wanted other browsers/applications to copy their UI design. Mozilla is just taking them up on their offer.

Now, the reason why they are putting Glass into the client area in Windows:

It is meant to keep user's attention on the actual content of the window, rather than the controls around it.
In Windows Vista, you would obviously only see the glass if the window isn't maximized, and when the window was maximized, the taskbar and the window goes dark.

Microsoft changed the behaviour in Windows 7 because they noticed that the glass effect is actually less distracting than the opaque effect.

It's like this: the blurred background of the window pretty much makes anything that is behind it, well, out of focus, like a camera. When you take photos with a camera, you want to focus on a certain subject, That's where your lens blur and depth-of-field come in. In Windows 7, Microsoft uses it well in various Wizards and applications like Windows Explorer and (not as much) Internet Explorer to get the user to focus more on the content of the window rather than—as I said earlier—the controls around it.

Google Chrome, Safari 4, and (upcoming) Firefox 4 features the Aero glass effects to the user's advantage.

And now, about the menu bar disappearing in Firefox 4, and being replaced by a 'system button.' For one thing, all recent Windows software are starting to use the UI standards set by Microsoft's built-in software (WordPad, Paint, etc.), Microsoft Office 2010, and the upcoming Wave 4 release of Windows Live applications. Another reason why, is that it greatly cleans up the UI.

To me, it just seems that people just want to keep on using a user interface that has been used for at least 8 years. Then again, I do tend to be an early adopter of sorts when new things come out.

____________________
http://twitter.com/azuretan/
Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 3922/12211
EXP: 99320905
For next: 552666

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years

Posted on 12-24-09 03:03:07 AM (last edited by Metal_Man88 at 12-24-09 12:27 AM) Link | Quote

Time/Date

12-23-09 09:03:07 PM

Posts

3922

Days Here

904

Level

91
Metal_Man88
Local Moderator
Disclaimer: The target of this rant is Microsoft and Firefox and anyone else who uses this scheme, not so much Lain; 'you' is meant to mostly be to demonstrate things, rather than targeted at anyone at Jul. Reading this may also cause your hair to catch on fire. Children under 3 are not recommended to read this. Nursing and pregnant women and time-traveling mariachis will not be effected by this rant. Void where prohibited.



These new UI are garbage, which make things less usable. New is not always better.

Lemme put it this way. You know the gas and brake pedals in the car? Guess what it'd be like if they changed it to something else where you have to push a third knob to switch between them.

That's right. Car accidents.

Now perhaps that's stretching it. Okay, we have these things called books.

And you might notice, there's this way with the spine on them, and how they're bound... ever wondered why they aren't arbitrarily changed to, say, open from the top or bottom instead?

Because it works.

The menu bar has been around not because of nostalgia, but because it works. You want one of the things on it? Click-bam, done. Now while I'll agree it has never been 'perfect', these idiotic, numbskull, thumb-sucking crud-pieces of button they want to replace it with are made entirely to make it worse.

Before, you'd just push one button. Now, you have to push two.

In what universe does that make sense?

None. What kind of nation would win a war if they decided, because one gun manufacturer made it take two clicks to shoot a gun, their guns needed to work that way too?

And if a moron leaps off a cliff, do we follow them too?

No.

This UI insanity stops here.

There's a difference between being an early adopter for something that works, and for something which is useless.

You know how much space the menu bar takes up? About 10-11 pixels vertically.

That shiny button also takes up that much vertical space.

So how much space are we saving here? A couple hundred?

And what kinds of resolutions are we running on today's computers... 1920 x 1080ish?

So the people who are pushing this are telling me, that, out of those 2 million pixels, those extra hundred have been a secret evil, devouring our ability to see webpages to the point that...

* All usage of vertical space must be eliminated except where absolutely necessary
* All content must be buried in hard to navigate cluster****s of menus instead of right there in one button press
* Microsoft UI guidelines (which they themselves violate at times) is more important than Linux, Mac, Unix, or Common sense
* We were able to survive with expensive vertical-space gobbling bars back when we had only 14% of the pixels we have today, yet we can't use the same 10-pixel menu bar now that we have almost 10 times the screen space we had back then on average
* We must break what works because 'it's new'

What's worse is that, rather than giving people the chance to use either-or, the developers are forcing this idiotic scheme on everything.

Well, let them, then. But I'm not going to pay for or use anything which uses that fugly button--it's a waste of space, worse than any menu bar ever will be.

I'll be there when they replace this with yet another dysfunctional, dumb layout--and the menu bar will also still be there, too.

Laughing, because it will remain used on many applications... unlike this joke of a UI system, which allows windows underneath the one you're on to distract you from what you're doing. WTF?

____________________
Original Layout © Tobias Kelmandia
Black Lord

Magic Emperor
Level: 40


Posts: 264/314
EXP: 408465
For next: 32844

Since: 08-01-07

From: Nebraska

Since last post: 11.3 years
Last activity: 9.7 years

Posted on 12-24-09 03:37:40 AM Link | Quote
I've hated everything with the way any UI stuff is going (although the ribbon has started to grow on me).

I can see the point of wanting to reduce wasted pixels, only because of the current netbook push. Although rather than having the UI like this by default, it should be an option for people with netbooks etc.

Offtopic, the current Opera Mini (for smart phones) has a ton of wasted pixels that the current version doesn't have. I'm wondering why Opera decided to go this way. Maybe fit for a different thread.

____________________





Sails
2800
as a video game‎‎‎‏‏‎ grows old its content and‏‏‎ internal logic‏‏‎ deteriorateÿ
Level: 102


Posts: 2030/2803
EXP: 10922327
For next: 167640

Since: 07-04-07

Pronouns: He/Him
From: MA

Since last post: 120 days
Last activity: 28 days

Posted on 12-24-09 03:58:41 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Bagel
I like how there are no mockups of the Mac version at all.

They better not Chromeify the Mac version.

That's the one reason I can't use Opera; it feels wrong to have the tabs above the toolbar.

On Windows ... I don't browse. So ... yeah.

Ahem.

____________________
plushifoxed

King Yoshi
la chica dijo...

Mood: The current mood of roxiemika at www.imood.com
Level: 119


Posts: 1668/3990
EXP: 18465783
For next: 463508

Since: 08-22-07

Pronouns: it/its or she/her
From: kamihama city

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day

Posted on 12-24-09 04:02:35 AM (last edited by Supakitsune at 12-24-09 01:03 AM) Link | Quote
Supakitsune's post
[12:54:07 am] <@Supakitsune> It's really just an over-exaggeration in the case of Firefox, because within minutes of Firefox 4's final release there will be a Strata 3.0 theme
[12:54:10 am] <@Supakitsune> I mean really
[12:54:36 am] <@Supakitsune> The only real terrible offenders of this are... Microsoft and Google
[12:54:52 am] <@Supakitsune> No option on where the menu bar or tabs should be
[12:55:12 am] <Acmlm> and for both, no option on where it's even installed
[12:55:21 am] <Acmlm> Internet Explorer goes into system32 mostly
[12:55:21 am] <@Supakitsune> Opera gives you a choice of titlebar/no titlebar and tabs on top/elsewhere
[12:55:31 am] <Acmlm> Chrome goes into Application Data of all places
[12:55:52 am] <@Supakitsune> and Firefox is so easily customized that even if there aren't any options available to switch built-in, they'll be there via extension within like
[12:55:55 am] <@Supakitsune> 10 minutes of release
[12:56:11 am] <Acmlm> probably
[12:56:24 am] <Acmlm> or CSS hacks

I mean *really*.

____________________

Originally posted by Katelynn
Next thing I know, I'm in Paris, reading a newspaper about a girl who was killed in a diving accident off the Bahamas. Oh, and Tweaker was sitting across the table with a croissant in one hand and his cock in the other.

FPzero
9590



Post 7567/9597
Active
5.5 years ago
Posted on 12-24-09 04:19:38 AM Link | Quote
I can't be inclined to complain about the menu bar because I know I'll just get used to it regardless, just like I've gotten used to Office 2007 and the lack of menu bars in Explorer.

____________________
roxahris
600
was seriously wounded, but the soul still burns.
Level: 52


Posts: 577/600
EXP: 1081293
For next: 2547

Since: 07-08-07

From: Somewhere.

Since last post: 9.4 years
Last activity: 8.6 years

Posted on 12-24-09 04:40:15 AM Link | Quote
I don't see what's wrong with minimalism.
But that's okay, because I'm the one who supports minimalism in the first place.

____________________
You... wait, wha-?
Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 3923/12211
EXP: 99320905
For next: 552666

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years

Posted on 12-24-09 06:13:08 AM (last edited by Metal_Man88 at 12-24-09 03:22 AM) Link | Quote

Time/Date

12-24-09 12:13:08 AM

Posts

3923

Days Here

904

Level

91
Metal_Man88
Local Moderator
A. I think it's nice that it may be possible to nuke the button via extension, but don't believe it should have to be that way (after all, if I wanted to stick to hacking functionality in, there's no point in upgrading at all), and
B. I don't hate minimalism, except when it is forced on me and additionally used to obliterate a working system for a pointlessly confusing 'minimalist' one.

It's pretty simple, really. Something the Firefox people don't currently get.

Not to mention they don't seem to understand how to deal with memory leaks, despite it having been a problem for eons. It might not be easy to fix, but they could go so far as to admit they've been lax about it and attempt somewhere down the line to fix it.

Heck, I'd even use the silly button of dumbness if they could just fix that dumb memory leak already.

Oh, and...

is there any real improvement in 4.0, or is it just messing up the UI? I mean. Opera seems to have some useful stuff going on in its new version. I'm not seeing that here.

____________________
Original Layout © Tobias Kelmandia
paulguy

Green Birdo
Level: 93


Posts: 433/2294
EXP: 8032348
For next: 20462

Since: 09-14-07

From: Buffalo, NY

Since last post: 9.7 years
Last activity: 9.7 years

Posted on 12-26-09 04:32:43 PM Link | Quote
Paulguy's Post configuration
Explorer does have menu bars, you just need to turn them on, in the Organize menu.

____________________
Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 3936/12211
EXP: 99320905
For next: 552666

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years

Posted on 12-26-09 08:13:38 PM Link | Quote

Time/Date

12-26-09 02:13:38 PM

Posts

3936

Days Here

907

Level

91
Metal_Man88
Local Moderator
Then they appear under the buttons for navigation, which is completely wacky.

Paint me as the glass 3/4 empty type of guy if you wish, but that doesn't count as a proper menu bar either.

____________________
Original Layout © Tobias Kelmandia
Post 975/1311 (41 days), online 1 day ago
Posted on 12-26-09 11:29:25 PM Link | Quote
And Vista's Explorer isn't what I'd call minimalist, with all the crap you can't remove (or even move at all) ...

- Blank title bar just wasting space
- Address bar (with breadcrumbs that get in the way for me) and non-resizable search box (it's resizable in Windows 7 at least)
- Organize/etc. bar (another waste of space I never use)

Even with the menu bar hidden, it can't even come close to my actually minimalist (and still usable) XP Explorer

It's bad enough that I use an alternate explorer just to get closer to the XP feel

____________________



#50 
plushifoxed

King Yoshi
la chica dijo...

Mood: The current mood of roxiemika at www.imood.com
Level: 119


Posts: 1691/3990
EXP: 18465783
For next: 463508

Since: 08-22-07

Pronouns: it/its or she/her
From: kamihama city

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day

Posted on 12-26-09 11:39:20 PM Link | Quote
Supakitsune's post
Originally posted by Milly
Even with the menu bar hidden, it can't even come close to my actually minimalist (and still usable) XP Explorer
Dude, forget "XP Explorer", that's practically the Windows 95 explorer! XD


____________________

Originally posted by Katelynn
Next thing I know, I'm in Paris, reading a newspaper about a girl who was killed in a diving accident off the Bahamas. Oh, and Tweaker was sitting across the table with a croissant in one hand and his cock in the other.

Taryn

Passed away.

Thanks for being a part of us, even if it wasn't always on the best of terms.

1987-2014


Level: 204


Posts: 4588/14742
EXP: 121745546
For next: 1604272

Since: 09-01-09

From: Seattle

Since last post: 10.1 years
Last activity: 9.8 years

Posted on 12-26-09 11:48:47 PM Link | Quote
I don't like how they removed the "up one folder" button, replacing it with a back button that takes you to the last folder visited, not the one above the current folder in the hierarchy. They think that file management works like Web browsing?

____________________
~Terra

TKB Super Mario Bros. - Complete
TKB Super Mario Bros. 3 - In progress; 21/113 maps
Transforming cats into robots since 1989!
Posted on 12-27-09 12:52:47 AM Link | Quote

Lain's post №298

Originally posted by Terra
I don't like how they removed the "up one folder" button, replacing it with a back button that takes you to the last folder visited, not the one above the current folder in the hierarchy. They think that file management works like Web browsing?


That annoys me too. Although Microsoft added a keyboard shortcut for going up one folder in the hierarchy: alt+up. And they actually added a New Folder icon to the toolbar!

All that we need now is a keyboard shortcut for adding a new folder, and then Explorer would be fine... Right?

____________________
Rena
I had one (1) message in Discord deleted and proceeded to make a huge, huge mess about how it was a violation of free speech and how moderators are supposed to be spam janitors and nobody should have the right to tell me not to talk about school shootings
Level: 135


Posts: 2791/5390
EXP: 29075490
For next: 259515

Since: 07-22-07

Pronouns: he/him/whatever
From: RSP Segment 6

Since last post: 342 days
Last activity: 342 days

Posted on 01-01-10 08:22:24 AM Link | Quote
Post #2791 - 01-01-10 03:22:24 AM
It's not Ctrl+N?

I'm looking at these screenshots and not seeing much wrong. Just looks like Firefox on Vista, with the menu bar moved into a button, which is how I've had it for a while now anyway.

But dammit can we get some hardware acceleration on Linux already? So slow...

____________________
why not?
Ninji

Birdo
Why did my user title say I'm a toaster anyway
Level: 88


Posts: 1110/2014
EXP: 6638559
For next: 12105

Since: 07-26-07

Pronouns: he/him or they/them
From: Glasgow, Scotland

Since last post: 113 days
Last activity: 6 days

Posted on 01-04-10 01:35:55 AM Link | Quote
I actually like the new UI - but I'll stick to Opera because I love the speed.

Although then again, I also (somewhat) like 7's Explorer.. breadcrumbs are extremely useful for me.

Here's what Ikachan had to say about this:


____________________
[00:17:56] <+XkeeperSucks> treeki the spoiled brat go get speakersCurrent Project: REGGIE! - NSMBWii Level Editor
Hacking Tools: NSMB Editor 5 · Nitro Explorer · NARC Explorer
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
Jul - Computers and Technology - Firefox 4.0 early screenshots released New poll - New thread - New reply


Rusted Logic

Acmlmboard - commit 47be4dc [2021-08-23]
©2000-2022 Acmlm, Xkeeper, Kaito Sinclaire, et al.

31 database queries, 1 query cache hits.
Query execution time: 0.322483 seconds
Script execution time: 0.065411 seconds
Total render time: 0.387894 seconds