MozillaZine

Mozilla Firefox 2 Beta 2 Milestone Released

Friday September 1st, 2006

Mozilla Firefox 2 Beta 2 has been released. This milestone for developers and testers includes a visual refresh of the theme and user interface. Other features new to Firefox 2 include phishing protection, search suggestions, session restore, support for JavaScript 1.7, Live Titles for bookmarks (using microsummaries) and a new Windows installer. For more information, refer to the Mozilla Firefox 2 Beta 2 Release Notes, and the release announcement at the Mozilla Developer News weblog, which includes download links.


#1 Visual refresh

by thelem

Friday September 1st, 2006 6:21 PM

Reply to this message

What do people thing of the visual refresh? I'm not convinved myself, I think it just makes things harder to read and the semi circles around the location/search bar don't fit in properly. I'm on mac if that makes a difference.

#2 Re: Visual refresh

by pcabellor

Friday September 1st, 2006 7:10 PM

Reply to this message

You can see the visual refresh and cast a vote for it at <http://mozillalinks.org/w…2006/08/firefox-2-beta-2/>

Personally I like it. Not love it but I find it good enough to keep it as my default theme.

#3 Re: Visual refresh

by deviantopian

Friday September 1st, 2006 7:11 PM

Reply to this message

It needs polishing. The toolbar icons have lost padding making them too close to each other and the other toolbars. The anti-aliasing on the Go/Search buttons is not quite right, but I do like the fact that they are now 'part of' what they affect.

I don't like the new look of the buttons, but I expect that's just because they're different. I'll probably get used to them.

#43 Re: Visual refresh

by mbuna

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 10:35 AM

Reply to this message

1) the 3d and beveled look on the back and forward buttons is too pronounced and unappealing. It looks very fat and block-like.

2) refresh, stop and home buttons are too greyed out. the eye catching colors of the Firefox 1.5 theme are simple and more appealing.

3) not being able to remove the go button is a bad decision. Firefox users like to be able to configure things the way they want them. now the go button just takes up uneccessary space if you don’t want it.

4) location of Cached files should be configurable. many users like to place their cache on external hard drives, usb drives, partitions or custom directories.

new theme and less configuration options = thumbs down for firefox 2.0 beta 2.

stick with…

1) secuity 2) configurability 3) simple and elegant UI

until a better “new look” can be found.

#4 Session restore

by Harrison

Friday September 1st, 2006 7:54 PM

Reply to this message

Are there plans to expand on the session thing? It seems that the session restore is very good - it remembers form field information. It would be too much of a step to make it possible to save sessions and come back to them later, I think.

#9 Re: Session restore

by dorsan

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 8:13 AM

Reply to this message

Try, Options->Main->"When App starts:" option

Allows you to pick up from where you left off.

#10 Re: Re: Session restore

by Harrison

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 8:57 AM

Reply to this message

I meant more like, behavior that's kind of like Tabmix Plus' session saver. Like, if I have 9 tabs, and I think I want to go back to all of them but I want to close the mfor now, I would save the session and load it later when I need it.

#16 Re: Re: Re: Session restore

by dorsan

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 10:36 PM

Reply to this message

So the "Show my windows and tabs from last time" option isn't exactly what you are after then?

It does allow you to close and re-open where you left off. You want more of a save windows and tabs to some session name you can load up at a later date? Fair enough, it does sound like it has it's uses. I'd mostly use "Bookmark All Tabs" for this kind of thing.

Who knows what devs will come up with once they have time to learn and play with this new session saving ability. Assuming there's an API for devs.

#5 Firefox 1.5 theme

by ruturajv

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 1:04 AM

Reply to this message

I personally love Fx 1.5's Default theme. I didn't like the Visual Refresh theme much.

#6 New theme

by Karlosak

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 3:14 AM

Reply to this message

I really like everything in Fx 2.0b2 except the visual refresh. Spell checker, search tips, improved RSS feeds, redesigned Options and Add-on menus, undo close tabs and session manager - all are great, pushing this version ahead. However the new appearance is IMHO horrible. The icons are bland and pale, the toolbar is small for the icons to properly fit in. Moreover, when using small icons (my favourite setting for the "old" theme) it gets really difficult to distinguish one icon from the other. I much prefer a visible border around the icon image when hovering the cursor over it than the image glow. It seems that the active "clickable" area for the back/forward buttons got smaller - now I must precisely click on the arrow symbol, otherwise I get no action or a drop-down list, even though I didn't clicked on the strange drop-down button behind the big arrow! The new tab appearance is not much better. At first look, they're refreshing, modern looking. But after a while of heavy browsing a new issue is apparent. When there is more tabs open it's really hard to quickly find the active tab. It's quite funny that one of goals of the new visual refresh was to make the active tab more visible, though my feelings are exactly opposite - the old theme with the orange stripe was better in this regard! Last thing, only nitpicking - the close button in the active tab is not centered, it is 1-2px higher. I'm afraid that there is not much space for improvement since we are already at beta 2, release candidate coming. In that case, I hope the old theme (or Fx 2.0b1) will be available for the Fx 2.0 final.

#7 Visual degredation

by jeroen

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 7:36 AM

Reply to this message

I really like most of the improvements, but I think the visual refresh is absolutely horrible, not to mention unnecessary. The icons are blurry and dull. Why can't I remove the search go button? Enter does the job just fine. It just clutters the interface imo. I really don't get it. When the Winstripe theme was first introduced there was a refresh some time after that. The motivation given for this was better compliance with the interface guidelines on the different platforms. Where has this motivation gone? Because this surely isn't following the guidelines very well. When used on XP using no theme it looks absolutely terrible. When using Luna it looks slightly better and more streamlined, but I detest Luna, and don't use any theme for that matter. And no, I don't use themes for Firefox either, I like apps to look nice by default. Winstripe was clean and clear, this new theme is just a total mess imo. I really hope this will be improved A LOT.

#22 Re: Visual degredation

by PeteTehDuck

Sunday September 3rd, 2006 4:21 PM

Reply to this message

You're definitely right about the extra clitter. Firefox is about customisation, then I want my small icons to be well defined and clear, and i don't want to have a stupid button when I don't need one. That's why the old search box was brilliant, it's just that, a search box. Not made a big deal of. This could have been easily expanded with a more flexible minimalist approach.

It's outrageous if they will not allow me to change things to how I want them to be. I don't have a problem with the close in the tabs that's nice, if the Firefox designers were talking about having to cut out any extra things whatsoever, as a necessity of the design philosophy why detract on this.

I also think that bringing in a design team was a bad idea, this is a community project. Just because you have money, don't use it on such things when the community comes up with many better designs. I say bring back Arvid (of Qute) fame to produce a visual refresh.

#8 The Design Mockups were better.

by deviantopian

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 7:54 AM

Reply to this message

The design mockups look much better than what we've ended up with. The differences are subtle, but have a big impact on how professional the it looks - <http://wiki.mozilla.org/F…date/Default_Theme_Update>

#11 Re: The Design Mockups were better.

by FattMattP

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 11:06 AM

Reply to this message

Wow, you aren't kidding. The way tabs are presented in the mockups look fantastic. The final design doesn't do enough to show the difference between active and inactive tabs like the mockups do. I wonder why they didn't pursue thier original ideas.

#33 nice mockups

by Lyx

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 6:26 AM

Reply to this message

I agree that those mockups look great.

#69 Re: Re: The Design Mockups were better.

by FattMattP

Monday September 11th, 2006 5:54 PM

Reply to this message

After trying it out I have to say that the beta looks better than the images in the article convey.

#34 Re: The Design Mockups were better.

by epohs

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 7:51 AM

Reply to this message

Agreed. The new visually refreshed icons and tabs are too washed out. The colors in the mock-ups are more saturated and defined and generally look better.

One of the first things I noticed about RC1 was how poorly separated the active tab was from inactive tabs. The mock-ups don't seem to have that issue. Hopefully the theme will be refined before it goes final.

#35 Re: Re: The Design Mockups were better.

by epohs

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 7:53 AM

Reply to this message

Correction: Beta 2 instead of RC1.

#12 A couple Problems

by JoshWaa

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 4:18 PM

Reply to this message

I really like the new beta, but there are just a couple of things i dont like about it. The first thing is the new quick find that comes up when you start typing. I always enable "find when i start typing" but wi8th the quickfind, theres no option to find next or find previous, you're stuck with the first hit. Also, this isn't really a problem, but a suggestion for another feature. I think with multiple tabs, there should be a "refresh all" option or button. Just my 2 cents on the new beta :).

#38 Find as you type

by neilparks1

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 9:50 AM

Reply to this message

F3 still finds the next occurrence, if any.

#13 A couple Problems

by JoshWaa

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 4:20 PM

Reply to this message

I really like the new beta, but there are just a couple of things i dont like about it. The first thing is the new quick find that comes up when you start typing. I always enable "find when i start typing" but wi8th the quickfind, theres no option to find next or find previous, you're stuck with the first hit. Also, this isn't really a problem, but a suggestion for another feature. I think with multiple tabs, there should be a "refresh all" option or button. Just my 2 cents on the new beta :).

#14 sorry

by JoshWaa

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 4:22 PM

Reply to this message

Sorry for the double post all... I refreshed the tab by accident.

#15 Firefox 2 Beta 2 looking good...

by jabcreations

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 8:33 PM

Reply to this message

The visual theme is fine except the large icons have too much padding on the left and right.

I love the spell checker (except when writing syntax).

I love the session restore, that makes life a heck of a lot easier!

There seems to be an issue with the tabs sometimes displaying the close button and sometimes not.

I downloaded this version of Firefox to see how it was coming along and for not having a new Gecko I actually like it a lot! :-D

Now if we could only get this bug ... <https://bugzilla.mozilla.…rg/show_bug.cgi?id=264131>

And the menus on my site to be accessible via the tab key on the pure CSS menus with tabindex Gecko 1.9 won't have anything to complain about.

#17 Re: Firefox 2 Beta 2 looking good...

by dorsan

Saturday September 2nd, 2006 10:51 PM

Reply to this message

Might be able to eliminate one of those, "There seems to be an issue with the tabs sometimes displaying the close button and sometimes not."

This is actually a feature where by when the number of tabs reaches a certain size (9 on a maximized window in my case) the close button disappears off the inactive tabs in order to use that space to display the page title. The idea being that if you can't tell what the tab is then chance are you don't want to close it without first selecting the tab to check it out.

#21 Re: Re: Firefox 2 Beta 2 looking good...

by jabcreations

Sunday September 3rd, 2006 3:23 PM

Reply to this message

I see it now, when I open eight or more tabs the close button disappears and if I close it back down to seven or less the close buttons reappear. I do not like this feature as it takes away from the ability to control the tabs.

#73 Re: Re: Re: Firefox 2 Beta 2 looking good...

by c960657

Wednesday September 13th, 2006 10:22 AM

Reply to this message

I think it is annoying that the tab bar acts scrollbar-like when there are many open tabs. This makes it hard to access a specific tab if it is not among the visible tabs. I'd much prefer that the tabs switch to a multi-line view when they cannot fit in one row.

#18 Firefox Portable 2.0 Beta 2 (USB and CD)

by CritterNYC

Sunday September 3rd, 2006 9:53 AM

Reply to this message

A release of Mozilla Firefox - Portable Edition (the portable version of Firefox that runs from USB flash drives, iPods, CDs, portable hard drives, etc) based on Firefox 2.0 Beta 2 is available, too. You can use it to test out the latest Firefox beta without affecting your local install. It'll even run right from your desktop.

Get it from the Firefox Portable 2.0 Beta 2 homepage: <http://portableapps.com/a…net/firefox_portable/test>

#19 Icons are nice, except of back/forward effects

by yglodt

Sunday September 3rd, 2006 11:52 AM

Reply to this message

The back/forward icons, as all the other, seem nice to me. But the embedded <select> visible on hover for showing the history looks awful

#20 Great release

by krissilver

Sunday September 3rd, 2006 12:29 PM

Reply to this message

I'm disapointed with the reaction here on the release, it goes to show how we all (me very included) all to easily only comment when we dont like something, leaving good comments not being bothered to be noted. Firefox 2 b2 is is a big big move in the right direction all round, I'm very impressed and pleased with the decisions Mozilla have made on several area's, and have renewed faith that Mozilla are thinking about simplifying browsing for the user, and thinking fundamentally.

The theme is a very good improvement upon the existing theme, subtle yet a nice upgrade. It is perhaps very slightly to faint, and the Home, New tab, History, and a couple of other icons are fax to detailed and complex. Home button for one should return to original colours, and a lot more simple. It would be nice to see icons throughout the browser such as that CuteMenus2 provides, and per many programs, icons and text gives better recognition.

The Options re-work is very good indeed, and I'm glad restore is featured prominently so users are quickly shown just how useful it can be to seamlessly continue browsing sessions rather than starting from scratch. Its a brave move, but I think saving and loading sessions should soon become default as users gain little from starting from scratch all the time, and it can easily be turned off for the few whom for whatever reason didnt want it. Lets convey things correctly and simply to users, as per Firefox addons theres 4 main types of addons, they're extensions, themes, web plugins, and search engines. So, the addons manager should contain search engines and web plugins, it just should if its a true correct addons manager.

I'm also very glad tab overflow has both arrows and a list. The right arrow should be on the far right however. The Go button should also be like it was once drawn up with a enter like arrow, showing its the equivalent of enter. There's many other subtle improvements that I've long been trying to get included like the wording of pages in the tabs section and more, I'm very please. All thats left now is not forcing a cluttered bookmarks toolbar on all users, when google research shows approx 10% or less use bookmarks. So, Mozilla, keep Firefox simple and for the majority. Great release and move in right direction overall.

#23 Roaming profiles

by xtonda

Monday September 4th, 2006 8:36 AM

Reply to this message

I was thinking that roaming profiles were planned for Firefox 2, but I don't see them on new features list. So wil Firefox have roaming profiles or not<

#24 Re: Roaming profiles

by rwc

Monday September 4th, 2006 6:10 PM

Reply to this message

Roaming profiles?!?! Bwahahaha!!! Let me know when you find those WMDs too.

#25 Great release

by MichaelB

Monday September 4th, 2006 11:17 PM

Reply to this message

I echo, what krissilver said this is a Great release.

There is some very good new features. Things look simpler, having close button on the tabs, and having the go button attached to the url bar is a good move, though it annoys me. There are easy ways to fix it. One thing that dose annoy me a lot though and I think was a bad idea was have a minimum with to on the tabs. lucky that can be fixed too.

It is still only a beta, there are supposed to be bugs at thing stage. But is is a move in the right direction.

Oh, a hate the new theme. Hopefully some one will recreate a default theme the looks like the 1.5 version. <http://forums.mozillazine…rg/viewtopic.php?t=452014>

#26 New theme looks pretty good

by greenknight

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 1:54 AM

Reply to this message

It could use a little tweaking - make the icons less blurry and pale, mostly - but overall the new theme looks ok to me. I won't run it, anyway; I prefer to use a compact theme for more screen space. All the controversy about the visual refresh seems a bit overblown, though.

The other changes in 2.0 I think are great, I've been using the nightly builds as my main browser for months.

#27 Remove tab close buttons...

by achowe

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 2:29 AM

Reply to this message

Will there be an option to remove these useless buttons that just take up real-estate? Just using the middle button to close a tab is sufficient for power users.

#46 Re: Remove tab close buttons...

by FattMattP

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 1:54 PM

Reply to this message

More than likely, yes.

#49 Re: Remove tab close buttons...

by Nivag

Thursday September 7th, 2006 3:16 AM

Reply to this message

Please make it easy, such as in the preferences, toeliminate unwanted buttons and eatures.

I only want buttons that I need visible - else I use short cuts or menu options.

Having a delete on each tab is unnnessesary for me, I middle click, and my wife can use the close butten on the right hand side (Firfox1.5, at least)

-Nivag

#56 Re: Remove tab close buttons...

by hhh

Friday September 8th, 2006 12:00 PM

Reply to this message

There is a hidden preference for this.

1) Type about:config in the URL bar and hit Enter 2) Right click an entry and choose "New > Integer" 3) Copy/Paste the following into the field... browser.tabs.closeButtons 4) Set a value, 0=close button only on active tab, 1=close buttons on all tabs, 2=no close buttons, 3=single close button at end of tab strip (old shool;)

<http://kb.mozillazine.org…Browser.tabs.closeButtons>

#59 Re: Remove tab close buttons...

by jgl

Friday September 8th, 2006 8:34 PM

Reply to this message

They wouldn't bother me so much if they weren't active on tab that doesn't have focus. Now they cause me to mistakenly close tabs all the time and I just want to get rid of them.

#28 hello

by hjason

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 3:09 AM

Reply to this message

i have posted a question before but never got an answer. so i am going to try again.

is k-meleon a new mozilla ?

is mozilla, gone, done, finished? if so why what happened?

i have been useing mozilla for a few years now and it is better than firefox. firefox will not even get my webmail sign in screen to work. that is why i started useing mozilla everything works in mozilla.

i would like to know so i can get k-meleon if it is true.

thanks

#30 Re: hello

by leafdigital

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 3:16 AM

Reply to this message

1) No, k-meleon is something different, ignore it.

2) Seamonkey is the new name for what used to be Mozilla. If you search for it you'll find how to get it.

3) There is little chance that your webmail signon will work any better in Seamonkey than Firefox, they use the same web rendering engine.

4) You appear to be making the mistake of assuming that your own experience due to one bizarre bug that probably affects only your system is the same for everyone. For most people, Firefox works fine.

#32 Re: Re: hello

by hjason

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 5:29 AM

Reply to this message

hi thanks for your reply.

if the seamonkey is the replacement for mozilla. why hasn't there been anything on the website about it?

and firefox does have a bug that goes beyond my system. i have friends that have used it, and they have the same ip i do and their web mail don't work either.

so i know it is not my system it could however be my ip they don't support firefox.

#37 Re: Re: Re: hello

by pplwong

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 9:01 AM

Reply to this message

Nonono. Seamonkey is the code name of the Mozilla Suite (the one include browser, mail client, etc. all in one). It's not a "replacement for mozilla". The Mozilla Suite (i.e. Seamonkey) is now off the "offical" list for Mozilla Foundation, and is instead supported by community. While, Firefox and Thunderbird becomes the offical products.

#39 Re: Re: Re: Re: hello

by hjason

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 12:38 AM

Reply to this message

so i get that mozilla was absorbed by firefox.

is that coreect?

so there is no more mozilla at all?

i know i read on the k-meleon forum that it uses the new mozilla 1.8 version.

so if that is true why would they do away with mozilla?

#41 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: hello

by wimhuls

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 2:36 AM

Reply to this message

#47 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: hello

by FattMattP

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 2:01 PM

Reply to this message

I assume by "Mozilla" you mean the "Mozilla Suite". Firefox and Thunderbird split off from the Suite some time ago to become independent projects. About a year ago, I think, the Mozilla Foundation officially dropped support and development for the Mozilla Suite and decided to concentrate their efforts on Firefox and Thunderbird development. Some independent programmers decided to pick up development of the Suite on their own and continute work on it. It was renamed "Seamonkey". Under the hood Seamonkey and Firefox are very similar. They use a lot of the same code and the same web page rendering engine.

#50 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: hello

by hjason

Thursday September 7th, 2006 11:48 AM

Reply to this message

thank you very much for your answer.

that is the best one i have had yet. and yes i did mean mozilla suite, i haven't seen it on the website recently.

so i was wondering what happened since there was nothing posted on the site. thanks

#29 Theme issues

by leafdigital

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 3:13 AM

Reply to this message

1. Definitely definitely (no question) needs more space top and bottom of the main navigation buttons, at least two pixels each side. They're all crunched up; yet these are main browser control buttons. They deserve their personal space. :)

This is the only major issue with the theme that I've noticed. Some minor issues:

2. The new hover behaviour on back/forward is not bad, but the actual icons are slightly uglier - I don't like the shiny effect.

3. It would be nice to be able to turn off the Go and Search buttons, since for those who prefer to press Return, these just add screen clutter and reduce space available for the main boxes.

4. I'm not yet quite convinced about the inactive tab appearance - they're 'behind', not 'disabled'. You can click on them! But they definitely look disabled. Shouldn't the text (only) remain black, just not bold? Perhaps with a deeper background shadow if needed.

5. There isn't enough space to the right of the Stop button/left of the address bar; this should be a wider space to match the inter-button space. Not sure how easy that is to arrange though given that people can move the toolbar components around.

--sam

#31 Forgot to mention...

by leafdigital

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 3:20 AM

Reply to this message

...that after a day's use I haven't (yet) had any problems with the new beta. :) Seems quite solid. I'm not quite sure what it adds over Beta 1 other than the theme, if anything... all the release announcement list the new features since way back when, so it's hard to tell.

--sam

#53 API freeze?

by leafdigital

Friday September 8th, 2006 2:19 AM

Reply to this message

Several days later, only one issue (not reproducible) where it froze for ages on trying to load the pdf plugin. This appears to be a good, reliable build; well done to the developers.

I'm using this as my 'normal' browser up until the point in each day when for my work I need one of the vital features from the web developer toolbar extension, which isn't updated - so from then on (because I'm too lazy to quit it) I'll generally be back to 1.5. Out of curiosity, does the 'beta' designation mean there's an API freeze and it is therefore safe for extension developers to test their extensions and update the supported version? Or does that point not come until the first release candidate?

--sam

#36 Re: Theme issues

by Picklesworth

Tuesday September 5th, 2006 8:53 AM

Reply to this message

I like the general feel of it, but I still have a few crits.

-The borders around toolbar buttons seem to have been broken in some cases. For example, the FlashBlock button now does nothing when I put the mouse over it, but with the older visual style a nice border appeared around it. That may be something weird about the extension, though, since the border still appears around the Google Browser Sync button.

-I find it very inconsistent that the Back/Forward buttons have a border upon mouse over, but the Stop and Refresh buttons just change colour.

-The small version of these icons (which I use) look a bit ugly around the edges. I also agree that they appear oddly faded.

-I notice that the Search bar now has a search engine selector on the left and a Go button on the right. I think that this is unnecessary; I found the previous one with the Go button and the selector button being the same thing much easier to use.

-The gradients on the tab bar look a bit odd. I may get used to that, and I do like where it's going. Maybe it could be played around with a little bit more.

-Pressing on the Forward button when it is disabled still causes a border to appear around the drop-down menu arrow thing.

Other than that, I like it!

#40 Another disappointment

by kaiwai

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 1:11 AM

Reply to this message

Please, for the love of pete, fix up up tbe bloody widgets on MacOS X; there are NO excuses for not getting it working on MacOS X; fix the damn problem, and stop moving to 'the next version' like what has been done for the last two releases.

#42 Er... Firefox 1.5 is fine on OS X, so was 1.0...

by leafdigital

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 3:36 AM

Reply to this message

So what's wrong with it, it uses slightly wrong widgets or something? Big deal. I use it every day and am perfectly happy with it. (I'm not testing Ff 2 on my Mac, though, since I'm still on OS X 10.3 and apparently this beta crashes all the time on that platform due to a since-fixed bug.)

If I were to pick a Mac platform integration issue that could benefit from a fix, it would be to make it use Keychain for passwords. I guess that's not exactly a major priority and would be a platform difference which Firefox tries to minimise, but it happens to annoy me personally since I record all significant passwords in keychain anyhow. (That's backed up, while my browser profile is not.)

--sam

#58 Re: Er... Firefox 1.5 is fine on OS X, so was 1.0.

by kaiwai

Friday September 8th, 2006 4:03 PM

Reply to this message

So they can be bothered making the form widgets using GTK+ and Win32, but can' t be buggered doing so with the Mac platform - the Mozilla Mantra - "if it compiles, ship it!"

#64 Re: Re: Er... Firefox 1.5 is fine on OS X, so was

by leafdigital

Monday September 11th, 2006 3:19 AM

Reply to this message

Seriously, I never even noticed this, and I'm sure the same is true of most Mac Firefox users. So form buttons don't have the Aqua look, huh? Who knew. :)

A trivial appearance difference in web forms doesn't sound like enough grounds to me to claim that Mozilla will ship anything that compiles, but perhaps I haven't drunk enough fanboy kool-aid today...

I would presume there is a relevant Bugzilla entry. If you want to promote your pet issue, please at least give the bug number, maybe I'll vote. :)

--sam

#68 Re: Re: Re: Er... Firefox 1.5 is fine on OS X, so

by BenoitRen

Monday September 11th, 2006 11:10 AM

Reply to this message

You are aware that votes don't mean anything, right?

#70 Re: Re: Re: Re: Er... Firefox 1.5 is fine on OS X, so

by kaiwai

Monday September 11th, 2006 11:27 PM

Reply to this message

True, true; hence, I'd prefer to see pledges of money.

As for the Mac issue; I'm now running Windows XP (new laptop), its a non-issue now, but the memory hogging and bloatage needs to be addressed; its insane when a internet browser explodes to 100MB plus memory usage, simply with a few tabs open.

#44 Go Button

by mbuna

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 10:38 AM

Reply to this message

Please allow the Go button to be removed if the user wants.

#51 Re: Go Button

by tono

Thursday September 7th, 2006 10:19 PM

Reply to this message

And the "search button"

#57 Re: Re: Go Button

by hhh

Friday September 8th, 2006 12:06 PM

Reply to this message

This is coming. A bug has been filed and assigned... <https://bugzilla.mozilla.…rg/show_bug.cgi?id=347754>

#45 RSS

by puzz1ed1 <mozilla@puzzledpc.co.uk>

Wednesday September 6th, 2006 11:55 AM

Reply to this message

Looking good - not so bothered by the vis refresh as others are, but each to their own :)

Surprised that TB is not provided as an option for feed subscriptions though - am I missing something?

#48 Please enhance addons.mozilla.org for the release!

by johann_p

Thursday September 7th, 2006 12:35 AM

Reply to this message

Extensions are one of the most important specific advantages of Firefox. Personally, the only reason why I definitely prefer FF over, say, Konqueror is that extensions exist that make my work easier and more pleasant.

Therefore I think it is absolutely necessary to give more importance to the resource where users can inform themselves about and get extensions from. The website addons.mozilla.org unfortunately has a many problems and is sometimes embarrassingly inconvenient to use.

There are dozens of problems, here are just the most ugly ones: - the lists include extensions that are not compatible with the browser used. - the target browser version/OS cannot be deliberately specified - search within one category produces matches from another (e.g. searching from within Thunderbird themes shows Firefox themes, while the header still reads "Thunderbird themes" - search sucks -- the result list is not ranked by relevance to the search. Even if the name of an extension is a perfect match that extensions often does not come up first. - Navigation in lists is extremely clumsy. No way to scroll to a specific of many pages. - Sort by rating is idiotic: since the number of rates does not have to exceed some threshold, items with a single top rate are ranked highest. - Everyone else uses tags and for good reasons -- why can't AMO let authors tag their products and use those tags for searching and grouping? - Every tiny variation of some themes is listed seperately which is very annoying. There should be a way to group items the are just variations or minor modifications of a base version. - Internationalization: the UI of the site should be available in other languages. The search and grouping should allow to limit items to those that support a certain locale.

With so many bugs and things being broken, one would expect some way of easily giving feedback to the developers and maybe even a pointer for people who would like to help, none of which can be found on that site.

#52 Re: Please enhance addons.mozilla.org for the rele

by leafdigital

Friday September 8th, 2006 2:11 AM

Reply to this message

'With so many bugs and things being broken, one would expect some way of easily giving feedback to the developers'

Actually, quite the reverse is true. If there's so many bugs and things broken, then developers clearly have plenty to do and there is no point in requesting feedback from users who will only repeatedly point out the same already-known issues. :)

#54 Re: Re: Please enhance addons.mozilla.org for the

by BenoitRen

Friday September 8th, 2006 5:53 AM

Reply to this message

You'll find that the people responsible think it's fine like it is now, and won't listen to you.

#60 Feedback and help ...

by johann_p

Sunday September 10th, 2006 2:04 AM

Reply to this message

That is, if the developers are aware of the shortcomings. Since the site has been sucking essentially since its creation and some things got even worse since then, I doubt that the developers have a realistic opinion about their creation. Also, the other important point was that if the developers are simply not able to get this done, I am sure that -- as with FF/TB itself -- there are many qualified people who would be able and motivated to help. However, since so little is published about the site and since it is quite hard to see how helping would be possible at all, all that talent and potential work is thrown away.

I am not sure, but it looks a lot as if the developer of AMO either do not give a damn or arrogantly think that everything is optimal with their site anyways. To repeat myself: since *the* major innovation and way of making them useful for FF and TB is the extension feature, these developer attitudes are both counterproductive and embarrassing for the FF/TB project as a whole.

#61 Re: Re: Please enhance addons.mozilla.org for the

by ddr513

Sunday September 10th, 2006 10:29 AM

Reply to this message

I agree with BenoitRen on this. Such an attitude is fine for a *commercial* product, but I thought Mozilla was *supposed* to be an open-source community in which users were *supposed* to feel free to contribute. I use SeaMonkey most of the time these days, but as to Firefox: I don't mind the new default theme, but some behaviors seems a little off-kilter; I'm thinking especially of weird extraneious popup windows that appear when a site is blocked from downloading material to you computer. Or is this just me?

#62 Re: Re: Re: Please enhance addons.mozilla.org for

by gmiller

Sunday September 10th, 2006 1:54 PM

Reply to this message

I think you've got it pretty much backwards. Commercial products need to listen to paying customers. Open Source projects are by, for, and about the people contributing the code. User opinions don't mean that much.

#63 Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance addons.mozilla.org

by ddr513

Sunday September 10th, 2006 2:36 PM

Reply to this message

So browsers like IE and Opera more closely reflect user wishes?

#65 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance addons.mozilla.

by leafdigital

Monday September 11th, 2006 3:26 AM

Reply to this message

How many people paid for their copy of IE as a specific decision, or even considered it a significant positive factor in their OS choice? IE doesn't have 'paying customers'.

In the case of Opera, maybe - but Opera's customers are mostly e.g. companies who want to include the browser on their mobile phone, PDA, or video game system, not individual users. I'm sure Opera are indeed more responsive to the needs of this market, which is why Opera is on hundreds of mobile devices and Mozilla is on 0.

--sam

#66 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance addons.mozi

by ddr513

Monday September 11th, 2006 3:53 AM

Reply to this message

IE and Opera are closed-source, proprietary products, nevertheless.

#71 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance addons.

by leafdigital

Tuesday September 12th, 2006 4:18 AM

Reply to this message

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to get at? Some poster said that commercial companies are more forced to listen to the needs of their paying customers. This may be true, but IE has no paying customers and Opera's paying customers are mobile phone companies - not individual users. As a consequence, the developers of either browser don't have any more of a direct financial incentive to please individual users than Mozilla does.

It is probably true that most open source projects listen more to the needs of developers than users (which is why many open-source systems are very hard to use compared to commercial alternatives), but in the case of the Mozilla project there is generally a strong focus on what developers perceive as user needs.

--sam

#72 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance add

by ddr513

Tuesday September 12th, 2006 2:42 PM

Reply to this message

From above: "Open Source projects are by, for, and about the people contributing the code. User opinions don't mean that much." I was just wondering if, in that case, it might be better for end users to use closed-source products, which would (according to this view) more reflect their wishes. That's all.

#76 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance

by E_T_

Monday September 18th, 2006 11:23 AM

Reply to this message

I agree with this view in principle and I would answer in some cases yes but in general, no.

The thing is that while in OSS the developers code firstly for themselves, we are talking about themselves as users of course. And since anyone with a particular need proficient enough to implement it can, chances are general users' needs will coincide with some developer's. So I think it mostly boils down to priorities: what features are implemented early and thus who the software is initially useful to (the developers' problems in OSS, the problems had by most people and / or people with most money first in commercial software.)

On the other hand, there comes a point where some software fits a particular user's needs pretty well and adding more is not necessarily of value to him. At that point, I believe OSS software's value will still tend to grow while commercial software's will tend to start dropping. Why? Because in this case, updates that this kind of user will need or want are security and bug fixes as well as performance and usability improvements. In many (most?) cases, he will still need to update the software due to these concerns. OSS projects maintainers will love those kinds of users that don't complain and don't require (much) support, whereas companies wont. (Most) software companies don't make their money maintaining old products or versions, they make money selling you shiny new stuff. And, especially once they become dominant in their market, they will tend to try various tactics to "provide incentives" for the user to upgrade. Format incompatibilities, essential security upgrades degrading stability or features in older version, complex and intrusive registrations, DRM, etc.

But there is also the case of commercial companies leading OSS projects... In this case there should be more interest in implementing popular requests, while keeping the safety and motivation of knowing the project can be forked if the coders' needs are overlooked. And I think one could argue that, perhaps ironically, the MoFo / MoCo is overlooking the coders' interest and opinion too much, which hurts the users' interest because it discourages contributions that could be beneficial to them.

Software bloat and complexity are another matter... OSS may tend to have it from the start more as each coder implements his pet niche features, but commercial projects gets it in the end too, as they look for more users and markets to expand to. YMMV.

#77 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance

by E_T_

Monday September 18th, 2006 12:07 PM

Reply to this message

I agree with this view in principle and I would answer in some cases yes but in general, no.

The thing is that while in OSS the developers code firstly for themselves, we are talking about themselves as users of course. And since anyone with a particular need proficient enough to implement it can, chances are general users' needs will coincide with some developer's. So I think it mostly boils down to priorities: what features are implemented early and thus who the software is initially useful to (the developers' problems in OSS, the problems had by most people and / or people with most money first in commercial software.)

On the other hand, there comes a point where some software fits a particular user's needs pretty well and adding more is not necessarily of value to him. At that point, I believe OSS software's value will still tend to grow while commercial software's will tend to start dropping. Why? Because in this case, updates that this kind of user will need or want are security and bug fixes as well as performance and usability improvements. In many (most?) cases, he will still need to update the software due to these concerns. OSS projects maintainers will love those kinds of users that don't complain and don't require (much) support, whereas companies wont. (Most) software companies don't make their money maintaining old products or versions, they make money selling you shiny new stuff. And, especially once they become dominant in their market, they will tend to try various tactics to "provide incentives" for the user to upgrade. Format incompatibilities, essential security upgrades degrading stability or features in older version, complex and intrusive registrations, DRM, etc.

But there is also the case of commercial companies leading OSS projects... In this case there should be more interest in implementing popular requests, while keeping the safety and motivation of knowing the project can be forked if the coders' needs are overlooked. And I think one could argue that, perhaps ironically, the MoFo / MoCo is overlooking the coders' interest and opinion too much, which hurts the users' interest because it discourages contributions that could be beneficial to them.

Software bloat and complexity are another matter... OSS may tend to have it from the start more as each coder implements his pet niche features, but commercial projects gets it in the end too, as they look for more users and markets to expand to. YMMV.

#67 Re: Re: Re: Re: Please enhance addons.mozilla.org

by johann_p

Monday September 11th, 2006 4:06 AM

Reply to this message

I think the crucial question here is not what OS projects are "supposed to be" but, if we are actually interested in seeing FF/TB get more successful, what is reasonable.

Of course, the Mozilla Foundation people have all rights to do what they please and they have the "right" to come up with some crappy Extension site that is an embarrassment to to the FF project. People like me could just fork and do it better. However, given the effort and the ressources that already went into the FF/TB project and the hype around it, it would be *much* more reasonable to 1) put more effort into making the addons site better and 2) use the resources that are there from the world community more efficiently to make the addons site better.

None of the two things is at the moment happening to a significant extend and this was what I was (and still am) critisizing.

#75 it is worked on by *productive* developers

by spage

Friday September 15th, 2006 3:43 PM

Reply to this message

Visit <http://wiki.mozilla.org/Update> to read about plans including the "Remora" project, and may I suggest less whining. People are well aware of its importance, e.g. read <http://wiki.mozilla.org/AMO>.

#55 Visual refresh

by ibutora

Friday September 8th, 2006 7:21 AM

Reply to this message

Is Firefox 2 final still going to keep the Luna look in terms of the colors for menus, etc.? It does not look good on older versions of Windows (for example, the three Windows 98 machines in my apartment). With Firefox 1.5, users had to install a separate extension ("Classic Menus for Winstripe") to restore the classic menus. I thought that this would not be necessary in Firefox 2?

Also, <http://www.mozilla.org/su…t/firefox/tips#appearance> gives tips for editing UserChrome.css to have either Windows XP styled menus, or classic menus. Is the default in Firefox 1.5 and 2 the Windows XP style?

Lastly, I hope we will be able to remove the Search and URL Go buttons.

#74 Glowing Search Icon

by dummy00001

Thursday September 14th, 2006 8:07 AM

Reply to this message

Glowing search icon is what really bothers me. The overall look of default theme is very pale, and the "glowing" effect really make that button to really stand out. If I use only three search engines, why I have to be bothered by other sites I happen to come to? That glowing stuff is really annoying. Especially now it seems to glow always - even if search engine in question is already installed. I turned off the internal search box only to avoid seeing that stuff - and replaced it by Google Toolbar. Not much of replacement - but no glowing stuff.

Overall good release, thou I think 1.5 theme was better. It looked solid and gave overall impression of solidness of Mozilla's release. "Mature look" I think that what better describes 1.5 theme. 2.0 is bit too geeky.

Embedded spell checker - idea borrowed from MacOSX - is killer feature of course. It fixed for me ten or so typos only in that message alone. ;-)

#78 Why has the name changed?

by neilparks1

Tuesday September 19th, 2006 11:29 AM

Reply to this message

Why has the name changed from "Firefox 2.0 beta 2" to "Bon Echo 2.0"?

I guess I understand the use of an alternate name for test versions--but why change from Bon Echo to Firefox and then back to Bon Echo?

#79 Re:Why has the name changed?

by teoli2003

Thursday September 21st, 2006 2:15 AM

Reply to this message

Nightlies are labeled BonEcho. Official release and official test release (the betas and RC) are labeled Firefox. That's to prevent pseudo-news site to link to nightlies as official Firefox version.

If you see BonEcho, you aren't using a beta, but a nightly.