Slashdot Mirror


A New Look For Firefox

ben writes "Regular users of Mozilla Firefox may be interested to know a new default theme is planned for 0.9 in preparation for the road to 1.0. 0.9 will also feature new improved theme and extension management, which will make it easy to make Firefox look the way you want it to."

39 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. How about... by G-funk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...They leave everything as it is, and fix the resource leak in windows? It's hard to try and convince people to switch to my browser when I have to "end process tree" the thing once a day.

    --
    Send lawyers, guns, and money!
    1. Re:How about... by linuxci · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well remember the people who design themes aren't the same sort of people who can fix resource leaks!

      Also have you got a bug number for this? I've not had any major problems with Mozilla or Firefox for ages.

    2. Re:How about... by hattig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Definitely. It looks fine at the moment, but that resource leak is the biggest annoyance. Especially when everything stops responding because Firefox running as the only application starts paging on a 512MB machine.

    3. Re:How about... by xandroid · · Score: 4, Informative

      A thread I stumbled upon at MozillaZine mentioned that these resource issues won't be fixed in 0.9, or even 1.0.

      (Not sure if this is gospel truth, but I sure hope not... kill -9 firefox is getting old...)

      --
      $ echo "ceci n'est pas une pipe" | sed -Ee 's/(eci n|pas )//g'
  2. I liked the old look by linuxci · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I did prefer the old look, but then again the new one hasn't been finalised yet and is still under active development (it's been checked in but not enabled yet).

    Whatever the case, 0.9 will be an excellent release and well worth trying. However, please remember this release will have some major new features (better extension/theme management, migration of prefs from other browsers such as IE, Netscape and Opera) and then focus will be on polish and stability up to a successful 1.0 release.

    1. Re:I liked the old look by Conor+Turton · · Score: 5, Informative
      The preferences importing from Opera works extremely well. In fact I wasn't aware it was there, installed FF 0.9 and fired it up for the first time to set it up just to find it loading up my homepage and my Opera bookmarks were all there.

      A welcome suprise and it means I can get shut of my 3rd party bookmark convertor.

      --
      Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
  3. Thunderbird? by mccalli · · Score: 5, Interesting
    One reason given is for consistency across platform. I agree with this, but part of the 'platform' is the other software you're likely to use with it. In my case and I suspect in many others, that means Thunderbird.

    Will Thunderbird be following suite and changing default theme too?

    Cheers,
    Ian

  4. Definately a bad choice on the part of the devs by Xshare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Qute was a great Default theme. It looked great as a default theme, and really made switchers from IE feel comfortable. This new theme just doesnt fit in Windows or Linux... it looks good for OSX, but just not in other OSes.

    1. Re:Definately a bad choice on the part of the devs by igrp · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I agree. Most people I introduced to Mozilla were impressed by two features: the pop-up blocker and its feeling. Many remarked that it just felt "right". That's one of the biggest compliments you can pay to a UI designer: if the user doesn't feel that there's a transition period and can get started right away then you've done something right.

      Personally, I'm more of an "I don't care how it looks as long as it works" guy but I agree that the Qute theme looks great and I always felt comfortable using it. I guess variety is a good thing but I'd much rather see them sort out their differences and stick with Qute.

    2. Re:Definately a bad choice on the part of the devs by Xshare · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First off: That's not the new skin: This is. Second:Exactly. You have been using this skin. You know how to change a skin. Hell, you know what a skin is. You are also a reader of slashdot. That already means that you most likely are an advanced computer user, prolly use linux at times, and etc. Most people aren't. The people who we want to convert from MSIE don't like change. They don't want to go into the skinning thing and get a new skin. It's too complicated. First impressions are also crucial, and most "new users" would see this new skin as alien to them, and they won't want to go through the trouble of changing it, and will just slump back to IE. Just my take on things.

    3. Re:Definately a bad choice on the part of the devs by j7953 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Qute was a great Default theme. It looked great as a default theme, and really made switchers from IE feel comfortable.

      I agree. Replacing this comfortable feeling with a uniform cross-platform look is a stupid idea. Who benefits from a uniform cross-platform look, anyway? Most computer users use only a single platform. They probably don't care at all how the browser looks on some other platform (hell, many don't even know that there are other platforms), but they do care if it looks like it was designed for the platform they use.

      People who use multiple platforms are likely to be experienced computer users anyway, so if they want a uniform look, they'll probably be able to install whatever theme they prefer on all the platforms they use.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
  5. If you want to take market share by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    in the browser market, you'd be looking to take it from Internet Explorer (duh). That's Internet Explorer on Windows ... not the Mac. I think that it is important to have a default theme that makes it easy for the mums and dads to identify with (because they are not likely to change it). I think the current default theme does this and the proposed change is a mistake. But what do I know?

  6. Re:The new theme by linuxci · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is not informative. That's not the new theme. The article at the top points to the thread with the discussion about the new theme.

    This is a port of the Mac Pinstripe theme, although the new theme based on Pinstripe but called Winstripe (the GNOME version is called GNOMEstripe - not Linstripe!) I assume these names won't be used in the finished product though.

    Anyway back on track, although Winstripe will be similar to Pinstripe the icons will look more Windows like and therefore not a total Mac lookalike.

  7. And to celebrate by m00nun1t · · Score: 4, Funny

    They are changing the name!

    It's now known as ThunderFox.

  8. Yay by W2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is why I like open source software development. Just look at that forum thread. Inside a company like IBM or Microsoft, a debate like this would be kept covered up out of PR fears. Open source developers more often than not do not give a shit about PR (which is a good thing), they just want to make the best possible program. They also don't have to be afraid of losing their jobs, getting their salaries lowered, or whatnot. So we get to see the nitty gritty details of intra-project disputes and arguments from the front row, even silly things like what theme ships with Firefox as the default.

    Gotta love it.

    --
    Quality, performance, value; you get only two, and you don't always get to pick.
    1. Re:Yay by eyeye · · Score: 4, Informative

      Firefox devs make their decisions (e.g name changes!) behind closed doors and the first you know about it is when they have already made the change.

      I am glad he released this info.

      --
      Bush and Blair ate my sig!
  9. Fuck the Mozilla devs by Fnkmaster · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Sorry to sound like a prick, but some of the lead Mozilla developers have turned into incredibly unresponsive pricks that don't know how to delegate and assign authority properly. I respect their hard work immensely, but their attitude and arrogance on certain issues continues to mystify me. Look at this new theme at the top of this thread. This is beyond atrocious. This is because the Mozilla devs don't know how to resolve differences with other people, and they REPEATEDLY have shown a complete indifference to aesthetic issues in the browser and an unwillingness to make use of the talents of the many artists out there who would be very willing to help create good splashscreens, icons and so on, a rather critical part of a mass market desktop application that we want people to adopt (in the interests of a more secure, standards-compliant web).


    Yes, Arvid Axelsson, the author of the current default theme (Qute), may have a bit of an ego himself, and may have been reluctant to freely license his artwork under the same MPL terms as the Mozilla codebase. But he's a reasonable person, and he's indicated he's willing to compromise and do a Free license that works for the Mozilla team, because he wants to make sure that Firefox succeeds, and has the best, most aesthetically pleasing look and feel possible.


    For God's FUCKING sake you egomaniacs (and anybody who has followed some of these discussions over the last few years knows this is true - see the splashscreen debacle in Bugzilla, the many UI layout discussions, and the naming debacles for examples), we are relying on you and the excellent browser you have created and maintained. We respect immensely all the hard work the Mozilla and Firefox core developers have done, but their lackadaisical attitude towards branding of their product (Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox?), the terrible aesthetics of the splashscreens and icon sets they keep putting back in are just unacceptable. Qute was the best thing that ever happened to Firefox and the Mozilla project - compare to the awful looking old versions of the Mozilla browser - ugh.


    You are the developers and project leaders of a critical mass-market product. If there is truly an unresolvable licensing issue with the current icons and their author is unwilling to compromise, come out and tell us, and assign a group of artists or other aesthetically inclined technology professionals to consider submissions for a new default. Realize that your contributions, while critical, do not need to include drawing shitty icons or making terrible off-the-cuff aesthetic decisions that have a negative impact on the adoption of a critical product for the entire Internet's wellbeing.

    1. Re:Fuck the Mozilla devs by linuxci · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The problem is when you debate every little detail to death you get a browser like the Mozilla suite which progressed relatively slowly because everything was a committee decision.

      Yes I do think this could have been handled a *lot* better because Arvid but a lot of work into this excellent theme and now is word will be getting a lot less attention as it'll now just be a downloadable theme on update.mozilla.org

      Also as you can see from the forum thread mentioned in the original article you can see the information process wasn't the best.

      However, ultimately difficult decisions have to be made and they can't satisfy everyone all of the time.

      If you look at the original charter for m/b, Phoenix, Firebird, Firefox you'll see that they intended from the very beginning to have only a small group of people making the decisions.

      To quote:
      The size of the team working on the trunk is one of the many reasons that development on the trunk is so slow. We feel that fewer dependencies (no marketing constraints), faster innovation (no UI committees), and more freedom to experiment (no backwards compatibility requirements) will lead to a better end product.

    2. Re:Fuck the Mozilla devs by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Those difficult decisions should not be made by Ben Goodger. I'm sure he's a great, stand-up guy. I've worked with engineers like him before - their code may be fabulous, but their sense of aesthetics is fundamentally broken. I support the idea of a small group *of artists and UI designers* making UI decisions, and a group with some marketing experience to make branding decisions.


      I've managed plenty of software development teams before, and you just don't assign any random engineer to make important UI decisions. Some people have the talent for this and some don't. It's part aesthetics, part usability, part style. Very important stuff, and not something you learn getting a computer science degree, hacking Unix, writing HTML rendering engines and so on.

    3. Re:Fuck the Mozilla devs by bogie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is just indicitive of the way the entire Phoenix/Firefox project has been handled from day one on issues that actual users are interested in. They devs simple are not interested in taking in and responding to feedback from users on issues that users really care about like aesthetics. Look at the bugzilla voting system for an example. No matter how many votes a bug gets the devs could care less. Yes at some point someone needs to step in and say "This is how its going to be", but jeez at least try to make it look like you value the opinion of the people who have been bug testing and promoting *zilla for years and years now.

      I still use Firefox but I don't particpate anymore. I don't file bugs and I don't post in the forums. If the developers are going to continue to not pay attention to the users then they are losing IMHO their greatest strength outside the actual merit of the products themselves.

      Call me a drama queen. Explain how I'm wrong. But don't discount the fact that many people right or wrong feel the same way as I do.

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
  10. Re:opera vs firefox? by elFarto+the+2nd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    May I suggest you fire up Firefox again, and type

    about:config
    into the address bar and hit enter.

    More options than you could shake a very large stick at

    Also, Character Encoding is in the view menu.

    Regards
    elFarto
  11. Did they fix the Cancel/Ok buttons? by GodWasAnAlien · · Score: 4, Funny

    Can I configure Firefox back to the sane Ok/Cancel button order?

    No or Yes?

    1. Re:Did they fix the Cancel/Ok buttons? by marq00z · · Score: 5, Informative
      It's not a bug, it's a feature. The Cancel|OK order appears only in Linux and Mac OS X and it's done this way to be compliant with Gnome and Apple Human Interface Guidelines. If you want to have the Windows-like OK|Cancel order, just add these lines to your userChrome.css in your .firefox//xxxxxx.slt/chrome directory:
      .dialog-button-box {
      -moz-box-direction: reverse;
      -moz-box-pack: center;
      }

      .dialog-button-box spacer {
      display: none !important;
      }
    2. Re:Did they fix the Cancel/Ok buttons? by damiam · · Score: 4, Insightful
      No, the decision is because they did think about it. Cancel/OK makes more sense and is fundamentally easier to use than OK/Cancel. That's why Apple uses it.

      It'd be nice if Firefox could detect KDE and switch its button order. However, as Firefox is written in GTK and KDE already has its own non-Gecko browser, probably most of the Firefox developers aren't KDE users and don't care. If you do care, go ahead and code it.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  12. Theme choice... by Epistax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now I know you can just download themes to your heart's content. I'm using a tiny theme because that's the way I like it. However there's no reason not to have several default themes to choose from at install time. I would suggest the themes be "Default", "Internet Explorer", "Netscape", "Opera" and perhaps a Macish theme. As long as it is explained that this is simply the look and feel and has no real functionality differences (explained in a calm and simple manner), things should be less scary. Previous posters are absolutely right-- the more different it looks, the more scared the user will be, even if everything is in exactly the same place.

  13. Re:And what was Firefix was for, again ?? by linuxci · · Score: 4, Informative

    Firefox was *supposed* to be a *fast* lean-and-mean browser. One reason was given that bundling IE with OS works because people are too lazy to download another browser. That gap WIDENS as the download size increases. Already Firefox is 10+ MB!!!!


    Don't be such a troll. The download size for Firefox hasn't been anywhere near 10 meg (except perhaps before they stripped out all the app suite stuff).


    If you look at the latest branch builds you'll see that the current download is below 5 meg on Windows.

  14. Re:You need a bigger "but" next time by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Informative
    I've spent a lot of time on the Mozillazine forums and so have many others who've contributed code, artwork, testing and hundreds upon hundreds of hours of their time. I am talking here about the core developers from Mozilla.org who have actively displayed their arrogance repeatedly to the rest of the community. In particular, I think Ben Goodger has stood out as a tremendous prick. In fact, my original post said "Fuck Ben Goodger" in the title, but I decided it was too much of an ad hominem, when many of the others have stood up far too strongly for Goodger.


    Ben Goodger is the strongest anti-advocate for Mozilla I have ever seen. There are hundreds of other developers who have contributed lots of code to the original Mozilla project and the Firefox codebase. Many of these are great people who have quietly contributed tens of thousands of hours of their work over the years to the community. And those people I respect immensely. The ones who insist on repeatedly driving rifts through and disrespecting the fabulous community of Mozilla supporters that have evangelized their product and fought for a better, more standards-compliant internet everywhere else have been done a tremendous disservice to the rest of the Internet, and I have simply lost my respect for them.

  15. HCI anyone?? by the_true_cirrus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why oh why do they want cross platform uniformity??

    One of the most basic principles of human-computer interaction is consistency. Windows users expect to see Windows-like apps, Mac OS X ppl expect native OS X looking apps and likewise for GNOME, KDE and whatever else.

    Anything that breaks that (for example an OS X app that looks and/or behaves like a Windows app goes against the user's expections. And ultimately that makes the app harder for them to use and hence less appealing.

    Granted there is a lot of similarity between the various desktop environments but they do each also have their own quirks. For example OS X apps have the toolbar along the top of the screen (not part of the app window) and have that little window-resizing thing in the bottom-right corner of a window (not part of the window's border). GNOME and KDE generally have different standard back, forward, reload etc icons for buttons that all apps should use rather than their own.

    If you make Firefox look the same on every platform you will be breaking such little quirks and conventions on some (possibly all) platforms and the users will suffer.

    I say make a different, native looking (and feeling) theme for each major platform and ship it as the default for that platform!

    As for branding - you've got the name, you've got the firefox icon - they stay the same on every platform - surely that's all that's needed.

    Personally I think that's a good thing too. I for one perceive it as really annoying and intrusive when I install an app that insists on planting it's icons all over my desktop, installing a pointless system tray icon and making itself the default player/browser/whatever (eg RealPlayer or QuickTime on Windows) - it feels like I get the branding forced down my throat and that does NOT make me a happy user! Apps that don't feel the need to do that are a breath of fresh air and it would be a real shame for Firefox to go down the road of excessive branding.

  16. From my reading of it by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Mozilla devs did the right thing and asked about having Qute freely licenced 6 months ago. They were apparently told no and have therefore taken the only reasonable course left to them, sourcing another theme.

    The new theme might not be brilliant but it is a work in progress and rather importantly is freely licenced so other people will be able to tweak it over time.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  17. Re:Why bother? by linuxci · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've just had a look at the bugs mentioned and they're both being worked on. Therefore it's unlikely you'll see them when 1.0 comes out. However, like I said previously, the type of person who can design a good theme is unlikely to be able to help with the other bugs

  18. You act like IE is stable... by gtaluvit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've seen IE barf on pages before. No browser is going to be perfect and I think explaining to people that you may have to close and restart a browser during the day (if they keep it open THAT long) is a lot easier than saying "ok, if you close those 5 pop ups and uninstall CometCursor, you'd see the page you're lookin for."

    --
    - gtaluvit (prnc. GOT-tuh-LUV-it)
    1. Re:You act like IE is stable... by Kyouryuu · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Just because IE isn't stable doesn't mean Firefox can't aspire to be. IE is an archaic browser as far as I'm concerned, and that's why Mozilla and Netscape are actually gaining momentum. Prior to Mozilla 1.0, IE dominated. Now, at least according to my statistic, it's more of a 90%-10% or 85%-15% distribution. And although that may seem small, in something as gigantic as the browser market, that's actually quite a lot of people.

      Why are they gaining? They offer technologies people want. Tabbed browsing, pop-up blocking, and are generally less crashy. They are also generally more immune to the various sorts of crap unscrupulous advertisers have been pulling that "infects" IE. To keep gaining, these browsers need to keep doing this. That means not allowing large and highly documented bugs like the memory leak in question to be ignored.

  19. Idiots love skins by Tom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, the look of things is about the only thing that even total idiots do change about their computers.

    Many, many thousands of machines out there run without having ever been update since install, with every service under the sun enabled, and probably with the default passwords still in place. However, these same machines have custom backgrounds, colour cursors, sound effects and a dozen screensavers.

    Skins are big with people who don't know how to change the Start menu and believe Linux must be a windos program, because how can something run on a computer if it isn't a windos program?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  20. Screenshot of the New Default Theme by sgarrity · · Score: 5, Informative
  21. SVG Support by kiyut · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How about firefox native SVG support? Does anyone know if native SVG is included by default install?

    --
    Sketsa
    SVG Graphics Editor
    http://www.kiyut.com
  22. Re:The new theme by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And here is a complete screenshot of the new theme. I think this is a huge step backwards.

    Remember that to gain market share, you have to design the product for the average idiot. Yes, you know the one; the guy that thought his CDROM was a cup holder.

    To win the average idiot, you need simple layout, bright colors, and hand-holding wizards.

    --
    I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
  23. Re:How about we fix the more important things firs by colinramsay · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have no idea what you're talking about with regard to Firefox CSS rendering, but it's fairly clear you have little idea how the box model works.

    display:block and display:inline have nothing to do with how elements are aligned. They control the behavior of an element within the document flow. An inline element, such as an anchor, does not disrupt the flow. A block level element has breaks before and after; as such, it will interrupt the flow.

    Your perceived alignment comes fromt this. When three inline elements follow each other, the act line words in a sentence and flow one after the other. When three block level elements follow each other, the breaks before and after the element cause each block to appear under the preceeding one.

    Just a quick lesson. If I were you, I'd read up on CSS and prepare some testcases with a well written bug report before you talk about rendering issues. From your post you appear to be fairly ignorant of what's really going on.

  24. Re:Caution 0.9 will break ALL your extensions by colinramsay · · Score: 4, Informative

    0.9 will FIX the extension system in Firefox, which has been one of it's weakest points thus far. After 0.9 there will be no further major shifts in the way extensions are handled, and so this is the first and only time that extensions have been broken in this way.

    It's a necessary change.

  25. Re:Caution 0.9 will break ALL your extensions by Eil · · Score: 4, Insightful


    once again backwards compatibility has been sacrificed (and we are not even at 1.0 yet)

    Uh, hello? How did this get modded up?

    Rather than feeding this relatively obvious troll, I'll simply remind folks that the whole POINT of the pre-1.0 development cycle is to break things. And nobody's forcing anyone else to use Firefox, stable or not. End of story.