Slashdot Mirror


What Do You Want On Future Browsers?

Coach Wei writes "An industry wishlist for future browsers has been collected and developed by OpenAjax Alliance. Using wiki as an open collaboration tool, the feature list now lists 37 separate feature requests, covering a wide range of technology areas, such as security, Comet, multimedia, CSS, interactivity, and performance. The goal is to inform the browser vendors about what the Ajax developer community feels are most important for the next round of browsers (i.e., FF4, IE9, Safari4, and Opera10) and to provide supplemental details relative to the feature requests. Currently, the top three voted features are: 2D Drawing/Vector Graphics, The Two HTTP Connection Limit Issue, and HTML DOM Operation Performance In General . OpenAjax Alliance is calling for everyone to vote for his/her favorite features. The alliance also strongly encourages people to comment on the wiki pages for each of the existing features and to add any important new features that are not yet on the list." On a related note, an anonymous reader writes "The Tao of Mac has put up pretty interesting list of five things that are still wrong with browsers these days, and I have to wonder — with things like AIR starting to be accepted by developers, do we still need the browser at all?"

110 of 628 comments (clear)

  1. Personally I want... by Verdatum · · Score: 4, Funny

    Laserbeams....oh yeah...and Ninjas!!!

    1. Re:Personally I want... by andrewd18 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, no, you want frickin' ninjas with frickin' laser beams on their heads. That's obviously superior to individual ninjas and laser beams.

    2. Re:Personally I want... by Zencyde · · Score: 5, Funny

      Laser beams? Hell, I want porn! Porn with frickin' laser beams!

      --
      What day is it? Could you please tell me?
    3. Re:Personally I want... by Cley+Faye · · Score: 2, Funny

      i would like to have porn with sex ninjas and frickin' laser beams!!!1

      ... and sharks in the middle of this, I suppose ?

    4. Re:Personally I want... by ultranova · · Score: 3, Funny

      Laser beams? Hell, I want porn! Porn with frickin' laser beams!

      Word of warning: I've seen it, and it ain't pretty.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  2. stability? by story645 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I upgraded firefox and now it decides to crash every 15 minutes, when it used to only crash every half our. So yeah, I'd just like a browser that lets me complete all my web tasks without dying on me.

    --
    open source modern art: laser taggi
    1. Re:stability? by Victor_0x53h · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I upgraded firefox and now it decides to crash every 15 minutes, when it used to only crash every half our. (...)

      What could you possibly be doing to crash Firefox every 15 minutes? It sounds like you've got something else wrong to me. Time for a system reload.

    2. Re:stability? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Agree with sibling post. The only time any FF install I've got crashes it's the Linux one, whenever I try to kill a flash video before the system is done processing it.

      Otherwise it never blips, and I'm a hardcore tab whore: if I can hit CTRL-T I will.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    3. Re:stability? by arth1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The important words there are web tasks. I don't want a browser that does e-mail, instant messaging, feed aggregation, balances my check book and feeds my dogs. I want a browser where the unnecessary features have been removed, and those who want them can add them themselves. No add-ons as default, thanks!

      Seamonkey works best for me at present -- you can at least choose to install it without all the features, unlike Firefox with comes with the kitchen sink as standard. Which is kind of ironic, considering that Firefox was meant to be the leaner alternative to the Mozilla Suite, and Seamonkey is the continuation of the Mozilla Suite.

    4. Re:stability? by veganboyjosh · · Score: 2, Informative

      In case you didn't know, unless you've specified it to do otherwise, clicking the mousewheel/center clicking on a link will open it in a new tab. I don't think IE had that feature when I first came across it, or if it exists now, but it was/is one of the features I love most about FF.

    5. Re:stability? by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This isn't 2002, browsers should be above that.



      Sure the browser can be, but Flash is a plugin, not a browser and a poorly-written plugin for any platform other then Windows. So think of Flash as a program running in the background that display's the contents in your browser window. Can a program crash? Yep. So can Flash crash and make your browser slow? Yep.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    6. Re:stability? by vrmlguy · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm running FF3 on a company desktop without admin rights. It installed just fine. If your system's locked down tighter than mine, try the Portable Edition. I haven't tried, but I suspect that it would also run just fine from anyplace you have write access to.

      --
      Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    7. Re:stability? by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sounds like a good wishlist item for future browser: have plugins run as separate process with very limited (or more importantly: well defined) IPC with the browser, probably running as user "nobody." If a plugin crashes, browser crash should not be an option.

      In other words, have the browser treat plugins as just as dangerous as data from the 'net.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    8. Re:stability? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I absolutely bet it's your flash-plugin. FF3 dies very often for me, when i walk the history with some flash-sites in between. It dies so hard, that the session becemes useless. on windows and linux.
      I recommend trying it with flash disabled (=not loadable my the browser!), and when this helps you know the source.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    9. Re:stability? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow I didn't.

      *click*
      *click*
      *click*
      *click**click**click**click**click**click**click**click**click**click*

      Mmmmmmm. I need a moment...alone...

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    10. Re:stability? by Khaed · · Score: 2, Informative

      What could you possibly be doing to crash Firefox every 15 minutes?

      Surfing the web with it.

      Seriously, I've been using Firefox since before they called it that, and 3.0 is one of the most unstable versions I've ever come across. Of any browser, and I've used a lot of them.

      For some reason, when using Google Reader, it randomly pops up an empty pop up window (even though I've told it not to open ANY pop ups), and if I close that window, Firefox simply vanishes. This is on a recent clean install of Ubuntu 8.04, so it's not Windows malware -- it's a fault in Firefox.

      I also have a list of complaints as long as my arm about other issues with 3.0. Including the weird way it handles right clicks (sometimes, instead of getting a menu, I automatically get asked to name the bookmark, or an e-mail window pops up, or it automatically opens the link in a new window). I don't know if there's some "Gestures" bullshit I'm missing and can turn off, or if this version is just ass-tastic, but I'm better on the latter.

      I am seriously considering downgrading to 2.0. (Actually, with the stability issues... might be an upgrade.)

    11. Re:stability? by morcego · · Score: 3, Informative

      FF 2.0 would crash for me about once a week, tops.
      I've upgraded to FF3 the day it was released, and I'm yet to see it crash.

      Running on Linux (CentOS 5).

      I usually have at least 2 windows (about 15 tabs) open all the time. Lots of extensions and such.

      Maybe there is something wrong with your Linux install/distro ?

      --
      morcego
    12. Re:stability? by morcego · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Besides the obvious answers ("Laziness" and "Microsoft did it to us"), there is the issue of complexity.

      These days, systems are so complex that many times it is simply faster to reinstall.

      I don't like this any more than you do. If you don't find the cause, there is a good chance you will have the same problem again.

      --
      morcego
    13. Re:stability? by rrohbeck · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's being easy on FF.
      With Linky, you can select a range of links and open them all at once in tabs.
      Open 100 tabs? No problem. I have yet to see a crash doing that. Linky works well in FF 3.0 with compatibility checking off; it hasn't been updated to a 3.0 compatible version alas.

    14. Re:stability? by Maestro485 · · Score: 2, Informative

      FWIW I had the same problem some time back. I was able to fix it by putting the flash plugin (libflashplayer.so) in the system-wide plugins folder, /usr/lib/firefox/plugins rather than the local ~/.mozilla/plugins folder. Not sure if that still works since the problem didn't crop up after a Slackware upgrade, but it might help.

    15. Re:stability? by m50d · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For example I can compile Firefox -O3 (or get a Swiftweasel binary) and it will run at a fast speed on lower-end hardware, Opera being binary-only doesn't allow this.

      Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Go on, make my day. Do it, and do some benchmarks, or heck, just try actually using them both. I guarantee you Opera will blow your firefox out of the water, speed optimizations or none. There's only so much a compiler can do.

      Number 2, it used to be adware and how can I really trust a browser that used to be adware, something that my browser is the first line of defense in combating it?

      It wasn't adware in the way it's commonly used nowadays; it had one banner ad at the top of the browser, all revealed very obviously up front, and that was it. As for why you can trust its anti-adware capabilities, again, look at the results. And look at Opera's security record, and compare it to firefox or anything you like.

      Also, even though it isn't adware, there could still be bits of the adware code in the source slowing it down,

      There could be. But it runs a lot faster than firefox anyway, so until someone releases a slightly faster version, why does that matter?

      --
      I am trolling
  3. Not just support for SVG, but mixed SVG/XHTML by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So browsers other than IE support (to varying degrees) referencing SVG drawings using the <img> or <object> tags. But that doesn't go far enough, IMHO; since both SVG and XHTML are both XML, I'd like to be able to embed either within the other, e.g. by putting a SVG polygon or circle on a webpage (surrounded by HTML), with another field of HTML embedded inside it.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    1. Re:Not just support for SVG, but mixed SVG/XHTML by jesser · · Score: 4, Informative

      Firefox 3 does support mixed SVG and XHTML. I think the other non-IE browsers do as well.

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    2. Re:Not just support for SVG, but mixed SVG/XHTML by bcrowell · · Score: 2, Informative

      Firefox 3 does support mixed SVG and XHTML. I think the other non-IE browsers do as well.

      The problem is that IE is never, ever going to support xhtml. They don't support it now. They don't have plans to support it. Their stated policy is to provide support for it via browser plugins, and even if the user does have a plugin, you can't write a w3c-standard xhtml file that will work. All of this applies to both svg and mathml.

      For instance, here's a nearly minimal example of a w3c-standard xhtml file with a little inline mathml:

      <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
      <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0//EN"
      "http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD/mathml2/xhtml-math11-f.dtd" >
      <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head><title>foo</title><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8"/></head><body>
      <p>
      testing
      <math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mrow><msup><mrow><mi>x</mi></mrow><mn>2</mn></msup></mrow></math>
      </p>
      </body></html>

      This works fine in ff3. (The user doesn't even have to download fonts anymore. If you install ubuntu hardy heron, fire up firefox, and let it look at this page, it will Just Work.) However, if you serve this page up to any version of IE, it will display a file download dialog, which warns that "some files can harm your computer..." It won't render the page.

      There is currently no way to write a standards-conformant, static web page with inline mathml so that (1) it renders correctly in firefox, (2) it renders correctly in IE with the MathPlayer plugin, and (3) it doesn't just give a scary dialog box to the ~85% of all users who have IE without the MathPlayer plugin.

      Xhtml is basically dead in the water. However, the w3c html 5 standard is going to allow inline mathml and svg as special cases. That is, html 5 won't be xml, and it won't be able to embed other arbitrary types of xml, but it will have all the mathml and svg tags defined in its grammar. Now the real question is whether MS will support those parts of html 5 in IE 10 or whatever. My guess is that they won't, because mathml has no economic value to them, and svg solves a problem that MS wants to solve with Silverlight. However, it's possible that they will end up providing some more graceful degradation of the content, in which case users might start seeing messages like, "Sorry, this page doesn't display in Internet Explorer 10, because Internet Explorer 10 doesn't support SVG. Please use an SVG-enabled browser, such as Firefox, Safari, Opera, Konqueror, or Galeon."

    3. Re:Not just support for SVG, but mixed SVG/XHTML by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Funny

      However, it's possible that they will end up providing some more graceful degradation of the content, in which case users might start seeing messages like, "Sorry, this page doesn't display in Internet Explorer 10, because Internet Explorer 10 doesn't support SVG. Please use an SVG-enabled browser, such as Firefox, Safari, Opera, Konqueror, or Galeon."

      I think I'd go into full cardiac arrest if I ever saw that error message from IE.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  4. I want what most users want. by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    More speed and less bloat.

    Make it launch in 1 second and run for years without consuming much ram as well as render the page and all text FIRST before loading graphics and other crap.

    I am tired of the bloated dead fish that browsers have become.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:I want what most users want. by Angostura · · Score: 5, Funny

      You'll be wanting Lynx, my friend.

    2. Re:I want what most users want. by harry666t · · Score: 3, Informative

      s/Lynx/Elinks/

    3. Re:I want what most users want. by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So true. Heck, I'd be happy if we could just get rid of all the web designers who build bloated Flash-based websites when simple HTML and a handful of graphics would look just as good and work much better....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    4. Re:I want what most users want. by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And, the option to open each instance in a seperate process, so one window's crash dosen't take down the rest.

    5. Re:I want what most users want. by eldepeche · · Score: 5, Funny

      Basically, it would be really nice to never leave your web browser because all the functionality is there.

      Have you considered Emacs?

    6. Re:I want what most users want. by roc97007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > ...as well as render the page and all text FIRST before loading graphics and other crap.

      Didn't Mosaic do this? I wonder how we lost this feature.

      > I am tired of the bloated dead fish that browsers have become.

      Copy that.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  5. What do _I_ want? by dotancohen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What do _I_ want? HTML and CSS compliance. That's it. Get that done first then worry about the 'features'.

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    1. Re:What do _I_ want? by hackstraw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What about <MATH>

    2. Re:What do _I_ want? by hackstraw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Shouldn't reply to myself, but also what about media besides images and text?

      I don't mean plugins, but a standard.

    3. Re:What do _I_ want? by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What do _I_ want? HTML and CSS compliance. That's it. Get that done first then worry about the 'features'.

      The problem with that equation is, the non-compliant crap still has major sway over the market since Average Joe Luser has it already installed on his new Windows box. You need to get the compliant browser into the average home, and the only way to do that is to give Average Joe the bells and whistles he wants and do it better than that pile of crap MSIE. The non-geeks need a reason to switch beyond "it follows some invisible rules you don't know or care about."

  6. Force feedback by nuzak · · Score: 4, Funny

    Teledildonics. Mmm.

    --
    Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    1. Re:Force feedback by dedazo · · Score: 3, Funny

      That will take a while. But in the meantime, here's the best next thing.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    2. Re:Force feedback by OzPeter · · Score: 3, Funny

      I. Am. Now. Officially. Scared. I thought you were putting up a joke link. Ugggghhhh.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  7. mathml support and full unicode by WillAdams · · Score: 5, Interesting

    and a decent h&j algorithm --- if only TBL had taken a closer look at TeXview.app on his NeXT Cube before writing worldwideweb.app

    William

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    1. Re:mathml support and full unicode by WillAdams · · Score: 5, Informative

      >What is an ``h&j algorithm''?

      hyphenation and justification --- instead of just setting one line at a time, the system should consider the entire paragraph and set it so that all lines are as nice as possible w/ the best possible breaks.

      See the Knuth and Plass paper on it:

      http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/SFCS.1979.46

      Or look at Knuth's book _Digital Typography_

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    2. Re:mathml support and full unicode by jesser · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ahh. I think browsers tend to go for the greedy / line-by-line algorithm because it's fast and works well with incremental layout (e.g. if you receive the page from the server slowly). The speed argument may be less important since it can be argued that reading speed is more important than layout speed (cf the recent change to support kerning and ligatures). There are also internationalization issues with hyphenation. See Mozilla bug 67715.

      Is entire-paragraph hyphenation always expected, or only expected for justified text?

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
  8. Stable plugins by Chlorus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I want some degree of protection from the entire browser crashing when a plugin misbehaves(***cough*** flash ***cough***)

    1. Re:Stable plugins by norminator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      For me it's been QuickTime, but I second your plugin-protection request... That is, I would, if this were actually the place to make the requests.

    2. Re:Stable plugins by wondershit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, I have problems with flash very rarely but every time my browser locked up because of flash a small dialog box would appear asking me whether I'd like to stop an apparently misbehaving flash file. I'm not really shure if this is my browser (Opera) or flash itself but I think the latter.

      It's like Windows calculator. Type in 1000000000! and after a few seconds of wasted CPU cycles you get a chance to stop the calculation.

  9. Why only 2D Vectors? by StCredZero · · Score: 4, Funny

    Give me 3D vector graphics, and let me play Battlezone in the browser!

    1. Re:Why only 2D Vectors? by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Give me 3D vector graphics, and let me play Battlezone in the browser!

      3D vector graphics sounds nice, but (and no offense) I'd rather there was less convergence of the browser and the desktop environment.

      Browsers are inherently buggy and exploitable, or include technologies that are. Until security is locked down tight, IMHO, we should not be moving to a place where the browser does more.
       
      /If it isn't clear, I'm also not a fan of browser based webapps.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:Why only 2D Vectors? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A game like Battlezone is actually well served by 2D vector drawing. All you have to do is do a quick rasterization of the vertexes (x2d = x3d/z3d, y2d = y3d/z3d), then pass the result to the 2D vector routines. Rendering engine done.

      While I can't view the site right now, COMET support sounds like one of the more interesting feature requirements. The only thing that I don't get is (and maybe this is explained on the currently-slashdotted site), isn't this solved by Server-Sent DOM Events? That effectively provides a smooth and scalable form of COMET support. Of course, only Opera supports it at the moment, so maybe that's the problem...

    3. Re:Why only 2D Vectors? by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Windows operating systems are inherently buggy and exploitable, or include technologies that are. Until security is locked down tight, IMHO, we should not be moving to a place where the Windows operating system does more.

      Fixed.

      Since you're so clever, please tell us:
      Through what path do the vast majority of Windows OS exploits travel to reach the desktop?
      A) Web Browsers
      B) Desktop Programs that connect to the internet
      C) Portable Media (CDs, DVDs, USB Drives, etc)
      D) Other (Please explain)

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Why only 2D Vectors? by bluephone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know the guy that made these, and in Fx3 they really fly (no pun intended.
      http://ctho.ath.cx.nyud.net:8080/toys/rollercoaster.html
      http://ctho.ath.cx.nyud.net:8080/toys/3d.html
      Real 3D stuff, too. Well, as real as you get on a 3d screen.

      --
      jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
  10. FF3 by pla$+!k · · Score: 5, Funny

    Firefox 3 ought to be enough for everybody

  11. Slashdot effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    First of all, I want them to fix the Slashdot effect so I can read about the other probems.....

  12. An upload meter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'd like an upload meter.

  13. Upload progress bar by Ignorant+Aardvark · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know what I want: an upload progress bar. We've had download progress bars for nearly two decades now, so why not the same for uploading? In this age of YouTube and such, users are uploading files in their browsers more often than ever before, and the addition of an upload progress bar in the browser (not implemented as a hackish AJAX/Flash application) would be very much appreciated.

    1. Re:Upload progress bar by Ignorant+Aardvark · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Two more things I'd like to see: native support for vector graphics (in the form of SVG) and native support for video (in the form of the <video/> tag and a Free codec such as Ogg Theora). The latter is actually already written, but Mozilla isn't going live with it yet because of patent fears from certain large companies.

      How nice it would be to have integrated video support directly in the browser, though. No need for all of the hackish solutions, such as anything Flash-based, that have grown up around this gaping capability hole in the original spec. Make embedding videos into a webpage as easy as embedding text. That would be an amazing feature for a future browser.

    2. Re:Upload progress bar by jesser · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Firefox had the progress bar working for uploads for a while, but then it broke. There is pretty much nobody working on Firefox's networking code, so minor bugs like that tend to pile up more so than in other components of Firefox :( If you know someone who enjoys working on C++ networking code, please send them our way!

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    3. Re:Upload progress bar by garett_spencley · · Score: 3, Informative

      I know that you probably realize this, but the reason for the lack of upload progress is because it's a limitation of the HTTP protocol itself. In order to upload you have to send the data in one big POST request and there's no way, via HTTP, to poll the results on the server.

      That's why, currently, upload progress bars are implemented in HTML/javascript/server-side scripting. It requires a server side script to dump the current file size on the server and some javascript to poll the server-side script. In order to get upload progress bars standard in all browsers there would be have to be a standard way, via HTTP, to poll the status of the upload on the server.

      So don't blame the browsers solely. To get this feature implemented would require modifications to the servers too. So the best way to get this feature implemented in all browsers (in a widely-accepted, standard fashion) is to call for an addition to the HTTP protocol.

    4. Re:Upload progress bar by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think the problem with a tag is that the sites hosting the video won't use it. I mean, if they really wanted you to be able to just download and watch the video, they would have just put a link to a .mpg, or .avi. Instead what they want to do, is to ensure, as much as they can, that you are watching it in your browser window, so that all the ads show up on the side, and so that you can't save a copy. By using tricks such as using flash, or storing the actual URL inside a playlist file, inside a playlist file, inside a playlist file, inside a playlist file, inside a playlist file, they can stop most casual users from downloading a copy of the file, or watching it in a program that is not their browser.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:Upload progress bar by Rhapsody+Scarlet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      native support for video (in the form of the tag and a Free codec such as Ogg Theora). The latter is actually already written, but Mozilla isn't going live with it yet because of patent fears from certain large companies.

      I thought that was because it just wasn't finished in time for Firefox 3.0, hence why they're implementing it in Firefox 3.1 instead. If Mozilla are worried about submarine patents, they've kept that very quiet. Apple have been quite vocal of their worries about submarine patents in Theora, while Nokia seem to have objected without knowing quite what it is they're objecting to, but Mozilla supported making it a part of the HTML 5 spec.

    6. Re:Upload progress bar by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Couldn't you just measure the amount of data sent out over the connection? If you only count the stuff that the server has sent back the ACK packets for, you could probably get a pretty good indication of the progress of the upload. It wouldn't represent the size of the file on the actual server, but it would be a really good indicator. I think part of the problem is that it requires going a little bit more low level than generic posting code that the browser would usually call, but there's no reason it couldn't be done.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    7. Re:Upload progress bar by Bogtha · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the reason for the lack of upload progress is because it's a limitation of the HTTP protocol itself. In order to upload you have to send the data in one big POST request and there's no way, via HTTP, to poll the results on the server.

      You don't need to poll the results and it's not a shortcoming of HTTP. You know how much data you have sent, and you know that the server has received it because of the TCP acks.

      So don't blame the browsers solely. To get this feature implemented would require modifications to the servers too. So the best way to get this feature implemented in all browsers (in a widely-accepted, standard fashion) is to call for an addition to the HTTP protocol.

      No, it really is the fault of the browser vendors and nobody else. You don't need an addition to the HTTP protocol, in fact such a thing is pointless because it's already handled at a lower level of the networking stack.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    8. Re:Upload progress bar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The progress bar that Firefox had was pretty useless since most users didn't even notice it. As others have said, uploads should receive the same treatment as downloads...perhaps even integrating it into the downloads window in some sort of tabbed interface where you can switch between downloads and uploads. Most BitTorrent clients have a pretty good transfers window that could be used for inspiration. Of course this could open up the Pandora's Box of users asking why FireFox isn't a BitTorrent client, but maybe it should be.

      But I'd like to go one further and add JavaScript hooks for uploads (and perhaps the corresponding hooks for downloads). Something like onUploadProgress would allow sites to display content to the user during the transfer in the same way that OS installs will display tips to the user. Even without the native upload monitor, having JavaScript hooks would allow developers to give the user feedback on the progress of the upload without having to resort to some hackish polling solution (something I've been forced to do at two successive jobs now).

    9. Re:Upload progress bar by Grishnakh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I find it to be the same for sound and animated GIFs. They're mostly unwelcome distractions.

      All the people watching YouTube disagree with you.

      I compare them with regular newspapers or magazine articles. We have images on both of those. But we don't have video.

      I'm sure that if it was possible to embed video into newspapers or magazine articles, it would have been done long ago. Now we have the web, which makes exactly that possible.

      And I thought I was old-fashioned. Even I can see the utility of embedding video into web pages. Yeah, it's frequently annoying, but so are advertising images. That doesn't mean I want to cut out all images on the web; instead, some smart people invented ABP (Ad Block Plus), so I can see all the useful images, and none of the advertising ones. If they haven't already done it (it's not like I disable ABP to see what I'm missing), I'm sure the same technique can be used to screen out annoying videos without blocking the useful ones.

  14. Am I the only one who doesn't mind that much? by gparent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do enjoy a minimum browsing quality. However, personally, all of the competing browsers currently on the market do what I ask them to. Yes, this includes IE7. Microsoft has vastly improved their browser and I applaud them for it. However, I think there's a point where feature packing has its limit. I guess you could compare it to Microsoft adding tons of bloat to XP and making Vista instead of fixing the outstanding issues of XP. I believe there's a point where browsers are just fine, and extra features would be superfluous. I thought Firefox 2 had attained that point until Firefox 3 came out, with its many performance improvements. At this point I only think that bug fixes and even more performance improvements are necessary. Vector graphics? No thanks. My work computer already has enough trouble loading Toms hardware and slashdot properly as it is.

    1. Re:Am I the only one who doesn't mind that much? by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just raised mine to 6 (supposedly the new preset value in IE8) ... restarted browser, and the difference is amazing!

      It's not that my connection is any faster, but rather there's less latency when viewing sites / opening new windows/tabs.

      Instructions for increasing it in IE...
      http://support.microsoft.com/kb/282402

      Set the values to 6 if unsure - going even higher may speed things up more, but may be poor netiquette...

      Welcome thoughts on what the ideal value is? -and does an excessively high value say like 20 truly cause problems for servers? ... or are most servers configured to limit concurrent connections per client already?

      Ron

  15. Boobies! by DarthVain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously though how about some decent security for a change. It would be nice to have a browser that doesn't let malware pown you system with a million vulnerabilities or so. Integrate an adware/spyware protection system.

    That and boobies.

    and tabs, and decent memory management. Speed is good also. Sharks with frikin' lasers...

  16. Make it possible to select multiple files by siDDis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and not just one single file when I want to upload. I really hate to go that java/activex way to solve this issue today.

  17. Re:A less "Awesome" URLBar Would be Nice! by Vectronic · · Score: 2, Informative

    Bullshit, if they did that, then you'd come back and bitch that it doesn't search thoroughly enough.

    Opera's searches both, if the URL, or the Title contain the query, it displays the URL and associated Title, or vice-versa, with the query in bold.

    Firefox does the same, just displays it a bit differently, and IE doesn't seem to do it at all, just the normal auto-complete type thing.

    So, i'll presume, and simply say "stop using IE"

  18. Re:Fast and clean by Daimanta · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Fast and clean"

    Guess what ideal webbrowser and ideal hookers have in common.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  19. a rich-text editing standard by brunascle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    browser based rich-text editing is a huge mess. of the browsers that claim to support it, there's very few functions that work universally, and everything else has to be hacked together. one of the 4 major browsers, up until the latest version, couldnt even create hyperlinks!

    we need a standard desperately, and we needed it years ago.

  20. Henry Ford by Lank · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "If I had asked my customers what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse."

    Maybe we should be thinking what do we want _beyond_ a web browser?

    --
    Gotta get me one of these!
  21. I want my broswer to well, browse the web. by shypht · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't want it to read my email, or be my RSS reader. I don't want it to be an image editor, or a word processor, or MP3 player or media library. I would like it to be standards compliant, render web pages quickly, not consume loads of ram, and be stable. If I want any of the various 'features' as above, I'll take them in a plugin-format, or through a web application programmed to standards that can accomplish that task. Or, use a stand alone program for it. I want my applications to specialize in a few things and do them VERY well, I dont want 'jack of all trades, master of none' applications that implement dozens of features (most I dont want/use anyways), that don't do them very well, and add to overall bloat/instability in the application.

    1. Re:I want my broswer to well, browse the web. by clang_jangle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      RSS, especially with Google's customizable news feeds, totally rocks. It is by far the very best and easiest way to scan news that matters to me -- at least, using Safari on OS X it is. (I've heard Safari on win sucks, but wouldn't know personally). For the uninitiated, Safari on OS X renders feeds just beautifully, like a web page of all your feeds. Very simple, usable, and obviously without need for some contrived "browser integration" scheme. I also use FF2 with a plugin called Brief on FBSD, that works very much like Safari's integrated reader (though unfortunately *much* slower). If they get that Brief add-on working well in FF3 and fix the crashing on OS X (for those of us using OS X and Shapeshifter) I would happily switch to FF3 for all my machines.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    2. Re:I want my broswer to well, browse the web. by arth1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If RSS rocks you, then by all means install a plugin for RSS. Don't force RSS on everyone, including those of us who have no interest in it at all.

  22. Modular design by lazyDog86 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think that you have to make the design modular so the ninjas can be made available either with or without laser beams. While we're at it, we will really need an open standard bus supporting ninja-laser interconnectivity. I should think that we could interest an IEEE working group in such an activity. It's important that we develop a generic enough command set so that our ninjas and lasers can interact with as rich a set of other devices as possible. (i.e. ninja-laser-television-beer cooler interoperability would be high on my list)

    --
    my insights may be modded Funny, but at least some of my jokes are modded Insightful
  23. A Mute Button by camperdave · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would like firefox to have a "kill the sound" button like IE does. If I'm on a site that plays background music, I can press [esc] in Internet Explorer and get silence. In Firefox, I don't think there is such a keystroke.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:A Mute Button by LMacG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree. And I want that button to send a Taser(tm)-like shock to the developer who thought I'd want any sound at all to play automatically.

      --
      Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
  24. SAFETY by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Kill 10% of the performance but bounds check everything.

    I use "noscript" and flashblocker and I havn't gotten anything yet. but a friend using firefox was trashed by a link a friend sent her. A lot of "legit" sites (esp lyrics) now inject stuff into your computer.

    I want safety first, then after that ,, safety. THEN maybe some new feature.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  25. There are so many things I want by mikael_j · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IMO the most important things for browsers in the near future is the following:

    • XHTML and CSS compatibility - To save us all a lot of trouble.
    • Memory footprint - It needs to be smaller.
    • Stability - When I've got fifteen tabs open I don't want something in one of those tabs to crash the browser.
    • Some form of page rendering where browsers are able to render page layout and text without waiting for larger images and such, perhaps by figuring out how to just fetch the dimensions of images from the server somehow.
    • Properly sandboxed plugins - I want to be able to let flash run but limit the resources available to it, same for javscript and java applets..

    If all this could be done then I'd be pretty happy with the state of web browsers and would stop complaining...

    /Mikael

    --
    Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    1. Re:There are so many things I want by sp332 · · Score: 2, Informative

      HTML already gives the web page designer the ability to specify width and height of parts of the page. Many simply do not. This is not so much a browser issue as a web design issue.

  26. Is client programming really all that bad? by tjstork · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People are looking for 14 different flavors of HTML, different scripting languages, plug ins, sandboxes and more and they somehow want all of this slop to throw in graphics ...

    maybe, just maybe, the idea of a single application that accesses all information is a dumb idea, and the right place for this sort of integration is on the desktop, after all.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Is client programming really all that bad? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then again. Consider the alternative. Imagine having to install a separate program for every online service you wanted to access. If all your browser had was HTML+CSS+Javascript, how many extra programs would you have to install, just to get your current web experience? Imagine how hard it would be to get things like youtube to catch on if you had to install a program to experience it. Wait.... Maybe this is a good idea.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  27. Re:Customizable on/off switches in status area by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Informative

    You can accomplish the same thing with a few different settings. I have firefox configured to delete all cookies when I exit, except ones on my whitelist. You can change what each site in the exception list does. You can configure it to not accept cookies at all, and then sites in the exception list can keep them for the session or until they expire, as per your configuration. I also have it configured to clear out my cache and history when I exit too. If you don't want to go that far, you can go to tools->clear Private Data, to clear that stuff whenever you want.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  28. Back in the day.... by mark-t · · Score: 4, Interesting

    when I first heard of bittorrent, I always thought it would make an excellent addition to the http protocol to utilize bittorrent or something like it to share the content of a page, including embeded images and other media content, for as long as a browser window is open on that page, with the web site itself acting as an initial seed if nobody else is currently viewing the page. Instead of the data transfer load being placed entirely on the web server, the task could be delegated to other machines that are viewing that page, all of which ought to have the information readily available. This would have the upshot of keeping smaller websites from being crippled due to sudden surges in traffic, such as what is all too often caused by news stories on sites such as slashdot and numerous others on the web. Had things gone this way back in the day, I think I can safely say we would not be seeing P2P throttling happening the way it is today, because it would be too prevalently used by the mainstream population for general purpose browsing for the ISP's to pull it off without legitimate complaint from everyday users.

    I have to say I'd still like to see something like that... although I suspect now it may be too late, because broadband ISP's are already throttling protocols like bittorrent, so most of its potential benefit may already be gone.

    1. Re:Back in the day.... by Vectronic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Thats "kinda nice" in theory, but only as an Opt-In, and I can't see very many people liking it.

      Especially not those still on Dial-Up, or slow DSL, having half or more of their bandwidth helping "other people"... I shouldnt have to build a porch for my neighbours, simply because I already built my own.

      Plus, I imagine security would become an issue, anyone with a web-browser could potentially find out what you have been browsing since the last time the cache was cleared, or even much longer considering something has to tell the new clients that "hey this guy was there once too"... right now its generic "he visited www.xxx.com", but having a BT-Linked network, means they would know each page you visited, if you opened/expanded an image or pop-up, etc...

      Would also be quite curious, during say a fairly large power-outage that knocks out a couple main HUBs/ISPs... watching the internet frantically attacking (spamming?) anyone that might have a cache of the sites that are now down potentially creating an even larger problem.

  29. Site Filter by rwrife · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Something that would filter out crap sites like experts-exchange.com and others that require you to sign in to see the content. Also filter sites that do fast redirects so you can't use the back button.

    1. Re:Site Filter by kRITek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With experts-exchange.com just scroll down to the bottom of the page to see the content. Or use the cached version Google has.

  30. Sockets by Jerf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sockets. Raw sockets. Stop pretending with AJAX, with Comet, and just cut to the chase. Why this isn't the first thing on the AJAX agenda beats me.

  31. nspluginwrapper by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 3, Informative

    does that, and also allows me to run Flash 32 bits in a 64 bits Firefox.

  32. My wishlist item: OpenPGP trust model by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Built in support (i.e. enabled by default for millions of users) for OpenPGP trust model for SSL certs. Kill the CA oligarchy by giving them serious competition, where an identity can be certed by any number of CAs, partially trusted through a WoT, etc.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  33. Become the Operating System by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since you asked, I'd like the browser to become the operating system. Then any hardware that could run the browser could run everything else.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  34. Pffft! Real men don't need Lynx. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 3, Funny

    $ telnet www.google.com 80

    nuff said.

  35. Re:Fast and clean by BGrif · · Score: 2, Funny

    Don't forget that they both should take up as little space in your memory as possible.

  36. Forward / Back with branching by FunkyELF · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Right now browsers are limited to linear forward and back. Branching would be nice to see graphically too. Then maybe I wouldn't need so many darn tabs open.

  37. Re:A less "Awesome" URLBar Would be Nice! by clone53421 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you actually read the whole OP, you'd know that he wanted

    I'd like a URL bar that searches, you know, URL's when I type them in

    In other words, you type part of a URL and FF gives a list of URLs that match.

    Really I have a number of disagreements with the "Awesome" bar... I'm not just hacked off by the new search behavior.

    • What the hell is this top 10 results business? I want to be able to scroll through all the results like I could before. It's way easier to delete certain (ahem!) websites from one's history this way. Deleting stuff in History is a pain, and I don't want to indiscriminately delete URLs that I'll want auto-completed later.

    • Searching for page titles is clever, but it should be optional: search by title and URL / search by title and always display title matches [above|below] URL matches / don't search by title. (Doesn't History already let you search by title? How many people actually need this added to the address bar too? If enough people don't like it, it should be optional.)

    • My partial URL templates need to be above completed URLs. Always. http://www.google.com/search?q= should be the top result if I start typing "goog". Every damn time. Down arrow, $search_term, enter. Boom. Same for Wiki, M-W, Google Images, and so on. (FF 2.x put them at the top; FF 3.0 "learned" that I want them once I visited that particular URL, but since I don't actually go to that URL again it starts putting them mid-way down the list after a couple of days.)

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  38. The user must be in charge by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The user must be in charge. Not the remote site. Not any "toolbars". Specifically,

    • All "toolbars", "branding", codecs, DRM keys, and other installed browser helper objects must show as clearly identified items that can be easily disabled, restored to their initial state, or removed completely.
    • Nothing is ever downloaded to any place other than the browser cache without explicit interaction from the user. This specifically includes codecs and DRM code.
    • Pages cannot disable menus or menu items. The "back" button always works, although pages are permitted to notice that they were reached via the "back" button.
    • If the user chooses to disable popups, all popups must be disabled.
    • All pop-ups must be on top. No "pop-unders".
    • Pop-ups are treated as subordinate pages of the page from which they were launched. When the parent page closes, so must the pop-up.
    • Ad-blocking support should conceal from the remote site that the ad is being blocked.
    • Windows that are not on top should be limited in their resource consumption when they have active content running.

    You get the idea. When it's user vs. website or user vs. toolbar, the user wins.

    1. Re:The user must be in charge by nyctopterus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think allowing popups, or indeed letting pages control window size, position or arrangement at all was a colossal blunder. It's completely unnecessary today. I say remove it. Or, to maintain some sort of backward compatibility, have new windows appear within the bounds of the original. Pages should only control their own space, not control my browser.

  39. A working cache by sunderland56 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How about a working browser cache??

    Pull up a reasonably complex web page (e.g. NYTimes). Click on a link. Now hit the "Back" button. What takes so *ing long to repaint the previous screen that was displayed less than five seconds ago and so is (hopefully!) still in the browser's cache?? I can frag alien life forms at 72 Hz, but a simple browser page repaint takes a visibly long time?

    And - do not under any circumstances pop up a new friggin' window unless I ask for it.

  40. simplify by speedtux · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Rather than just adding more features, simplify stuff.

    Make Javascript faster and add a JIT and optional type declarations (in progress).

    Standardize local storage.

  41. Syncronization Primitives by c0d3r · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most ajax developers (NOT USING SOME FANCY/LIMITING FRAMEWORK) will run into basic synchronization problems that will cause major problems. Basic critical sections and thread safety primitives are needed. The closest I've found is an implementation of the bakery algorithm. Many of these issues can be solved with synchronous ajax calls, but for true asynchronisity, you'll need these primitives.

  42. A porn button by roc97007 · · Score: 2, Funny

    It would save a lot of time.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  43. #1 by Thaelon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The #1 thing I want out of Firefox is threading.

    Even IE has a separate thread for flash objects or other tabs.

    It turns the FF browsing experience into one that is usually slower than IE and infinitely more frustrating when the browser is too busy rendering stuff in the background to listen to the user trying to use it.

    --

    Question everything

  44. a "tiny" mode by roc97007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A mode you can set and keep in preferences to minimize the amount of real-estate the controls take, for small screens like on sub-sub-notebooks. Ideally there would be nothing showing except a small row of buttons on the title bar for most used gestures like "back" and "home". Give me an option to get rid of all that cute real-estate-chewing crap at the top of the browser.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  45. Simple wishes by uffe_nordholm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I consider myself a simple man, with modest wishes. As far as my browser needs go, Firefox 3 pretty much fulfills them.

    However, things can always get better, so in the future I would like all browsers to render (X)HTML documents correctly (ie as per the W3C specifications) and identically. If the W3C are unclear on anything, they should settle the uncertainty, and fill in any gaps they may have left.

    Also, it would be nice to be able to use some of the newer techniques 'out there', like SVG. Firefox seems to do this nicely, but Konqueror does not. I don't think IE in any version does it. For a nice page that uses SVG for good purposes try http://isthis4real.com/orbit.xml.

    And since I am making wishes for the future, wouldn't it be nice to be able to use any of the techniques the W3C (or other relevant body) accept as recommendations/standards? Like a multitude of image formats, various mark-up languages (MathML springs to mind) and fully supported CSS/JavaSCript/Java.

  46. Binary XML/HTML/JSP by Semaphore_99 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Whatever happened to that idea? In theory the browser dowload speed and render times would be faster.

  47. Re:Ability to individually kill divisions and fram by 0xygen · · Score: 2, Informative

    I believe the add-on you want is Nuke Anything Enhanced. It provides a "Remove This Object" entry in the right-click menu.

    To get rid of Java / Flash you can select across the object and use "Remove Selection".

    Get it at https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/951

  48. Show me the source of the sound, mute button by Mal-2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I really hate when I CTRL-Click a bunch of links, and suddenly there is a hodgepodge of unintelligible sound as the Flash ads and/or videos on those sites all start playing at once. I want the ability to:

    * tell which tabs are making noise at any given moment (a little flashing bubble on each tab would do fine)
    * mute a tab's sound
    * "solo" one tab with a maximum of two clicks -- all other tabs producing sound are muted

    If I could pan/mix each tab independently, that would be even nicer, though most of the players that cause this problem in the first place do allow for individual control.

    Another nice feature would be "anything you can see, you can save", negating the need to pile on plug-ins to capture flash video, but I can see why they might not want to offer this by default.

    Another one with a somewhat fuzzy target would be "stop loading crap like this". If a site keeps pushing pop-unders from AdultFriendFinder, I want to be able to say to the browser "I just don't want to see their crap, don't even load it" no matter what domain it comes from. As I said, a moving target, but it would be nice.

    Finally, it would be nice if I could move tabs between multiple browser windows.

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  49. 3 Kitchen sink add ons by ukemike · · Score: 2, Funny

    I have 3 different kitchen sink add-ons. One is really good at hot and cold water, one is great at draining, but it crashes if you get hair in there. I use a third for dispose-all purposes.

    --
    -- QED
  50. Re:Feeping creaturitis by Plutonite · · Score: 2, Funny

    This could be a great start to the modular vs. monolithic kernel debate! Where is Tannenbaum when you need him :(

  51. Re:Feeping creaturitis by AmyRose1024 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Have you tried Lynx?