Slashdot Mirror


Firefox 4.0 Goes Chrome, New UI In Q4 2010

sv_libertarian writes "Mozilla recently updated its product roadmap through 2010. According to the first draft, the current browser will see a minor update in Q4 2009 and another in Q2 2010. Version 4.0 is headed for an October or November 2010 release and will bring a new user interface and browser sync integration. 'There is not much information on [what] this new user interface will look like, but the first mockups that have been posted on Mozilla's website suggest that the Mozilla team favors a Google Chrome-like design that integrates Windows 7 graphics features. Overall, window elements seem to be floating over the background.' The mockup page emphatically notes that the design is not final."

29 of 556 comments (clear)

  1. Function before form by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I do have to say, what I really want out of a browser is function, not a flashier interface.

    Make it not crash, and I don't care what it looks like.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Function before form by Fizzol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is this post marked as a Troll? It's a legitimate viewpoint and one I agree with. I'll take function over form every time. Give me a good, fast, stable browser with a UI that isn't flashy, cluttered or distracting.

    2. Re:Function before form by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I do have to say, what I really want out of a browser is function, not a flashier interface.

      Make it not crash, and I don't care what it looks like.

      "Form Follows Function". It's an eternal debate.

      I'm of the team that says we can have both. Especially if they factor in software ergonomics into their design decisions. Most people don't realize it, but they like intuitive designs. Clearly, minimalism (an element of both form and function) is what is "in" for web-browser designs right now. We don't apparently need 8 menus with 20 submenus with 14 more sub-submenus, combined with 9 sections in the options menu, each with 15 subsections. We don't need 40 icons between the top of our web page and the bottom of our address bar.

      So, you can have your function (a web browser with less junk crammed into it, and therefore a lower probability of things going wrong) and I can have my form (a nice looking, easy to use minimalist web browser). Everyone wins.

    3. Re:Function before form by cyphercell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yea, I'm getting sick of this Firefox doesn't crash shit. Someone needs to start modding these fanbois troll. Not that I don't like FF, but it doesn't shit golden bricks either.

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
  2. of all the things to copy from Chrome by spyrochaete · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If there's one thing I hate about Chrome it's the way the tabs replace the normal title bar functionality. It makes the window harder to drag, harder to maximize, and basically throws 25 years of Windows usability standards out the window. I expect something like this from Apple but not from Firefox (or Google for that matter).

    A nonstandard UI is the epitome of developer arrogance. The tabs-on-bottom mockup is excellent, but the tabs-on-top concept needs to die on the drawing board.

    On the flip side, if Firefox 4.0 supports some of the new Windows 7 standards like Aero Peek controls I will be very pleased!

    1. Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome by VGPowerlord · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Tabs on top makes a sense, they just shouldn't be part of the title bar.

      I say they make sense because the address bar, back button, forward button, refresh/stop buttons, and home button are all part of the current tab, rather than the browser as a whole.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    2. Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, IE7 was originally designed with the combo stop/refresh/go button, but they recieved a ot of feedback from users that stop and start/refresh are distinct functions and should not be combined. Eventually, Microsoft relented and made stop seperate.

  3. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by EvanED · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just as a counterpoint, I decidedly don't like the tabs-on-top design, don't use Chrome in part because of that UI, and would probably switch to Opera if Firefox didn't make tabs-on-bottom an option. ;-)

  4. Why transparency? by JPLemme · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Am I the only person who thinks transparency sucks? If it's too transparent, the content can be hard to pick out from the background. And if it's only a little transparent (OS X), the menu can look like it got smudged with dirt. Are we expected to use only low-contrast, muted backgrounds?

    If I wanted to see a partially obscured, blurry version of what's behind my browser, I can just smear my glasses with Vaseline and minimize Firefox.

    1. Re:Why transparency? by sloth+jr · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I don't have mod points, otherwise you'd get them. There's zero functionality derived from transparency for UI elements.

      It doesn't look cool. It's the UI equivalent of spinners and under-chassis neon lighting.

    2. Re:Why transparency? by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Yup you're right! . . . Apple >> System Preferences >> Desktop & Screensaver >> Translucent Menu Bar

      My favorite thing to uncheck.

  5. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by zevans · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Tabs should be down the side. A monitor (even 4:3) is too wide to read comfortably all the way across, ergo, tabs and toolbars should be on the side where they are not using screen estate that can otherwise be used effectively for browsing.

    Yes, I know Firefox does it with plugins, but I don't understand how this basic mistake can have stayed with us for what, 10 years+ of tabbed browsing...

    --
    "... and more and more now there are all kinds of electronic goodies available" -- Pink Floyd 1972
  6. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by EvanED · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with tabs down the side is you either get (1) vertical text or (2) tabs that are as wide as they are above the window in which case the tab list takes up a HUGE proportion of the screen real estate, virtually all wasted unless you actually have a couple dozen tabs in one window to start eating up the available rows.

    Neither of these options are very good IMO; I'd rather spend a few pixels of vertical height then have to read sideways text.

    (Incidentally, this is why I never liked the taskbar on the side of the screen either. Maybe I should give it another shot with Windows 7 now that the taskbar is a little more icon-based and less word-based.)

  7. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    No. Tabs should be diagonal. The obvious advantages of this are so obvious that I don't need to mention them. It can be mathematically proven, too, that diagonal tabs are the most aesthetic and comfortable layout. If you weren't so educated stupid by evil educators, you would realize the power of the four-corner diagonal tab.

  8. Options. by Kamineko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Please make it look like Firefox 2. I want it to look like an ordinary Windows XP application. Nothing flashy.

    And if you do add something flashy, please make sure to ADD IN THE OPTION TO DISABLE IT. Options are GOOD. KEEP ADDING OPTIONS. Make the options VISIBLE.

  9. Re:Nice but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why keep it the same across platforms? No, seriously, do you use Firefox on multiple platforms AND are you bothered by the differences in UI between the various Firefox'en? You'll live.

    The interface should be native to the platform, adhering to the platform's UI standards. The binaries location and configuration location should adhere to the platform's application development standards. Adhere to standards, they are good for you. (Note; Experts only: deviate from standards when necessary)

    Programs that use non-native, non-standard UI (Quicktime on Windows) are quickly (haha) reviled. And for good reason.

  10. Combo Button is hateful. by argent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I really hate the combo button. Safari introduced this and I started running into the following problems:

    1. A page is loading slowly (slow site, busy computer, DNS lookup failure, ...) and I go to click "stop", but the load finishes just before I click, the stop icon changed to a reload, and now I have to wait through it loading again.

    2. A page is refreshing on a schedule. I decide I want to reload it sooner, so I go to click the reload button... just as it starts reloading, so now the automatic reload gets stopped.

    Moving it to the end of the address box in the latest Safari is just an extra layer of manure on the sandwich.

    1. Re:Combo Button is hateful. by argent · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Press CTRL/CMD-backspace or CTRL/CMD-W before hitting submit next time. The fact that it's possible to avoid using a bad user-interface doesn't mean it's not a bad user-interface.

      If you want to run some minimalist browser under Ratpoison, you're welcome to it.

  11. They are abusing moderation for a long time now by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That is exactly why we must meta moderate like crazy these days. Troll has a very strict explanation and believe or not, it means exactly same on slashdot.

    These idiots really confuse Slashdot moderation with digg down&up while Slashdot does make a favor to them, overrated and underrated are exactly for that purpose.

    There are unhappy people with every kind of browser&application out there and yes, in this age, a browser should be really fast, simple to use and stable having very good standards support. It is valid for every browser out there. It is not just Firefox who doesn't get people's concerns, I have heard first time that system's default browser can't download files. It is Safari for Snow Leopard. Way to go Apple... All of this for run a freaking in 64bit mode, hurry of release to show finger to MS. See Firefox loving moderator? Every browser these days are a bit disconnected from users actual needs and demands.

    1. Re:They are abusing moderation for a long time now by AlHunt · · Score: 5, Informative

      >That is exactly why we must meta moderate like crazy these days

      Except that Metamoderation these days doesn't present you with already-moderated posts. At least, not for me. All I get is a selection of 10 random posts and I have to decide if you, the average Slashdotter, would benefit. Nearly every post I'm given to "meta-moderate" us not previously moderated.

      Now, someone mod me down.

      --
      1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
    2. Re:They are abusing moderation for a long time now by AlHunt · · Score: 4, Informative

      I understand that meta moderation is moderating the moderator. My problem is that when I go to meta-moderate, none of the posts I'm given have been moderated. Go re-read the paragraph at the top of the meta-moderation page. It's changed in the last few months.

      --
      1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
  12. Follow The Leader by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Google or Apple but their tabs in a rotating circular drum surrounding the window, you can be certain that Open Source developers would follow swiftly behind. It's disappointing to see it confirmed that Open source will never, ever have the confidence to put forth its own designs, paradigms or new innovations directly in front of users unless a glitz and glamour company has broken the mould first. The worst part is how eagerly FOSS developers ape the latest trend. A little dignity would be a lot more digestible.

    By contrast, Microsoft would simply wait to see what Apple did in their next revision before implementing what was kept.

    To the topic at hand, Tabs on top are an atrocious development, unfit for human consumption. They are the product of people who spend too much of their time using flashy, UI paradigm-less monstrosities like Winamp skins, Flash site and those awful OSX floating widget things, not to mention that ridiculous top bar. Inclusing that was the worst decision GNOME has ever made. Most normal people on the other hand expect applications and button that stay within their window box, that don't warp or distort when your mouse draws near, and that don't look like they just had a full body wax job done. There was very little wrong with the 1997-era user interface.

    I curse the Cult of Mac and what it has wrought on my UI's over the last 10 years. I'm hoping the Order of Google will not cast its baleful eye towards what little sanity remains in modern day GUIs.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  13. Re:Nice but.. by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I dunno...

    What is the deal today with trying to get rid of the simple menu bar??

    It is so easy and straightforward for finding things you use all the time....

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  14. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by vodevil · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think mathematically and aesthetically, tabs should be placed in a fibonacci spiral.

  15. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by mounthood · · Score: 4, Funny

    Tabs should be diagonal.... It can be mathematically proven, too, that diagonal tabs are the most aesthetic and comfortable layout.

    Just get the Cantor Diagonal Tab add-on. It lets you have more tabs then you can count.

    --
    tomorrow who's gonna fuss
  16. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 4, Funny

    I can see how diagonal tabs might seem sensible, but have we become so mired in the UI design rut that we're unable to take the concept of tabs to its logical conclusion?

    What is needed is for the tabs to be split out of the application and handled by a hardware peripheral. Something with tactile feedback when you activate tabs. Mozilla International have conducted research (I lost the link but you can Bing it) that shows that people with alternating yellow and black tabs are paid 12.5% more on average.

    So, yellow and black, and hardware. Caterpillar, fill this market need!

    --
    Blearf. Blearf, I say.
  17. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And to me the fact that you and he can have this little disagreement is one of the reasons I choose the Firefox over Chrome and Safari. Thanks to the easy additions of plugins and themes you can have it your way, he can have it his way, and I can have it my way. I just can't go back to the "one size fits all " UI of IE, Chrome, and Safari, as the one size fits all never fits me.

    I just hope in FF4 it is as skinnable as FF3, so I don't get trapped in that bling bling nightmare or I may have to go back to one of the other Gecko based like Seamonkey or Kmeleon. It is bad enough that they screwed up dialup access in the 3.5.x branch, so now I have to keep the 3.0x and Seamonkey on my flash for my dialup customers, but if FF4 makes it too hard to change the look (and they stick with that "Chrome wannabe" look) I'll just have to go elsewhere, because frankly I hate the Chrome UI. With as much time as gets spent in a browser I want it MY way, not what some designers deems is best for me. Is that too much to ask, or is the future doomed to be dominated by browsers and OSes that have more bling than a 14 year old's cell phone?

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  18. Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! by Lord+Ender · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your post contains twelve sentences. The majority of those sentences (seven) end in exclamation points. This is in a post regarding tab placement in computer software.

    You really need to switch to decaf. Seriously.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  19. Re:Nice but.. by Korin43 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I disagree. Firefox on Ubuntu should look like it belongs on Linux. These mockups would be horribly out of place on any Linux desktop that isn't set up to look exactly like Vista/Win7.