Slashdot Mirror


Firefox 23 Arrives With New Logo, Mixed Content Blocker, and Network Monitor

An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla today officially launched Firefox 23 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. Improvements include the addition of a share button, mixed content blocker, and network monitor on the desktop side (release notes). The new desktop version was available on the organization's FTP servers last night, but that was just the initial release of the installers. Firefox 23 has now officially been released over on Firefox.com and all existing users should be able to upgrade to it automatically. As always, the Android version is trickling out slowly on Google Play."

34 of 365 comments (clear)

  1. I hope there's an easy social integration disabler by intermodal · · Score: 5, Funny

    We use firefox across our work network, and for obvious reasons, the head of our company has ordered Facebook blocked. The last thing I want is everyone being ordered to use Internet Explorer as a result. Even better if we can install one that doesn't even have those functions.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  2. Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by sconeu · · Score: 4, Informative

    AND... user prefs returned to default?

    Thank the FSM I'm using NoScript.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      And it doubles down the devilry with: “Load images automatically” ... removed from preferences and reset to defaults

      So they re-enable javascript and image loading on people who actively disabled them. Removing the option from preferences isn't evil but silently re-enabling them is criminal. My apologies to them if they throw up a "we would like to re-enable these features" dialog on upgrade, but it certainly doesn't sound like it.

      Frankly I hope some people get their boxes owned as a result, sue mozilla and take them to the cleaners. Even some mobile users could get them for data charges incurred. If I used it, I'd have 50M daily data cap before I went into 2c/M charging on my payg sim, how many "average" tabs would I have to have open by default on launch for the JS+images to chew through my limit (remember _everything_ JS and image related would be uncached at that point)?

    2. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I've got a bad feeling about this!

      “Load images automatically” and Always show the tab bar” checkboxes removed from preferences and reset to defaults.

      It looks like they have been afflicted with the same "our way or the highway" disease that is ruining Gnome and Windows.

    3. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by rudy_wayne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And it doubles down the devilry with: “Load images automatically” ... removed from preferences and reset to defaults

      So they re-enable javascript and image loading on people who actively disabled them. Removing the option from preferences isn't evil but silently re-enabling them is criminal. >

      What the fuck is wrong with these people? If I wanted a browser with a shitty UI and almost no configurability I would use Internet Explorer

    4. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by rudy_wayne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Chances are you can still modify those options through the about:config page

      Maybe . . . . for now. Until they completely remove it, even from about:config, like they did with the "always show tab bar" pref.

      What a bunch of fucking retards.

    5. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by BenFenner · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can not autoHide tabs any longer. They've removed the option from the UI, and the entry in about:config is no longer honored. It has been completely stripped. I'm stuck with FF 22 until they reserve this decision.

    6. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What the fuck is wrong with these people? If I wanted a browser with a shitty UI and almost no configurability I would use Internet Explorer

      That's funny, because Internet Explorer does less to hide your (relatively limited) configuration options.
      Sure, FF's about:config has everything, but if you don't know what you're looking for, good luck wading through the 10,000 options.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    7. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The real reason here is money. Viewing images means you see ads, enabling javascript means you see ads. Mozilla is firmly in the pay of the big web advertisers and want to make sure their buddies are not inconvenienced. As more and more users learn about ways to secure their browsers and protect against malicious advertisements Mozilla will keep removing these loopholes and advertisers will keep rewarding Mozilla with paychecks.

    8. Re:Removed "Disable Javascript" check box by BenFenner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I looked into it. Do they have a browser-only option? I don't need a whole Internet Suite.

  3. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 5, Informative

    If Facebook is blocked then users will be unable to use any Facebook integration features in Firefox... I don't see a problem here?

  4. tag removed by Art3x · · Score: 5, Funny

    <blink>No!!!</blink> They removed the blink tag!

  5. And another 3D icon bites the dust... by Retron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...well, a bit at least. This anti-skeuomorphic craze is pretty damned irritating - the new logo looks worse than the old one in my view, just as the Windows 8 theme looks worse than Aero Glass and iOS 7 looks worse than iOS 6. I had enough of 2D, flat icons in the 80s (when there weren't the resources to do better); I can only imagine the designers doing all this 2D stuff today weren't around back then.

  6. Mixed Content blocker is awesome for security, but by gQuigs · · Score: 4, Informative

    ..many sites still need to be updated to work with it. Likely some behind the firewall stuff as well. (And many of these sites break in IE10 and Chrome as well)

    See here for full details: https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2013/05/16/mixed-content-blocking-in-firefox-aurora/

    Basically it prevents loading active content (JS/CSS/etc) from a non-HTTPS source when the page is HTTPS.

    Also, if you are a HTTPS Everywhere user and wondering why sites like XKCD and NYtimes are no longer HTTPS, this is why.

  7. A new logo?? Eyeroll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hate to go all hipster on you guys, but here goes.

    I was using Firefox before it was cool. It was called Phoenix when the project started, then later renamed to Firebird. This was circa 2002/2003.

    It was a great browser: cross-platform, smaller than Mozilla, fast. Everything I wanted. I used FF for over ten years without problems. I was OK with playing whack-a-mole in the settings each new release, trying to keep my preferences for things consistent. But then the UI people showed up. At some point they completely re-arranged the user interface, breaking over a decade of my visual/muscle memory. Seriously, what the fuck guys? I guess they wanted to make it look more like Chrome. So I switched to Chrome.

    The Firefox project needs to get rid of all of the people who don't code but "contribute" by fucking around with the UI. So, FF team, you can take your new logo and jam it up your ass.

    1. Re:A new logo?? Eyeroll by Desler · · Score: 5, Informative

      Phoenix was the original name of Firefox until there were trademark issues woth Phoenix Technologies. Then it was callef Firebird but was changed because of the Firebird database project. It was not until Feb 2004 that it was finally named Firefox.

    2. Re:A new logo?? Eyeroll by Arker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only part I dont agree with here is switching to Chrome. That's jumping from the pan to the fire. Firefox is being run into the ground by idiots that want it to be Chrome - but Chrome already IS Chrome.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
  8. Dumbing down is out of hand by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The continual removal of configuration options from Firefox is not only insulting, it's pointless. I seriously doubt it reduces the amount of code for the browser by any significant amount.

    The day Firefox removes the ability to set client-side font overrides is the day I switch to Chrome. Currently that is the only feature left in Firefox that keeps me using it. For me, it's an invaluable feature, and I'm really annoyed that Firefox seems to be the only browser that supports the concept. After all, the whole point of HTML was that the client is supposed to control rendering, not the server.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    1. Re:Dumbing down is out of hand by BenFenner · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's one example. The browser.tabs.autoHide functionality has been completely stripped. You can no longer hide the tab bar. There was an explosion of posts about it today, so I'm not the only one crying over the loss of this feature.

  9. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Informative

    Adblock works just great as a first line of defense against Facebook. Same for any other http/https-based spyware sites.

    I for one hate those buggers so much I also serve an empty zone for {facebook,fbcdn}.{com,net} and friends in my DNS, and block their IP ranges just in case some new domain pops up, but that's probably overkill. If you don't trust your co-workers to not muck with Adblock settings, you can do the DNS trick. If you want my zone management scripts, shout, I can clean them up for public consumption.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  10. URL bar and search bar synced? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In version 22, I could use the URL bar to search for something via google and use the search box (on the right) for other searches without changing it. Now in 23, they are in sync. So if the right bar is set for "corporate bug search engine" the URL bar is set for that as well.

    Kinda liked being able to have two different search bars at the same time.

    I know I can use aliases in the URL bar (I use 'dir' to search the corporate directory), but this was a surprise.

  11. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by Animats · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes, there's a way to turn it off. Go to "about:config" and set "social.enabled" to False. This was previously the default.

  12. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by Gr8Apes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The biggest thing here is that Firefox doesn't need FB (or any) social integration. So why add it? As an add-on, sure, go for it. But not as part of the core.

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  13. Re:That's it, I'm staying at FF22 for now by sinij · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Won't work for long. I tried staying with 3.6 for a while and eventually everything broke.

  14. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by sinij · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I just don't understand how could you not see a problem with X integration in a web browser, where X is not directly related to displaying web content.

    This social media integration is not unlike bukake integration, sure some users might enjoy convenient access to their vice of choice, but it is unreasonable to assume that everyone wants to partake.

  15. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by intermodal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Agreed. Between this and the removal of easy javascript disabling, I'm leaning more and more toward jumping over to Seamonkey.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  16. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by intermodal · · Score: 4, Funny

    Windows 3.11 is also a tailor-made selection for your workgroups.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  17. Re:LOL by nmb3000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wow a share button?!?!

    This is what Mozilla is wasting time on now?

    Don't forget the NEW LOGO!

    http://cdn.thenextweb.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2013/06/firefox_logo.png

    I'm at a loss for words, but that picture tells you everything you need to know about the UI/art direction types at Mozilla. It's painful.

    --
    "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
    /)
  18. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know, with all these options in the "about:config", it would be a great feature to have some of this in the preferences instead of their trend to actually remove options from the users or make them difficult to find.

  19. Re:No longer able to autoHide tabs. by BenFenner · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While I appreciate your sentiment (trying to help) and that solution might work for some, I am not about to install a plug-in to gain back functionality I had to begin with. That is asinine for a single user, not to mention a non-starter when it comes to configuring the 1,000+ machines I support.

  20. Pale Moon Rocks! by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 4, Informative

    Pale Moon is a Firefox variant optimized for Windows and modern processors, but also keeps most of the missing features and interface complained about here on Slashdot. It also works with NoScript and the handful of other add-ons I've tried.

    Contrary to what Mozilla has done with their redesign of the user interface, Pale Moon will continue to provide a familiar set of controls and visual feedback similar to previous versions, including grouped navigation buttons of a decent size, a bookmarks toolbar that is enabled by default, tabs next to page content by default (easily switchable) and not in the least a functional status bar, to name a few things.

  21. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by InfiniteLoopCounter · · Score: 4, Funny

    Perhaps edit the HOSTS file so that facebook.com is sent to 127.0.0.1...It's already blocked at the firewall. I'm also aware of the about:config settings.

    Oh yeah. Well where I work it is blocked at the firewall, in the hosts file redirect to 127.0.0.1 on both the client computer and Internet cache computer, in both group policy and GPP that refreshes every 5 seconds, and a keylogger checks for typing the word "facebook" which then sends an electric shock to the chair of the person who typed it. Beat that!

  22. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by hobarrera · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nobody is forcing you to partake. Firefox is simply catering to people who want it. This is like complaining about Firefox adding support for any new feature you don't care about. They're not just here for you, you know.

    Why not praise them for their amazing work on bringing the core Gecko engine into the new decade? Or in further reducing the memory footprint of the browser?

    All those "social integration" features end up increasing the footprint of the browser, even if you don't use them.

    Or any number of other features that aren't just buzzword compliance issues?

    Hell, even their work on Firefox OS has helped resurrect their Electrolysis efforts. It's not like Mozilla's just been working on social media buttons, removing features, and shitty Chrome-like UIs. But here on Slashdot, that's all I ever hear about. Some nerds we turned out to be.

    Sure, Electrolysis is cool, but it could have been ready MONTHS ago if resources hadn't been shoved into useless stuff that actually belongs in a plugin.

  23. Re:I hope there's an easy social integration disab by unrtst · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why not praise them for their amazing work on...

    Because a simple option to disable or hide the social integration feature should be included.

    In this release, they also REMOVED the checkbox options for:
    * Enable javascript
    * Load images automatically
    * Always show the tab bar ...AND those options will be reset to the defaults! (ie. if you did set them before, too bad - your settings will NOT be retained, and you'll have go dig through about:config to set them back to how you had already chosen to customize them).
    IE. There's plenty of room for a new checkbox.

    Of course, I'm 99% sure the about:config will include options to control the new social features, so GGP's point is probably moot, or at least not as big a deal, but it certainly should have some way to disable it. IMO, that should be in the easily accessible preferences, but that's being continuously gutted and dumbed down.

    I don't get why the social thing isn't simply an add on. It could even be distributed with FF by default, but it makes little sense to include it as part of FF proper.