Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Planning Firefox Metro For Windows 8 On December 10
An anonymous reader writes "Mozilla is finally getting close to releasing a Metro version of its Firefox browser that will run on Windows RT as well as the tablet-side of Windows 8. The touch flavor of the app will arrive on December 10 along with Firefox 26. That's assuming, of course, that there won't be more delays. Given what we've seen so far, we wouldn't be surprised to see a final Metro version arrive in 2014."
Fuck FireFox, they jack around with it every version, adding or removing features based on crack logic, and breaking shit for the hell of it. They even made it block Youtube just to fuck with us with their "mixed mode" https paranoia lies. Jerkasses!
Unless it's just a static JPG inside of a program window that says "WHY ARE YOU USING WINDOWS 8, IDIOT?!" then why bother? It's enabling/encouraging Microsoft. It's right up there with Google releasing a new maps app for iOS5 right when people were getting mad.
Summary is incorrect.
I can't wait to see if they can finish it before RT is canceled.
Wouldn't be the first time they denied and denied and then summarily canceled a project with no explaination.
Usually it starts with a section leadership change , or a Spring re-org.. then suddenly.. "We've decided to go in another direction.."
As for Metro.. what if like "SIlverlight" they decide to support that as an alternative user interface to the year 2133.. but no further updates will be forth coming.
but they really should focus on making a browser for the desktop that doesn't run like utter shat.
no survivors.. film at 11.
When is Windows 9 coming out?
Lets just end this already. It's not even worth talking about.
Hummm, who actually wants this? I mean "Microsoft", "Metro" ... And then apparently assuming one of the very few people who own one of those coulourful tily things also want to replace the already MS Browser (t/m) with Firefox? I just don't see it happening much.
So there's a new term for surfing the web? It's almost like surfing the streets with boards at the suburbs with skates. Bleh. Could they do something like, add a parameter to the icon or something? This will be touchy for a desktop.
The obvious reason is that over time vendor support for all previous versions of Windows will cease, leaving Windows 8.1 and above as your only option
With less and less people buying hardware which is bundled with win8, you think the vendors will keep on giving support to it ?
but they really should focus on making a browser for the desktop that doesn't run like utter shat.
I know reality doesn't sink in easily in nerd's minds but the firefox team doesn't give a flying fuck about tech savy users and ranting about it won't have any effect at all. The only viable routes at this point are :
1 - use a different browser (and no Chrome is not the answer)
2 - take the firefox source code and fork it. Forget about chasing the latest useless shiny and start fixing serious bugs and revamp the UI so that it caters to the tech savy user first (and by restriction to the lambda user as well). In other terms revamp Firefox so that it gives back the browser experience to the user.
For christ's sake, people forked Gnome, is there nobody at all that can fork Firefox and fix it ?
This. Fork Fx at 3.6, patch in the security patches, and ship it.
I can feel your pain. I Do find this technique of replying to yourself quite exciting, While attaching the product, without providing any substance. Here is http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/chrome-27-firefox-21-opera-next,3534-12.html a comprehensive comparison' Fastest Browser is Firefox.
Looking at what has happened since the new releases. I am personally enjoying the fact that features get delivered to me sooner like Isolated Plug-ins; WebM playback; Hardware Acceleration; Do Not Track...The List really does go on and on. The reality is though the UI has actually changed very little...and power users get advanced features like about:config; bout:memory; about:cache, as well as a whole plethora of plugins to play with. Its the reasons why I prefer it to Chrome...A none too shabby browser itself (http://gs.statcounter.com/ wow look at its adoption in spite of Internet Explorer monopolistic bundling)
The bottom line is Internet Explorer is behind, they are doing their customers a disservice by including it at all, as alternative browsers continue to provide a faster; safer; experience.
Well, every major version of Windows going back to 1.0 has come out around 3-4 years apart (except XP->Vista, which took 6+ years). So it's likely that Windows 9 would come out in in the beginning of 2016 or 2017
http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/28/3693368/windows-blue-update-low-cost I thought the plan was to keep the Windows 8 Numbering for now, and then push towards yearly updates for Microsoft’s OS. In fact I thought that is what 8.1 was. I thought it was a great idea.
You lost us as soon as you said XP is better than 7.
It isn't
Actually there are a few ways that XP is better than 7, Hardware requirements being a major one (It was sold on netbooks for years after it had been replaced...and never ran with 7). It is part of the reason why http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 for Windows XP is still around 40%.
Microsoft has changed UI name, seemingly due to trademark clash. It was even on /.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/08/03/1221242/microsoft-drops-metro-name-for-windows-8-ui
Yes. And nobody remembers the new name because it's completely unmemorable. "Windows 8 style UI"? Please. That isn't specific enough to refer to the tiled portion of the interface. It could be anything in the UI. Hence, when people describe what they (mostly) hate about the Windows 8 UI, it's still "Metro" as far as anybody but Microsoft is concerned.
Yes, everybody please refer to it as TIFKAM (The Interface Formerly Known As Metro).
Huh?
I currently use an operating system other than Windows on the PC that I use most often. This makes me an edge case. Would IE 10 still be better than Firefox in your opinion even if one would have to buy a copy of Windows and run it in VirtualBox in order to use it?
Source code is useful for porting an application without having to run an entire operating system in a virtual machine. A port of Internet Explorer to OS X or X11/Linux would have to start with the source code. Unlike IE, Firefox is already ported.
You could try to get people onto Xubuntu. Its Xfce panel resembles the familiar versions of the Windows operating system enough that people can learn it within a day.
The remaining 1% of the time (when I need to find an app by name), I hit the Win key and start typing
The problem here is that while you're typing, the context of the currently open applications' windows disappears. It's like the effect of amnesia while going through a doorway. It'd be fine if the Start Screen were semi-transparent, but because it's opaque and full-screen, it forces a subconscious context switch. And that's why I still install Classic Shell, so that the search-by-name box doesn't distract me by covering everything.
Yep, no good alternative has taken hold, so let's just call it Metro and be done with it.
I'm old enough to remember that when Windows 95 came out there was all this ranting on the newsgroups against this new 'start menu' and people used various hacks to get the Windows 3.1 Program Manager (basically a screen full of icons) to display in Windows 95.
(Now get off my lawn, etc.)
The metro screen is the start menu so many people seem to think disappeared.
The problem is that it covers the whole screen, including the task you were working on when you wanted to start an additional application for the task. Rapid switching in and out of a full screen application lead to forgetting what you were doing, as I pointed out before.
And ie runs on wine
Since when? I see "garbage" ratings for IE 9 in Wine AppDB. Besides, how should a user of OS X or Linux obtain a copy of Internet Explorer? As I see it, the only lawful way is to rip it out of a genuine copy of Windows.
So everyone that uses alt-tab forgets what they are doing?
Use of application switching shortcuts, such as Alt+Tab, does not imply full-screen operation. On PCs that I use, I often overlap windows somewhat and use Alt+Tab to raise and focus a particular window.
Since then "Metro" has taken on a slightly derogatory connotation for this user interface. Some who refer to it as Metro do so to be mildly insulting.
You know, Microsoft also tried to call it "Modern UI" for a while, which was very ironic since much of this design of full screen, typing commands in to a box, and memorizing key combinations is a major throwback to the DOS/Windows 1.x days.
Reached by Slashdot staff reporters, one user who liked the Metro interface said, "This is exciting! I'd really like an opportunity to use a different browser."
The other user who likes Metro couldn't be reached.
I hope they don't force this on Windows 8 users. My folks would hate it. Currently they live most of their lives on the desktop, save for card games and starting applications with the Metro menu. But if they were forced to live in the single-application-full-screen "vision" of Metro for Firefox, they'd be *pissed*.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
What a monumental waste of resources by Mozilla and the Firefox devs.
It has the same network issues that Vista had, as well as problems with accessing shares and shared devices in mixed environments. It also has lousy support of not so old printers, and it slows down even worse than XP after a few months of patches. I know of one small office that recently replaced their very old, but well maintained XP PCs for Win7 PCs, and there were serious misgivings to the point that it was felt it was a mistake not to have gotten Macs, even if it meant running Win7 in a VM for certain programs.
This makes me an edge case
And makes your needs entirely unimportant and irrelevant.
I'm sort of disappointed at the pro-tyranny-of-the-majority vibe that I've seen lately on Slashdot. When IE had 90% market share, was the need for other web browsers in the first place "entirely unimportant and irrelevant"?
In my experience, Win+R works only if I list each application's individual directory in the PATH environment variable. It's useful on Linux, where almost all applications install to /usr/bin, less so on Windows, where applications tend to install to folders within Program Files or Program Files (x86). So it works with utilities that ship as part of Windows (Win+R cmd or Win+R mstsc) but not much else. When did this change?
Too many apps are coming out now that parrot the "Metro" look and it's damn ugly. I just fired up Foxit Reader the other day and it had updated itself automatically with the new "Metro" look to match Win8 and I was like "Damn, what is this - Windows 3.1?!?" Because it looks like shit!
It's all flat and everything is square with an outline. Just like Windows 3.1
It's a giant leap backwards
What's taking them so long to offer up a Metro style version of Chrome? Fear of cannibalizing laptops running ChromeOS is a lame excuse, and as nice as Google's current Metro style app is, it's just a mini browser on crack and steroids.
You mean you actually have this problem
Yes, and I'm not the only one who thinks it's "a cognitive burden".