Firefox 2 Interface

[herme3]

I've tested the new Firefox 2.0. I believe it loads web pages well, but the user interface looks very bad. It still has the old "File" and "Edit" toolbar buttons at the top.

 

Look at the interfaces of Firefox 2 and Internet Explorer 7:

 

 

Why did Firefox keep the old interface of IE6 and Firefox 1? None of the upcoming Windows Vista programs I've seen have the "File" and "Edit" toolbar buttons anymore. Firefox needs to update their interface by next year or they are going to appear very outdated.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

This isn't exactly the best place to make suggestions to the Mozilla developers.

[Dak]

file edit etc are familiar. change for the sake of change sucks, cos then you dont know where anything is.

 

also, the file edit etc layout is the norm for most OS...

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I might point out that Vista compatibility is on the list of things to do for Firefox 3.0. Given that 3.0 is due to come out in early 2007, it should be in time for Vista (if perhaps a few months behind).

[alan2here]

Firefox > IE

Fact!

[Klaynos]

One of the things I REALLY dislike about the new IE is the removal of the file etc. menus.

 

But herme3 the interfaces in firefox is fully user changeable, if you don't like them, remove them... Talking about user interfaces though:

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6345836888710765277

http://www.saguratus.com/nick/beryl/layers/

[jeremyhfht]

http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/01/firefox_vs_internet_explorer.html

 

QED.

[ecoli]

what's wrong with 'file' and 'edit' buttons?

[Sayonara]

None of the upcoming Windows Vista programs I've seen have the "File" and "Edit" toolbar buttons anymore.

 

Yes, they do - they are simply not visible by default on some programmes.

[herme3]

Since I've become more familiar with the new interfaces on some of the Windows Vista programs, I would never want to go back to the old "File" "Edit" and the other old menu buttons.

 

I often receive phone calls from people who have a question about their computer. If I'm not in front of a computer, I usually have to ask them to check under every menu for the option they are looking for. If they are using IE7, I just tell them to check under "Page" if it's related to the web page or I tell them to check under "Tools" if it's related to the browser. Other options, such as the printing options, are easy because they are all under the printer icon. If someone has a question about an option in Firefox 2, we usually have to go on a scavenger hunt to see which menu button they threw it under.

 

Yes, it might take a while to get used to the new style of interfaces. I'm still having a little trouble getting used to the new Office 2007 applications. However, I'm sure people will prefer an organized interface once they get used to it. In the meantime, most of the programs will temporarily display the old options if you press the "alt" button.

[Sayonara]

It sounds like you are saying "Firefox 2 shouldn't have a menu bar because I prefer it to not be there."

 

It takes a while before conventions take time to be adopted, never mind become a de facto standard. Let's not forget Vista is not even on general release yet.

[herme3]

I'm not saying this only because of my opinion. Interfaces with a more organized menu bar will be the new standard in Windows Vista programs. Even though Windows Vista is not available to the public yet, Internet Explorer 7 has been released to the public. Since Internet Explorer has already adopted the new standard, Firefox needs to do the same if they wish to stay competitive.

 

The reason many people, including myself, downloaded Firefox 1 was because it was more modern than IE6. It featured tabbed browsing and other features that made IE6 appear obsolete. Now, IE7 is making Firefox look obsolete. I believe that Firefox 2 was a huge mistake for Mozilla, and they are really going to have to play catch-up with Firefox 3.

 

Firefox 3 should not just adopt the new standard, but they should improve it. Firefox 1 adopted the features of IE6 and they added tabbed browsing and extra security features. Now, IE7 has adopted the features of Firefox 1 and they added better interface. So Firefox not only needs to adopt the new interface, but they should be thinking about a new feature they can add to the browser. In a browser war, the goal is to stay one step ahead of the competition.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I might point out that Vista compatibility is a major goal for Firefox 3.0.

 

In case you didn't read my previous post.

[herme3]

I might point out that Vista compatibility is a major goal for Firefox 3.0.

 

In case you didn't read my previous post.

 

Right, but what do they consider to be "Vista compatibility"? Do they mean just having the browser work properly with the operating system, or do they mean redesigning the interface?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=352420

[herme3]

Is that form for making suggestions to the Mozilla development team or just reporting bugs?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

That's the Vista support tracking bug. Look at the list of bugs that it depends on to see what they're doing for Vista.

[herme3]

That's the Vista support tracking bug. Look at the list of bugs that it depends on to see what they're doing for Vista.

 

Ok, thank you Cap'n.

 

In Windows Vista (Beta 1)' date=' there is a dedicated Downloads folder in the

%USERPROFILE% folder. It would probably be a good idea to change the default

from Desktop to Downloads. I'm not sure if there is an environment variable for

Downloads...if there is, it would probably be a good idea to use it.[/quote']

 

This is something that I don't like about Windows Vista. What is the purpose of the "Downloads" folder? When you download something, you need to open your user profile folder, and then open the downloads folder, and then open the file your downloaded. What's wrong with just downloading a file directly to the desktop?

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Ask Microsoft.

 

All Mozilla is doing there is conforming to the standards supplied by Microsoft, just like you want them to.

[-Demosthenes-]

But herme3 the interfaces in firefox is fully user changeable, if you don't like them, remove them...

 

You could do this.

 

I like most of the menus though, I did take down edit and help, they weren't of much use. I've got everything into one bar (plus the row where the tabs go). Don't have any navigation buttons, use mouse gestures for that You can really customize it any way you want.

[Dak]

This is something that I don't like about Windows Vista. What is the purpose of the "Downloads" folder? When you download something, you need to open your user profile folder, and then open the downloads folder, and then open the file your downloaded. What's wrong with just downloading a file directly to the desktop?

 

the desktop gets cluttered, and takes longer to display. given windows track-record with malware, it might be to allow for the auto-scanning of anything written to the folder, or setting the os to auto-sandbox anything run from that folder, run them with limited privelages etc. maintainance programs could auto-delete/archive the contents of the downloads folder every now-and-then...

 

who knows? i guess m$ just thought it'd be a useful convention.

[bluesmudge]

If FF had been released with the vista style interface it wouldn't fit in with the rest of XP - which is all they need to care about untill vista is released.

 

If they adopted the Vista standard it would look as unatural to its environment as IE7 does . . . as pretty as you may think it is it doesn't match your current XP environment.

 

The one thing that makes FF absolutely brilliant appart from its security, tabbed browsing, useability etc etc is the fact its not made by people who like IE which is fine by me.

[Klaynos]

If FF had been released with the vista style interface it wouldn't fit in with the rest of XP - which is all they need to care about untill vista is released.

 

If they adopted the Vista standard it would look as unatural to its environment as IE7 does . . . as pretty as you may think it is it doesn't match your current XP environment.

 

The one thing that makes FF absolutely brilliant appart from its security, tabbed browsing, useability etc etc is the fact its not made by people who like IE which is fine by me.

 

Or all the other os's it runs on...

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Firefox already has two (or three) separate default styles, each customized for a different operating system. They're mostly the same though.

[Sayonara]

Interfaces with a more organized menu bar will be the new standard in Windows Vista programs.

But it is not the standard now, and even if it becomes a de facto standard through sheer market force that does not behove other developers to follow suit.

 

Now, IE7 is making Firefox look obsolete.

Looking obsolete is not the same as being obsolete.

 

Hiding the menu system that you have been training people to become accustomed to for the better part of two decades is a massive gamble in terms of usability, and it remains to be seen - by a LONG way - if it will pay off in any way.