xPerFeXioN Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Does anyone know how to get Speed Dial to work? I Have it so it Bypasses the addon compatibility check but none of the dials show up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon H Supervisor Posted July 22, 2010 Supervisor Share Posted July 22, 2010 a lot of extensions are broken right now for the nightlies because of the new version of gecko i believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Thoughts? I don't get why they go through all this trouble getting their non-native interface to look like a half-baked native Aqua interface if they could just use the truly Aqua native interface instead and all the services it offers. Oh well... Just wondering what the point of having tabs on top is in this manner as it saves zero screen estate. Is it just having tabs on top for the sake of having tabs on top? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunstark Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I don't get why they go through all this trouble getting their non-native interface to look like a half-baked native Aqua interface if they could just use the truly Aqua native interface instead and all the services it offers. Oh well... Just wondering what the point of having tabs on top is in this manner as it saves zero screen estate. Is it just having tabs on top for the sake of having tabs on top? Here is the answer: http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/2010/06/24/why-tabs-are-on-top-in-firefox-4/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 For some reason the video won't load for me, I'll try to watch it later. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted July 23, 2010 Veteran Share Posted July 23, 2010 I don't get why they go through all this trouble getting their non-native interface to look like a half-baked native Aqua interface if they could just use the truly Aqua native interface instead and all the services it offers. Oh well... ... Because it's very limited compared to XUL, there's a reason Camino doesn't do extensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m4cfly Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Hi there, What do you think about this ? I found a tut here : http://alctplus.blogspot.com/2010/07/firefox-4-beta-how-to-move-orange.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogas04 Posted July 23, 2010 Author Share Posted July 23, 2010 Hi there, What do you think about this ? I found a tut here : http://alctplus.blog...ove-orange.html Looks cool! But i don't like the text Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirkburn Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Looks cool! But i don't like the text Indeed, "Fx" is the correct shortening of Firefox, not MFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SakuraKira Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 I don't get why they go through all this trouble getting their non-native interface to look like a half-baked native Aqua interface if they could just use the truly Aqua native interface instead and all the services it offers. Oh well... Just wondering what the point of having tabs on top is in this manner as it saves zero screen estate. Is it just having tabs on top for the sake of having tabs on top? The video that Dunstark linked was released here on Neowin a while back as a news item, and it was very interesting. They didn't do it for aesthetics, or to copy Chrome, there is an actual design philosophy behind it that is explained. However, keep in mind that the video only addresses the desision to make tabs-on-top the default, not whether to add them in at all. You are still able to change it if you want. Because it's very limited compared to XUL, there's a reason Camino doesn't do extensions. I think he was simply referring to the actual buttons that Fx uses, not the guts of the application. When they were designing Fx 3.0 and trying so hard to make it "fit in" with the new look for Vista (and failing miserably), I had similar thoughts. -- First time using the new multiquote feature on Neowin, it's awesome! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Hammond Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Are there any gmail notifiers that work with this yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Because it's very limited compared to XUL, there's a reason Camino doesn't do extensions. Yet anno 2010 XUL still fails at executing basic tasks such as the animations that have been part of Aqua since 2001, giving the Firefox UI about the same level of refinement as Windows XP's Luna. I can't stand the fact it still lacks out-the-box-Mac OS X features like in-window Dictionary when hitting cmd + ctrl + D. And no, I don't want to install a bunch of extensions for functionality that the OS already offers by default. Safari 5 does do extensions while maintaining Aqua and Mac OS X' other build-in services. Maybe Mozilla should be looking into the same direction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted July 23, 2010 Veteran Share Posted July 23, 2010 Animations have nothing to do with XUL, they're something separate (and they're being added). The dictionary is actually implemented via the Accessibility APIs, which has fairly limited support on the Gecko side (they ran into a whole bunch of bugs in the OS, which were reported back in 2008, and Apple haven't done anything about them, so support is on hold until Apple fixes things) The Safari extensions (like Chrome's) are fairly limited in what they can do, compared to normal Firefox extensions. But Mozilla is working on implementing something similar (although that won't change the fact that XUL/CSS/SVG/HTML is more flexible than building the stuff in Interface Builder) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoapyHamHocks Member Posted July 23, 2010 Member Share Posted July 23, 2010 Yet anno 2010 XUL still fails at executing basic tasks such as the animations that have been part of Aqua since 2001, giving the Firefox UI about the same level of refinement as Windows XP's Luna. I can't stand the fact it still lacks out-the-box-Mac OS X features like in-window Dictionary when hitting cmd + ctrl + D. And no, I don't want to install a bunch of extensions for functionality that the OS already offers by default. Safari 5 does do extensions while maintaining Aqua and Mac OS X' other build-in services. Maybe Mozilla should be looking into the same direction... Safari can't do themes ;) . I agree it would be nice for the program to integrate with the OS, but the amount of customization Firefox has it unrivaled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeromejg Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 It does look a little like Chrome. So far it seems to be of sound stuff. I note that it is slightly faster than the older versions. It is also a good thing to have a clean interface. The older versions used to require a bit of work to keep them under control. I am looking forward to the next release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torrentthief Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 i wonder if beta 2 will be released today or if it will be delayed again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Animations have nothing to do with XUL, they're something separate (and they're being added). So where are they after over 9 years of Mac OS X? And with animations I mean the the fluid default ones (like the roll-out of dialog windows from the toolbar) provided by the OS, not crummy custom ones... Firefox contextual menus don't seem to do the blur effect either. Safari can't do themes ;) . I agree it would be nice for the program to integrate with the OS, but the amount of customization Firefox has it unrivaled. Thank God Safari can't do themes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted July 23, 2010 Veteran Share Posted July 23, 2010 So where are they after over 9 years of Mac OS X? And with animations I mean the the fluid default ones (like the roll-out of dialog windows from the toolbar) provided by the OS, not crummy custom ones... Firefox contextual menus don't seem to do the blur effect either. ... Sheets roll out for me, and contextual menus have the blur. And animations are being implemented, but they aren't that important in the scheme of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Sheets roll out for me, and contextual menus have the blur. Not sure what build you're using but the latest Firefox 4 nightly I'm using just instantly pops out the dialog window when customizing the toolbar. There's no default dialog window animation there. Granted, contextual menus do blur the background now. And animations are being implemented, but they aren't that important in the scheme of things. They (like tabs and bookmarks sliding around) should be there by default. Just like in every other application that uses a fully native interface... Period. It's quite apparent that the animations that are there aren't the real deal. For example the window resize animation of the Preferences window is way too fast and rather glitchy. I have to say the tabs on top do have a certain "cool" look to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted July 23, 2010 Veteran Share Posted July 23, 2010 Ah yeah, I keep forgetting about the customise bit, it's not a normal sheet, it's just styled like one (normal sheets slide in/out). I'd personally like to see that removed/updated (it doesn't fit on Windows or Linux either) As for the animations, they're being added but they aren't important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 As for the animations, they're being added but they aren't important. Quite frankly the lack of them still makes Firefox feel awkward on Mac OS X. We aren't using 1999's OSs anymore and in the way the graphical user interface has progressed on the Mac Firefox should have followed suit. Especially after 9 years. It's not like Aqua was introduced by Apple a month ago. That said this isn't unique to Firefox. Opera and Chrome suffer from the exact same problem. At this point Firefox 4 probably is the best looking one of the three on Mac OS X by default. Opera and Chrome are just awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Udedenkz Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Firefox seems to have gotten another speed improvement this week - it seems a lot more snappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hylands Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 What happened to my firefox? I've tried disabling all plugins but that didn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoapyHamHocks Member Posted July 23, 2010 Member Share Posted July 23, 2010 What happened to my firefox? I've tried disabling all plugins but that didn't work. Disable Strata40 and StrataBuddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hylands Posted July 23, 2010 Share Posted July 23, 2010 Disable Strata40 and StrataBuddy. Thanks, it somehow enabled itself because I just got that problem this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts