Meet the browser: Firefox Next

By bogas04
in Web Browser Discussion & Support

 Share

Recommended Posts

Veteran

bogas04

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Is there a about:config setting for UX 13.0a1 x86 to enable it? Assuming the new DM is that nice drop-down button. Strangely it worked for me yersterday on ux 64...

it was removed from 32bit versions (and from 64bit too , but its just that its not yet updated)

will come back after sometime :)

Grand Master

+Zlip792 MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

Some goody good bug fixes:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206438 (New Smooth scrolling algorithm - in inbound)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705877 (Some speedup in CSS - in inbound)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=726396 (WebGL regression - in inbound)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=729878 (New Layout for New Tab Page - in fx-team)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=673381 (Some more info in about:support - in inbound)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=735014 (Incremental GC related Snappy - in Inbound)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=498998 (Standard - in inbound)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697006 (Desktop support for WebApps - in inbound)

Mentor

BetaAddict

Posted
Posted

Same opinion. This one is much better than current one.

Better looking but feels laggy with all the gradient rendering and fade-in-fade-out highlights when you scroll the mouse of the ones of the boxes. But it's a step in the right direction.

Mentor

ArialBlue

Posted
Posted

Mozilla may try to oust Adobe Flash away from h264 enabled systems; a plug-ing free media experience may await us:

Asa Dotzler

Post reply

More message actions

Mar 13 (3 hours ago)

On 3/13/2012 8:55 PM, Chris Hofmann wrote: > What's really needed from

here forward is a heavy dose of website

> evangelism, and/or some incentives for websites to convert over,

> and some easy and guaranteed path they can deliver the kind of

> experience with either codec.

>

> Do we think all that is in place?

No. And I don't think it can be put in place.

There is no easy or guaranteed path they can deliver the same

experience. They have to first re-encode their library of content -

something that no one we've talked to other than YouTube (and Blizzard

has talked to other large catalogs) is willing to do. It's not easy or

cheap and it's got zero reward when everything just works with H.264

(even for Firefox because they'll have Flash fallback using that same

h.264 encoding for quite a while.) Next they have to re-build their

sites to do the right thing with H.264, WebM, and Flash fallback (and

probably several quality versions of each of those encodings) for all

the different desktop and mobile browsers. That's no easy task, not

cheap, and again with zero reward.

This isn't a "do x, y, and z, and it will work in Firefox" like the old

days. It currently "works" in Firefox as far as they're concerned. This

isn't a "re-encode once and never again" like "re-write for standards"

was in the old days. It's "double the encoding load, the site burden,

and user support issues" for the foreseeable future.

There is no carrot here. A free codec doesn't help when they still have

to pay for the non-free one to reach all of their Microsoft and Apple

users. They don't get better performance or quality from WebM. They get

something slightly less performant and slightly lower quality.

We are not going to win this one evangelizing a more expensive, slightly

lower quality solution that requires a whole lot of effort with no

obvious benefits. No matter how well it fits our values, it doesn't fit

their values.

Had adobe included WebM in Flash and Flash Media Server; had Google

dropped H.264 on Chrome and Android; maybe there'd be some opportunities

to try to get people to move to WebM as a global web solution but I

think that opportunity past us about 8 months ago with the massive rise

in Android and iPad usage and with the further cementing of h.264 as the

<video> element solution - both with more site use and with Adobe's

launch of a streaming h.264 to the <video> tag server product.

- A

Taken from discussion Google thing.

Veteran

bogas04

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The thumbnails on the new tab page looks terrible.

Yeah they do , they have just used bigger thumbnails but same crappy size of images... I think a new thumbnail service is on its way before NewTabPage lands for beta/stable...

Grand Master

The_Decryptor Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

The thumbnails on the new tab page looks terrible.

Yeah they do , they have just used bigger thumbnails but same crappy size of images... I think a new thumbnail service is on its way before NewTabPage lands for beta/stable...

Clear your cache or re-visit the pages. The thumbnail size was changed but you guys are still seeing your old cached copies.

Mentor

Kyang

Posted
Posted

If you remove a site from the about:tabs page it stores your selection and will not show that site again! I accidentally removed a site I wanted to pin and know never can?

If you bookmark the site, you should be able to drag the bookmark from either the bookmark bar or the menu, over to a spot on the new tab page. That will pin your selection.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing