6 ms·

After Firefox 4 came out I had to install so many extensions to make it feel like 3.6 that it became unstable and incredibly slow. Because Firefox apparently tr

After Firefox 4 came out I had to install so many extensions to make it feel like 3.6 that it became unstable and incredibly slow. Because Firefox apparently tries to be more like Chrome I decided to switch to the original and I haven't looked back yet. I only fire up Firefox when Chromes built-in developer tools lack functionality compared to Firebug, which is rarely the case. The way Firefox decided to take makes me really sad, as I was a big Firefox supporter, until they screwed me over with the new UI. I hope this is not too off topic, but I never got the chance to comment on the changes.

lfx 15y ago
What fundamental new is for new UI comparing with 3.6? I use Firefox for some way, only for firebug mostly. I think its just evolution of person, now I use what is most serves my needs.
- codecaine 15y ago
  what bothers me most is that they made the whole top part (including title, menu bar etc if you choose to enable it) transparent. I personally just find that horrible. Screenshot: http://0.tqn.com/d/browsers/1/0/Z/c/-/-/firefox-5-show-menu-bar-1.png http://0.tqn.com/d/browsers/1/0/Z/c/-/-/firefox-5-show-menu-... Here is a screenshot comparing FF 3.5 to 4: http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/12/500x_firefox4.jpg http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/12/500x_firefox... (3.5 is right)
  - gcp 15y ago
    Arguably, having the menu visible is not the default setup, is it? The default fold-out "Firefox" menu simply doesn't have that issue and is not transparent. I agree it's a problem in Thunderbird, which has a menu by default. I think that if you try to tweak Firefox 4+ to look like 3.6 you're going to run into suboptimalities. It evolved. I think that if you get used to the changes, they're actually changes for the better (new menu giving more vertical room, tabs-on-top, etc).
    - sp332 15y ago
      If you tap the Alt key, the regular old menu comes up. It's transparent.
  - jamesgeck0 15y ago
    Enable the menu bar and disable tags on top. Then install a plain persona like this one: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/white-glossy-look/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/white-glossy-... It's not exactly like 3.5, but it's not transparent anymore.
    - codecaine 15y ago
      I did that and installed a couple of extensions that add old functionality and Firefox now crashes pretty much randomly
- sp332 15y ago
  Tab Groups are cool, but I don't think anyone uses them. If you're on Windows 7 it hides the menu bar for more vertical space. It has support for lightweight extensions (called "JetPacks" internally) which don't require a restart to install or uninstall. There's no statusbar, like Chrome, URLs pop up when you hover over a hyperlink. The main advantage over Chrome is that it doesn't freeze up when it's loading a new tab.
  - trickjarrett 15y ago
    I use Tab Groups mainly for task related stuff, as well as using a tab group to allow for a read later style of interface. But no, it's not a major thing for me, I've used Chrome for the past few months and not missed Tab groups.
  - iam 15y ago
    Tab groups would've been much better if they showed all the tabs across all windows (like Expose on Mac does for windows). Unfortunately it's just a gimmick in its current implementation.
  - keeperofdakeys 15y ago
    Firefox also hides the menubar on linux, although it can also be disabled. It is also posiblse to enable an 'extension bar', which takes the place of the status bar for extension icons.
afhof 15y ago
I actually still run 3.6 since I like the UI on it better. The speed of the browser means very little to me, I'd rather have the familiar UI. If you liked FF 3.6, why not stick with it?
- hollerith 15y ago
  And FF 7 (which I've been using for about 5 months now) is not even noticeably faster than 3.6 on my usage pattern. In fact it seems to spend more time with an unresponsive UI than 3.6.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- codecaine 15y ago
  after I've worked with a fast browser like Chrome I just can't go back
code_duck 15y ago
Huh? The only way it's like Chrome is how you can move the tabs above the other controls on top. 3.6 feels very slow now, I can't use it and have never felt that I wanted to.

lfx 15y ago

What fundamental new is for new UI comparing with 3.6? I use Firefox for some way, only for firebug mostly. I think its just evolution of person, now I use what is most serves my needs.

codecaine 15y ago
what bothers me most is that they made the whole top part (including title, menu bar etc if you choose to enable it) transparent. I personally just find that horrible. Screenshot: http://0.tqn.com/d/browsers/1/0/Z/c/-/-/firefox-5-show-menu-bar-1.png http://0.tqn.com/d/browsers/1/0/Z/c/-/-/firefox-5-show-menu-... Here is a screenshot comparing FF 3.5 to 4: http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/12/500x_firefox4.jpg http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/12/500x_firefox... (3.5 is right)
- gcp 15y ago
  Arguably, having the menu visible is not the default setup, is it? The default fold-out "Firefox" menu simply doesn't have that issue and is not transparent. I agree it's a problem in Thunderbird, which has a menu by default. I think that if you try to tweak Firefox 4+ to look like 3.6 you're going to run into suboptimalities. It evolved. I think that if you get used to the changes, they're actually changes for the better (new menu giving more vertical room, tabs-on-top, etc).
  - sp332 15y ago
    If you tap the Alt key, the regular old menu comes up. It's transparent.
- jamesgeck0 15y ago
  Enable the menu bar and disable tags on top. Then install a plain persona like this one: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/white-glossy-look/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/white-glossy-... It's not exactly like 3.5, but it's not transparent anymore.
  - codecaine 15y ago
    I did that and installed a couple of extensions that add old functionality and Firefox now crashes pretty much randomly
sp332 15y ago
Tab Groups are cool, but I don't think anyone uses them. If you're on Windows 7 it hides the menu bar for more vertical space. It has support for lightweight extensions (called "JetPacks" internally) which don't require a restart to install or uninstall. There's no statusbar, like Chrome, URLs pop up when you hover over a hyperlink. The main advantage over Chrome is that it doesn't freeze up when it's loading a new tab.
- trickjarrett 15y ago
  I use Tab Groups mainly for task related stuff, as well as using a tab group to allow for a read later style of interface. But no, it's not a major thing for me, I've used Chrome for the past few months and not missed Tab groups.
- iam 15y ago
  Tab groups would've been much better if they showed all the tabs across all windows (like Expose on Mac does for windows). Unfortunately it's just a gimmick in its current implementation.
- keeperofdakeys 15y ago
  Firefox also hides the menubar on linux, although it can also be disabled. It is also posiblse to enable an 'extension bar', which takes the place of the status bar for extension icons.

afhof 15y ago

I actually still run 3.6 since I like the UI on it better. The speed of the browser means very little to me, I'd rather have the familiar UI. If you liked FF 3.6, why not stick with it?

hollerith 15y ago
And FF 7 (which I've been using for about 5 months now) is not even noticeably faster than 3.6 on my usage pattern. In fact it seems to spend more time with an unresponsive UI than 3.6.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
codecaine 15y ago
after I've worked with a fast browser like Chrome I just can't go back

code_duck 15y ago

Huh? The only way it's like Chrome is how you can move the tabs above the other controls on top. 3.6 feels very slow now, I can't use it and have never felt that I wanted to.