Big Theme change again in Firefox 4?

[ShareBird]

Hi Ed, I have to agree with you... I'm "peau à peau" removing support for the 1.5 series. A lot of work since I have to deal with too many code. The theme is XOS compatible and just one file for Thunderbird and Firefox.

[DonGato]

I don't have any problem with cutting compatibility with major old releases, that means 1.x > 2.x > 3.x > 4.x

I mostly stop fixing/updating old releases after I start with a new version. I made some exceptions but is not like people should stick to old versions and we shouldn't encourage that IMO. You shouldn't miss much of 2.x by now and with 3.0 will happen the same in some months from now.

I know most people don't use themes and need a better design for the default one but we don't need to copy Chrome or IE to achieve that. There are other things we could improve. I think the home tab is a nice touch because it's a natural place to have it and it recovers space from another button crowded one. They should follow such pattern of innovation. The refresh button can be integrated with the go button, but I don't think the cancel should be integrated as well. At least not in that button.

[patrickjdempsey]

I have three concerns with these mockups:

1. If I wanted something that looked and acted like Chrome I would just use Chrome. I don't use Chrome because I can't stand the interface. I could go into the reasons why I don't enjoy the Chrome interface for weeks, but the gist of it is that it just doesn't make any sense to me. One interesting thing to remember is that the Chrome chrome is not the 100% original theme that everyone seems to think it is, and in some ways was taken from the Firefox design book. The urlbar looks like the one in Firefox 2.0, the Bookmarks button is taken directly from Firefox 3.0, the Reload button is taken from 3.0. The Back/Forward button, the universal color cast, and always-active buttons style is taken straight from Netscape Nagivator 9. So really, other than tabs on top, and buttons instead of menus, there isn't anything especially novel about Chrome. And those two features that are novel about it... well, they are annoying and make it difficult to use.

2. Are some of these new elements anchored to the chrome? The Tools menu especially appears to be anchored to the edge. One of my personal annoyances with the current and previous Firefox's has always been that the Menubar is anchored to the top left and can't be moved or customized without extensions. This is especially annoying considering that many many Windows programs have included menu customization for over a decade now and it seems to be a standard feature of many programs. If the Tools and Bookmarks buttons are meant to replace the Menubar, then they should both be movable. Currently, many of use use Hide Menubar to make the menu invisible until you hit the Alt button.... this is brilliant as you keep the convienence of organized menus and the compact simplicity of not having to see them all the time. I'm also wondering if this is the end of the Bookmarks toolbar? That would seriously be a mistake. And the Page button... is that replacing the appropriately placed and appropriately simple tabs drop-down button with a large and confusingly titled button on the wrong side of the chrome?? People keep talking about a simplified interface, but honestly I don't see that here... I see an interface complicated by things like anchored Tools button, the Page button, the Home button in the tab bar (I don't think I've EVER left the home button on my chrome), the combined back/forward button that forces the user to have the seldom-used forward button on the chrome anchored to the back button. Don't force me to have features I don't use active, and don't hide features I do use for the sake of "style" especially when that style is obvious to anyone looking at it as descendant from the competition.

3. What happened to support for OS Integration? Mozilla pushed very hard to produce a Windows theme that would feel native, even though Microsoft itself can't agree on what a native application should look like or how it should act. Has the popularity of Chrome and Safari on multiple platforms proven to Mozilla that the lengths they were going to were uneccessary, since non-OS integrated browsers can be very popular if the design is "catchy" enough? Actually, I hope so. I never liked those awful square corners on the urlbar, or the late-to-the-glossy-party effects on the identity button and toolbar buttons of 3.x just looked tacky.

What is to like about the new theme?

Return to round cornered urlbar! Return of the rounded bottoms of the tabs! Woohoo! Combined urlbar + search.... well, lets hope they give us the option of activating it through a keyword like a question mark. Merged Go / Stop / Reload.... I'm on the fence about that one... but in general I think it could be a very good idea, and certainly saves space and gives us back the Go button that has been missing in 3.x.

[WattsvilleBlues]

Has the popularity of Chrome and Safari on multiple platforms

Huh? Chrome still only has a stable release on Windows, and Safari's usage share on Windows is practically non-existent.

[Virtual_ManPL]

I have one question...

Will I be able with this new skin move/add/remove any bars or icons anywhere like is in todays skin ?

[Aronnax!]

I have one question...

Will I be able with this new skin move/add/remove any bars or icons anywhere like is in todays skin ?

Yes, it is not intended to change there something.

[ehume]

A friend has pointed out the following:

If they combine Stop/Reload/Go on the urlbar - you will not be able to undo it. If they combine searchbar and urlbar, then you will not be able to undo it. Same with them hiding the menubar!

I will amend his point to say this: if the current wire diagram holds, the menu bar will not be "hidden;" it won't exist.

In other words, the new UI changes will not be like the BackForward sodomy - we won't be able to pry the pieces apart.

[KLB]

A friend has pointed out the following:

If they combine Stop/Reload/Go on the urlbar - you will not be able to undo it. If they combine searchbar and urlbar, then you will not be able to undo it. Same with them hiding the menubar!

I will amend his point to say this: if the current wire diagram holds, the menu bar will not be "hidden;" it won't exist.

In other words, the new UI changes will not be like the BackForward sodomy - we won't be able to pry the pieces apart.

This would SUCK!

They need to leave in an option to have traditional menus if the user wants them. One of the things I hate most about IE7, Microsoft Office 2007 (e.g. Office Vista) is that they did away with traditional menus. I use them all the time. Even though I do have a merge menu option in the companion extension for my theme, I personally do not use it on my primary Firefox profile because I am constantly using the menu bar.

[Aronnax!]

This would SUCK!
They need to leave in an option to have traditional menus if the user wants them.

I would bet a billion dollar that you will have an option .. it is ridiculous to think, that Firefox 4 will have there no option
And on the Mac side for example, will you see there for sure no change.

[ehume]

I would bet a billion dollar that you will have an option ..

Do you have that billion dollars?

My friend noted this:

The whole thing has to be about giving choice to users. Probably only 1 in a 1000 ever wanted to put a space between BackForward in FF2 or move them to opposite ends of the toolbar - but I know some who did.

. . . Did Mozilla use the very simple coding that is required to do that? No, it locked them together - for no good reason.

Same with the Downloads Window in FF2. Did they hide the UI buttons in that window in FF3 that they didn't want showing? No, they coded them out of existence and we cannot show them either.

Even though we can put back the Go button, did Mozilla leave it in the Customize Window for users to put back themselves? No.

We know they are committed to NOT putting in user pref options and this stuff is no different.

So much for allowing user customization.

I'll bet my dollar against your billion that my friend is right. Mmmm. I can see that I will be spending some quality time on Tahiti.

[dao-g]

Menubar auto-hiding is implemented today, and it's opt-in. The change in Firefox 4 would be that it's opt-out, i.e. enabled by default.

[Aronnax!]

Menubar auto-hiding is implemented today, and it's opt-in. The change in Firefox 4 would be that it's opt-out, i.e. enabled by default.

Thanks dao-g, for the info

ehume, you can use the Paypal button on my theme site

By the way, you have bet as well a billion?
Great, likely is Tahiti a good idea ... for the start .. and then around the world ...

[malliz]

Like to see how Ed has lost. Seems to me since the mac theme was changed you have been very pro Moz where once upon a time it was your personal mission to basically deride and complain about every minor hiccup. How the worm turns eh? And giving untrue or at least unprovable advice just to gain brownie points or another T-shirt is not the done thing IMHO.

[ehume]

Well, I've a dollar on the post to his one billion. And we'll have to wait for fx 4 to see if the menu toolbar, the bookmarks toolbar and separated stop/reload buttons remain available to the user in a readily accessible UI.

[Euchre]

Keep in mind that the current option to hide the Menu bar doesn't equate to making a massive coding change which puts all of those functions under a single button (or maybe two). Much as with the Awful...er... 'Awesome Bar', when such is implemented you can bet that Firefox is likely to rip out the back end which would allow the previous method, to force...er...encourage users to adopt the new feature.

(Am I cynical about this? Nah! )

I notice nobody is crying foul of the complete removal of the Status bar. That's a very bad thing, as it leaves the user with no real way to even try to validate a link before clicking it. Sorry, I don't want to lean on a phishing list which by it's nature will always be behind the curve. If they find somewhere else to display the link currently being moused over, great - but I am not seeing that.