MozillaZine

UX Branch Discussion

Discussion about official Mozilla Firefox builds
bogas04

User avatar
 
Posts: 977
Joined: May 18th, 2010, 1:14 am

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 1:53 am

SoapyHamHocks wrote:
shorlander wrote:
SoapyHamHocks wrote:The new designs are great, but there are a few problems because of the size of the active tab compared to the inactive ones.

Awesome!

Do you mean an implementation problem because of the overlap? Or that they are actually different sizes? They should be the same size however only the active tab has a tab shape.



Ah you're right. I just had a few mistakes. Now it looks pretty damn good. Any chance you could share your PSDs? :D I'll post an updated screenshot shortly.


You two guys , can rock firefox like hell!! Hope to see joshua implementing the mockups even better and finer with upcoming releases :D
bogas04.github.io
MacBook Air Mid 2013 |@bogas04

faulty_fox

User avatar
 
Posts: 421
Joined: April 20th, 2010, 10:25 am

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 4:10 am

For me the most probable style with which they are gonna roll with is this one.
Think about it - the rounded tabs for firefox 4 were dropped because of their curves not looking right and all the complications.
Plus they are trying to make to make the interface look lightweight which is not the case with those curved tabs, at least IMHO.
For me the current style is pretty close to perfection though is reasonable they still want to improve it.

Otherwise i love the button style, much better than what bug 673695 is trying to achieve anyway.

remixedcat

User avatar
 
Posts: 212
Joined: July 9th, 2011, 12:33 am

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 4:33 am

The curved tabs bring too much attention to the browser chrome.

Terepin

User avatar
 
Posts: 1081
Joined: March 11th, 2009, 2:35 am
Location: Košice, Slovakia

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 5:51 am

Yeah, they are too sexy to be able to focus on page content. This new design is like watching a porn!

Sheesh...
Hope dies penultimate. What remains till the end is sarcasm. And I have plenty of it.

Frank Lion

User avatar
 
Posts: 20429
Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 6:47 am

shorlander wrote:
Frank Lion wrote:...Here's a new idea you might like to consider, Mozilla - give these guys a level playing field with yourselves. Give them an installable version of the latest version default theme and which includes chrome manifest flags pointing to sub folders for Linux/Aero/Mac folders for universal compatibility with all major OSs. This would take Mozilla less than a day to make and directly improve the performance and 'user experience' of around 250+ themes by the less experienced theme authors.

@ Stephen ~ I'm not afraid of 'competition' and nor should you be. Give those guys a level playing field with yourselves. :)


There is certainly all kinds of stuff wrong with how hard it is to create and maintain a theme. However nothing about this difficulty is adversarial or motivated by fear of 'competition'. More themes = more choice = good. This would mean everyone wins.

Which mirrors exactly my views on this as well.

shorlander wrote:Also it is late so I am maybe am not quite sure what you are suggesting to alleviate this pain point. You are suggesting a nightly updated theme template download?

I am suggesting a single theme template be made available by Mozilla exactly one month prior to the official release of that version. If earlier beta stage templates were offered, it would only encourage the less experienced themers to run with that beta version and not change their stuff to the latest. This would result in breakings on release as the default code would have changed a fair bit.

Do a single pre-release template and you have guaranteed built-in QA that any theme based directly off default template will be functionally as good as the default theme and no icons/graphics will be missing, as if any are not added by the themer it will simply use the default ones.

A month may not seem long, but consider how it would pan out in practice -

1. Addons notifies themers the the default template is ready.

2. Themers basing off default then change the template GUID, External Name, Internal Name, description as appropriate in install.rdf and chrome.manifest.

3. They then substitute their own icon.png, preview.png, toolbar.png, background images and any other images they want. They just have to stick to the same locations and image naming conventions as the template uses and ensure that their toolbar.png matches the same -moz-image-regions as the template - a simple blank toolbar.png with those regions marked off could even be included in the template.

4. If the template included an import url in global.css (i.e. @import url("chrome://global/skin/xul/xul.css");) pointing to a blank .css then the themer could add any additional coding there without touching the default template coding. This would be coding for their non-default toolbar/window backgrounds, etc.

5. The theme is finished.

Many new themers only theme the main browser window as it is, so the theme dropping to default in the Addons Manager, Options, Bookmark Manager, etc. is nothing new and there is no reason why they couldn't substitute their own Options.png, viewButtons.png, etc at a later date.

So, how does this work out in real life? Well, I did an experimental theme based off default back in 2008 using this idea. It took 90 minutes to version it from Firefox 3.0 to Firefox 3.5 and the same for 3.6.

How long were other guys basing off default taking at the time to do the same? Judging from their comments, 30/60 even 100 hours...and they still had breakings on release.
Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

Frank Lion

User avatar
 
Posts: 20429
Joined: April 23rd, 2004, 6:59 pm
Location: ... The Exorcist....United Kingdom

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 7:20 am

malliz wrote:Just wonder what it looks like when the menu bar is shown and the user does not have tabs on top?

Looks pretty grim, but you can make the code conditional for it to appear only in Tabs on Top mode.

mikedl wrote:I thought that had already been done in stylish.
I remember running a style very similar.

Yeah, it's been around a few years now. The name gives a clue to the intention, I think the userstyle was called Chromefox or Chromifox or something.

As you noticed, those convex and concave curves take up a lot of space as they have to be gradual to look OK. Have 7 or 8 tabs open and it whacks into tab overflow mode.

Having a default theme is one thing, but having a fake default behaviour that only looks OK in a screenshot is not good. Themers, understandably, fake their mockups/screenshots to look good (short urls, matching OS theme, limited tabs, no bookmarks or extension icons, etc) and that's fine. The trouble starts when the guy begins to believe that is how the user will actually use the browser.

The other problem with this style is pretty obvious...it looks just like the tabs on Google Chrome and no amount of 10,000 word justification 'rebuttal' blog posts is going to change that fact or the negative impression left in the minds of users as to Mozilla's powers of innovation. ;)
Metal Lion latest SeaMonkey & Thunderbird Themes - Sea Monkey and Silver Sea Monkey
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke (attrib.)

mattcoz
 
Posts: 1018
Joined: November 7th, 2002, 11:15 pm

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 3:15 pm

revolutions wrote:
Frank Lion wrote:
revolutions wrote:Wait, you're comparing http://people.mozilla.org/~rcampbell/im ... 29-v04.png to http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s1/g ... ge/MAP.png because the colors are similar? I'm really confused.

Well, you do know this is a technical forum and not MySpace, right? What are the chances that I would be comparing them because, er, the colours are similar?

Right. That's why I said "I'm really confused" as opposed to "You make no sense."
Frank Lion wrote:Waiting and not jumping straight in...is often a good idea. ;)

I still didn't get an answer, and I'm still confused. How would waiting have helped if I hadn't asked a question?

I'm just as confused as you.

Hanki

User avatar
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: April 2nd, 2004, 11:52 pm
Location: Australia

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 5:18 pm

Terepin wrote:Yeah, they are too sexy to be able to focus on page content. This new design is like watching a porn!

Sheesh...

whinge whinge whinge, thats all you get in this forum its like lil kiddies playground. if you dont like it, use another browser . i dont think the Developers are gonna care what you think of it.

LoudNoise
New Member

User avatar
 
Posts: 40048
Joined: October 18th, 2007, 1:45 pm
Location: Next door to the west

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 5:33 pm

Knock it off Hank.
Post wrangler
"Choose between the Food Select Feature or other Functions. If no food or function is chosen, Toast is the default."

mikedl

User avatar
 
Posts: 1236
Joined: October 14th, 2010, 4:47 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 5:48 pm

Frank Lion wrote:
mikedl wrote:I thought that had already been done in stylish.
I remember running a style very similar.

Yeah, it's been around a few years now. The name gives a clue to the intention, I think the userstyle was called Chromefox or Chromifox or something.

As you noticed, those convex and concave curves take up a lot of space as they have to be gradual to look OK. Have 7 or 8 tabs open and it whacks into tab overflow mode.

Having a default theme is one thing, but having a fake default behaviour that only looks OK in a screenshot is not good. Themers, understandably, fake their mockups/screenshots to look good (short urls, matching OS theme, limited tabs, no bookmarks or extension icons, etc) and that's fine. The trouble starts when the guy begins to believe that is how the user will actually use the browser.

The other problem with this style is pretty obvious...it looks just like the tabs on Google Chrome and no amount of 10,000 word justification 'rebuttal' blog posts is going to change that fact or the negative impression left in the minds of users as to Mozilla's powers of innovation. ;)

Yeah, that was it, thanks. Also, thank you for the insightful comments which followed; I agree.

Much appreciated! :)
"It may be that there are true demonstrations; but this is not certain. Thus, this proves nothing else but that it is not certain that all is uncertain, to the glory of skepticism." Pascal's Pensées

Hanki

User avatar
 
Posts: 1415
Joined: April 2nd, 2004, 11:52 pm
Location: Australia

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 6:24 pm

LoudNoise wrote:Knock it off Hank.

sorry for stating the truth.

SpewBoy
 
Posts: 64
Joined: July 26th, 2009, 1:12 am

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 8:43 pm

Hank- wrote:
Terepin wrote:Yeah, they are too sexy to be able to focus on page content. This new design is like watching a porn!

Sheesh...

whinge whinge whinge, thats all you get in this forum its like lil kiddies playground. if you dont like it, use another browser . i dont think the Developers are gonna care what you think of it.

If only you had the brain capacity to pick up on the obvious sarcasm in his comment. I suggest you pull your head out of your ass and stop trolling the forum. You've already been told to knock it off so show us that you have some decency and do what you were told.

Daifne
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 123056
Joined: July 31st, 2005, 9:17 pm
Location: Where the Waters Meet, Wisconsin

Post Posted July 29th, 2011, 9:47 pm

That's enough. Keep it up and the bans will start to roll. That includes you, SpewBoy.

Terepin

User avatar
 
Posts: 1081
Joined: March 11th, 2009, 2:35 am
Location: Košice, Slovakia

Post Posted July 30th, 2011, 1:51 am

Hank- wrote:
Terepin wrote:Yeah, they are too sexy to be able to focus on page content. This new design is like watching a porn!

Sheesh...

whinge whinge whinge, thats all you get in this forum its like lil kiddies playground. if you dont like it, use another browser . i dont think the Developers are gonna care what you think of it.

Everyone was able to understand that my reply was sarcastic reaction to remixedcat. Everyone except you.

I have my signature for a reason...
Hope dies penultimate. What remains till the end is sarcasm. And I have plenty of it.

SpewBoy
 
Posts: 64
Joined: July 26th, 2009, 1:12 am

Post Posted July 30th, 2011, 2:56 am

Sorry Daifne. My anger got the better of me. Justified or not, I probably shouldn't have been that offensive. Just sometimes people can be so hypocritical.

Return to Firefox Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests