Firefox 23 final will be released on August 6

Same here. NoScript is the main reason I use Firefox...also Cookie Monster.

Later...

 

I'm pretty sure Georgio will code it for Australis. SeaMonkey can run it as well.

 

Once Australis will be introduced, I'll be on the lookout for a new extension. It's being baked. See here: http://aris-at-mozilla.blogspot.ca/

 

lets see how australis goes. I think it comes with v26..
I guess many people will be using this new addon, it looks promising.

ABP and NoScript are the savior for me

 

I wonder if Status-4-evar and Download Statusbar will still work/be adapted. The addon bar was already less usefull, and now they're killing that as well, and the new download button thingy has way to less information compared to Download Statusbar.

 

Personally I don't have the Status-4-evar extension but use NoSquint. NoSquint icon cannot be moved to another toolbar and don't know if the author would change NoSquint to be put on a toolbar. Mozilla better keep the addon bar, I can't do it without it or otherwise perhaps someone will create an extension for an addon bar. If no new extension will be created for an addon bar I'll make Palemoon my default. AFAIK Palemoon won't introduce Australis. We'll see eh?

 

Testing also out right now the Open Source Chromium - i have changed my mind, if i am being forced to use Mozilla's Chrome copy then what should stop me to use Chromium.

In Case if Palemoon or Cyberfox will be able to not follow the Australis road, i use them as secondary Browsers. But seriously.. Replacing all core customization with an add-on - I refuse doing that. And if Mozilla is only able to copy the shiny Chrome Skin and the Feature reduction and not Raw Performance and HTML5 Standard like the latest Chromium Versions or Maxthon - i see no Reason to stay and use an Australis-Chrome!

In that case, even the Chromium Team is more honest as Mozilla with it's Australis-Chrome. At least the Chromium guys never tried to be someone else.

So if i have choose, i would always choose Chromium over a Firefox Australis Version, because of Honesty, Technology Support and Speed. Australis takes a big part away what was unique of Firefox - installing Add-ons i can also with Chromium or Opera Next - the Firefox Add-ons may be able to bring back what was good and what was taken away now by Mozilla, but it is not part of the Standard Firefox anymore. So between 2 Mainstream Browsers i choose the one with the more Features. As i said, Add-ons have both Chromium/Opera/Firefox. But in terms of Performance and HTML5 Support Chromium is the clear winner and without customization of Firefox, this makes Chromium in my opinion now more special as compared with a Firefox without it's strenghts!

 

Some people say Firefox copies Chrome design and that it sucks. Then these same people wouldn't mind ditching Firefox and convert to Chrome. Anyone sees the irony? If you can tolerate Chrome's design when using it, why can't you do the same for Firefox? At the very least, you still retain all the other things you love about Firefox such as it's add-ons. I really can't blame Mozilla for all of their curremt design choices if long-time users play such double standard games. Google smiles from far away.....


P.s. Speaking from the viewpoint of a user who uses both Chrome and Firefox.

 

Why use a copycat when you can use the original, with arguably better performance and security to boot? If Mozilla is lacking innovation or originality and are going to simply imitate Google, then they start to lose their distinctiveness and become a follower instead of a leader. Some users may want to hitch their wagon up to a leader, not a follower.

I don't see the irony or double standard from that pov.

 

I have discovered that I can live without the add-on bar as I can transfer icons to the GUI &/or bookmarking bar. The Chrome-style look isn't really a handicap to Firefox & it is a clean looking GUI as is Chrome. As safeguy says above, there is a certain irony with people complaining about Fx being 'Chrome' then abandoning it to actually run Chrome.

I believe that Australis won't be the disaster many are predicting. I don't use Chrome much, I'm not a huge fan, but the uncluttered GUI was an innovation. It won't look out of place on Fx IMO.

 

Your generalisation could also apply to security products also could it not.?

 

It could apply to a lot of things, I imagine. It depends on the circumstances and the individual.

At this point in time I'll wager that the only thing really keeping Firefox relevant is the large extension list that has been built up over the years.

As I said in another thread one time: I think most users probably understood Mozilla moving to a rapid release schedule in the face of the competition, but they didn't also expect them to copy their version scheme too. When that happened I think that the user base put up a collective face palm.

It's the same thing here with Australis. Is that Webkit under the hood or is it still Gecko?

 

There is a thing which is called Market Share. Sure, one person does not count much, but you can compare it like a voting process for politicians. I just take my chance to vote an alternative party because my old one just became lame copycats This is only normal human behaviour.

Exactly. But i would not say hitch the wagon... Chromium compared with Australis Chrome features all the innovations old Gecko is not able to deliver.

I was always a big fan of Firefox Customization, i did not use Firefox because it was faster or had more Webtechnology Standard compatibility compared with Chrome, but i did use it because Firefox had all the nice featured In-Browser Customization. I used Firefox because i was able to change it out of the box how i wanted to have it.

That is gone. So what, why should i use now a second best Browser Option? Perhaps because of the good memories of Customization inside the Browser? I choose not a leader, i choose something special. And now if i compare an Australis Version without the ability to change it out of the box with the incredible fast Chromium (not Google Chrome, because i value Open Source) with the nearly excellent HTML5 features and other Webstandard Supports - it is easily to tell which Browser is becoming now more Special.

If you take something of value away, you have to rate the rest of the Browser. Nothing more simple as this. And what is left when you take away Firefox amazing In-Browser-customizations... Not that much any more which is worthy following.

Again.. Because of the memories? no. Because of the Add-On's? Chromium based Browsers do have them too. I Dislike "Mozilla Chrome" - and the amount of like's i give Chromium compared with Firefox of the Past is also very low. But between that 2 Low points, Chromium is at least a bit higher in ranks now.

It's the choice between the Demon and the Devil

And to repeat myself again... Chromium never tried to be someone else. I value a steady road and continuity more as a forward-back road like Mozilla is driving it now. What will be the next thing Mozilla is taking away because it is not Chrome like now? Full Themes? Many now that a lot of high ranking Mozilla guys would love to see Full Themes killed. That is no secret at all. What about with Electrolysis which will reduce the amount of things you can do with add-ons? Chromium just has not that problems. They drive a successful road and have no identity crisis!

Sure, i agree. But Mozilla could have kept the options, just being disabled right from Start. So everyone could have been happy. But no, they wanted to be Chrome and decided to give not the choice. And THIS i find plain disgusting........ Such behaviour i will not support. Never ever!

And we still have not talked about the technical aspect.

Thing is Firefox tries to beat Chromium/Google Chrome in terms of simplicity. Taking away options like choice to load pictures, remove the easily to find option to shut on/off Javascript, The Browser DPI = Windows DPI force-feature... In all of that Firefox suddenly leaves no direct Userchoice anymore. Chromium does. You can disable that all in the UI!

Something is terrible wrong with Mozilla these Days. Are they really so out of options that they now try with force now to beat Chrome under all costs? More simple as Chrome? Seriously? Firefox is no more a Browser for Power Users. Absolutely no more, exactly like Opera.

And to the Topic Add-Ons - Yeah, some do argue that Firefox has the more Powerful add-ons which will still let you change the look and functions when Australis arrives. But Add-Ons - no matter which ones - are an outside of the Browser Feature. Something Developers think which is for stuff which is not worthy to have inside the Browser. Arguing that with them the Browser is richer right from stock is like counting coffee and sugar together. Sure, if you put Sugar in the Coffee, it tastes better, but Coffee is bitter anyway from start in the first place. So no matter how it is turned around, Australis makes Firefox less Feature rich! And that is a true Statement

Again.. Seriously... Basic Customization not worthy to have inside the Browser?? Even Windows features Basic Customization from Start! Microsoft even adds stuff back with the Windows 8 Update. The only one which really thinks that Customization is way too overrated is today Mozilla, and only because they are constantly hit by the Chromium Devs...

 

If one switches to Chrome because it's a 'better' browser for one's usage, that's fine.
If one switches to Chrome only because of the perceived 'copying', it's lame

Version numbering is a non-issue, no more than what Chrome does. The addon compatibility structure has been updated to deal with it compared to the early days
In fact, Mozila has an upper hand here because it offers ESR for those who need such a model.

Back to the GUI, again people are making this seem more than it is. Google started with the UI minimalism concept with Chrome. Mozilla decided they want to adopt UI minimalism. If that's cardinal sin, then we all should go back to the time when browsers had no tabs. I'm surprised no one is crying out loud at Google for having extensions. Even if it's a big dal, at the very least, one still has the ability to revert parts of the UI change with addons. Good luck trying to do that with Chrome

My point here is when Mozilla does something, they get all the hate. When Google does it with Chrome, it's ok...they get all the free pass. If that isn't double standards, I don't know what you call it. If people really hate the direction Mozilla is going with the reasoning it's a 'Chrome copy', I'd respect them more if they switch to IE, Seamonkey or anything that isn't based on Chromium. If not, it's irony...classic self-contradiction at it's best.

 

It all depends on how much customisation that Mozilla leave in Fx 25 I suppose. It's no accident I'm writing this in SeaMonkey! LOL

 

Agreed

Again Agreed

I dont see all the issue related to version numbering. I support rapid release cycle. Which makes it easier to release newer features (not just GUI i mean) at a faster pace.

Coming to html standards support, i am yet to come accross a site in either daily usage or 1 time, which did not worked me in Firefox and that worked in Chrome. Just for normal day-day browsing i highly doubt for an average user would face any issue with standards support. Yes, i agree it lacks in standards support when compared to web-kit based browsers (chrome, opera). Which is mozilla a little slower in adding.

I am not a big thingie for browser gui customization. I usually dont touch on that. So, people, relying on that should opt for ESR or non Firefox based i think.

Except, the sandbox thing in Chrome, i think firefox is very much comparable to Chrome, once NoScript and ABP, Actually it is better after adding these 2 extensions (this is based on observation on my laptop, same may not be true for others)..

 

Do not forget that Seamonkey also shares partly the Mozilla Source Code. They also had to kill already an important Feature: Keyword.url Same with Cyberfox... Bringing back that Feature did not work.... I did constantly comparisons between the alternativs! And it is not unrealistic to say if things like that can NOT be avoided.. how high is then the chance that Palemoon or Cyberfox or Seamonkey really can go against the Australis concept.

I admit i had a high wishful thinking, IF there is really an alternative based on Mozilla Code which CAN avoid Australis, i will use it too of course. But all this made me wary - Just to be in case that the changes can not be avoided, having a real alternative is never be wrong. Who knows, perhaps i could also switch to Midori or Qupzilla since they are also more Feature Rich compared with the Australis In-Browser-Right-From-Start features.... It is still a while until Australis hits, and no matter how it turns out, i have for everything and all a backup plan, i always like to be prepared for all situations

Well and people who do not like Customization, they just do not need to touch it in the first place. But that is still no valid reason for removing them in the first place. Mozilla should offer people a choice! Seriously, what is wrong with offering a choice? Its a democratic Universe, its 2013 and not Middle Age!

And if you really would visit a page with heavy HTML5 demands, Firefox has enormous problems... No sound for example... Technology Wise Chromium is much more advanced as what is possible with old Gecko. Instead of playing around with Social Features and ever advancing Webdeveloper Tools and WebRTC Mozilla should finally put more work in Performance and HTML5 Support. If Australis would at least in that matter be as good as Chromium in the latest "Nightly Versions" - then i COULD live with a more restricted UI, otherwise i would also not use Chromium if i could not live with more restrictions..... But only if the rest is fitting at least. And Mozilla is in that case FAR behind!

Conclusion.. If "Mozilla Chrome" would offer me a very high rated HTML5 Support and that incredible Performance... i would use it perhaps, because i have something of value for all the loss. But a shiny Chrome Skin and Feature Cuts without Performance, HTML5 Standard support and so on... This is unacceptable!

 

Version numbers are a non-issue to everyone but Mozilla. The face palm is that Google's methods matter enough to Mozilla for them to copy Chrome right down to the version scheme. Speaking of lame...

Google gets a free pass because they're the leader setting the pace with some innovation and appearing more original instead of blatantly cloning someone else. Even after this Mozilla is arguably still coming up short. It's understandable that they catch the flak from the user base and not Google.

 

Again i have to agree with you in all ways Mozilla should finally start again to work instead of doing lazy hacks which bring only alibi advancements.

If copying only cosmetic stuff is the best what Mozilla is able to do these days... Why should i use Firefox! And Australis is at the most possible far away end of being special. Firefox with Australis is just a plain normal Browser.

I have no chance anymore to put all my Navigation Bar Elements in the Add-on Bar, i can not put Navigation Bar Elements in the Tab Bar! I can only move some Add-On Icons around and put them in and out of the new upcoming Overflow Panel. This is as cheap as alibi Customization can be...

It looks like Chrome, it works like Chrome - One Chrome/Chromium is already enough, we need more originality instead of plain copying stuff! Something which Mozilla has forgotten on their way.

And how hard can it be to put more HTML5 Feature Support in a Browser... Maxthon and the latest Chromium Versions as said are incredible leaders in that case. Take a look at Mozilla... Depressing to say the least.... Perhaps they would be able to do too again something special if they would stop playing around with second class toys...

And Performance Wise... on my rather Week Acer Aspire Netbook with 4 GB Ram Chromium starts in less then 2 seconds and Firefox needs between 5 and 10 the whole time. Clean Profile, less then 50 Tabs at both Browsers. This is a damn big difference!

Anyway, i have a small "Home Office" around at home with 5 Computers where i have banished Firefox on all these machines, and as long as there are no Real Gecko Browser alternatives around which are able to avoid Australis i stay for now with Chromium. If i get in a pleasant way surprised in the Future, i am willing to change my way again at least half-way - But for now... If i can choose between a cheap Copy and a rather weak original i would choose without much thinking the rather weak original aka Chromium!

 

I am sorry. What does keyword.URL do...

As far as i see per bug ( 738818), they state as below, which i am not sure about it completely, but it might make sense..
"In order to help address the problem that is search hijacking, and to make search engine selection more intuitive I'd like to have location bar, context menu, and about:home searches use the same engine, and have that be controlled by a single pref (to be configured in the preferences dialog)."

It is sad, that they are restricting customization with australis. I guess it is being completely rewritten on how the tab frame is generated..

Any real world example.. I wish to see if any one had experienced audio/rendering issue due to lack these new standards support on the normal site usage..

The performance is being improved with each version,
like a new cache is system is being written which comes in v26/v27 which is known to improve page load performance a bit..

a new downloads api (in v26), which will reduce the performance issues when starting and finishing downloads..Downloads_API

But mozilla still misses fluid animation when pages are loading..i.e., no hang. Which is greatly reduced for me with noscript and abp along with all the cluttered ads..

I like lesser UI. Agree that Australis UI (curved tabs and right side icon) seems to be inspired from chromium. But if it is implemented as it looks in their mock up, then it will look lot better than orignality of the chrome! and functionally too i think.
And it would have been more great, if they would some how allowed to customization on the new UI too, like keeping addon bar. b/W i dont use addon bar as i am fan lesser UI

 

The only real reason why they removed Keyword.Url was because this function also does not fit in their Australis-Chrome plans - Mozilla very often says a thing and means the completly opposite! Did in the past and also today, that is another open Secret! Chrome features only the Adress UI Element, the so called Omnibox, so it is no Secret that Mozilla does everything to get a reason to get rid of their additional Search Box too to finally implement also a so called Omnibox.... Just to be more like Chrome. Sure, the Security Aspect does exist too, but it is for Mozilla not that much important because they create with that change another long term goal!

Increasing the performance... May be the case, but why not experiencing anything in a real world test? Compared to Chromium i have to admit that Firefox still feels rather slow - No matter if trying out Palemoon, Cyberfox or Firefox 24.


http://www.wab.com/

A classic Demoscene site. Chrome is heavily recommended. As equal to all other pages which do use heavy Javascript/HTML5 usage. Fact is, Firefox has because of his dated engine more and more problems to view pages correctly. Similiar to Opera, which was a reason why they changed Engines in the first place. Sure, Mozilla is still a bit of the road away from reaching this level, but they are coming more and more close to that point too. Guess they know that and that's the reason why they work on servo which will be possible their new Browser engine. But here too, Mozilla sees this mostly as chance to run experiments and and sees this as "playfield" instead of getting their acts together and beginning really to work! Equals the heavy need that Mozilla finally implements this new Age Technology instead of half baking "Chrome" over Firefox.

Mozilla feels seriously threatened by Chromium - The only reason why they suddenly push away their old concept of Customizability away and changing it against Chromiums more inflexible system. A company which begins to be so insecure that they see the only way to survive is to adapt the System of a competitor... this shows that the level of creative thinking is not there anymore. Behaviour like that was unthinkable for Mozilla of the Past! As there would be no other ways to stand up against Chromium. Just give yourself that fact... In 5 Years or something like that where Open Source Chromium is around - there is a difference between the Open Source Project and the finally Closed Source Version of "Google Chrome", so do not make the mistake to think that 2 Projects are 100% equal - they made much more progress in terms of technology as Firefox was able do to so since Mozilla exists! And that says quite a lot!

This all equals the serious need that Mozilla should finally implement serious HTML5 and Javascript advancements, like Chromium Team does it. But for this Mozilla is either unable because of the limitations of Old Gecko or they are just unable and missing the necessary knowledge to do so... This and they focus on rather stupid stuff.. Social integration... Making Phonecalls over the Browser - or porting Game Engines over into the Web or crippling the Click To Play Feature because it is unacceptable for a Rookie User that he is not able to manage that he has to click on blocked Flash Objects to watch them! That all is just stuff for the more simple minded Social Networking, Skype and Gamer Generation which is unable or unwilling to something productive beyond that and who give up when they are facing some challenges. And all that mirrors what Mozilla is thinking of their Userbase today and thats the reason why they act that way too

All that makes it rather easily to forget my Dislike for the inflexible Chromium System and go along rather fine with it. After all, it is the original and no copy!

 

I will miss that second search box though ...

 

I have been experimenting with the PortableApps QupZilla & I am hugely impressed. I haven't tried the local drive version yet.

It is quite customisable, has a nice GUI & can be set up easily. I like the fact that I can add search engines to the GUI search box, which is very useful for me at work. I believe that the browser itself was originally developed for education. It (the portable) is only about 51 MB on a pendrive, which is a fair bit lighter than a customised portable SeaMonkey or Firefox & a whole lot lighter than portable Maxthon. I like DDG being its default search engine. It also has an RSS feed which I haven't really explored yet.

The only downsides for me are that I can't find a way to enable the Hunspell spellchecker in the portable & even though I tried to copy/paste the np-mswmp.dll file into its plugins folder (like SeaMonkey) it won't run videos on some BBC pages.

The spellchecker is moot for me though as it isn't really important for what I use the browser for & there is an online drop-down for Wiktionary & any other online dictionaries you wish to add anyway. The WMP plugins aren't a real problem for what I use it for either. It has a built in flashblock feature & runs well in YouTube & most other videos. I believe it has good HTML5 support as well.

I can see QupZilla having a good future.

 

You got me curious, but it doesn't seem to want to work for me. It always closes just about half of a second after the window opens. I tried PA's version and their own portable version, in a VM, Sandboxie and on a real machine, but it's always the same. In the VM and Sbie it just closes again, same on the real machine though it also shows a crashed process message there.

 

I have no idea what the problem is for you. I should imagine it is conflicting with something.