Firefox 4.0 Goes Chrome, New UI In Q4 2010 556
sv_libertarian writes "Mozilla recently updated its product roadmap through 2010. According to the first draft, the current browser will see a minor update in Q4 2009 and another in Q2 2010. Version 4.0 is headed for an October or November 2010 release and will bring a new user interface and browser sync integration. 'There is not much information on [what] this new user interface will look like, but the first mockups that have been posted on Mozilla's website suggest that the Mozilla team favors a Google Chrome-like design that integrates Windows 7 graphics features. Overall, window elements seem to be floating over the background.' The mockup page emphatically notes that the design is not final."
Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:2, Interesting)
of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:5, Interesting)
If there's one thing I hate about Chrome it's the way the tabs replace the normal title bar functionality. It makes the window harder to drag, harder to maximize, and basically throws 25 years of Windows usability standards out the window. I expect something like this from Apple but not from Firefox (or Google for that matter).
A nonstandard UI is the epitome of developer arrogance. The tabs-on-bottom mockup is excellent, but the tabs-on-top concept needs to die on the drawing board.
On the flip side, if Firefox 4.0 supports some of the new Windows 7 standards like Aero Peek controls I will be very pleased!
Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:5, Interesting)
Tabs on top makes a sense, they just shouldn't be part of the title bar.
I say they make sense because the address bar, back button, forward button, refresh/stop buttons, and home button are all part of the current tab, rather than the browser as a whole.
Why transparency? (Score:5, Interesting)
If I wanted to see a partially obscured, blurry version of what's behind my browser, I can just smear my glasses with Vaseline and minimize Firefox.
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:4, Interesting)
Tabs should be down the side. A monitor (even 4:3) is too wide to read comfortably all the way across, ergo, tabs and toolbars should be on the side where they are not using screen estate that can otherwise be used effectively for browsing.
Yes, I know Firefox does it with plugins, but I don't understand how this basic mistake can have stayed with us for what, 10 years+ of tabbed browsing...
Re:Function before form (Score:5, Interesting)
I do have to say, what I really want out of a browser is function, not a flashier interface.
Make it not crash, and I don't care what it looks like.
"Form Follows Function" [wikipedia.org]. It's an eternal debate.
I'm of the team that says we can have both. Especially if they factor in software ergonomics [wikipedia.org] into their design decisions. Most people don't realize it, but they like intuitive designs. Clearly, minimalism (an element of both form and function) is what is "in" for web-browser designs right now. We don't apparently need 8 menus with 20 submenus with 14 more sub-submenus, combined with 9 sections in the options menu, each with 15 subsections. We don't need 40 icons between the top of our web page and the bottom of our address bar.
So, you can have your function (a web browser with less junk crammed into it, and therefore a lower probability of things going wrong) and I can have my form (a nice looking, easy to use minimalist web browser). Everyone wins.
Re:Why transparency? (Score:5, Interesting)
It doesn't look cool. It's the UI equivalent of spinners and under-chassis neon lighting.
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:3, Interesting)
Ugh, I hate UI elements that appear and disappear like that. I had the taskbar on auto-hide on my laptop (which only has a 1024x768 screen) and decided it wasn't even worth it there, even though that would have been present in every application.
Browsers have the added problem of me using ctrl-tab/ctrl-shift-tab to change between tabs a lot, but doing that non-blindly requires seeing where the tab is that you want. A hidden tab list would slow that down.
FIXME: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why'd all the browser developers decide that this same model we have for browsing web pages is adequate? Considering how much time we, as a human race, are currently using the web browser, I would hope that we could make one that is a little better than this Netscape 26.0 shit we're stuck with. Apple, are you there? Can you please do for the browser what you've done for the phone? Google, we know you have like $n! dollars, can't you throw some more money at this problem? Chrome (which I am browsing from ATM) is pretty half-baked.
Shouldn't this thing read to me by now, standard? Shouldn't I have a better way to look at multiple pages than separate tabs and windows? Why does it all crash so much? Why must it be such an unelegant, awful thing to display information to from programming languages?
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:1, Interesting)
Everything is just the right ratio with my monitor turned vertically.
I tried this about 3 years ago, seeing how it felt and I haven't gone back.
It turns out that for me vertical real estate is more valuable than horizontal real estate.
Of course this is different if most of the use of your monitor is for running video, but I would venture that this isn't the case currently.
Re:Why transparency? (Score:5, Interesting)
My favorite thing to uncheck.
Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:3, Interesting)
If there's one thing I hate about Chrome it's the way the tabs replace the normal title bar functionality. It makes the window harder to drag, harder to maximize, and basically throws 25 years of Windows usability standards out the window. I expect something like this from Apple but not from Firefox (or Google for that matter).
A nonstandard UI is the epitome of developer arrogance. The tabs-on-bottom mockup is excellent, but the tabs-on-top concept needs to die on the drawing board.
On the flip side, if Firefox 4.0 supports some of the new Windows 7 standards like Aero Peek controls I will be very pleased!
With UI there's a trade-off between "flawed but we're used to it" and "innovative but so different nobody will catch the hang of it." QEWRTY sucks. Scientists can prove with lots of charts and numbers that there are better ways to layout a keyboard. Unfortunately, this is a change that won't likely happen. Everybody is used to QWERTY even if it sucks. Metric beats customary every time but I can't think in metric.
The problem with most of these changes is there really doesn't seem to be much of an improvement, no compelling reason to switch. Different does not mean better. Going from command line to GUI was a revelation. Even when you were lost in the first week you knew you were going to love it once you got yourself sorted out. You had your fuddy duddies who memorized scads of commands who said GUI wasn't as good but hell, the dos box was left in specifically for you guys. Have at it. Going from Office 2003 to Office 2007 was "where the hell did all my shit go?!"
I'm a big fan of unified interfaces. While dropdown menus might not be the best possible way of displaying tools and options, it's the best we've come up with so far. I think the biggest innovation I've seen on this end is with OSX where you have a search box built into the menu box. Start typing what you want and it will highlight the icons that apply to the feature. The drawback here is you need to know what the feature is called in order to type the name.
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, they should use as much horizontal space as they're given, but it's been proven that it's easier to read a narrow column of text than a wide one (google [google.com]). That's why newspapers use small columns.
If scrolling messes up your reading then perhaps you need to enable smooth scrolling or use the middle button to scroll slowly while you read.
Re:Tabs on top, do it NOW! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Nice but.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, IE7 was originally designed with the combo stop/refresh/go button, but they recieved a ot of feedback from users that stop and start/refresh are distinct functions and should not be combined. Eventually, Microsoft relented and made stop seperate.
Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:3, Interesting)
Chrome is better optimised for small screens and maximising window real estate
That's a fantastic point. I've got a 22" monitor at home and use a fairly high resolution laptop at work so I'm sure I'm out of touch with those with small monitors and netbooks. I still argue that disposing windows UI/UX standards is not the best way to accomplish this task, though.
Re:of all the things to copy from Chrome (Score:3, Interesting)
Tabs on top makes a sense ... because the address bar, back button, forward button, refresh/stop buttons, and home button are all part of the current tab, rather than the browser as a whole.
A cardinal rule of good user interface design is that controls are always in the same place. When the buttons are part of a tab, they may move around, for instance if the tab bar is set to hide if it contains one tab, or if the tab bar can expand to multiple lines, or if it can be placed horizontally or vertically.
In a GUI, "part of" means what visual grouping it belongs to and not the conceptual grouping it belongs to. If all the tabs contain the same controls, in the same positions, then these controls are not "part of" the tabs, they are part of something outside the tabs (they are factored out). To put it in geek terms, consider these expressions:
chrome: (xa + xb + xc)
firefox: x(a + b + c)
Do you argue that "x" must be inside the grouping because it is 'part of' each term, even though it is the same for all terms? It's more clear and more usable to factor out everything that is shared in common.
Re:They are abusing moderation for a long time now (Score:2, Interesting)
The problem is that Slashdot is handing out moderation points like candy these days. They're becoming more Digg-like; maybe because their overloads have told them that the more traffic Slashdot gets, the better. Since Digg.com [alexa.com] is a good deal more popular than Slashdot [alexa.com], maybe they're trying to emulate Digg more.
Personally, I prefer the older Slashdot where we didn't confuse "troll" with "legitimate criticism of Linux" or "Legitimate rebuttal of conservative idea". The reason Slashdot had moderation in the old days was to stop the brats who would post Goatse links [wikipedia.org] and what not; it was not to stifle legitimate discussion.
Re:Nice but.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Nice but.. (Score:3, Interesting)
I like having my Back, Forward, Reload, and Stop buttons left of the address bar. I can't believe they're considering adopting an IE-esque interface.
Their Chrome-like tab examples really fail, since they don't touch the top of the screen. That means not only are they not where you expected them to be, but you also can't click them by ramming your cursor to the top of the screen.
(This is a big one for me - I hate those X buttons that are in the top right, but are several pixels out, so that you actually have to look and see where your cursor is)
In short, I agree that non-native = bad. Windows has always had easy to click buttons, scrollbars, etc. on the edges - I hope they don't screw that up. ;)