Firefox Is Heading Towards Trouble
-
David Stone wrote: Tools->Options->Advanced->Use Smooth Scrolling will turn on smooth scrolling and provide you with the same experience you get in IE I already have that option activated. :) The experience is not the same though. A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder than in other applications - now obviously you don't so it must be the user experience it gives. Pressure sensitive mice buttons would be cool for gaming and graphics work though. David Stone wrote: UI guidelines I sort of half-disagree here: UI guidelines have nothing to do with anything because as you go on to say the success of a UI always comes down to preference. Consistency of usability does matter though. I didn't mean to suggest that FF got it's UI wrong and others have got it right, just that conformity is the important thing. There is a reason that IE and many other Microsoft applications have non-standard behaviour from an outsiders pov - it's so they work as the user will expect them to. It's only really clever people like us that ever complain. :)
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flikrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
David Wulff wrote: A wheel click in FF always feels like you have to press it harder than in other applications The wheel button generally does double-duty in Firefox, opening up links in a separate window if clicked, while doing the standard drag-scroll thing otherwise. This can be frustrating, if (like me) you tend to keep the cursor off to one side of the window (a location favored by web designers for tower ads). It's a small thing to get used to, with nearly the whole window still available to click in... but it can be a subtle annoyance (not as annoying as not being open links in a new tab though, at least for me). Far more annoying in my book is the fact that Firefox's drag scroll doesn't capture mouse input - so if the mouse is dragged outside the window and released, Firefox will still be scrolling next time your cursor enters.
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
-
There is some interesting reading here. Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Mike Connor, a core Firefox developer, writes in his blog, "In nearly three years, we haven't built up a community of hackers around Firefox, for a myriad of reasons, and now I think we're in trouble. Of the six people who can actually review in Firefox, four are AWOL, and one doesn't do a lot of reviews. And I'm on the verge of just walking away indefinitely, since it feels like I'm the only person who cares enough to make it an issue." If Firefox's reviewing developers, the key people of any open-source project, have burned out on the project, Firefox is in a lot of trouble. Forget about trying to get new and better versions out. They're not going to be able to keep up on security fixes and bugs. For example, it used to be that if you ran Firefox you never saw annoying pop-up ad windows. That was then. This is now. See: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1774091,00.asp[^] Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows www.getsoft.com and Surfulater www.surfulater.com "Save what you Surf"
Neville Franks wrote: Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Programmers fastituously document their code so other can pick up where they left off? Senior programmers don't move on to greener pastures when a product is released, rather than hanging around doing maintenance work? If I sound a bit irate, it's because I am. Saying you have trouble putting your trust in OS is a lot of BS, in my book, if the only reasons you can cite are things that happen in commercial development just as much. Been there, done that, in numerous closed source commercial endeavors. Seen it happen many times too. Granted, you did say "most" OS projects. ;P Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
There is some interesting reading here. Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Mike Connor, a core Firefox developer, writes in his blog, "In nearly three years, we haven't built up a community of hackers around Firefox, for a myriad of reasons, and now I think we're in trouble. Of the six people who can actually review in Firefox, four are AWOL, and one doesn't do a lot of reviews. And I'm on the verge of just walking away indefinitely, since it feels like I'm the only person who cares enough to make it an issue." If Firefox's reviewing developers, the key people of any open-source project, have burned out on the project, Firefox is in a lot of trouble. Forget about trying to get new and better versions out. They're not going to be able to keep up on security fixes and bugs. For example, it used to be that if you ran Firefox you never saw annoying pop-up ad windows. That was then. This is now. See: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1774091,00.asp[^] Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows www.getsoft.com and Surfulater www.surfulater.com "Save what you Surf"
Biggest problem I have with firefox is it's HORRIBLE copy/paste ability.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
-
- This should help with your dialup problem. 2) The scrolling offset isn't random. It's offset by the amount of space that the last post took up. So if you're reading a freaking huge post and then click on a different post, the page won't focus on the new post, it'll keep you where you are. But since the large post has collapsed, the forum has moved back up the page. This is an issue with the forum code rather than Firefox. Nowhere in the SwitchMessage javascript function does the code call the focus() method on the tr for the message header. IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard. It's another case of IE doing its own thing.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
David Stone wrote: IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard With respect, that is a pointless argument, it's just bull and always has been. IE *is* the standard. Take a look at any website hit log (normal website that is, not a slashdottie one) and the standard is clear, overwhelmingly IE. The bodies at large can come up with whatever standards they want, but it's completely meaningless when there is already a de-facto standard. Most of what people decry about IE being "non-standard" are things that are simply better than the standard. This is a hollow argument at best in favor of a clearly inferior browser. So what if it follows the standards? If the "standards" result in unreadable text then the "standards" are crap!
-
Neville Franks wrote: Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Programmers fastituously document their code so other can pick up where they left off? Senior programmers don't move on to greener pastures when a product is released, rather than hanging around doing maintenance work? If I sound a bit irate, it's because I am. Saying you have trouble putting your trust in OS is a lot of BS, in my book, if the only reasons you can cite are things that happen in commercial development just as much. Been there, done that, in numerous closed source commercial endeavors. Seen it happen many times too. Granted, you did say "most" OS projects. ;P Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
Marc Clifton wrote: Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. Honestly what in the world do you think *can't* be done better with a real company, real budgets and real revenue to invest than with exactly nothing? There's just no winning that argument under any circumstances. Sure some commercial organizations are run badly, but the great majority are not and they are able to deal with this kind of thing. Fighting for open source is exactly as helpful to the career programmer as fighting for outsourcing.
-
Marc Clifton wrote: Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. Honestly what in the world do you think *can't* be done better with a real company, real budgets and real revenue to invest than with exactly nothing? There's just no winning that argument under any circumstances. Sure some commercial organizations are run badly, but the great majority are not and they are able to deal with this kind of thing. Fighting for open source is exactly as helpful to the career programmer as fighting for outsourcing.
John Cardinal wrote: Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. ROTF! In the companies I've worked for, developing commercial products, this has never been the case. "deals" and "moves on seamlessly"??? HAHAHAHA! John Cardinal wrote: with a real company, real budgets and real revenue and real beauracracy, real red tape, real idiots in management... Ah well. I think I'm overtired and punchy tonight. So, I'll be signing off. Have a good evening! Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
John Cardinal wrote: Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. ROTF! In the companies I've worked for, developing commercial products, this has never been the case. "deals" and "moves on seamlessly"??? HAHAHAHA! John Cardinal wrote: with a real company, real budgets and real revenue and real beauracracy, real red tape, real idiots in management... Ah well. I think I'm overtired and punchy tonight. So, I'll be signing off. Have a good evening! Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
- This should help with your dialup problem. 2) The scrolling offset isn't random. It's offset by the amount of space that the last post took up. So if you're reading a freaking huge post and then click on a different post, the page won't focus on the new post, it'll keep you where you are. But since the large post has collapsed, the forum has moved back up the page. This is an issue with the forum code rather than Firefox. Nowhere in the SwitchMessage javascript function does the code call the focus() method on the tr for the message header. IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard. It's another case of IE doing its own thing.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
David Stone wrote: This should help with your dialup problem. Been there, done that, no difference. I will be sticking with a browser that works.
"You're obviously a superstar." - Christian Graus about me - 12 Feb '03 "Obviously ??? You're definitely a superstar!!!" mYkel - 21 Jun '04 Within you lies the power for good - Use it!
Honoured as one of The Most Helpful Members of 2004
-
David Stone wrote: IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard With respect, that is a pointless argument, it's just bull and always has been. IE *is* the standard. Take a look at any website hit log (normal website that is, not a slashdottie one) and the standard is clear, overwhelmingly IE. The bodies at large can come up with whatever standards they want, but it's completely meaningless when there is already a de-facto standard. Most of what people decry about IE being "non-standard" are things that are simply better than the standard. This is a hollow argument at best in favor of a clearly inferior browser. So what if it follows the standards? If the "standards" result in unreadable text then the "standards" are crap!
John Cardinal wrote: IE *is* the standard. Take a look at any website hit log (normal website that is, not a slashdottie one) and the standard is clear, overwhelmingly IE. My (.NET) blog stats:
62% MSIE 6.0
23% Firefox 1.0.1
9% Firefox 1.0
3% Netscape 7.1
2% Mozilla 5.0
1% Opera 8.0My audience is far from slashdotties: they are almost only Microsoft Windows .NET developers. And I believe the only reason IE 6.0 lost only 38% of .NET developer browsers is because it came installed in the OS. John Cardinal wrote: Most of what people decry about IE being "non-standard" are things that are simply better than the standard. Transparent PNG support anyone? I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!
-
David Stone wrote: IE does this nicely for you, sure. But it's non-standard With respect, that is a pointless argument, it's just bull and always has been. IE *is* the standard. Take a look at any website hit log (normal website that is, not a slashdottie one) and the standard is clear, overwhelmingly IE. The bodies at large can come up with whatever standards they want, but it's completely meaningless when there is already a de-facto standard. Most of what people decry about IE being "non-standard" are things that are simply better than the standard. This is a hollow argument at best in favor of a clearly inferior browser. So what if it follows the standards? If the "standards" result in unreadable text then the "standards" are crap!
Screw ANSI C++ compliance then. I mean, who gives a crap if Boost or Loki compile correctly. I mean seriously, if you're going to excuse IE for doing a crappy job of sticking to the standard, then you've got to excuse VC 6 for not compiling standard C++ properly. But that didn't stop C++ devs from complaining every time we had to include specialized templates in our code, did it? I know that HTML is a markup language, and is therefore treated as "less of a language" than compiled languages, but saying that you should render incorrect markup is like saying that you should compile C++ without the semicolons at the end of the lines. And saying that IE does something better than the standard is just plain wrong. CSS 2? Transparent PNGs? The list goes on... Something tells me you're not a web developer.
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
Neville Franks wrote: Stuff like this is why I have trouble putting my trust in most open source projects. Why? The key people who start a major development effort for a closed source application don't get burned out? The brain trust doesn't leave? Programmers fastituously document their code so other can pick up where they left off? Senior programmers don't move on to greener pastures when a product is released, rather than hanging around doing maintenance work? If I sound a bit irate, it's because I am. Saying you have trouble putting your trust in OS is a lot of BS, in my book, if the only reasons you can cite are things that happen in commercial development just as much. Been there, done that, in numerous closed source commercial endeavors. Seen it happen many times too. Granted, you did say "most" OS projects. ;P Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
One issue I see with OS software is that no one is accountable. With commercial software if the appropriate level of support, product quality etc. aren't there, the company would eventually either get there act together or close there doors. When this happens with OS software it just hangs around for ever like a bad smell. Various (but not all) OS projects I've looked at over the years have lousy documentation and poor support. I'm sure they start off with the best of intentions but they seem to run out of steam. Yes I know I have the source and I can do whatever I want, but I'm basically not interested in doing that. Mind you I have done a bit in the past and handed it back but at the end of the day it was a waste of time and effort. I'm not saying commercial products are the answer to our prayers, that's definitely not the case. There is probably more crap commercial software out there than OS. But there is a real motivation to make commercial apps a success and that is to put food on our table and that of our employees (if we have any which I don't). Generally that type of motivation doesn't exist in the OS world, so keeping it happening for the long haul is a lot more difficult IMO. My 2c worth. Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows www.getsoft.com and Surfulater www.surfulater.com "Save what you Surf"
-
Biggest problem I have with firefox is it's HORRIBLE copy/paste ability.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
-
John Cardinal wrote: Of course they do, and a commercial enterprise anticipates this, deals with it and moves on seamlessly. ROTF! In the companies I've worked for, developing commercial products, this has never been the case. "deals" and "moves on seamlessly"??? HAHAHAHA! John Cardinal wrote: with a real company, real budgets and real revenue and real beauracracy, real red tape, real idiots in management... Ah well. I think I'm overtired and punchy tonight. So, I'll be signing off. Have a good evening! Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
Hmmm..not sure what sort of places you've worked at, but any professional organization is going to have turnover, it's inevitable. Usually the "brain trust" are the most highly sought after and most likely to leave. It just comes with the territory and is part of doing business. Open source is not doing business, at best it could be called a charitable act, at worst extortion when it comes to projects that make money off support only.
-
Poves my theory that all successfull OpenSource projects are vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenpeterchen wrote: Poves my theory that all successfull OpenSource projects are vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors. I guess I'm being nitpicky, but you're saying, "Firefox is vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors. This proves my theory that all successful OpenSource projects are vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors." It proves your theory? I'm sure you can see the problem here. ----------------------------------------------------- Empires Of Steel[^]
-
Biggest problem I have with firefox is it's HORRIBLE copy/paste ability.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
-
Poves my theory that all successfull OpenSource projects are vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenThe same applies to commercial applications, but you just don't hear about it. Speaking as one who was once instructed to leave out an enhancement to a software package, on the current release, because if it went on the next release the firm would make more money!
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't." - Anatole France
-
The same applies to commercial applications, but you just don't hear about it. Speaking as one who was once instructed to leave out an enhancement to a software package, on the current release, because if it went on the next release the firm would make more money!
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't." - Anatole France
Ted Ferenc wrote: The same applies to commercial applications, but you just don't hear about it. Absolutely. However (a) this weakens a major perceived advantages of OpenSource - peer review - to "peer review possible". And (b) an commercially viable project has a better incentive to find a replacement.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
peterchen wrote: Poves my theory that all successfull OpenSource projects are vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors. I guess I'm being nitpicky, but you're saying, "Firefox is vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors. This proves my theory that all successful OpenSource projects are vitally dependent on a very small number of main contributors." It proves your theory? I'm sure you can see the problem here. ----------------------------------------------------- Empires Of Steel[^]
s/poves/confirms happy now? :rolleyes:
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen -
Biggest problem I have with firefox is it's HORRIBLE copy/paste ability.
Found on Bash.org [erno] hm. I've lost a machine.. literally _lost_. it responds to ping, it works completely, I just can't figure out where in my apartment it is.
"Biggest problem I have with firefox is it's HORRIBLE copy/paste ability." I just copied and pasted your message and so far it seems ok... :-D I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!
-
Ted Ferenc wrote: The same applies to commercial applications, but you just don't hear about it. Absolutely. However (a) this weakens a major perceived advantages of OpenSource - peer review - to "peer review possible". And (b) an commercially viable project has a better incentive to find a replacement.
Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygenTo me the main advantage of open source/freeware/shareware is that the program is written by people who want to write the code, commercial software tends to be written by the cheapest people tha management can find, who probably have no interest in what they are writing!
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you do know and what you don't." - Anatole France
