Firefox 1.0 Preview Release

Firefox 1.0 Preview Release (http://www.mozilla.org)

I didn't see this posted elsewhere yet, so I suppose I'll be the first to mention that the Mozilla Foundation has just released the preview release for Firefox 1.0.

I typically use the nightlies, so some of the "new" features aren't that new to me. But there are some features that I didn't even know about, that definitely makes this the best browser ever!

Check it out.

What are the added features? I'm afraid I don't feel like downloading it. Yeah I know it sounds lazy, but what are nightlies?

Well, this was a feature packed release. Lots of new stuff. In quirks mode, they now emulate global access to elements by id and document.all. They have added "Livemarks", which are bookmarks that acts as RSS/Atom subscriptions. They have added a master password UI and raised the security of passwords. They have fixed an exploitable security hole in ligpng. They have improved the type ahead find feature. They have improved popup blocking features and raised the security on a few security weaknesses. They have improved the favicon support. They have made bookmarks easier to sort.

Cool, I'll be sure to get it once they properly release it

FINALLY: Shift+Tab from the Google search box goes back to the address box

nice features but i'm still waiting for the extensions to be updated. Some of those extensions I want still can't work for 1.0.

I dunno... my favorite feature in Moz is typing my search terms in the address bar and then arrowing down to select a google search. That's the ONLY thing keeping me from using FF... It's nice to have only that one bar to type in.

That's kind of psychotic, sir. :)

I mean, if you really want to split hairs...

TAB+typetypetype+Enter

is the same number of actions as

typetypetype+down+Enter

And that's assuming you only have to press down ONCE, otherwise, FF is faster

|V|[agnus']That's kind of psychotic, sir. :)

I mean, if you really want to split hairs...

TAB+typetypetype+Enter

is the same number of actions as

typetypetype+down+Enter

And that's assuming you only have to press down ONCE, otherwise, FF is faster

And I always turn off the Google box and just use a Bookmark when I want to search.

Remember the idea of being able to customize things is in order to allow people to form the tools to fit their hands instead of conforming their hands to fit the tools.

You have your way of searching, I have my way and rmedek has his way. Why should anyone think there's only one good way to do something?

Who's saying that?

All I'm saying is that if your *only* reason for using browser A over browser B is that A contains a "feature" which is no more efficient than the equivalent in browser B, then that's a bit goofy. :thumbsup:

Who gives a **** if it's more efficient?

Just my preference.

Goofy? That's like saying you're goofy for liking tea over coffee, because coffee's more efficient at delivering caffiene.

... sheesh :rolleyes:

Uh... MEH? Yeah...

That's a cute response, but you completely ignore the context of your own answer which is why I commented. You said it was your *only reason* not to use FF. Meaning, FF gives you ample reason otherwise, but for this "feature", you cannot budge. I mention the efficiency of each action in both browsers then because it is the only way that one "feature" could trump the aforementioned *ample* reasons to use something else. What other reasons? You like the colors? You like the noise it makes? Those are irrelevant to the task. A browser is a tool, you use it to do something. The content is accesses might be facetious, it might be a game, but the tool that brought it to you is just that: a tool.

If your *only* reason for sticking with one tool over another is because of a task that the other one does just as well, in spite of all the other reasons you *would* switch ... that is nutty.

That has nothing to do with your freedom to prefer whatever you want. It is simply irrational behavior.

In so many words... it is nutty.

P.S. type "google [search terms]" in the FF address bar... :rolleyes:

Seth: you have waaaaaay too much free time at work. And drink way too much tea. ;)

So, tell me then, what things will Firefox do that will blow my mind away as compared to my trusted Mozilla browser? What features will make me say, "damn it, you're right! I WILL give up my favorite search method ever because now I can do this!"

My browser is in your hands, dude...

...

<calm>*You* implied that you already saw sufficient reason to prefer FF over Moz, for instance, but that you preferred Moz because of one "feature" which it does just as well if not worse than FF. I was commenting on that, not trying to pitch you browser A, B *or* X.</calm>

...

Remember the idea of being able to customize things is in order to allow people to form the tools to fit their hands instead of conforming their hands to fit the tools.

If that were the goal at which they aimed, they'd have the popup blocker turned off by default, allowing users to choose which sites to block, instead of being forced to choose which ones to unblock.

Of course, the popup blocker can be turned off, but that misses the mark, imo--it should be so, by default. What's next...javascript turned off by default?

Not that I'll lose any sleep over it. But neither is it my browser of preference.



-james

hmmm, when did this become a thread of why you use one or the other and for what reason?

james,

You haven't thought the situation out if you think having it off by default makes more sense. People would be adding sites 'til they're blue in the face, as opposed to unblocking what they need. Blocked until proven innocent: you get only what you actually asked for. It's in line with the spirit of user choice, not user reaction.

Consider television. TV is somewhat like browsing the web with no popup blocker. The best you can do is to try to switch channels or shut the whole thing off. Suddenly somebody gives you the ability to block ads as they come. Great! But oh, the ads are plentiful and the admakers clever, and the onslaught seems neverending! You grow weary and end up where you started.

Orrrr... you block the whole lot of it and slowly filter in what you actually want.

It's better the way it is. :)

when did this become a thread of why you use one or the other?

it didn't..

james,

You haven't thought the situation out if you think having it off by default makes more sense. People would be adding sites 'til they're blue in the face, as opposed to unblocking what they need. Blocked until proven innocent: you get only what you actually asked for. It's in line with the spirit of user choice, not user reaction.


Na, na. The blocker can be toggled on or off, so what people would do is turn it on, if they so desired, not be stuck adding an endless number of sites to be blocked. Point being, most people are not techies and, therefore, don't change their browser's default settings. Hence, I'd prefer it was turned off by default.


hmmm, when did this become a thread of why you use one or the other and for what reason?

I think the thread starter set that tone:


I typically use the nightlies, so some of the "new" features aren't that new to me. But there are some features that I didn't even know about, that definitely makes this the best browser ever!





-james

Na, na. The blocker can be toggled on or off, so what people would do is turn it on, if they so desired...

Haha... or perhaps, turn it off? :thumbsup:

Point being, most people are not techies and, therefore, don't change their browser's default settings. Hence, I'd prefer it was turned off by default.

Almost everybody will want it on... why do you think the feature is still such a selling point? So, under your pretenses, all the "non-techies" would have to be bothered to go into their settings and turn this setting on, and you would wish this upon them *because* they are "non-techies"...

:confused:

an example (true story):
in my company, there are techies and non-techies. We made the switch from groupwise mail to outlook. (why? don't ask me) Outlook Web Access has the feature to open mails in a pop-up. What if someone (without knowing it) had a popup blocker active? His mails wouldn't open up anymore. After a few postings in a newsgroup and some calls to the servicedesk, he found out his pop-up blocker was the problem.

I (peronally) think it would be easier to add a site which throws pop-ups to the blocked list, than finding out why your favourite site won't work anymore.

Roelf

Almost everybody will want it on... why do you think the feature is still such a selling point? So, under your pretenses, all the "non-techies" would have to be bothered to go into their settings and turn this setting on, and you would wish this upon them *because* they are "non-techies"...

I have no objection to anyone providing a popup blocker with their application. But turning it on by default limits the functionality of Javascript, which, IMO, breaks browser architecture protocol for a feature that possesses no more intrinsic risk than, say, Java Applets, ActiveX controls, numerous plugins (Flash, et al), or even good ole images.

Instead, this is not a question of risk, but one of convenience. And in that regard, I don't consider launching a new window, onload, any more intrusive than loading a new window into a frame and/or iframe. In any case, you have the inherent ability to close the browser, and choose to not patronize a site. So if my ability to close a browser window, at-will, has been built into the browser's architecture, why then remove my ability to view one? IMO, the former [ability] is sufficient to the cause.


I value your opinion, but I have no desire to hijack this thread, so I won't comment further. :thumbsup:




-james

Eh, and ultimately it doesn't really matter I guess. Turn it on, turn it off... whatever.

I just moan over comments like your one about techies and non that just made no sense... and then Roelf's which ignore both the very good tenets of my points earlier, but also simple facts like how browsers with popupblockers built in NOTIFY YOU when they block something. So, unless you're braindead, there should be no wondering, "OH MY GOD WHERE DID MY SITE GO!?!" Thus, almost his entire example is a non-issue, but again... whatever.

:rolleyes:

Just a view on this:

The purpose of (Firefox|Thunderbird|nvu|Calendar|ChatZilla) is to be a good application for techies but provide more than the rest for non-techies. Techies typically tweak things until they work as they want them to work, while non techies use the tools as-is and sometimes don't even know how to tweak them. Therefore the default settings should totally disregard all aspects of techie use and instead reflect the median non techie users. Typically, the non techie user wants an application that is fast, responsive, predictable, that doesn't have any irritation moments such as popups or adverisements, that sorts out their personal mail from viri and spam etc.

Whenever this default setting may make some content inaccessible, the solution is a good and exhaustive built in help system, and preferably a good wizard for solving the most common problems. The solution is not to force the non techie to learn how to activate the features they want to use. The most common user that don't already know how to change the settings to their liking must be the norm for deciding the default setting. Anything else would be giving less than your best to the most just to cater to the few with the best for them.