PDA

View Full Version : Firefox 3



Yachtzee
06-18-2008, 05:23 PM
Anybody download and install this yet? I did today, hoping that they've fixed the memory problems that I've been having with Firefox 2.0. Well, I haven't had a problem with memory, but that new location bar, called the "awesomebar" is probably the most ridiculous overkill of a once useful feature I've ever seen. The problems I have are:

1. I liked how in the past it only stored sites in the drop down list that I had previously typed in. Now I can't find anything because there's all kids of bookmarks and random history links in there.
2. The different font colors and sizes make things just about unreadable
3. The autocomplete is completely botched up. If I'm typing something in, I typically want to go to the top level of the site. For example, if I type in www.redszone.com, that's where I want to go, so autocomplete should take me there. Unfortunately, when I've typed it in, it gives me links to individual threads I've visited rather than the top level site. It's so bad I actually went to the config file and turned off the autocomplete entirely.
4. While some people may like it, I figure many will not. Unfortunately, the developers didn't give us the option to turn it off.

So here's the dilemma, uninstall and return to the memory hog that is Firefox 2.0, or stick with 3.0 and do without some useful features of the location bar I enjoyed just to avoid being annoyed by the new and "improved" features.

vaticanplum
06-18-2008, 05:29 PM
3. The autocomplete is completely botched up. If I'm typing something in, I typically want to go to the top level of the site. For example, if I type in www.redszone.com, that's where I want to go, so autocomplete should take me there. Unfortunately, when I've typed it in, it gives me links to individual threads I've visited rather than the top level site. It's so bad I actually went to the config file and turned off the autocomplete entirely.


Safari does this too...I *think* what it autocompletes is what you visit most often. For example, it autocompletes Redszone for me too, but it usually autocompletes the Old Red Guard. If I've spent a lot of time on a particular thread (such as the Dusty Baker is hired thread), it will take me there. It's a real pain for google in particular because I use gmail (which starts with www.google.com something technically), so if I want to go to google I have to be mindful of that because it's probably going to take me to gmail. If that's not where I want to go, I just have to type the full address and hit backspace to get rid of what it's autocompleted.

Does that make sense?

Johnny Footstool
06-18-2008, 05:30 PM
Is Clint Eastwood in this one?

RedsManRick
06-18-2008, 05:31 PM
I agree 100% about the "awesomebar". I understand what they are trying to accomplish, but it's horrible. The page icon is distracting, two line format is unnecessary, and it's generally not useful.

westofyou
06-18-2008, 06:12 PM
Anybody download and install this yet? I did today, hoping that they've fixed the memory problems that I've been having with Firefox 2.0. Well, I haven't had a problem with memory, but that new location bar, called the "awesomebar" is probably the most ridiculous overkill of a once useful feature I've ever seen. The problems I have are:

1. I liked how in the past it only stored sites in the drop down list that I had previously typed in. Now I can't find anything because there's all kids of bookmarks and random history links in there.
2. The different font colors and sizes make things just about unreadable
3. The autocomplete is completely botched up. If I'm typing something in, I typically want to go to the top level of the site. For example, if I type in www.redszone.com, that's where I want to go, so autocomplete should take me there. Unfortunately, when I've typed it in, it gives me links to individual threads I've visited rather than the top level site. It's so bad I actually went to the config file and turned off the autocomplete entirely.
4. While some people may like it, I figure many will not. Unfortunately, the developers didn't give us the option to turn it off.

So here's the dilemma, uninstall and return to the memory hog that is Firefox 2.0, or stick with 3.0 and do without some useful features of the location bar I enjoyed just to avoid being annoyed by the new and "improved" features.

You can type config in the url bar and tweak firefox beyond the menu choices, I had to do it in Ubuntu to power it up, it was incredibly weak, but after some searching on some forums I found a fix.

As for 3.0... I never change until a .1 is after a piece of software... if I can help it.

Yachtzee
06-18-2008, 07:22 PM
You can type config in the url bar and tweak firefox beyond the menu choices, I had to do it in Ubuntu to power it up, it was incredibly weak, but after some searching on some forums I found a fix.

As for 3.0... I never change until a .1 is after a piece of software... if I can help it.

I usually wait too, but I often do legal research on my computer and have a bunch of tabs open. The memory leaks on 2 were getting out of hand, to the point where I'd have to use task manager to shut down firefox. So when I saw that 3.0 fixed those leaks, I jumped on it. If I had known about the "awesomebar" I would have thought better of it.

Yachtzee
06-18-2008, 07:25 PM
I agree 100% about the "awesomebar". I understand what they are trying to accomplish, but it's horrible. The page icon is distracting, two line format is unnecessary, and it's generally not useful.

I used to teach UI design and one of the classic blunders, besides fighting a land war in Asia, is trying to jam too much information in too small a space. It makes it too difficult to scan and find info quickly.

LoganBuck
06-18-2008, 10:28 PM
I used to teach UI design and one of the classic blunders, besides fighting a land war in Asia, is trying to jam too much information in too small a space. It makes it too difficult to scan and find info quickly.

There has to be a Dusty Baker joke in there somewhere.

I am waiting until the updates come along.

RedsFan75
06-19-2008, 08:53 AM
Does it seem slower to you?

I know I had 2.0 tweaked really well, but it seems like 3.0 takes much to long to load a page.

The memory was killing me in 2.0 as well, so I switched to this one quickly, so far I'm underwhelmed for the reasons you already listed.... It will definitely take some getting used to.

Thankfully I still do a lot in Opera and 9.5 is a pretty decent upgrade.

Roy Tucker
06-19-2008, 09:06 AM
It's open source software, folks. You get what you paid for and if you don't like what it does, pitch in and help fix it.

And like woy, I never install a .0 release or a .even for that matter. The .odds are the bug fix releases and what I use.

Unassisted
06-19-2008, 10:18 AM
I use a handful of browsers, so nothing in this one seems revolutionary. It does render pages faster than 2.x, which I like. The thing I dislike the most is that it's incompatible with my favorite plugins, Tab Mix Plus and Google Browser Sync, the latter of which won't be updated by Google.

RedsManRick
06-19-2008, 10:24 AM
I noticed last night that it doesn't seem to play nice with MS Sliverlight.

nate
06-19-2008, 11:07 AM
I find it's way faster than 2.whatever on the Mac. I probably had to force-quit out of the previous version around 10x per day. Haven't installed it on my PC yet.

westofyou
06-19-2008, 11:09 AM
I noticed last night that it doesn't seem to play nice with MS Sliverlight.

The key is MS.... and the Ubuntu version won't even allow it as an option... thus I can't listen to MLB radio on that box.

jmcclain19
06-19-2008, 12:47 PM
I tried the beta version for a while - and went back to 2.0.

The drop down bar is irritating for all the reasons you mentioned and more. I was hoping some would get irritated and help design a patch to turn that option yet. I have a feeling with the wide release, that will get done now.

I wish I was a programmer - otherwise I would follow Roy's lead and pitch in to help. Thats the wonder of open source.

TRF
06-19-2008, 04:15 PM
I'm liking 3.0 so far. been running the beta for months, with no thought of rolling back to 2.0.

HBP
06-19-2008, 05:35 PM
Love it. I can tell a noticeable difference in the speed. It's almost impossible for me to use anything besides a combo of Firefox and Adblocker plus.

GAC
06-19-2008, 08:53 PM
Is Clint Eastwood in this one?

When was Firefox 2? :D

I installed it yesterday because I kept having trouble with the previous version locking up for some reason.

The problem that I've been experiencing with Firefox is that when I initially open it up (and I have Google as my homepage), it consistently gets the page "cannot find address", which then tells me to verify the address is correct (and it is). And after I close and re-open it several times it finally brings it up.

Any suggestions?

Unassisted
06-20-2008, 11:55 AM
The busier dropdown bar doesn't bother me so much. There was a study recently that showed people don't remember and use URLs as much as they used to, so I figure the developers felt there was a need for the dropdown bar to include more than the URL of recently-visited sites.