Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Australis pushed back to Fx 25
8 views
Skip to first unread message
»Q«
May 16, 2013, 11:27:27 PM5/16/13
to
On Thu, 16 May 2013 20:58:40 -0500
»Q« <box...@gmx.net> wrote:
> <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/firefox-dev/2013-May/000405.html>
>
> Summary: They want to land Australis early in a release cycle, but
> it's not ready for early in the Fx 24 cycle as planned, so now the aim
> is to land it early for Fx 25.
Sorry, I didn't mean to post this in *.support. Crossposting now and
setting followups to m.general.
»Q« <box...@gmx.net> wrote:
> <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/firefox-dev/2013-May/000405.html>
>
> Summary: They want to land Australis early in a release cycle, but
> it's not ready for early in the Fx 24 cycle as planned, so now the aim
> is to land it early for Fx 25.
Sorry, I didn't mean to post this in *.support. Crossposting now and
setting followups to m.general.
Ron Hunter
May 17, 2013, 3:25:33 AM5/17/13
to
since it looks like a simple copy of Google Chrome's screen presentation.
»Q«
May 17, 2013, 9:52:16 PM5/17/13
to
like that to me than Fx already does.
Ron Hunter
May 18, 2013, 3:12:00 AM5/18/13
to
installed, there is little to distinguish between Chrome, Firefox, and
IE10. Some may see that as a good thing, but I am not one of them. As
long as they don't get rid of themes, then I don't really care much as I
will still be able to use something the still has an individual
character, rather than a 'me too' appearance.
Daniel
May 18, 2013, 6:38:51 AM5/18/13
to
Firefox and IE10 all set up to look the same?? i.e, if you had one set
up to look as you wanted, then, if you had to use other browsers, you'd
have them set up the same, if possible!!
--
Daniel
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130502201647
or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:21.0)
Gecko/20100101 Firefox/21.0 SeaMonkey/2.18 Build identifier: 20130403022815
Ron Hunter
May 18, 2013, 9:23:20 AM5/18/13
to
light under a bushel? My firefox looks like Firefox, and I can make it
look like Chrome, or IE, or even Opera, but it certainly doesn't work
the other way, so why make Firefox look like the others, losing its best
feature for most users.
WaltS
May 18, 2013, 9:37:46 AM5/18/13
to
theme in Thunderbird?
I would like my Mozilla apps to look the same.
Sure there is much more work involved, but I believe they could have the
curved tabs now, and work on the other items as versions progress.
BTW: Bug 755598 - Merge back/forward, URL bar, reload/stop/go into one
toolbar item is REOPENED.
--
openSUSE 12.3 (64-bit) KDE 4.10.2
Thunderbird Release
I despise GG.
»Q«
May 18, 2013, 11:11:54 AM5/18/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 02:12:00 -0500
*more* like those others?
> Some may see that as a good thing, but I am not one of
> them.
I don't notice it -- they all seem different to me. But why wouldn't
it be a good thing?
> As long as they don't get rid of themes, then I don't really
> care much as I will still be able to use something the still has an
> individual character, rather than a 'me too' appearance.
You *say* you don't care much, but you frequently object to the default
theme looking too much like Chrome.
Ron Hunter <rphu...@charter.net> wrote:
> On 5/17/2013 8:52 PM, »Q« wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 May 2013 02:25:33 -0500
> > Ron Hunter <rphu...@charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/16/2013 10:27 PM, »Q« wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 20:58:40 -0500
> >>> »Q« <box...@gmx.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/firefox-dev/2013-May/000405.html>
> >>>>
> >>>> Summary: They want to land Australis early in a release cycle,
> >>>> but it's not ready for early in the Fx 24 cycle as planned, so
> >>>> now the aim is to land it early for Fx 25.
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, I didn't mean to post this in *.support. Crossposting now
> >>> and setting followups to m.general.
> >>
> >> In my opinion, they might as well rebrand it as Google Chrome by
> >> Mozilla since it looks like a simple copy of Google Chrome's screen
> >> presentation.
> >
> > You've been saying that for years, though. It doesn't look much
> > more like that to me than Fx already does.
> >
> They are already so similar that, unless one has a third party theme
> installed, there is little to distinguish between Chrome, Firefox,
> and IE10.
Is there something about Australis which makes you think Firefox seems
> On 5/17/2013 8:52 PM, »Q« wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 May 2013 02:25:33 -0500
> > Ron Hunter <rphu...@charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/16/2013 10:27 PM, »Q« wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 20:58:40 -0500
> >>> »Q« <box...@gmx.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> <https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/firefox-dev/2013-May/000405.html>
> >>>>
> >>>> Summary: They want to land Australis early in a release cycle,
> >>>> but it's not ready for early in the Fx 24 cycle as planned, so
> >>>> now the aim is to land it early for Fx 25.
> >>>
> >>> Sorry, I didn't mean to post this in *.support. Crossposting now
> >>> and setting followups to m.general.
> >>
> >> In my opinion, they might as well rebrand it as Google Chrome by
> >> Mozilla since it looks like a simple copy of Google Chrome's screen
> >> presentation.
> >
> > You've been saying that for years, though. It doesn't look much
> > more like that to me than Fx already does.
> >
> They are already so similar that, unless one has a third party theme
> installed, there is little to distinguish between Chrome, Firefox,
> and IE10.
*more* like those others?
> Some may see that as a good thing, but I am not one of
> them.
it be a good thing?
> As long as they don't get rid of themes, then I don't really
> care much as I will still be able to use something the still has an
> individual character, rather than a 'me too' appearance.
theme looking too much like Chrome.
Ron Hunter
May 18, 2013, 9:33:16 PM5/18/13
to
>> Some may see that as a good thing, but I am not one of
>> them.
>
> I don't notice it -- they all seem different to me. But why wouldn't
> it be a good thing?
>
>> As long as they don't get rid of themes, then I don't really
>> care much as I will still be able to use something the still has an
>> individual character, rather than a 'me too' appearance.
>
> You *say* you don't care much, but you frequently object to the default
> theme looking too much like Chrome.
>
Chrome' philosophy. The minimalist interface, which still seems to
consume more screen space than my more 'interesting' one (currently
Nuvola), and the muted, or non-existent colors, don't meet my needs.
»Q«
May 18, 2013, 10:17:59 PM5/18/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 20:33:16 -0500
Yes, but I don't particularly associate curved tabs with Chrome and
IE. But now that you bring them up, the tabs do look more like those
currently in other browsers and in other software in general.
> >> Some may see that as a good thing, but I am not one of
> >> them.
> >
> > I don't notice it -- they all seem different to me. But why
> > wouldn't it be a good thing?
>
> Because having a brand identity is always a good thing.
I'd much they continue to view the UI as a way to improve most users'
experience rather than viewing the UI as a delivery vehicle for brand
identity.
> >> As long as they don't get rid of themes, then I don't really
> >> care much as I will still be able to use something the still has an
> >> individual character, rather than a 'me too' appearance.
> >
> > You *say* you don't care much, but you frequently object to the
> > default theme looking too much like Chrome.
>
> I don't use the default, and haven't since FF4. I don't like the
> 'copy Chrome' philosophy. The minimalist interface, which still
> seems to consume more screen space than my more 'interesting' one
> (currently Nuvola), and the muted, or non-existent colors, don't meet
> my needs.
I still don't see any 'copy Chrome' philosophy in evidence. For years
now, the direction of all the major browsers has been to make the
default UI less intrusive for most users. Moving to a simpler
interface was one of the main reasons the Firefox project was started,
and was IMO the main reason it became popular enough for Mozilla to make
it their flagship product.
IE. But now that you bring them up, the tabs do look more like those
currently in other browsers and in other software in general.
> >> Some may see that as a good thing, but I am not one of
> >> them.
> >
> > I don't notice it -- they all seem different to me. But why
> > wouldn't it be a good thing?
>
> Because having a brand identity is always a good thing.
experience rather than viewing the UI as a delivery vehicle for brand
identity.
> >> As long as they don't get rid of themes, then I don't really
> >> care much as I will still be able to use something the still has an
> >> individual character, rather than a 'me too' appearance.
> >
> > You *say* you don't care much, but you frequently object to the
> > default theme looking too much like Chrome.
>
> I don't use the default, and haven't since FF4. I don't like the
> 'copy Chrome' philosophy. The minimalist interface, which still
> seems to consume more screen space than my more 'interesting' one
> (currently Nuvola), and the muted, or non-existent colors, don't meet
> my needs.
now, the direction of all the major browsers has been to make the
default UI less intrusive for most users. Moving to a simpler
interface was one of the main reasons the Firefox project was started,
and was IMO the main reason it became popular enough for Mozilla to make
it their flagship product.
0 new messages