Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it.

Showing 1-228 of 228 messages
Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Jeremy Morton 8/28/12 4:55 AM
Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593

Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
(Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
  It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.

I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
  Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
Firefox better.

I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
minority and we should count!)

--
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Martijn 8/28/12 5:19 AM
I would hate it too when this option would go away.
One of Firefox's selling points is it's customizable UI.
If the tabs-on-top feature would be the only default option, this
would be greatly diminished.

Regards,
Martijn
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox



--
Martijn Wargers - Help Mozilla!
http://quality.mozilla.org/
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_QA_Community
irc://irc.mozilla.org/qa - /nick mw22
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Asa Dotzler 8/28/12 11:26 AM
On 8/28/2012 4:55 AM, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?

Beginning your request with suggestions that our UX leaders are
incompetent or working in bad faith may not be the ideal approach to
convincing said leaders the merits of your request.

- A

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. EE 8/28/12 12:00 PM
The idea of forcing the tabs into the title bar in Macs is something I
do not want.  I am hoping that the setting in about:config
"browser.tabs.drawInTitlebar" being set to false will prevent that.
There is enough stuff in the title bar that there would be a lot less
room for the tabs if you put them up there, plus the title of a page
would not be readable if there were several tabs there.
Just because Chrome did that, does it mean you absolutely have to copy it?

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Jeremy Morton 8/28/12 12:36 PM
Asa,

I'm afraid that's exactly what I believe.  I have had my Bugzilla
account suspended in the past by you PERSONALLY because I said something
you didn't like.  I have been kicked out of your IRC channel because I
said something you didn't like.  Frankly, I'm through trying to persuade
you and your UX team to listen to users because I don't think you care
about many of them.

Who I'm appealing to here is other Firefox devs (and maybe the Firefox
management).  I'm also stating some facts so that Firefox devs will know
what the consequences of this decision will be.

As far as I'm concerned, the onus is on YOU to convince ME that you give
a damn about what users' feedback is; and not just 51% of them -
significant minorities too.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Jeremy Morton 8/28/12 12:38 PM
This isn't about tabs in titlebar, it's about "tabs on top".  In other
words, all toolbar elements would be "contained" within a tab, rather
than being above your tabs.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Paul Rouget 8/28/12 1:47 PM
Jeremy, please, let not start a "hate" thread again.
Please understand the problem here is your tone.

This topic is important. We need to talk about it, but it's impossible to start
any decent conversion when someone is aggressive like you are.

If you don't understand why we see you as being aggressive here, please just
leave this thread.

If you're willing to have a rational argument about "tabs-on-top", yeah, let's
discuss. With rational arguments, and not just with some
"I-know-better-than-you" or "you-need-to-convince-me" sentences.

Again Jeremy, please let's not start a hate thread.

(and really, no need to reply to this message, let's just move on and try to
understand what should be done or not-done)

-- Paul
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. jsma...@gmail.com 8/29/12 4:25 AM
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 7:55:50 AM UTC-4, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.

Count me in this group. I much prefer having my tabs "on the bottom".

Perhaps there are arguments for having tabs on top. But they are no reason to force everyone to comply.

I hope the developers will be more concerned with the interests of the users of Firefox than with their own interests of having Firefox reach some theoretical design "ideal".

--
John Small
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. B.J. Herbison 8/30/12 3:04 AM
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 7:25:37 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
>
> Perhaps there are arguments for having tabs on top. But they are no reason to force everyone to comply.

There certain are reasons to force tabs on top (or to otherwise limit flexibility). Fewer options mean:

- Easier to create UI designs that look good (standard and add-ons).
- Less code.
- The code is more likely to be correct.
- Fewer cases, so a higher percent of the cases can be tested.
- It's less likely that a new change will break something, because of the reasons above.
- Better performance.
- Easier to optimize.

The effect for each change is small, but cumulative.

I don't always agree when Firefox developers want to reduce options, but I do recognize there are advantages to simplifying.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 8/30/12 9:55 AM
Thanks for pointing that out, B.J. It's a good list, and you're
absolutely right that the effect is often cumulative.

I think it's important for everyone to recognize that decisions like
these involve tradeoffs - they're really never as simple as it may
seem from an outside perspective. The relative importance of the
various factors in that tradeoff depend a lot on your perspective. For
a user, the impact to their use of the product will be the most
important factor, and it's easy to discount the maintenance cost or
the cost of the complexity to new users. For a developer who doesn't
use the feature, the cost of maintenance of the feature (i.e. most of
the things on B.J.'s list) will be the most important factor, and it's
easy to discount the impact the removal will have on users.

My job as Firefox module owner, and the job of the Firefox reviewers,
and the UX team, and the product team who help make these decisions,
is to recognize those different perspectives, and carefully balance
them using our judgement to make the best call that we can. It's
basically impossible to make any UI decisions that involve removing a
feature or functionality without upsetting someone, given the size of
the Firefox user-base (or even just the size of the vocal community
who knows that they can discuss such changes in this newsgroup), but
it's important that we continue to make those hard decisions, because
the alternative is a product that gets worse over time, rather than
better.

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Dao 8/30/12 11:16 AM
This is all true, but I've argued in bug 755593 that the maintenance
costs of tabs on bottom have been reasonably low and I don't see large
costs approaching us. So I think we can delay this decision until it
becomes relevant.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 8/30/12 12:34 PM
My message wasn't intended as an argument for or against any
particular decision, I was just trying to make an observation about
the decision process in the most general sense.

Re: tabs-on-bottom specifically, there is clearly disagreement (even
just amongst developers, let alone users). As you suggest, it's
probably not useful to re-open the debate here, now.

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. John Small 9/1/12 3:55 AM
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 10:04:39 UTC, "B.J. Herbison"
<bjher...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 7:25:37 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps there are arguments for having tabs on top. But they are no reason to force everyone to comply.
>
> There certain are reasons to force tabs on top (or to otherwise limit flexibility). Fewer options mean:
>
> - Easier to create UI designs that look good (standard and add-ons).
> - Less code.
> - The code is more likely to be correct.
> - Fewer cases, so a higher percent of the cases can be tested.
> - It's less likely that a new change will break something, because of the reasons above.
> - Better performance.
> - Easier to optimize.

All of these, except the performance, are advantages primarily for the
developers, not for the users.  To me, these arguments do not justify
forcing users to change from a mode they are comfortable with and find
more intuitive than "tabs on top".

P.S. I would find "tabs on top" more palatable if the bookmarks
toolbar, which I also prefer using, was "on top" of both the
navigation toolbar and the tabs.

--

John Small
(remove z's for email)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Boris Zbarsky 9/1/12 8:46 AM
On 9/1/12 6:55 AM, John Small wrote:
>> - Easier to create UI designs that look good (standard and add-ons).
>> - Less code.
>> - The code is more likely to be correct.
>> - Fewer cases, so a higher percent of the cases can be tested.
>> - It's less likely that a new change will break something, because of the reasons above.
>> - Better performance.
>> - Easier to optimize.
>
> All of these, except the performance, are advantages primarily for the
> developers, not for the users.

Uh.  Fewer bugs is an advantage for users.  Basically, most of the items
above either lead to fewer bugs or directly lead to the "better
performance".

-Boris
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 9/1/12 9:09 AM
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 3:55 AM, John Small <jsm...@os2world.net> wrote:
> All of these, except the performance, are advantages primarily for the
> developers, not for the users.  To me, these arguments do not justify
> forcing users to change from a mode they are comfortable with and find
> more intuitive than "tabs on top".

Advantages for developers translate indirectly into advantages for
users, because our development resources are finite - they're not
completely independent variables. Having to maintain old features
hampers our ability to develop new desirable ones (to attract new
users and hopefully improve the experience for existing users), and
also often hampers our ability to make maintainability improvements
that lead to performance, or stability, or security improvements - all
user benefits.

The "To me" part of your message illustrates perfectly the
"perspectives" point of my previous post. It's not unreasonable for
the tradeoff from your perspective to be biased heavily towards your
own usage, but it's useful in these discussions to recognize that
bias.

As you point out, it's also important for us to consider the costs of
"forcing users to change", and we try never to forget that. But
balancing that against the cost of being stagnant - which hampers our
ability to attract new users, or maintain those who are interested in
a cutting edge browser - is not trivial. Trying to minimize the
negative impacts of change and maximize the positive ones requires
looking at the "big picture", and factoring in as much information as
we can get about our entire existing user base (hundreds of millions
of users, with a very broad array of perspectives and desires) as well
as our potential future users (also a very diverse set, and even
harder to reason about).

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. B.J. Herbison 9/1/12 11:57 AM
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 6:55:47 AM UTC-4, John Small wrote:
>
> P.S. I would find "tabs on top" more palatable if the bookmarks
> toolbar, which I also prefer using, was "on top" of both the
> navigation toolbar and the tabs.
>
> John Small

There's an open bug on this issue, but going nowhere. I advocated in favor of your position in a comment.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=634560

Comment 18 provides a work-around, putting bookmarks in the menu bar.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=634560#c18
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. John Small 9/2/12 4:57 AM
The comment talks about putting bookmarks on the menu bar but does not
say how to do this.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. B.J. Herbison 9/2/12 6:08 AM
On Sunday, September 2, 2012 7:57:48 AM UTC-4, John Small wrote:
>
> The comment talks about putting bookmarks on the menu bar but does not
> say how to do this.

Enable Menu Bar, enable Bookmarks Bar.
Right-click on Menu Bar and select Customize.
Drag "Bookmarks Toolbar Items" from the Bookmarks Bar to the Menu Bar.
Click Done.

(Or drag it to the Navigation Bar and get rid of both the Menu Bar and the Bookmarks Bar.)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. David Smith 9/4/12 10:25 AM
I use Tabs on Top at work, because my browsing is extremely light, and I wanted to at least work with the feature to get a handle on it.  There are a few quirks, but I don't do enough browsing for it to really matter.

I use Tabs on Bottom at home, because that's where I do all my serious browsing work, and Tabs on Top fails badly (I tried the Tabs on Top once several months ago; it was not pleasant).  In general, in my experience, the more heavy lifting I do in the browser, the less suitable Tabs on Top is.  Yes, Tabs on Top is nicer for more vertical real estate, but I find that if I'm even considering the need for that, I'm hitting F11, which makes the entire question moot.

If you remove Tabs on Bottom as a feature, entirely, then I would simply lock the browser onto the previous version, and not allow it to update after that.  I wouldn't move to another browser (at least not entirely), partly because other browsers don't have Tabs on Bottom, and partly because I'm too invested in a number of Firefox extensions to be able to transition to any of the other browsers, however don't think for a minute that it's because you managed to keep my loyalty as a user.


As already pointed out, the above list is almost solely to the benefit of the developers.  What's good for developers has a high correlation with what's good for users, but it is definitely not a cause>effect relationship.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Blair McBride 9/4/12 6:09 PM
On 5/09/2012 5:25 a.m., kinem...@gmail.com wrote:
>   In general, in my experience, the more heavy lifting I do in the browser, the less suitable Tabs on Top is

Could you try to explain why?

- Blair
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. tril...@gmail.com 9/4/12 7:12 PM
Personally, I like tabs on top. I find it objectively better. But, I also recognize two important facts:

1. Firefox has always been about customizability. The user should be free to put the tab bar anywhere they like.

2. The last thing Firefox's reputation needs is the rage storm that this change will cause. Even removing the option from the menu was a mistake. If a silent update changes the browser chrome to Australius and moves everyone's tabs to the top without the option to fix it, you will cement the undeserved reputation that Mozilla no longer cares about what users want.

Both of these are good reasons not to remove the option for tabs on bottom.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Millwood 9/5/12 8:10 AM
For me the answer seems obvious.  The mouse motion I use most is select
another tab.  On the bottom, I don't have to go as far.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Dave Townsend 9/5/12 8:45 AM
But on the top the tab extends all the way to the top of the screen when
maximized, meaning you don't have to be as accurate with your mouse
movement to hit the tab, this can lead to it being faster to click the
tab even if it is further away.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. David Smith 9/5/12 11:23 AM
1) Window is always maximized, so Tabs on Top means the tabs are in the title bar.
2) There is less space in the title bar than in the standard tab bar; roughly one less tab's worth.
3) Tabs in the titlebar removes the ability to place the page title in the titlebar (fixed Mozilla's removal with another extension).
4) The more tabs I'm using, the more difficult it is to read titles on the tab itself, necessitating the titlebar option.  This is exacerbated somewhat by #2.
5) With tabs in the titlebar, the close button (which I keep on the right end of the tabs since I find that more convenient than having close buttons on each tab) is close enough to the window's min/max/close buttons that there's notable risk of hitting the wrong button.  This has happened more than once.
6) Fairly often I accidentally select something that I don't actually want.  The one place I can reliably go to to cancel such an action (or release something that was being dragged) that won't affect the browser in any way is the title bar.  I can also often select a blank space within the viewing area if it's to cancel a click (but not cancel a drag), but there are a fair number of sites that like to put in full-page linked ads in the background space; if it's not a site I visit regularly enough to have built a Stylish rule to get rid of such things, that becomes a hazardous target.  If tabs are at the top, I lose access to that safe area.
7) The more active I am in browser, the more the above issues come into play.  The more tabs are open, the more the title issue comes up.  The more 'stuff' I'm doing, dragging/clicking/whatever, the more the safe area is an issue.  The more tabs I'm opening and closing, the more the close button becomes an issue.

8) Conceptually (and purely subjectively), Tabs on Top puts the focus of the various controls (location bar, bookmarks toolbar, etc) within the space of the current tab.  That is, it creates a confining impression where all the controls are 'in here', and all the other tabs are 'out there'.  Actual work process, however, is preferentially for all the tabs to be contained and compartmentalized (aided by things such as Tab Groups), where the controls are above and outside that.  I know that they aren't actually doing anything different, but the mental impression is much more stifling.

Having the controls within the tab area implies that I'm doing all my browsing inside a single tab, when that's not what I want at all.  I'm doing lots of things with lots of tabs; I'm doing very little that constitutes "within this tab", as far as the navigation controls are concerned.

This is related to the fact that I pretty much constantly have about 100 tabs open, broken into a couple windows, and about a half dozen tab groups per window.  As I have to keep all of that organized for it to be at all useful, that subjective impression of control (or lack thereof) has a very definite impact on my general comfort level.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. EE 9/5/12 12:40 PM
I noticed a new setting in about:config: browser.tabs.drawInTitlebar.  I
set that to false and put in into my user.js file.  I see the "Tabs on
top" setting in the View menu greyed out now.  Hopefully that will
prevent the tabs fron going into the titlebar in future versions of Mac
Firefox?

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Asa Dotzler 9/5/12 12:44 PM
On 9/5/2012 11:23 AM, kinem...@gmail.com wrote:

> This is related to the fact that I pretty much constantly have about
> 100 tabs open, broken into a couple windows, and about a half dozen
> tab groups per window.  As I have to keep all of that organized for
> it to be at all useful, that subjective impression of control (or
> lack thereof) has a very definite impact on my general comfort
> level.

That's an impressive set-up. Fewer than 1/10th of one percent of our
users have anything close to your number of tabs. The 80% case is 5 or
fewer tabs and the 95% case is 10 or fewer tabs.

While it would be great to make the hundreds of tabs case easy to manage
and for users with that many tabs to feel totally in control, if a
trade-off must be made, the single digit tabs case has to be the focus
and the priority.

For extreme cases, like yours, I would hope that extensions would be
able to cover.

- A
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Piscium 9/5/12 12:57 PM
On 30 August 2012 11:04, B.J. Herbison <bjher...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 7:25:37 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps there are arguments for having tabs on top. But they are no reason to force everyone to comply.
>
> There certain are reasons to force tabs on top (or to otherwise limit flexibility). Fewer options mean:
>
> - Easier to create UI designs that look good (standard and add-ons).
> - Less code.
> - The code is more likely to be correct.
> - Fewer cases, so a higher percent of the cases can be tested.
> - It's less likely that a new change will break something, because of the reasons above.
> - Better performance.
> - Easier to optimize.
>
> The effect for each change is small, but cumulative.
>
> I don't always agree when Firefox developers want to reduce options, but I do recognize there are advantages to simplifying.

+1 to keep the option of tabs on bottom (which I use and prefer).

However if the FF developers that do the actual work think this makes
their life easier, I am not the one to object.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. David Smith 9/5/12 1:52 PM
And I'm not arguing against tabs on top in general.  For extremely light browser usage, with only single-digit tab counts, it seems perfectly fine, and if people are happy with it, good for 'em.

However, while I personally have a large number of active tabs, I will point out that it's primarily about the activity level of browser usage that I feel it doesn't scale well for, not just the tab count.  I could still encounter these issues (aside from the tab title in the titlebar) with just a half dozen tabs, and the titlebar issue creeps in with just 10-15 tabs.  So please don't try to marginalize the issue solely because of the tab count I keep open.

Issues with managing dozens or hundreds of tabs gets into the problems in Tab Groups, which is an entirely separate matter.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. n...@ilias.ca 9/5/12 2:06 PM
On 12-09-05 3:57 PM, Piscium wrote:
> +1 to keep the option of tabs on bottom (which I use and prefer).
>
> However if the FF developers that do the actual work think this makes
> their life easier, I am not the one to object.

These types of decisions are typically not put to a vote, especially in
a newsgroup. With 400 million users, the vote sample is just accurate.

Instead of people voicing opinions about what they prefer, how about
getting some data on how many people use tabs on bottom?

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Stuart Cook 9/6/12 2:02 AM
On 5/09/12 11:09 AM, Blair McBride wrote:
> On 5/09/2012 5:25 a.m., kinem...@gmail.com wrote:
>>   In general, in my experience, the more heavy lifting I do in the
>> browser, the less suitable Tabs on Top is
>
> Could you try to explain why?

For me, the content area and the tab bar are the two most important
parts of the browser UI. Tabs-on-bottom mode allows me to keep them
adjacent, which in turn makes it very easy to transition between them,
or monitor one in my peripheral vision while interacting with the other.

Tabs-on-top takes the navigation bar and wedges it between these two
elements, even though I spend relatively little time looking at it. The
result is that there's a huge gulf of irrelevant space between the two
parts of the browser that I'm most interested in looking at. That might
not sound like much, but it's a constant source of friction in almost
every single interaction with the program.

Things get worse when I have a dozen or so tabs open, because then the
distance between content and the tab bar starts to approach the width of
the tabs themselves. That makes it even more of a hurdle to constantly
search for and reacquire my visual target.


Stuart

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Martijn 9/6/12 3:54 AM
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Piscium <gro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 September 2012 22:06, Chris Ilias <nm...@ilias.ca> wrote:
>> Instead of people voicing opinions about what they prefer, how about getting
>> some data on how many people use tabs on bottom?
>
> Point taken. But how to get _reliable_ data?

I think that question was directed to Asa, not you.

Regards,
Martijn

> If FF were to report on tabs usage to some central server. Also
> maintainers in distros might comment out that code. A pop-up question
> after a version upgrade asking permission to report the current tabs
> status to some server would be be puzzling to a majority of users so
> they might just answer no so the sample would not be representative.
> It would seem to me there is no low cost way to get reliable data so
> any decision will be made on some other basis. Btw, I am just a FF
> user not a developer so I am likely missing some angles and technical
> possibilites.
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox



--
Martijn Wargers - Help Mozilla!
http://quality.mozilla.org/
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_QA_Community
irc://irc.mozilla.org/qa - /nick mw22
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. David Smith 9/5/12 11:23 AM
On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 8:09:41 PM UTC-5, Blair McBride wrote:
> On 5/09/2012 5:25 a.m., kinem...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >   In general, in my experience, the more heavy lifting I do in the browser, the less suitable Tabs on Top is
>
>
>
> Could you try to explain why?
>
>
>
> - Blair

1) Window is always maximized, so Tabs on Top means the tabs are in the title bar.
2) There is less space in the title bar than in the standard tab bar; roughly one less tab's worth.
3) Tabs in the titlebar removes the ability to place the page title in the titlebar (fixed Mozilla's removal with another extension).
4) The more tabs I'm using, the more difficult it is to read titles on the tab itself, necessitating the titlebar option.  This is exacerbated somewhat by #2.
5) With tabs in the titlebar, the close button (which I keep on the right end of the tabs since I find that more convenient than having close buttons on each tab) is close enough to the window's min/max/close buttons that there's notable risk of hitting the wrong button.  This has happened more than once.
6) Fairly often I accidentally select something that I don't actually want.  The one place I can reliably go to to cancel such an action (or release something that was being dragged) that won't affect the browser in any way is the title bar.  I can also often select a blank space within the viewing area if it's to cancel a click (but not cancel a drag), but there are a fair number of sites that like to put in full-page linked ads in the background space; if it's not a site I visit regularly enough to have built a Stylish rule to get rid of such things, that becomes a hazardous target.  If tabs are at the top, I lose access to that safe area.
7) The more active I am in browser, the more the above issues come into play.  The more tabs are open, the more the title issue comes up.  The more 'stuff' I'm doing, dragging/clicking/whatever, the more the safe area is an issue.  The more tabs I'm opening and closing, the more the close button becomes an issue.

8) Conceptually (and purely subjectively), Tabs on Top puts the focus of the various controls (location bar, bookmarks toolbar, etc) within the space of the current tab.  That is, it creates a confining impression where all the controls are 'in here', and all the other tabs are 'out there'.  Actual work process, however, is preferentially for all the tabs to be contained and compartmentalized (aided by things such as Tab Groups), where the controls are above and outside that.  I know that they aren't actually doing anything different, but the mental impression is much more stifling.

Having the controls within the tab area implies that I'm doing all my browsing inside a single tab, when that's not what I want at all.  I'm doing lots of things with lots of tabs; I'm doing very little that constitutes "within this tab", as far as the navigation controls are concerned.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Dr J R Stockton 9/6/12 12:04 PM
In mozilla.dev.apps.firefox message <45qdnRsYfc5EI9rNnZ2dnUVZ_oadnZ2d@mo
zilla.org>, Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:06:32, Chris Ilias <nm...@ilias.ca>
posted:
The premises behind this thread are silly.

There should be a potential tab row (I avoid "bar", to be generic) at
the top and one at the bottom, and at the sides as well.  In each row
there should be an icon giving a four-tick menu to tick-select any of
the 16 possible combinations of on and off.  Either "all off" should
give a preselected row on (chosen as in about:config), or it should give
all rows off with the icon moving to another existing control bar (or
there could be a copy of the icon permanently there).

Product designers should not (where reasonably avoidable) provide only
what they think will be the most popular or useful choice; that is the
communist way.  They should instead provide full, easy, and obvious
freedom of choice --- and use their judgement to decide which will be
the initial default.


Also : I now use two operating systems and nine browser versions, and
other software too, and I have many other things to remember.  ALL
controls should be labelled with the name used to refer to them.  Menu
items are self-labelled, of course; web page controls are generally
labelled, formally or otherwise, but bars are generally, it seems, not
so labelled.  A hover pop-up as is given by the HTML TITLE attribute
will serve; there is no need to use screen space.  If Microsoft is
reading this, the same applied to the System Tray and other such named
areas.  Unoccupied space could also be so labelled.

--
 (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK.  ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v6.05   MIME.
   Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
 Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
 Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Jeremy Morton 9/8/12 4:05 AM
On 01/09/2012 17:08, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 3:55 AM, John Small<jsm...@os2world.net>  wrote:
>> All of these, except the performance, are advantages primarily for the
>> developers, not for the users.  To me, these arguments do not justify
>> forcing users to change from a mode they are comfortable with and find
>> more intuitive than "tabs on top".
>
> completely independent variables. Having to maintain old features
> hampers our ability to develop new desirable ones (to attract new
> users and hopefully improve the experience for existing users), and
...
> The "To me" part of your message illustrates perfectly the
> "perspectives" point of my previous post. It's not unreasonable for
> the tradeoff from your perspective to be biased heavily towards your
> own usage, but it's useful in these discussions to recognize that
> bias.
...
> balancing that against the cost of being stagnant - which hampers our
> ability to attract new users, or maintain those who are interested in
> a cutting edge browser - is not trivial. Trying to minimize the

I think _your_ post is full of biases towards your perspective that
you're not recognizing.  You seem to be implying that tabs-on-bottom is
"old and obsolete", "undesirable", "stagnant", "doesn't attract new
users", and not "cutting edge".  These descriptions only make any kind
of sense if people who use tabs-on-bottom are doing so purely because
they don't want to change.  You seem to fail to realize that there are
actual advantages to tabs-on-bottom; most of us are happy to change to
new UIs that genuinely make old ones obsolete, but in this case, many of
us argue that what you're calling the "old" UI is functionally better.

Therefore I don't see why tabs-on-bottom couldn't continue to be a
useful feature that you market to new users as a useful piece of
functionality.  You guys like to state that many "average" users use
tabs-on-top, but how sure are you that they use it because they have
evaluated it to be better, as opposed to using it because it's just the
default in Firefox and Chrome?  What if you made tabs-on-bottom the
default again?  How many average users would "just use it"?

--
Best regards,
Jeremy Morton (Jez)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. swle...@gmail.com 9/14/12 7:29 AM
To the great developers of Firefox: please do not remove this possibility! I have been using browsers with tabs at bottom all my life, and several of my Autohotkey scripts depend on it, not to mention my entire routine. I beg you! If this option is removed, I will have to stay with FF 15 forever, and eventually migrate away from Firefox to some fork. Would make me very, very sad. Please, don't force unnecessary changes upon us!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. mikeha...@gmail.com 9/21/12 6:01 PM
I would like to add my voice to those who are opposing the removal of the "tabs on bottom" option.

As a power user, to me, Firefox's utmost strength over all of its competitors is its ability to be customized to the particular needs and wants of its user.  I can do things with Firefox that I can do with no other browser.

It is inaccurate to characterize this removal as a "bold" removal of "cruft", as I saw one person do.  It seems common nowadays for some people to characterize features that exist but that they do not personally use as "cruft".

Quite simply, I utterly hate the look of tabs on top.  I do not want that look in my browser.

The more Firefox removes choice from the end user, the more it sabotages its own greatest strength, and the more it will begin to resemble a Chrome photocopy, as opposed to catering to its own unique strength.

Restricting users to tabs on top is a poor decision.  Do not make this mistake.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. ralf.l...@gmx.de 9/22/12 3:04 AM
Am Dienstag, 28. August 2012 13:55:50 UTC+2 schrieb Jeremy Morton:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
It's not a bug, it's a feature. Keep "tabs-on-bottom" mode!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Michael Verdi 9/22/12 9:26 AM
There's still a about:config pref to turn it on https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/put-tabs-back-on-bottom
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Reuben Morais 9/22/12 9:29 AM
On Sep 22, 2012, at 1:26 PM, Michael Verdi <mve...@mozilla.com> wrote:
> There's still a about:config pref to turn it on https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/put-tabs-back-on-bottom

Right. This discussion is about removing that pref and the supporting code.

-- reuben
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. EE 9/22/12 11:31 AM
I also think that Firefox should not shut out options to go back to
previous setups, including tabs on bottom.  Just because Google Chrome
does it, must Firefox follow?  Why can Firefox not just be itself,
rather than a Chrome clone?
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. steve...@btinternet.com 10/5/12 4:57 AM
I also would also be very much against not having the ability to have my tabs on the bottom.

For me, it is the logical place to have them, i can switch between tabs with the minimum of movement with my mouse. Plus, i just like it that way! The one thing that's always kept me with Firefox is the fact that i can control how the browser is layed out - i do not have to be stuck with a layout that some developer somewhere thinks is best for me. Losing the ability to customise the layout stinks of 'microsoft big brother' - "We know what's best, this is the way it will be"!

Maybe that's why virtually nobody i know uses Internet Explorer or Chrome. Choice is taken away from the user.

After each of the large changes concerning Firefox, or after a complete reinstall, i have always been able to get Firefox back to how i like it, sometimes i have had to dig around on the net to find out how to do that, but the important thing is that i have always been able to get things back to how i like them. This is the reason i have been loyal to Firefox for so many years now, it is the reason i have always recommended Firefox to countless friends and family. Firefox is simply the best because it gives the user so much control. Take that control away from the users and they WILL lose the main reason why they like, and why they stay loyal to Firefox.

From reading the above posts i understand that keeping the ability to have tabs on the bottom if we wish, means a bit more work for the developers, but surely that is what Firefox as always been about? The developers put in that bit of extra effort to make Firefox the best out there!

I hate it when software developers adopt the "We know what's best for you" attitude. Don't get me wrong, i have nothing against developers making the browser look sleek and modern by default that will, no doubt appeal to many of the younger users that love the dumbed down, simply to use 'app' look. But please do not take away the ability to modify the look, feel and layout for all of us loyal Firefox fans that switched to Firefox in the first place because of those reasons. If you do that i am afraid that Firefox WILL drop from the top of my browser list, and it will drop from the top of many of other users lists.

In the past i will admit to looking at other browsers like Chrome, but the simple fact that i could not change the layout to suit my own personal tastes put me off straight away, the browser was simply uninstalled within an hour or so of being installed. Simply reading that i may be facing similar problems in the future with Firefox is enough for me to start looking for an alternative, that is something i simply do not want to do. I am a big Firefox fan, but i would hate to see the developers take away the freedom of choice from it's users.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. fiz...@gmail.com 10/6/12 1:46 PM
Il giorno martedì 28 agosto 2012 13:55:50 UTC+2, Jeremy Morton ha scritto:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
>
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
>
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
>
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
>
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
>
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
>
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>
> Firefox better.
>
>
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
>
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
>
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeremy Morton (Jez)

The very first thing on every new Firefox installation is to put tabs on the bottom.
I am really surprised about this discussion.
What are the reasons to cut nice options instead of add new ones?!
The default configuration of Firefox should be the classic one, far better than this, and let users to set options to Chrome style IF they want.

Regards
A firefox user (and webdev) from 1.5 ver
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. a.sup...@gmail.com 10/9/12 11:30 AM
I also do not like the tabs on top. I use the speed dial add-on, with 16 tabs, 36 boxes each tab. Tabs on top puts my tabs in two different places.

I don't like, chrome, IE, safari, Opera is ok....but I really use my speed dial and I really like the freedom of customizing firefox. I just noticed that firefox 15 & 16 have lost the option to put tabs on the bottom. Unless install old and custom upgrade :(
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Alex Jordan 10/9/12 12:18 PM
Just because its a "bug" doesn't mean its a bug. The bug tracking system is
used to track issues and requests, even those that aren't glitches.
unk...@googlegroups.com 10/9/12 1:00 PM <This message has been deleted.>
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ann Watson 10/9/12 2:14 PM
On 09/10/2012 4:00 PM, icm148...@gmail.com wrote:
> Most people use the mouse to select another tab. So why would
> you want tabs on top? More change for change sake. UI design
> is about usability, and not about trying to make a piece of
> art work.
>

I prefer tabs on top in the desktop version of Firefox; however I
feel that those that prefer tabs on the bottom should be able to
keep that feature.

I'm not too crazy with the location of the tabs on the mobile
version I'm using on an android tablet - but consider myself
adaptable.

AW
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. e...@quackingduck.net 10/9/12 6:25 PM
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 4:55:50 AM UTC-7, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
>
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
>
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
>
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
>
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
>
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
>
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>
> Firefox better.
>
>
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
>
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
>
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeremy Morton (Jez)

I'm in complete agreement with Jeremy. I'm a longtime user, not a developer, and I am flabbergasted that you developers would even *think* to remove tabs on the bottom. I think the tabs on top is the most impractical and visually jarring design decision ever made. The look and feel with the drab gray buttons was also awful. I am grateful for Jeremy's Firefox 3 theme for Firefox 4+ which has made FF look good again. Now, you devs want to take away normal tabbing and my Firefox 3 theme ?! Absolutely not! I have already turned off updating FF and will remain at 15.0.1 for as long as possible. I will look into Sea Monkey as an alternative and look forward to a new branch of FF without these ridiculous "upgrades".
Thanks,
Eva
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. viralpro...@gmail.com 10/10/12 10:53 AM
Stop aping Google Chrome, seriously! We use Firefox for it's ability to be customized, and we don't necessarily want FF to look like a Chrome kock-off.

Now, onto the subject of "Tabs On Bottom" being taken away, and more specifically Jeremy Morton (Jez)'s themes to restore the look of FireFox 2, FireFox 3, and FireFox 3 Aero.

I have a large family (mum, dad, 3 brothers, 1 sister) and NONE of them would know what to do with FF4+ visual changes, and menu rearranges such as tabs being moved on top, or the menu toolbar being moved into the orange firefox button. For my family and myself I use Jez's "FF3 for FF4+" theme. FireFox 16.0 has broken this theme's compatibility.

I don't want my family to be stuck on an old version of FF and not get the latest security benefits etc, but I won't subject them and myself to the headaches of dealing with FF's changes. So where do we go from here, FF user interface developers?
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ann Watson 10/10/12 11:23 AM
On 10/10/2012 1:53 PM, viralpro...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> Stop aping Google Chrome, seriously! We use Firefox for it's
> ability to be customized, and we don't necessarily want FF to
> look like a Chrome kock-off.
>
> Now, onto the subject of "Tabs On Bottom" being taken away,
> and more specifically Jeremy Morton (Jez)'s themes to restore
> the look of FireFox 2, FireFox 3, and FireFox 3 Aero.
>
> I have a large family (mum, dad, 3 brothers, 1 sister) and
> NONE of them would know what to do with FF4+ visual changes,
> and menu rearranges such as tabs being moved on top, or the
> menu toolbar being moved into the orange firefox button. For
> my family and myself I use Jez's "FF3 for FF4+" theme. FireFox
> 16.0 has broken this theme's compatibility.
>
> I don't want my family to be stuck on an old version of FF and
> not get the latest security benefits etc, but I won't subject
> them and myself to the headaches of dealing with FF's changes.
> So where do we go from here, FF user interface developers?

Even though they're turned off by default, most of the toolbars,
including the menu toolbar, can be turned back on if necessary,
even in FF 16.  I'm sure your family could adapt to the changes
in the FFx GUI since FF3 if they were introduced slowly.

AW


Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. viralpro...@gmail.com 10/10/12 11:37 AM
Not when they have bad eyesight. Have you seen what Windows Vista and Windows 7 do to the chrome at the top of the FF window? It's horrendous. Semi transparent or completely see-through 'aero glass', and any text such as 'File, Edit,' on the menu bar - if you choose to turn it back on has this horrible stained-glass/frost block behind it which makes it hard to read.

Not everyone wants FF to be glass-ified, or to look like Chrome's little brother. There are enough people being weened-onto Safari through iProducts, or following the Google brand over to Chrome. Don't alienate the people that have been with you since you were FF1 (like me and my family have), or before that even.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ann Watson 10/10/12 5:58 PM
On 10/10/2012 2:37 PM, viralpro...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 7:23:03 PM UTC+1, Ann Watson
> wrote:

>> Even though they're turned off by default, most of the
>> toolbars,
>>
>> including the menu toolbar, can be turned back on if
>> necessary,
>>
>> even in FF 16.  I'm sure your family could adapt to the
>> changes
>>
>> in the FFx GUI since FF3 if they were introduced slowly.
>>
>>
>>
>> AW
>
> Not when they have bad eyesight. Have you seen what Windows
> Vista and Windows 7 do to the chrome at the top of the FF
> window? It's horrendous. Semi transparent or completely
> see-through 'aero glass', and any text such as 'File, Edit,'
> on the menu bar - if you choose to turn it back on has this
> horrible stained-glass/frost block behind it which makes it
> hard to read.

I don't see much glass along the top of my Firefox Window and the
menu bar is definitely not semi-transparent or translucent, but
then I'm not using the defaulttheme.  Most of the ones I choose
tend to be more solid.  Same goes for Thunderbird.

There are add-ons that can help with some of the accessibility
issues.

AW
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/10/12 6:29 PM
2012/10/10 <viralpro...@gmail.com>:
> Have you seen what Windows Vista and Windows 7 do to the chrome at the top of the FF window? It's horrendous. Semi
> transparent or completely see-through 'aero glass', and any text such as 'File, Edit,' on the menu bar - if you choose to turn it back
> on has this horrible stained-glass/frost block behind it which makes it hard to read.

Windows Vista and Windows 7 both allow changing to the classic Windows theme.
There is even a short instruction video on YouTube on how to do that
(for Windows 7):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHnWy1ZfmXE

-M.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. HarveyG 10/10/12 7:25 PM
On 8/28/2012 06:55, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
> Firefox better.
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
> minority and we should count!)
>
I am posting here because one of your Firefox themes was automatically
disabled when I updated from FF15 to FF16 today:
Firefox 3 Theme for Firefox 4+
http://ffaddons.game-point.net/ff3ff4/
I am not familiar with the technical problems involved but I have used
that theme for a long time and was very disappointed. In your
explanation you mention that it has something to do with this tabs on
top/bottom development/design issue, which I don't claim to comprehend.
All I care about is being able to continue using that theme. To that end
I posted elsewhere and got enough hints how to fix it to work with FF16,
which I did, and have uploaded it for others if they're interested:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/3xgfl0zhvfpe832/ffe_ff3ff4@game-point.net_HarveyG.xpi
To install, download and open manually with FF.
My only modification is in the install.rdf file where I set it to expire
with Firefox 99.0, which won't be around for awhile yet. :) Further info
posted at moz.gen and moz.sup.ff.

The Firefox 3 design & theme is far superior to the bland, colorless,
pale shades of gray, illegible, user-unfriendly, awkward Firefox 4+
theme(s) and layout(s), and I hope to keep it forever.

Thanks for your good efforts, really appreciated.
-- HarveyG

--
HarveyG
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. viralpro...@gmail.com 10/10/12 7:39 PM
I don't mean to be rude, but are you serious with that suggestion? I am 'not' using the Windows Classic theme, system-wide, just because Mozilla FireFox's user interface has turned disgustingly hard to read, and looks worse and worse every time FF tries to adopt the OS theme into their window dressing, and later when they try to change FF to look like a Google Chrome cheap imitation. Plus, if I recall correctly the upcoming Windows 8 doesn't even have a 'Windows Classic' theme. So please, suggest me something serious and I'm happy to listen?
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. viralpro...@gmail.com 10/10/12 7:44 PM
So you have just defeated your own purpose. You do not use the default theme in FF4+. I can't imagine anyone would. The reason that I use "FF3 theme for FF4+" by Jez is so that FF remains easy for me and my entire family to use. We do not want that kind of simple customization to be ripped away from us due to broken compatibility, and we do not wish for things to be changed like "Tabs On Bottom" just to futher the Google-Chromification of FF. If we wanted to use Google Chrome, we would. But we don't.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/10/12 10:18 PM
> I don't mean to be rude, but are you serious with that suggestion? I am 'not' using the Windows Classic theme, system-wide, just
> because Mozilla FireFox's user interface has turned disgustingly hard to read, and looks worse and worse every time FF tries to
> adopt the OS theme into their window dressing, and later when they try to change FF to look like a Google Chrome cheap imitation.
> Plus, if I recall correctly the upcoming Windows 8 doesn't even have a 'Windows Classic' theme. So please, suggest me something
> serious and I'm happy to listen?

There is Windows Basic :-)

And if it's hard to read, then there are options to either change the
font and font size in all of Windows, or you can use a large or custom
DPI setting for the display.

Oh, and no offence taken ^_^

-M.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. viralpro...@gmail.com 10/10/12 11:40 PM
But again, that would be me altering the look of my entire system every time I used FF. The easier solution is to use a new theme for FF which is exactly what I have been doing with Jez's "FF3 theme for FF4+". Now, due to changes that Mozilla seem intent on forcing, such as tabs on top, that theme is looking to stop being developed-on.

The issue isn't just this theme, but this new mindset of aping Chrome and taking away customization options. If I wanted to be locked into 'one way or the highway' I'd use Safari. If I wanted to use Google Chrome I'd use that. But I like my firefox, which was previously customizable to my needs.

The user interface isn't FF's problem, please stop trying to fix what wasn't broken with your Chrome-ified changes. Fix other things such as Flash not working, pages freezing, and whatever else people bring up when they declare they've had enough of FF and are switching to Chrome. Because soon enough people are going to add 'I've had enough of FF taking away customization options from me and looking like Chrome's bitch - I might as well just use Chrome now'.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ann Watson 10/11/12 5:40 AM
On 10/10/2012 10:44 PM, viralpro...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, October 11, 2012 1:58:14 AM UTC+1, Ann Watson
> wrote:

>> "I don't see much glass along the top of my Firefox Window and
>> the menu bar is definitely not semi-transparent or
>> translucent, but then I'm not using the defaulttheme.  Most of
>> the ones I choose tend to be more solid.  Same goes for
>> Thunderbird.
>>
>> There are add-ons that can help with some of the
>> accessibility"
>>
>> So you have just defeated your own purpose.

Huh, what was my purpose other than to show that Firefox is still
customizable?  That's one reason why I use Firefox - I don't have
to stick with the default theme.  Sometimes my preferred theme
won't work with an upgrade but I can always find an acceptable
one that does work.

> You do not use the > default theme in FF4+. I can't imagine anyone would.
> Thereason that I use "FF3 theme for FF4+" by Jez is so that FF
> remains easy for me and my entire family to use. We do not
> want that kind of simple customization to be ripped away from
> us due to broken compatibility, and we do not wish for things
> to be changed like "Tabs On Bottom" just to futher the
> Google-Chromification of FF. If we wanted to use Google
> Chrome, we would. But we don't.

Most of the programs I've used consistently over the past decades
have changed their user interfaces with updates; change is
usually inevitable.

I do agree that those that prefer tabs on the bottom in Firefox
should be able to keep that option but then I don't know how
difficult it is to keep developing it.

AW

AW

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ann Watson 10/11/12 5:51 AM
Even on my mobile device, Firefox looks nothing like the stock
browser which is a stripped-down Chrome. It's still taking some
getting used to :-).

AW
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. aimhe...@gmail.com 10/11/12 4:02 PM
I have to echo the sentiment that making "tabs-on-top" a requirement would be a bad idea. I VASTLY prefer Firefox's tabs to be on the bottom, and think "tabs-on-top" looks ugly and counter-intuitive. I want my TOOLS and MENUS to be on the top, and CONTENT (and tabs ARE content) below!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. jh.con...@gmail.com 10/11/12 4:21 PM
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 4:55:50 AM UTC-7, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
>
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
>
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
>
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
>
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
>
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
>
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>
> Firefox better.
>
>
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
>
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
>
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeremy Morton (Jez)

Agree with Jeremy, don't force FF users to adopt the tabs on top if they don't want them on top. Seems simple, what's the problem or reason for forcing the change on people?
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. HarveyG 10/11/12 7:20 PM
Seems fairly popular, 77 downloads so far...

--
HarveyG
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. joosti...@gmail.com 10/11/12 8:02 PM
I really hope this change doesn't go through.  I'm tired of devs (not just the mozilla ones) forcing changes that the majority doesn't like.  From what I've read above (I didn't read all of it), this would make things a little easier for the developers.

But what about the users?  Are they of no importance when compared to the developers?  The UI changes you have made are generally disliked on the forums I've mentioned it in.  To avoid your "improvements", people don't update, use themes to make the program simple again, or just switch to another browser.  Is that really what you want?

I hope I'm not coming off as angry, I'm just very surprised by some of the decisions and hope you will consider what I've said.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. bill...@gmail.com 10/11/12 8:43 PM
I've supported you when you were Netscape, and adamantly support Firefox. In other words, she's an old girl, been around the block for a while, had a few paint jobs, an overhaul or two, but I still love the way she looked when she was new. Do what ever you want "under the hood", but PLEASE, please keep her lines and shape the same. I don't want fins where the don't belong, but if you want to add some fuzzy dice, that's OK.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Sudhakar 10/11/12 11:41 PM
I've been using Firefox almost exclusively since 2004.  I really fell in love Firefox, the appearance, the customizability, from the beginning.  In my opinion from an aesthetic point of view Firefox peaked somwhere between versions 2 and 3, and has been going down hill.  But think I like about Firefox is that I can go in and change it to the way that suites me.

I feel that tabs on bottom is way more functional than tabs on top.  I consistently switch to tabs on bottom when ever i reinstall firefox.  This is an option that should be kept (and in my opinion should be the default view).  The idea that Firefox developers are considering removing this option is extremely disappointing.  The user should be the one deciding this.

Firefox should strive to offer more customizability, and more user choice.  If taking away user choice is the path that Firefox will take, then I will seriously consider switching away from Firefox after 8 years.  This is something I would expect from a company like Microsoft, not Mozilla.  When organizations decide that they prefer to make the decisions over user preferences, that is the time I know its time to move on.  I will do that with Windows (replacing start bar with metro theme), I will do that with Sim City (making the next game online mode only), and I will do it with Firefox if they get rid of tabs on bottom.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Alexander Skwar 10/11/12 10:40 PM
Hi

Am 12.10.2012 05:05 schrieb <joosti...@gmail.com>:
>
> I really hope this change doesn't go through.  I'm tired of devs (not
just the mozilla ones) forcing changes that the majority doesn't like.

Gotta chime in here... What makes you think, that the majority wouldn't
like this change? Just because of the vocal few people that said something
in this thread? This can be quite misleading.

I for one would welcome this change. I'd prefer tabs on top. I also don't
quite get, why people are so angry. What's so bad about copying
features/behavior from eg Chrome?

>  From what I've read above (I didn't read all of it), this would make
things a little easier for the developers.

This alone is an good enough reason.

> But what about the users?  Are they of no importance when compared to the
developers?  The UI changes you have made are generally disliked on the
forums I've mentioned it in.

Which doesn't mean much. In general, you'll find that especially those
people say something who dislike something. Those, that are in favor, they
say nothing.

To me, it sounds as if those that oppose this change seem to be afraid of
changes. Seem to want that there is a standstill. I really don't quite
understand the problems people imagine and hope, that the devs do NOT let
go of the changes and continue to improve Firefox just like they used to.

Alexander
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. viralpro...@gmail.com 10/10/12 7:39 PM
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. viralpro...@gmail.com 10/10/12 11:40 PM
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Alexander Skwar 10/12/12 9:45 AM
Hi

Am 12.10.2012 05:05 schrieb <joosti...@gmail.com>:

>
> I really hope this change doesn't go through.  I'm tired of devs (not
just the mozilla ones) forcing changes that the majority doesn't like.
Gotta chime in here... What makes you think, that the majority wouldn't
like this change? Just because of the vocal few people that said something
in this thread? This can be quite misleading.

I for one would welcome this change. I'd prefer tabs on top. I also don't
quite get, why people are so angry. What's so bad about copying
features/behavior from eg Chrome?

>  From what I've read above (I didn't read all of it), this would make
things a little easier for the developers.

This alone is an good enough reason.

> But what about the users?  Are they of no importance when compared to the
developers?  The UI changes you have made are generally disliked on the
forums I've mentioned it in.

Which doesn't mean much. In general, you'll find that especially those
people say something who dislike something. Those, that are in favor, they
say nothing.

To me, it sounds as if those that oppose this change seem to be afraid of
changes. Seem to want that there is a standstill. I really don't quite
understand the problems people imagine and hope, that the devs do NOT let
go of the changes and continue to improve Firefox just like they used to.

Regards,
Alexander
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. n...@ilias.ca 10/12/12 11:56 AM
On 12-10-11 2:40 AM, viralpro...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, October 11, 2012 6:18:28 AM UTC+1, Mart Rootamm wrote:
<snip>
> The user interface isn't FF's problem, please stop trying to fix what wasn't broken with your Chrome-ified changes.

I get the feeling that you think Mart is a Firefox developer or Mozilla
employee. As far as I know, he's not. Neither is Ann.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Fra...@knology.net 10/12/12 12:15 PM
This is just getting very frustrating with s/w developers acting like all users are just like them and forcing different individualism to either join the sheep <or> "get Lost". Removing tabs-on-bottom mode because the Google geek group is a 800-lb niche is sickening.

I have used computers for 40+ years as a powerful tool  everyday so I can achieve more tasks efficiently. I don't use computers to be my "mother" and dictate how I should interface every second of the day with society.

Flexibility is the trait that makes computers useful for the greatest amount of people. (not just geeks) Slowly but surely just about all s/w development organizations has come up with the attitude that they know how we should the software so they act like we should change our MO and get with the program. Microsoft has always had this mentality. Just look at all the versions of s/w that they have forced upon us just to do mundane e-mail usage. The majority of ordinary users were just plain happy with Outlook Express. But NO ....ordinary users were just idiots and didn't know what was good for them-selves. Fortunately, Mozilla had Thunderbird and Firefox to improve on what "mother" Microsoft was dealing us. I've lost track of the many hours I have spend getting out of the Microsoft "quick-sand".

Now Mozilla is picking up some of the "evil-empire" tricks. I have tried taps on top and I hate it. I use tabs like a book writer uses periods. Tabs on the bottom works best for me by far. I realize that there may be some fancy methodology where this placement of tabs works better but why must I re-train myself periodically just because more "stuff" must be added to my essential computer tools ?? Having options to configure key features to match and not defeat user preferences appears like such a simple solution. Obviously, I must be a total idiot, but I know that I have plenty of company.

Thanks Mozilla for ruining my day/week/month/etc
Frank Giambalvo (retired s/w test engineer)      

On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 7:55:50 AM UTC-4, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
>
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
>
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
>
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
>
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
>
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
>
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>
> Firefox better.
>
>
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
>
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
>
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
>
>
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Michael Verdi 10/12/12 12:34 PM
Hi everyone,
Just a note that it is still possible to put your tabs on bottom. The menu choice has gone away but the preference hasn't. You can find instructions in this article http://support.mozilla.org/kb/put-tabs-back-on-bottom
Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Verdi • support.mozilla.org • irc: verdi
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. aols...@gmail.com 10/12/12 12:39 PM
I apologize, and I should have known better to comment on a bug tracking issue I did not see that a link was posted to this group right above my own comment.

However to bring this back on topic, there has been a desire to get more programmers willing to maintain this code, is there something specific that needs to be done in order to maintain this feature? I am willing to donate my time if there is a specific issue to maintaining this issue beyond a desire to change UX for UX sake.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Martijn 10/12/12 12:41 PM
On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Michael Verdi <mve...@mozilla.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> Just a note that it is still possible to put your tabs on bottom. The menu
> choice has gone away but the preference hasn't. You can find instructions
> in this article http://support.mozilla.org/kb/put-tabs-back-on-bottom
>

Weird. For me, the menu choice is still there.

Regards,
Martijn
> > _______________________________________________
> > dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> > dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox
>



--
Martijn Wargers - Help Mozilla!
http://quality.mozilla.org/
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_QA_Community
irc://irc.mozilla.org/qa - /nick mw22
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. bche...@gmail.com 10/12/12 12:41 PM
On Friday, October 12, 2012 3:15:32 PM UTC-4, Fra...@knology.net wrote:
> This is just getting very frustrating with s/w developers acting like all users are just like them and forcing different individualism to either join the sheep <or> "get Lost". Removing tabs-on-bottom mode because the Google geek group is a 800-lb niche is sickening.
>
>
>
> I have used computers for 40+ years as a powerful tool  everyday so I can achieve more tasks efficiently. I don't use computers to be my "mother" and dictate how I should interface every second of the day with society.
>
>
>
> Flexibility is the trait that makes computers useful for the greatest amount of people. (not just geeks) Slowly but surely just about all s/w development organizations has come up with the attitude that they know how we should the software so they act like we should change our MO and get with the program. Microsoft has always had this mentality. Just look at all the versions of s/w that they have forced upon us just to do mundane e-mail usage. The majority of ordinary users were just plain happy with Outlook Express. But NO ....ordinary users were just idiots and didn't know what was good for them-selves. Fortunately, Mozilla had Thunderbird and Firefox to improve on what "mother" Microsoft was dealing us. I've lost track of the many hours I have spend getting out of the Microsoft "quick-sand".
>
>
>
> Now Mozilla is picking up some of the "evil-empire" tricks. I have tried taps on top and I hate it. I use tabs like a book writer uses periods. Tabs on the bottom works best for me by far. I realize that there may be some fancy methodology where this placement of tabs works better but why must I re-train myself periodically just because more "stuff" must be added to my essential computer tools ?? Having options to configure key features to match and not defeat user preferences appears like such a simple solution. Obviously, I must be a total idiot, but I know that I have plenty of company.
>
>
>
> Thanks Mozilla for ruining my day/week/month/etc
>
> Frank Giambalvo (retired s/w test engineer)      

As already said about other comments, your tone is aggressive and doesn't fit to the discussion of this topic. It reads more like a demand than clear reasoning against the change.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. bche...@gmail.com 10/12/12 12:50 PM
I think the issue is deciding behavior between tabs on top compared to on bottom. UX designers have to create completely different looks that don't really match, as well as manage different functions.

As an example, one of the first problems in Firefox 4 was that double clicking the Aero Glass frame of the Tabs bar would maximize the window instead of create a new tab. Both behaviors are expected on Windows with Aero Glass. The end decision was to create keep the maximizing, but only with tabs on top. Users really shouldn't be dealing with different things happening based on where the tabs are. Additionally, designers/programmers shouldn't be figuring out which users expect more. Having two interfaces just begs for inconsistency.

**Keep in mind that I am still pro for keeping tabs on bottom as a toggle
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ann Watson 10/12/12 12:54 PM
Ann is definitely just a long-time non-techie user of Firefox.

AW
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. HarveyG 10/12/12 1:59 PM
Now 156 total downloads after 2 days:
http://i50.tinypic.com/34yscyd.png

So it seems popular despite the limited advertising - solely by a few
mentions on these mozilla newsgroups a couple of days ago. Word of mouth
travels fast.

One caveat...

When I installed the next version of Firefox (16.0.1), it phoned home
then said this add-on (theme) was incompatible and disabled it. To fix,
remove it, then reinstall manually by opening the .xpi file from Firefox.

If you haven't downloaded it yet, it's still available at:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/3xgfl0zhvfpe832/ffe_ff3ff4@game-point.net_HarveyG.xpi

--------------------------------
  WORKS FINE WITH FIREFOX 16.0.1
--------------------------------
;) :)


--
HarveyG
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. yggd...@gmail.com 10/12/12 2:11 PM
Thanks for posting this. Cannot stand the new crap interface.

Why is copying Chrome the new direction of Mozilla? If I wanted to use Chrome I would . . . use Chrome!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. edh...@gmail.com 10/12/12 5:17 PM


I'm one of those mouse-only users. For me, having the tab next to the content area is the only sensible arrangement.

If there is an extension that does that, then I'll use the extension. If there is no alternative to tabs on top, then Firefox loses yet another advantage over other browsers. With the loss of the "Send Link..." context menu item (thanks, devs; sure makes my life . . . different), the loss of flexible Bookmarks window (remember that?) we end up with more and more usability issues dropped from Firefox and replaced with extensions.

But extension developers are mortal, and some extensions are not maintained. At some point Firefox lacks so many usability features it just becomes another IE (not not not Chrome: Firefox is nowhere near as fast as Chrome; we use Firefox because heretofore it was more usable). Tabs only on top? Hmm. Let's see what Opera looks like. It been a few years since I peeked . . .

I note that it is ten years ago this month that I began using Phoenix.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/13/12 1:53 AM
2012/10/12 Chris Ilias <nm...@ilias.ca>:
> I get the feeling that you think Mart is a Firefox developer or Mozilla
> employee. As far as I know, he's not. Neither is Ann.

I've been on the Internet since about Netscape 3.0, and no, I'm not a
Mozilla employee or developer.

-M.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Dmitry Semionin 10/13/12 2:33 PM
I've been using FF since the version 1.0, and this is the first time i'm going to complain about the developers' decision publicly.

Seeing what's going on with the browser development, i can only come up with a single reason why the devs are doing what they are doing. They just don't know any other way to make FF the number one non-Microsoft browser out there.
You see, FF has been here for a while, and it had its own moments of glory. Until a few years ago, it was the best open source browser, and for me it was the best browser overall.
But the time was going, and FF was getting more and more bloated. Eating more than 1Gb of RAM became a (not so) good tradition, as did failing to scroll some websites smoothly. But once you're used to the perks FF is offering, it's hard to lure you back into the IE's embrace, so the people were staying.

And then Chrome appeared. Sleek, minimalistic, inherently fast and shamelessly advertised. You started seeing offers to install Chrome on the Google's search page. It was really hard to avoid or miss. So the people started migrating on it. Including those who were pissed by the slobby form that FF has turned into.
I guess that's when the Mozilla guys started to panic. It became obvious that Chrome was taking their share of the market as well.

Unfortunately, the people who make decisions at Mozilla found no better way than to start blatantly copying everything that Chrome introduced. Even the version increment policy: i remember the talks like "How are we gonna explain the users that our Firefox 4.9 is as modern and potent as Chrome 12".
But the interface changes were the biggest mistake. First it was that ugly gray default theme of FF4 that only colorblind people could call appealing, killing the status bar and the tabs on top which never made much sense to me. So i had to stick to the 3.6 branch until the awesome guys like Jeremy Morton and the developers of nice add-ons like Status-4-Evar made it possible to actually enjoy using the newer versions.
And now you're trying to take from me the one of the basic, i'd even say fundamental things that Firefox has, forcing me to use the tabs-on-top paradigm i always disliked (in Chrome too). And because of that, i'm losing the rest of the visual appeal that Firefox had to me, since the FF3 Aero theme is no longer working.

If you (the people behind that idea i mean) really think that the tabs on bottom are really your main obstacle on the way back to the world domination, please think again, because you're missing something. I'm typing this message in the answer form of the Google Groups webpage opened with FF 15.0.1, and i can clearly see the text being entered with lags sometimes. Not to mention the lags i experienced when pressing the "Answer" button on this page to open the answer form. And this is happening on a Core 2 Duo powered laptop which isn't busy with any significant jobs right now.
You see, the non-Chrome UI isn't what makes the people run from FF to Chrome. It's the slowness of your product. FF is nowhere near Chrome when it comes to the JS processing speed, memory management and security. It's their turf now, and i doubt that you guys have enough manpower to challenge Google on that.

But for some reason i still didn't give up on FF. Moreover, i made it my default browser again, after more than a year of Chrome serving that purpose. You know why? Because i got tired of not having a convenient session management functionality, not being able to see the page titles somewhere other than the tab tooltip, not being able to repoen the closed tabs by middle-clcking the tab bar, the "reopen closed tabs" function putting them in the end of the tab bar instead of the place they were at before closing (oh wait, maybe it was because i also installed the extension to put the newly opened tabs in the end of the tab bar, oh well), the recent PepperFlash lags i experience in the flash games. Et cetera, et cetera...

You see, it's these little things that seem unimportant when considered alone, but together they create what one can call a user experience. Something that just makes using the product convenient. And something which can be worth switching to another product over.
Until now, Firefox was my #1 choice when the comfort of usage was considered. At some point i managed to configure everything just the way i liked it to be, and, for the years ensuing, i was only making minor tweaks to make everything perfect to me again if something was changing.

But now the only undeniable advantage of Firefox over ANY other browser - an almost infinite customizability - is in danger. Those who pull the strings seem to have decided to make a total Chrome clone out of Firefox, killing the main thing that keeps people using it. Because if there's no visual difference between these two, then why taking the slow and heavy one when you can have the faster and more lightweight thing with the same face.

You may think it's a good idea, and that people will most likely give in and accept anything you feed them. And for some time, you might be right, because it takes time to finally realize that there's nothing in Firefox that i would tolerate its disadvantages for. But once you cross this line and it becomes clear that it's easier to configure Chrome to fit my needs (more or less) than to keep Firefox be what it once were out of the box, i'll switch to the former and forget FF like a dream which started out nice but turned into a pale nightmare.

Please don't make this mistake. Don't fix what's not broken. Leave the FF face as it always was, don't change stuff just for the sake of the change. And please, don't treat any difference between FF and Chrome as FF's defect. It might just be otherwise.

PS: To those who think that some people here express their opinion too aggressively. You know, the civilized way was always to listen to one another and try to understand what everybody wants and needs. When you leave people with no choice but to either accept any changes to push on them or quit FF for good, it's you who puts us to stress. And when cornered, people start taking things personal. You never asked us if we wanted this change, so why acting all so surprised when you see how we dislike your idea?

PPS: To those whose position is "whatever makes development easier is THE right thing to do". Each time i download Firefox, its website tells me that i'm getting something "different by design", a "browser that's got your back". Ever wondered what this means? For me, it means that Firefox is being made with respect to its users, and with taking their opinion into consideration.
You call us the vocal minority whose voice can be ignored because we're just a drop in the bucket of the Firefox user community and the rest doesn't seem to give a damn. But you see, right now the people who you're trying to ignore are mostly the most devoted FF users, with years of FF experience behind their backs. They were with you from the beginning, they were a part of that Firefox miracle that once showed the world that there can be an alternative to Internet Explorer. Well, maybe we really are a drop in the bucket, but does it seem that the rest is gonna be so passionate and determined in defending your decision? Or maybe they just don't give a damn as well and use whatever there is to use.
Tomorrow Google pulls another trick off its sleeve, or launches yet even more powerful advertizing campaign, and will you be so sure that those people are gonna stay loyal to FF? I doubt so. But there will surely be much less hardcore Firefox fans who would be spending countless hours on the various forums trying to convince the hesitant ones that Firefox is still worth using.
Firefox main power was always the passion of the people who enjoy using it and contributing to it, not the ones who would quit on it in no time. Please don't make people think that there is no more stuff to love about Firefox.

PPPS: Sorry for this being such a long message. But for once in a long time it feels like there's something important to lose, and i think it's worth fighting for.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. bche...@gmail.com 10/13/12 8:40 PM
On Saturday, October 13, 2012 5:33:04 PM UTC-4, Dmitry Semionin wrote:
> I've been using FF since the version 1.0, and this is the first time i'm going to complain about the developers' decision publicly.
>
> Seeing what's going on with the browser development, i can only come up with a single reason why the devs are doing what they are doing. They just don't know any other way to make FF the number one non-Microsoft browser out there.
>
> You see, FF has been here for a while, and it had its own moments of glory. Until a few years ago, it was the best open source browser, and for me it was the best browser overall.

I really feel like many people that come to this conclusion don't completely understand the reasons for changes such as these. I haven't seen any change or reasoning on Bugzilla that is "because other browsers do the same".

> But the time was going, and FF was getting more and more bloated. Eating more than 1Gb of RAM became a (not so) good tradition, as did failing to scroll some websites smoothly. But once you're used to the perks FF is offering, it's hard to lure you back into the IE's embrace, so the people were staying.
>
> And then Chrome appeared. Sleek, minimalistic, inherently fast and shamelessly advertised. You started seeing offers to install Chrome on the Google's search page. It was really hard to avoid or miss. So the people started migrating on it. Including those who were pissed by the slobby form that FF has turned into.
>
> I guess that's when the Mozilla guys started to panic. It became obvious that Chrome was taking their share of the market as well.

Actually, no. There were many people that did not switch to Chrome because of the fact that its interface was new and alien. It did not really gain market share until this advertising started.

> Unfortunately, the people who make decisions at Mozilla found no better way than to start blatantly copying everything that Chrome introduced. Even the version increment policy: i remember the talks like "How are we gonna explain the users that our Firefox 4.9 is as modern and potent as Chrome 12".
>
> But the interface changes were the biggest mistake. First it was that ugly gray default theme of FF4 that only colorblind people could call appealing, killing the status bar and the tabs on top which never made much sense to me. So i had to stick to the 3.6 branch until the awesome guys like Jeremy Morton and the developers of nice add-ons like Status-4-Evar made it possible to actually enjoy using the newer versions.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". I thought the Firefox 4 mockups were beautiful when I first saw them. -> https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/1/17/Firefox-4-Mockup-i06-%28Win7%29-%28Aero%29-%28TabsTop%29.png

I'll admit the end result didn't come out perfectly like mockups, but it was indeed an improvement in my opinion. I remember being largely against Tabs on Top until using it on the Firefox 4 betas for a week.

> And now you're trying to take from me the one of the basic, i'd even say fundamental things that Firefox has, forcing me to use the tabs-on-top paradigm i always disliked (in Chrome too). And because of that, i'm losing the rest of the visual appeal that Firefox had to me, since the FF3 Aero theme is no longer working.

Again, Mozilla hasn't forced you to use Tabs on Top. If you believe so, how have they done that? You're still entitled to change the browser as you wish.

> If you (the people behind that idea i mean) really think that the tabs on bottom are really your main obstacle on the way back to the world domination, please think again, because you're missing something. I'm typing this message in the answer form of the Google Groups webpage opened with FF 15.0.1, and i can clearly see the text being entered with lags sometimes. Not to mention the lags i experienced when pressing the "Answer" button on this page to open the answer form. And this is happening on a Core 2 Duo powered laptop which isn't busy with any significant jobs right now.

I'm typing this on a 7 year old machine with 2.0 GHz and 2GB of RAM. Firefox is running smooth as it always has for me. I'm going to go ahead and say that something is causing your install to not run as great as it can.

> You see, the non-Chrome UI isn't what makes the people run from FF to Chrome. It's the slowness of your product. FF is nowhere near Chrome when it comes to the JS processing speed, memory management and security. It's their turf now, and i doubt that you guys have enough manpower to challenge Google on that.

Actually, it is. Since Firefox 7, it has been the most memory efficient browser, topping Chrome. Most users that claim Chrome has better memory are only counting one of its tabs, due to Chrome having a process for each tab (resulting in multiple chrome.exe)

If you don't believe me, please look at the following benchmarks. They were found from a simple search with "Firefox vs Chrome memory". They're a couple months outdated, so consider that Firefox 14 has been released since then addressing another memory issue.

http://lifehacker.com/5917714/browser-speed-tests-chrome-19-firefox-13-internet-explorer-9-and-opera-1164
http://www.ghacks.net/2012/06/21/chrome-uses-way-more-memory-than-firefox-opera-or-internet-explorer/

Also, the claim that Firefox is insuperior in JavaScript is also not true. It's on par with Chrome.

http://arewefastyet.com/

> But for some reason i still didn't give up on FF. Moreover, i made it my default browser again, after more than a year of Chrome serving that purpose. You know why? Because i got tired of not having a convenient session management functionality, not being able to see the page titles somewhere other than the tab tooltip, not being able to repoen the closed tabs by middle-clcking the tab bar, the "reopen closed tabs" function putting them in the end of the tab bar instead of the place they were at before closing (oh wait, maybe it was because i also installed the extension to put the newly opened tabs in the end of the tab bar, oh well), the recent PepperFlash lags i experience in the flash games. Et cetera, et cetera...
>
> You see, it's these little things that seem unimportant when considered alone, but together they create what one can call a user experience. Something that just makes using the product convenient. And something which can be worth switching to another product over.
>
> Until now, Firefox was my #1 choice when the comfort of usage was considered. At some point i managed to configure everything just the way i liked it to be, and, for the years ensuing, i was only making minor tweaks to make everything perfect to me again if something was changing.
>
> But now the only undeniable advantage of Firefox over ANY other browser - an almost infinite customizability - is in danger. Those who pull the strings seem to have decided to make a total Chrome clone out of Firefox, killing the main thing that keeps people using it. Because if there's no visual difference between these two, then why taking the slow and heavy one when you can have the faster and more lightweight thing with the same face.

Maybe it's just me, but I still see a huge visual difference between Firefox and Chrome. And like you said before, functionality also matters, not just appearance and speed.

> You may think it's a good idea, and that people will most likely give in and accept anything you feed them. And for some time, you might be right, because it takes time to finally realize that there's nothing in Firefox that i would tolerate its disadvantages for. But once you cross this line and it becomes clear that it's easier to configure Chrome to fit my needs (more or less) than to keep Firefox be what it once were out of the box, i'll switch to the former and forget FF like a dream which started out nice but turned into a pale nightmare.
>
> Please don't make this mistake. Don't fix what's not broken. Leave the FF face as it always was, don't change stuff just for the sake of the change. And please, don't treat any difference between FF and Chrome as FF's defect. It might just be otherwise.

Wait. Every change has had user studies (collected from betas) and/or large evidence to back them up. The "don't fix what ain't broken" logic doesn't apply here when there's stuff to improve.

> PS: To those who think that some people here express their opinion too aggressively. You know, the civilized way was always to listen to one another and try to understand what everybody wants and needs. When you leave people with no choice but to either accept any changes to push on them or quit FF for good, it's you who puts us to stress. And when cornered, people start taking things personal. You never asked us if we wanted this change, so why acting all so surprised when you see how we dislike your idea?

That's a great point, but you're missing the part where these people (I included) are mostly not involved with Mozilla and thus, their decision. Mozilla hasn't forced Tabs on Top on anyone. The option to switch this is still there, so the "developers decide keep deciding what's good for users" and "Mozilla is preventing user choice" claims are invalid.

> PPS: To those whose position is "whatever makes development easier is THE right thing to do". Each time i download Firefox, its website tells me that i'm getting something "different by design", a "browser that's got your back". Ever wondered what this means? For me, it means that Firefox is being made with respect to its users, and with taking their opinion into consideration.
>
> You call us the vocal minority whose voice can be ignored because we're just a drop in the bucket of the Firefox user community and the rest doesn't seem to give a damn. But you see, right now the people who you're trying to ignore are mostly the most devoted FF users, with years of FF experience behind their backs. They were with you from the beginning, they were a part of that Firefox miracle that once showed the world that there can be an alternative to Internet Explorer. Well, maybe we really are a drop in the bucket, but does it seem that the rest is gonna be so passionate and determined in defending your decision? Or maybe they just don't give a damn as well and use whatever there is to use.

But the Mozilla community doesn't call these users the vocal minority they can ignore. This thread is proof of that. Developers that are actually responding is proof of that.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. bche...@gmail.com 10/13/12 8:44 PM
Replying to the user above this post makes me wonder myself if this thread is really doing something. So far, this has mainly been a place for users to express their opinions. Let's get the actual (rational) debate started. What are the real "development" costs? We've already seen the large outbursts a simple context menu item removal has caused. I have to agree with Dao that it is entirely worth supporting tabs on bottom a little while longer.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Jeremy Morton 10/14/12 2:49 AM
On 14/10/2012 04:44, bche...@gmail.com wrote:
> Replying to the user above this post makes me wonder myself if this thread is really doing something. So far, this has mainly been a place for users to express their opinions. Let's get the actual (rational) debate started. What are the real "development" costs? We've already seen the large outbursts a simple context menu item removal has caused. I have to agree with Dao that it is entirely worth supporting tabs on bottom a little while longer.

Why "a little while longer"?  There's no point in that.  It's either a
long-term commitment or you might as well do away with it.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. dmitry....@gmail.com 10/14/12 5:12 AM
воскресенье, 14 октября 2012 г., 7:40:31 UTC+4 пользователь Brandon Cheng написал:

> I really feel like many people that come to this conclusion don't completely understand the reasons for changes such as these. I haven't seen any change or reasoning on Bugzilla that is "because other browsers do the same".

What would be your opinion on the reasons behind this particular change? Seriously, besides a clear wish to drop the functionality that some developers already consider obsolete, is there anything that makes removing tabs on bottom reasonable?

> > And then Chrome appeared. Sleek, minimalistic, inherently fast and shamelessly advertised. You started seeing offers to install Chrome on the Google's search page. It was really hard to avoid or miss. So the people started migrating on it. Including those who were pissed by the slobby form that FF has turned into.
>
> >
>
> > I guess that's when the Mozilla guys started to panic. It became obvious that Chrome was taking their share of the market as well.
>
>
>
> Actually, no. There were many people that did not switch to Chrome because of the fact that its interface was new and alien. It did not really gain market share until this advertising started.

Well, you see, it's always a game of choosing the lesser evil. FF is what you're used to, but it makes you unhappy with its performance (well, for example. some other people might be unhappy with something else just as well). Chrome is all so new and alien, but it seems to be doing some technical things better. And its JS engine was better than FF's when Chrome was released.
It doesn't matter when exactly the Chrome rise to power began. What matters is that Chrome was taking the Firefox's share too. Even if it was after the advertizing campaign. Google is good at that, i can give them that.

> > But the interface changes were the biggest mistake. First it was that ugly gray default theme of FF4 that only colorblind people could call appealing, killing the status bar and the tabs on top which never made much sense to me. So i had to stick to the 3.6 branch until the awesome guys like Jeremy Morton and the developers of nice add-ons like Status-4-Evar made it possible to actually enjoy using the newer versions.
>
>
>
> "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". I thought the Firefox 4 mockups were beautiful when I first saw them. -> https://wiki.mozilla.org/images/1/17/Firefox-4-Mockup-i06-%28Win7%29-%28Aero%29-%28TabsTop%29.png
>
>
>
> I'll admit the end result didn't come out perfectly like mockups, but it was indeed an improvement in my opinion. I remember being largely against Tabs on Top until using it on the Firefox 4 betas for a week.

Well, that mockup you showed us isn't that bad. But this picture just doesn't represent the way i use my browser. No Aero glass for me, the window about three times this size, bookmark toolbar and no fancy wallpaper on a background. This way, even with this mockup having been implemented as a FF real face, it wouldn't be perfect for me.

You see, this is not a "the new design must burn in hell, it sucks" debate. I can totally understand people who actually like it. But it's a debate about being able to keep having what you're used to having.

People can be divided into two groups. The first one is the "progressive guys". They embrace ANY changes and think that no change equals to stagnation and stagnation is bad. Such people would definitely consider the UX change that FF4 has brought a good thing.
The second group can be called the "conservative guys", and i'm gonna advocate for them now =). We just have too much unwanted change around us already, and we would prefer to at least keep the things we value the most the way we are used to see them. For such people, no change is required until you either have something extra super terrific which is absolutely a must have but demands some changes so it can be developed and integrated, or some absolutely obvious flaw is found in the current implementation which nobody, and i mean nobody, is gonna argue about and there is an obviously good way to fix this flaw, the way that, again, nobody would be going to argue about as well.

The way i see it, FF4 neither included something amazingly and terrifically useful that required its interface changes nor fixed some insanely obvious flaws that, for the reasons nobody could fathom, were presented in Firefox before. It was just a change.
Well, maybe the guys who invented that change thought that they were adapting Firefox for use in the environments other than the classic desktop/notebook ones. Maybe they thought that the new style is better suited for the netbooks with their smaller screens (it's funny that a few years have passed and netbooks are already a dying breed, Asus deciding to stop producing their EeePc line in favor of the new trend - the tablet devices).
Anyway, there was not so much to fear back then, because i could still revert to the classic look, and nobody was telling me that it would one day be treated as something old and not worth supporting. Otherwise, i'd start protesting right away, and the situation we're now in might never happen in the first place.
But anyway, at that point it seemed that Firefox just gave its users another option to choose from. And more options is always better than less options, so i was happy, with help of Jez and other guys who let me have my options back in full.


> Again, Mozilla hasn't forced you to use Tabs on Top. If you believe so, how have they done that? You're still entitled to change the browser as you wish.

It hasn't YET. You see, we're being said that it's only a matter of time before the move to the tabs on top style is done completely, and then i will be literally forced into it.
I believe that the reason why a lot of other people and i have gathered here is to make sure this time never comes. Not rather later than sooner, but in fact never. We are trying to influence the situation until not all is lost. And obviously it will be so in some close time in the future if we just sit still and do nothing being happy that we're still not deprived of this functionality YET.

> > If you (the people behind that idea i mean) really think that the tabs on bottom are really your main obstacle on the way back to the world domination, please think again, because you're missing something. I'm typing this message in the answer form of the Google Groups webpage opened with FF 15.0.1, and i can clearly see the text being entered with lags sometimes. Not to mention the lags i experienced when pressing the "Answer" button on this page to open the answer form. And this is happening on a Core 2 Duo powered laptop which isn't busy with any significant jobs right now.
>
>
>
> I'm typing this on a 7 year old machine with 2.0 GHz and 2GB of RAM. Firefox is running smooth as it always has for me. I'm going to go ahead and say that something is causing your install to not run as great as it can.

Well, then you're a lucky guy. Or maybe you're not constrained with the add-ons that i have 17 of. Or maybe it's the non-default theme that is doing it for me.
Anyway, i'm not the one to blame. The current FF profile was built from scratch just a year ago, along with a clean OS install. I only imported the bookmarks from my older profile, but it should not affect the way the text is being typed. Nor should my add-ons, which affect the different aspects of the browser usage.
I've always followed the installation instructions, i don't have my machine swarming with viruses or spyware, so if there's anything wrong with my FF performance, i think it has to do with the browser itself.
Or maybe you're using FF on Linux or MacOS, and my Windows Vista installation is inherently flawed. But then again, it's not a non-Chrome UI issue.


> > You see, the non-Chrome UI isn't what makes the people run from FF to Chrome. It's the slowness of your product. FF is nowhere near Chrome when it comes to the JS processing speed, memory management and security. It's their turf now, and i doubt that you guys have enough manpower to challenge Google on that.
>
>
>
> Actually, it is. Since Firefox 7, it has been the most memory efficient browser, topping Chrome. Most users that claim Chrome has better memory are only counting one of its tabs, due to Chrome having a process for each tab (resulting in multiple chrome.exe)

Memory management isn't only about allocating memory. It's also about freeing it in time. I am too used to have a single-window single-tab Firefox instance eat more than 1Gb of memory because i already closed the windows/tabs with the heavy stuff but FF just doesn't wanna clean up after itself.
With Chrome, the cleaning up is done by the OS. And while i agree that Chrome eats maybe even more memory cumulatively compared to FF (if we compare the same sets of windows/tabs), at least i could close the tabs or windows i don't want anymore and see the result right away.
It's even more crucial if you're using more memory than you physically have. When the swap usage overhead starts to bug me with Chrome, i close the unwanted tabs or quickly read through them and then close - so i'm back to the physical memory only. With FF, only an application restart might help.

> If you don't believe me, please look at the following benchmarks. They were found from a simple search with "Firefox vs Chrome memory". They're a couple months outdated, so consider that Firefox 14 has been released since then addressing another memory issue.
>
>
>
> http://lifehacker.com/5917714/browser-speed-tests-chrome-19-firefox-13-internet-explorer-9-and-opera-1164
>
> http://www.ghacks.net/2012/06/21/chrome-uses-way-more-memory-than-firefox-opera-or-internet-explorer/
>
>
>
> Also, the claim that Firefox is insuperior in JavaScript is also not true. It's on par with Chrome.
>
>
>
> http://arewefastyet.com/

It's not the benchmarks that have meaning in my everyday life. It's the websites i use. If the Gmail window scrolls with lags for me, or my favorite social network's website based on the JS navigation works slow as hell, i can't just tell myself "but the benchmarks said that FF does it just as fast, i must be hallucinating". It's especially noticeable if i use the "Save energy" mode on my laptop: FF becomes insanely slow, while Chrome makes due more or less.
It of course can be related to something having gone wrong in my installation. But i'm not an FF insides guru, i'm just a user who knows some tricks but has never coded a single JS script in my life. And i don't wanna sit around and profile my FF installation just to find out the bastard who slows me down. I want it to work okay for me out of the box.
Hm, just to be more objective: i launched Firefox on a fresh profile. No add-ons, no themes, no other burdens. Logged into my Gmail account and tried to scroll the inbox. Lags are there. Definitely, there's something wrong. Because Chrome, with all its add-ons, scrolls around like there' no tomorrow.

> Maybe it's just me, but I still see a huge visual difference between Firefox and Chrome. And like you said before, functionality also matters, not just appearance and speed.

Well, like i also said above, it hasn't gone YET. But that visual difference is getting less and less. I just don't wanna wake up one day and see no visual difference between them at all.

> Wait. Every change has had user studies (collected from betas) and/or large evidence to back them up. The "don't fix what ain't broken" logic doesn't apply here when there's stuff to improve.

Like Jeremy said already, why is removing tabs on bottom considered an improvement? What is there to improve other than the internal development stuff?
Also, how many people of the "conservative" kind are actively using the betas? If they are happy with what they have and just don't need any unwanted changes, why would they break their habits and use the beta versions which are altered all the time?
Such people as me only see something only when it's released. And when it's released, it's usually too late to change something.
Luckily, Jeremy Morton made us realize what's going on before it's too late. He just decided not to update his theme, so when FF16 was released, i saw the change right away. My tabs are still there, but my colors are already gone. But at least it's not too late to turn everything back, that's why we're all here - because we all believe that our voices have some importance.

> That's a great point, but you're missing the part where these people (I included) are mostly not involved with Mozilla and thus, their decision. Mozilla hasn't forced Tabs on Top on anyone. The option to switch this is still there, so the "developers decide keep deciding what's good for users" and "Mozilla is preventing user choice" claims are invalid.

The option to switch is actually not there anymore. It's already hidden under the hood, so it's being clearly shown to the users that this solution is no longer endorsed.
The claims you're calling invalid may be so for now. But when Mozilla really leaves us no choice it will simply be too late to complain. So we're all complaining while it makes sense. Because we see that what's still invalid for today may become a sad truth very soon, unless we turn that around.

> > PPS: To those whose position is "whatever makes development easier is THE right thing to do". Each time i download Firefox, its website tells me that i'm getting something "different by design", a "browser that's got your back". Ever wondered what this means? For me, it means that Firefox is being made with respect to its users, and with taking their opinion into consideration.
>
> >
>
> > You call us the vocal minority whose voice can be ignored because we're just a drop in the bucket of the Firefox user community and the rest doesn't seem to give a damn. But you see, right now the people who you're trying to ignore are mostly the most devoted FF users, with years of FF experience behind their backs. They were with you from the beginning, they were a part of that Firefox miracle that once showed the world that there can be an alternative to Internet Explorer. Well, maybe we really are a drop in the bucket, but does it seem that the rest is gonna be so passionate and determined in defending your decision? Or maybe they just don't give a damn as well and use whatever there is to use.
>
>
>
> But the Mozilla community doesn't call these users the vocal minority they can ignore. This thread is proof of that. Developers that are actually responding is proof of that.

Like i said, that passage was directed towards the people whom i saw above saying stuff like i mentioned. I never said they were the Mozilla guys. And i really hope that no Mozilla guy would ever say anything like that.
Unfortunately, from what i've read in the Bugzilla discussion of the related "bug", some developers really think of tabs on bottom as of some nuisance that has to die. For them, it's only a matter of time. But like Jemery said, if one's gonna remove this feature anyway, let them do that now instead of prolonging the life of what's deemed to vanish. At least this way people would not be having any false hopes and would have time to prepare their migration to other products (be it Chrome or Opera or SeaMonkey or whatever) until their Firefox is not completely ruined.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. HarveyG 10/14/12 1:11 PM
Thanks for your feedback.

Now 335 downloads after 4 days!!
http://i49.tinypic.com/rcn9d1.png

--
HarveyG
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/14/12 1:58 PM
2012/10/14 Dmitry Semionin <dmitry....@gmail.com>:
> Or maybe you're using FF on Linux or MacOS, and my Windows Vista installation is inherently flawed. But then again, it's not a
> non-Chrome UI issue.

It's Windows Vista. I usually have indexing turned off. Make sure you
have at least 2 Gb of RAM, but 4 would be much better.

>  Or maybe you're not constrained with the add-ons that i have 17 of.

Would you be kind enough to list all the addons? I know there are some
toolbars that can be resource intensive. A complete list of all of the
plugins you have in Firefox would be nice, too.

> It's especially noticeable if i use the "Save energy" mode on my laptop: FF becomes insanely slow, while Chrome makes due
> more or less.

I assume the "Save energy mode" on your notebook reduces the CPU clock
speed, which directly affects performance.

Do you use Flashblock and NoScript?

-M.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. rwal...@gmail.com 10/14/12 2:09 PM
Please do not remove tabs on bottom. I really really hate it when companies change the UI on me when I do not want it to change.

I only recently upgraded from Firefox 3.6.28 because certain websites stopped loading correctly, and if you break this addon then I will stop using Firefox entirely.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. dmitry....@gmail.com 10/15/12 5:08 AM
Mart, thanks for your concern, but i kinda doubt that the reasons behind the lags i experience would be anything obvious. Otherwise i'd fix them already.

> It's Windows Vista. I usually have indexing turned off. Make sure you
> have at least 2 Gb of RAM, but 4 would be much better.

4 Gb it is. Indexing service turned off.
When i experience the scrolling lags (like, trying to scroll this very page), the CPU usage jumps up to the single core peak, so i guess it's where the bottleneck is.

> >  Or maybe you're not constrained with the add-ons that i have 17 of.
>
>
>
> Would you be kind enough to list all the addons? I know there are some
> toolbars that can be resource intensive. A complete list of all of the
> plugins you have in Firefox would be nice, too.

You're welcome.

http://pastebin.com/hGrFvAHQ - here is the Firefox's Troubleshooting Information with the list of add-ons and other stuff you might require.
http://pastebin.com/4cEPAg9p - here's a copy-paste from the about:plugins page.


> > It's especially noticeable if i use the "Save energy" mode on my laptop:
> > FF becomes insanely slow, while Chrome makes due more or less.
>
>
>
> I assume the "Save energy mode" on your notebook reduces the CPU clock
> speed, which directly affects performance.

Well, of course it affects performance directly. My point was, FF's performance was affected in a much more severe way than Chrome's.


> Do you use Flashblock and NoScript?

I have Flashblock installed, you can see the information on it and the other add-ons i use on that Pastebin page which the first link i posted leads to.
Just in case, Chrome has Flashblock installed as well.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. djsk...@gmail.com 10/15/12 10:34 AM
I saw a post in the bugfix on this saying that they didn't think this change would be enough for someone to switch browsers because of it. I would have to disagree. If people have to change their workflow due to a change they are in a position to now evaluate making a larger change since they are forced into change to begin with. Firefox is currently "holding" on to market share. If this change would bring some sort of huge growth of new users to replace the ones that leave, I could see the reasoning. I don't really see that happening. I do predict a noticeable number of existing users switching to another browser because this change is enough of a change to make them think about that larger change. Why not switch to the competitor now if my current browser is going to remove the reasons I still use it to look like the others? Why wait around to work like the others when I can just go ahead and switch to one of the others? Taking away choices usually makes things easier, cheaper or both. It usually a pretty poor way to retain a customer base though.

-Bill
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/15/12 3:06 PM
@Dmitry

> When i experience the scrolling lags (like, trying to scroll this very page), the CPU usage jumps up to the single core peak, so i
> guess it's where the bottleneck is.

I usually have smooth scrolling and other animations turned off,
especially if there are performance issues.

> I have Flashblock installed, you can see the information on it and the other add-ons i use on that Pastebin page which the first
> link i posted leads to.

I recommend you get yourself NoScript, too. By default, its whitelist
contains domains for most primary services that people use, but
outside these NoScript will need to be 'trained'. NoScript is by
extension a bit more 'intelligent' than Flashblock, and is great at
disabling many of the pesky scripts that can cause trouble.

> http://pastebin.com/hGrFvAHQ - here is the Firefox's Troubleshooting Information with the list of add-ons and other stuff you might
> require.

Extensions:
If you're really not using Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant for
anything, then I recommend you disable it.

Graphics:
Your nVidia GeForce driver version is 8.17.12.8562, driver date is
10-15-2011. Apparently, nVidia have released a newer driver:
http://www.nvidia.ru/object/notebook-win8-win7-winvista-64bit-306.97-whql-driver-ru.html
Do keep in mind that your computer manufacturer might have provided an
updated driver of their own for your computer and its graphics
adapter.

(I searched at the below page by selecting GeForce, then "GeForce 9M
series (for notebooks)", then "Windows Vista 64-bit" and then the
language. The advanced search yielded the same result.
http://www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx?lang=en-us )

Before updating the driver, I recommend you create a restore point in Windows.

Plugins:
> http://pastebin.com/4cEPAg9p - here's a copy-paste from the about:plugins page.

I have the Google Update plugin disabled in Firefox.

Neither to _I_, personally, find much use for the Unity Player.

Firefox has had lots of issues with Flash Player this year, especially
on Windows Vista and Windows 7, because Flash uses hardware
acceleration more than ever before. I recommend updating the graphics
driver.

If that doesn't help, disable protected mode in Flash Player 11.4; and
if that doesn't help, then downgrade Flash Player to version 11.2 —
the most recent one for Windows is 11.2.202.238, and is available
here:
http://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/archived-flash-player-versions.html

Mind you, Firefox prefers the 32-bit Flash Player Plugin.

-Mart.

2012/10/15 Dmitry Semionin <dmitry....@gmail.com>:
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. dmitry....@gmail.com 10/16/12 6:37 AM
вторник, 16 октября 2012 г., 2:06:42 UTC+4 пользователь Mart Rootamm написал:

> I usually have smooth scrolling and other animations turned off,
> especially if there are performance issues.

Turned the smooth scrolling off, lags are still there.
You see, i believe that such little thing as scrolling can be done painlessly on my laptop's hardware. I don't wanna strip down all the nice little things i'm used to - just to avoid the general problems resulting from some product's internal flaws.
If all my software was bugging me like this, i might assume that it's time to upgrade my computer. But you see, the same Chrome can scroll both smooth and fast. It has no problem with the last year's GPU drivers or whatnot, it just does its job on my OS and my hardware. So it's a living proof of what can be done with those resources if they are to be used properly.

> I recommend you get yourself NoScript, too. By default, its whitelist
> contains domains for most primary services that people use, but
> outside these NoScript will need to be 'trained'. NoScript is by
> extension a bit more 'intelligent' than Flashblock, and is great at
> disabling many of the pesky scripts that can cause trouble.

I tried using NoScript before, wasn't happy with the way it was behaving.

> If you're really not using Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant for
> anything, then I recommend you disable it.

You may notice that this extension is already disabled. I just don't know how to remove it completely.

>
> Your nVidia GeForce driver version is 8.17.12.8562, driver date is
> 10-15-2011. Apparently, nVidia have released a newer driver:
> http://www.nvidia.ru/object/notebook-win8-win7-winvista-64bit-306.97-whql-driver-ru.html

Thanks for that, i'll try the newer driver.
I just had some issues with upgrading the nVidia drivers in the past, the newer versions giving me less functionality to set up the color settings, so i kinda try not to fix what's not broken for sure. Also, for some reason, the Restore Points don't quite restore everything that i expect. Sometimes when a faulty installation takes place and i use the Restore Point to revert it, some of the changes remain. I assume it happens when the changes are being stored in the user home folders, which are not affected by the Restore Points.

> I have the Google Update plugin disabled in Firefox.

I was quite surprised that one can disable plugins now. When i looked there the last time, it seemed like those couldn't be disabled at all.

> Neither to _I_, personally, find much use for the Unity Player.

Well, i do =). Some good browser games are based on this technology.

> Firefox has had lots of issues with Flash Player this year, especially
> on Windows Vista and Windows 7, because Flash uses hardware
> acceleration more than ever before. I recommend updating the graphics
> driver.

While it might be relevant in some cases, i'm quite sure that the scrolling lags on this or Gmail's pages have nothing in common with Flash. Also, i don't experience problems with Flash per se when i use it explicitly (i.e. playing Flash games or watching the Flash videos), so it's highly unlikely that right now i'm having issues with it.
Finally, Flash plugin in Firefox is launched as a separate process, and if it is what consumes my CPU, i'd see that. Instead, i see the firefox.exe process doing that.

Don't get me wrong. I'm grateful for your help, i am. And maybe all my issues are specific to my platform. For example, i have Firefox on another, much older PC with a single core CPU and just 2Gb of RAM running Windows XP. Scrolling Gmail inbox there consumes 100% of the CPU, but gives no lags.

But my initial point about the Firefox performance issues wasn't to gain attention to my personal problems. It was to show that Firefox has them more than Chrome does. And that trying to win over the audience by removing the tabs on bottom isn't very smart because there are the things that are much more important to the people when they decide what browser to use.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. lilst...@gmail.com 10/16/12 7:04 PM
When you are in 'Tabs On Top' mode, you cannot double-click the empty space on the tab bar to create a new tab. That sucks!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/16/12 9:16 PM
> Turned the smooth scrolling off, lags are still there.

Hm, how many e-mails a time do you see in your inbox? I have this set to 25
in GMail.

The hardware I'm using is about five or six years old; a Celeron M 410 @
1.46 GHz, 1Gb of RAM, and Mobile Intel 945GM Express for graphics.

How I use Firefox sometimes puts the computer to its limits, because I have
hundreds of tabs ready to be loaded at Firefox startup.
OTOH, this kind of hardware is not good anymore for running the latest
Angry Birds via Google Chrome.

> I tried using NoScript before, wasn't happy with the way it was behaving.

NoScript does have a learning curve, but it can spare you a lot of trouble
going forward; using it requires that you allow necessary domains for
scripting. Granted, I've had trouble with some more obscure sites that use
multimedia or heavy AJAX (Washington Post comes to mind), but then it
turned out that their scripting was bad in the first place and wouldn't
work in Firefox even if NoScript allowed everything.

> While it might be relevant in some cases, i'm quite sure that the
scrolling lags on this
> or Gmail's pages have nothing in common with Flash.

I might agree with you here. Yet GMail does invoke the Flash Player, but I
also have it allowed via Flashblock

> And maybe all my issues are specific to my platform. For example, i have
Firefox on another,
> much older PC with a single core CPU and just 2Gb of RAM running Windows
XP.
> Scrolling Gmail inbox there consumes 100% of the CPU, but gives no lags.

Scrolling my GMail inbox of 25 items per page for a few seconds has the
Firefox process hovering at around 50-60% CPU-wise (I have Windows XP).

I'm thinking if this discussion about lags with GMail scrolling in Firefox
might need its own thread.

-Mart.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. robert...@btopenworld.com 10/19/12 1:56 AM
I have a very strong preference for tabs-on-bottom, it is more logical and easier to use.  The tab is intimately associated with the web page it refers to rather than lost above everything else and is quicker and easier to access.  One of the main reasons for originally choosing to use Firefox, when it first appeared, was the layout. If tabs-on-top only is enforced ihave two options, to stop Firefox updates and keep the last tabs-on-bottom compatible version or move to another browser.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. tom.mau...@gmail.com 10/19/12 12:53 PM
> --
>
> HarveyG

I just did, thank you sir.

Having tried Google Chrome, I uninstalled it after a week because tabs on top doesn't work for me at all. David Smith has already summed up most of my own complaints about the tabs on top option, but there's one even more egregious reason:

I use Stardock ObjectDock and have it attached to the top of my screen, auto-hiding when not used. It's basically a more customizable Windows clone of OSX's Application Switcher for those who aren't familiar with it. Since ObjectDoc is auto hidden at the top, trying to open a tab at the top of the screen almost always led to the ObjectDoc bar popping out, preventing me from actually clicking the tab.

I could of course place ObjectDock somewhere else on the screen (as would probably be suggested to me), but I'm using my computer for more than browsing. Over the years I've perfected my work flow so I need tabs and boxes from other programs to be arranged in very specific places around the desktop. This actually allows me to be fast and efficient across all of the programs I use, not just some. So appeasing Firefox by moving ObjectDock isn't an option (I realize this is just the need of one out of 400 million users, but if it's not voiced no one will know who might take it into account.)

Back when tabs on top became the default in Firefox, I read a few arguments by the UI design team about faster and more intuitive usage as the reason why it was introduced. Well, I have to take a large variety of programs into account for my entire workflow, and Firefox is only one cog in the machine.

Tabs on bottom is actually faster for my own workflow not just because ObjectDock messes with the tabs on top option. Over the years other programs have introduced tabs (on bottom! - e.g. Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign) or have had them all along (e.g. Notepad++). If the option to keep tabs on the bottom in Firefox is taken away, that'll seriously impact my work experience in general.

As an aside, it's ironic that Adobe of all companies has managed over the years to increase users' options to customize their interfaces, and the plucky Mozilla (Firefox) that I started using when it was called Netscape Navigator 3 is looking to take customization away from its users.

If there were a viable alternative to Firefox with tabs on bottom support, I would be tempted to switch if this option were to be taken away from Firefox users. So far that hasn't happened, and I'm really hoping you guys will reconsider. I'd rather not have to resort to disabling security updates for whatever last FF version supports tabs on bottom, but it would become a necessity if there was no alternative. My own workflow must take precedence to the needs of a single program or its programmers and designers.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. br....@gmail.com 10/20/12 9:18 AM
I have already disabled updates, because the developer of Firefox 3 theme for Firefox 4 has stopped updating his theme until this issue is resolved.  That's how much I care even for the Firefox 4 look and feel, let alone the tabs on top!!!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. gun...@email.com 10/20/12 12:21 PM
On Tuesday, 28 August 2012 17:25:50 UTC+5:30, Jeremy Morton  wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
>
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
>
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
>
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
>
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
>
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
>
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>
> Firefox better.
>
>
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
>
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
>
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeremy Morton (Jez)

I would never update Firefox if I couldn't retain the FF 4.0 look. :/ Large and colorful icons are MUCH MORE easier to use and tab on bottom are easier to switch, MUCH MORE easier.

Making icons monochromatic and tiny, hinders with my ability to intuitively browse. The new, tabs-on-top and smaller & mono-colored may look minimalistic, which some people may like, but it isn't any good for heavy, multi-tab browsing.

Firefox provided THE best browsing experience, and it would be great if it continues this way. I really hope that you seriously consider to keep the browsing experience as user friendly forever. :)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/20/12 3:48 PM
2012/10/20  <gun...@email.com>:
> I would never update Firefox if I couldn't retain the FF 4.0 look. :/
> Large and colorful icons are MUCH MORE easier to use and tab on bottom
> are easier to switch, MUCH MORE easier.

So far there is still the "Use small icons" checkbox in the toolbar
customization dialog.

> Making icons monochromatic and tiny, hinders with my ability to intuitively
> browse.

There are themes (not personas, but actual themes) at
addons.mozilla.org to improve on that.

-Mart.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. gun...@email.com 10/21/12 3:46 AM
I know that. :) I found a theme in the comments section of the FF 4.0 look theme which extended the theme usage till FF ver 50.0. I also use large icons and tabs on bot. I just wanted Firefox devs to know that they should keep it this way. :)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. in...@pimjoosten.nl 10/21/12 5:09 AM
I normally never post on any of the Mozilla forums because as an entrepreneur I do not have the time to do so. However in this case I have read the entire (!) thread before writing this post. Let me explain.

When FF4 came out I was not pleased with its new lay-out, because for me it was unproductive. With unproductive I mean taking more time than before to use it and therefore costing me money in the end. Ever since FF4 came out I estimate that I must have spent a couple of working days in total to arrange FF’s lay out in such a way that I can “read and write” with it, as we say in Dutch. It was a good investment, i.e. in the end I have saved much more time by the rearrangement than my investment had cost. To give you an indication: I have currently installed about 40 add-ons to tweak Firefox. One of those is Jeremy Morton’s “Firefox 3 Aero theme for Firefox 4+”. Like others I have found that my workflow is much better with this FF3 theme, and also it is much better for my eyes. For me it is not sticking to an older lay out as I am more familiar with it, but a tangible increase in productivity.

However, when updating to FF16 I received the message that the “Firefox 3 Aero theme for Firefox 4+” theme was no longer supported for FF16, due to the fact that tabs on bottom was going to be abandoned in the near future. To my amazement it had already been partially abandoned in FF15, because it is not shown anymore under options with a fresh install of FF15, or even when I open FF again after (temporarily) having placed the tabs on top. I had not noticed, because the FF15 update had respected my tabs on bottom setting.

I definitely do want to raise my voice and object to the possible demise of “tabs on bottom”. As stated above the way I have arranged my FF lay out helps me in being productive. On September 5 David Smith wrote a post in which he summarized his reasons for favoring tabs on bottom. Except for one (which I left out), I have the exact same reasons as him for using tabs on bottom, so I can just repeat them here:

1) Window is always maximized, so Tabs on Top means the tabs are in the title bar.
2) There is less space in the title bar than in the standard tab bar; roughly one less tab's worth.
3) Tabs in the titlebar removes the ability to place the page title in the titlebar (fixed Mozilla's removal with another extension).
4) The more tabs I'm using, the more difficult it is to read titles on the tab itself, necessitating the titlebar option. This is exacerbated somewhat by #2.
6) Fairly often I accidentally select something that I don't actually want. The one place I can reliably go to to cancel such an action (or release something that was being dragged) that won't affect the browser in any way is the title bar. I can also often select a blank space within the viewing area if it's to cancel a click (but not cancel a drag), but there are a fair number of sites that like to put in full-page linked ads in the background space; if it's not a site I visit regularly enough to have built a Stylish rule to get rid of such things, that becomes a hazardous target. If tabs are at the top, I lose access to that safe area.
7) The more active I am in browser, the more the above issues come into play. The more tabs are open, the more the title issue comes up. The more 'stuff' I'm doing, dragging/clicking/whatever, the more the safe area is an issue. The more tabs I'm opening and closing, the more the close button becomes an issue.
8) Conceptually (and purely subjectively), Tabs on Top puts the focus of the various controls (location bar, bookmarks toolbar, etc) within the space of the current tab. That is, it creates a confining impression where all the controls are 'in here', and all the other tabs are 'out there'. Actual work process, however, is preferentially for all the tabs to be contained and compartmentalized (aided by things such as Tab Groups), where the controls are above and outside that. I know that they aren't actually doing anything different, but the mental impression is much more stifling.

On September 6 Stuart Cook made a statement which I could have made myself too:
“For me, the content area and the tab bar are the two most important parts of the browser UI. Tabs-on-bottom mode allows me to keep them adjacent, which in turn makes it very easy to transition between them, or monitor one in my peripheral vision while interacting with the other.”

Also, Dmitry Semionin made some very good remarks on October 13th, although I do not know about and want to go into the technical aspects of that post. What I do know is that I have chosen for FF and have reaffirmed that choice quite a number of times, because of the flexibility FF offers. I have been an early adopter of FF since 2004 and promoting it to many others.

So I definitely want to raise my voice and say: Please keep the tabs on bottom option! I hope you realize how important this is to me (and apparently many others). It is so important that I have invested a lot of time (and, as an entrepreneur, thus money) to bring this to your attention. I sincerely do hope that you realize how passionate all of us proponents of the Tabs on bottom option are in this thread, and that it weighs in with you considerations about whether or (hopefully!) not to go ahead with your removal proposal.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. gun...@email.com 10/21/12 3:46 AM
On Sunday, 21 October 2012 04:18:56 UTC+5:30, Mart Rootamm  wrote:
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. in...@pimjoosten.nl 10/21/12 5:09 AM
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Martijn 10/21/12 8:16 AM
Apparently, this has changed with
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
When someone has tabs on bottom, then temporarily switches to tabs on top,
then restarts, the context menu option is gone.
The only way now to get the context menu option back is going to
about:config and set the preference browser.tabs.onTop=false.

I don't understand this change, it seems to fit the worst of 2 worlds,
namely more options, more cases and more code.

Regards,
Martijn
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox
>



--
Martijn Wargers - Help Mozilla!
http://quality.mozilla.org/
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Mozilla_QA_Community
irc://irc.mozilla.org/qa - /nick mw22
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Martijn 10/21/12 10:28 AM
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Martijn <martijn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Apparently, this has changed with https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
> When someone has tabs on bottom, then temporarily switches to tabs on top, then restarts, the context menu option is gone.
> The only way now to get the context menu option back is going to about:config and set the preference browser.tabs.onTop=false.

Sorry, I meant https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755646 here.

Regards,
Martijn
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Tomasz Borek 10/22/12 10:38 AM
Hi,

Perhaps I missed the answer but how hard it would be to check how many
active participants of "send Mozilla data on how you use FF" program use
tabs-on-bottom?

It's called Telemetry<http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/send-performance-data-improve-firefox>,
right? According to description, it already collects info on what features
you use (bolded):

Telemetry measures and collects non-personal information, such as memory
> consumption, responsiveness timing and *feature usage.* It then sends
> this information to Mozilla on a daily basis and we use it to make Firefox
> better for you.
>

Does anyone know / can anyone check   if this collects the info on tabs
location (top vs bottom)?

regards,
LAFK
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ángel González 10/23/12 10:07 AM
I have also read the 100+ mails in this thread and the 55 comments of
bug 755593.

There were several defenses of tab-on-bottom but few for the tabs-on-top
which is being sold as «better». I will try to list below the reasons
given for performing the change, answering each of them.

There was the original email by B.J. Herbison [1] based on "makes it
simple" but without much detail. Heh, if dropping options was always
better, we could just drop CSS support, and the code and designs would
be much easier :)

There's a good comment by Brandon Cheng [2] supporting tab-on-top:
> This is actually a good argument for Tabs on Bottom. Except there's a
> problem with it. Firefox is more than just a web browser
> displaying web pages. It's also a platform for web applications.
> For this, Tabs on Top make more sense due to the fact that a large
> majority of the controls (...)

Yes, reusers (such as xulrunner applications) must have the ability to
change the UI. That doesn't need to affect firefox at all. It isn't a
new requisite either.

A second case are 'web pages acting as applications'. It has been
quickly mentioned a few times, but without much explanation (and I am
afraid I don't have a handy reference to give about it).
This is a harder problem, since on the one hand we want these 'Apps' to
look more like native ones, and in the other there is their web nature.
I understand how moving to tabs-on-top is seen as a solution to hide the
toolbar for them. I currently see three UI options for these apps:
1. Open them in a new window. Opening new windows without a toolbar has
been possible forever, and this way they can appear without the
“browser-UI”.
2. Always hide the urlbar when visiting an app tab even in
tabs-on-bottom mode.
3. Hide the urlbar in tabs-on-top but keep it shown in tabs-on-bottom.

I would simply go with 3. It's easy to do in CSS, so I assume it
wouldn't be a problem in XUL either.
An app could be launched with arguments showing it in a new window
without bars if desired.


Finally, there's also the "Why Tabs are on Top in Firefox 4" video [3]

(Sidenote: I find videos a bad way for spreading your position. They are
good for native people, but just as not everybody is able to read/write
in English, it is harder to follow an audition. For instance, how do you
look up in the dictionary whatever-he-just-said? Text is also simpler to
localise. I'm not saying no videos should be used at all, but there
should be at least a transcription available.)


There are four arguments in the video for tabs-on-top mode:
1- Conceptual mode
It could be summarised as "Url and search bar belongs to the tab, since
it affects the tab".
However, this is not completely exact. When you enter an url which is
open in another tab, the urlbar switches you to that tab. Or you can
force it to be opened in a different tab/window by holding Ctrl/Shift.
Another example is the search bar opening the results in a new tab (I'm
quite sure this was a GUI option, seems to be moved to hidden preference
browser.search.openintab now)

These are all window actions, so it's not so clear that they "belong" to
the tab.


2- App Tabs
Already answered above. I'd like to add how in the cloud case we do need
the "Excel location bar" (3'45") to verify the page origin. I haven't
seen any web app so far, but  we will likely find out soon web malware
showing a url bar image showing you are at www.paypal.com or that their
fake virus scanner is hosted at <reputable antivirus domain>.
We have been moving away from in-content notifications because of these
kind of issues, and now the url bar (one of the most critical
information pieces) is moved into the content section in a hideable way...


3- Tab-based firefox UI
I don't understand the argument exposed there. Is he arguing about using
firefox as a shell explorer ? I don't think that would be good move. The
experience of explorer.exe vs iexplore.exe isn't encouraging.


4- Notifications
I actually find this to be the most convincing argument laid out in the
video. However, these notifications are scarce, and should not force the
tab position. A simple solution would be to make the notification bubble
from the tab title instead of the url bar.
That would mean more code for this special mode, but note that some
alternative is needed anyway for the case where no url bar is being
shown. Be that a notification anchored at a different place, a complete
tab-down system or keeping the old notifications, the duality is there.


The video does mention the mouse distance as a downside, but diminishes
it with the  argument of the "infinite height target".

This misses several things:
1. You still need to go there. I don't know if it's due to "training",
but I seem to reach more easily the tab bar (a "small" movement) than
the top of the screen (a "large" movement). I read at asktog that "the
human hand was designed to move in an arc", maybe that's why I find
easier to move to the tab bar (where I'm in fact doing an arc) than the
linear movement up.

2. You need to come back. You can't view the page with the mouse at the
top, you need to go back to the content area in order to scroll down (or
interact with the page, but even if we are just reading we need to go
down for non-trivial pages). If you are in tabs-bottom mode, it's just a
few pixels to go back to the content area.

3. Even if you detect clicks on all the area above the tab, the users
will still go down to click over the tab. Just like people go to the
bottom-left on Vista, then move right to click on the start button,
despite the whole area opening the menu (partly due for the poor
discoverability, but also because it's unintuitive to do so).



Finishing up, usability depends a lot on your usage. For some people
removal of the feature doesn't get into their way. For other, it's like
selling a smartphone without a numeric keyboard (ie. you can only type
letters there) because "Our smartphone does far more than phone calls".
The ability to cover more things doesn't mean that , and I think you
would agree that a solution like "you can write 'One hundred twenty
three' to call '123'" wouldn't be a good idea :)


So, all the developers out there, do you have any other reasons for
embracing tabs-on-top?
Critics to my points above are welcome, too. But I find important to
really have a debate, instead of having this long thread into /dev/null
and then doing otherwise.

Thanks for your attention

1-
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!msg/mozilla.dev.apps.firefox/Oral-S5Z8HQ/trxh-QweL0gJ
2- https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593#c32
3-
http://blog.mozilla.org/faaborg/2010/06/24/why-tabs-are-on-top-in-firefox-4/

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Ángel González 10/23/12 12:28 PM
On 05/09/12 21:44, Asa Dotzler wrote:
> On 9/5/2012 11:23 AM, kinem...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> This is related to the fact that I pretty much constantly have about
>> 100 tabs open, broken into a couple windows, and about a half dozen
>> tab groups per window.  As I have to keep all of that organized for
>> it to be at all useful, that subjective impression of control (or
>> lack thereof) has a very definite impact on my general comfort
>> level.
>
> That's an impressive set-up. Fewer than 1/10th of one percent of our
> users have anything close to your number of tabs. The 80% case is 5 or
> fewer tabs and the 95% case is 10 or fewer tabs.

I think the study you are quoting counted the number of tabs used in a
session, not the total number of them. This is important because you may
use 10 tabs in a session but have 100 tabs open.
Maybe there was a second study for total number of tabs, though.


> While it would be great to make the hundreds of tabs case easy to manage
> and for users with that many tabs to feel totally in control, if a
> trade-off must be made, the single digit tabs case has to be the focus
> and the priority.

If I were to add a feature for easing multiple tab usage, I would add an
option for saving the tabs of a window / from all windows in a file
plus the ability of opening them.
Akin to what is done in sessionstore.js, but initiated by the user.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/23/12 12:40 PM
2012/10/23 Ángel González <Kei...@gmail.com>:
> If I were to add a feature for easing multiple tab usage, I would add an
> option for saving the tabs of a window / from all windows in a file
> plus the ability of opening them.
> Akin to what is done in sessionstore.js, but initiated by the user.

In addition, I'd like to be able to "purge" existing tabs from closed
tab history, especially those that don't have or have not had
significant histories; That should reduce the overall memory footprint
used by Firefox. — Or the possibility to mark some tabs as significant
and some as not, because there are many that are opened as "new/pop-up
windows", without the user intending them to be permanent tabs.

I would also like keep those tabs I prefer to have longer or more
meaningful navigation histories with. Perhaps specify some tabs as
having longer navigation histories (50 pages) and some with shorter
histories (25 pages).

-Mart.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. ttfitz...@gmail.com 10/25/12 9:33 PM
I have been a long time Firefox user. I am 50 years old, and like Dr. Sheldon Cooper, I do not like change. I stayed with 3.6 for a long time because I didn't like the changes in UI for 4.0+, in particular the tabs-on-top look, and only upgraded when I found that I could change that around. If tabs-on-bottom goes away, I might as well switch to Chrome - my kids both tell me I should anyway.

I was going to say more than that, but then I saw the following, so I'll just say, What he said:

On Saturday, October 13, 2012 5:33:04 PM UTC-4, Dmitry Semionin wrote:
> I've been using FF since the version 1.0, and this is the first time i'm going to complain about the developers' decision publicly.
>
>
>
> Seeing what's going on with the browser development, i can only come up with a single reason why the devs are doing what they are doing. They just don't know any other way to make FF the number one non-Microsoft browser out there.
>
> You see, FF has been here for a while, and it had its own moments of glory. Until a few years ago, it was the best open source browser, and for me it was the best browser overall.
>
> But the time was going, and FF was getting more and more bloated. Eating more than 1Gb of RAM became a (not so) good tradition, as did failing to scroll some websites smoothly. But once you're used to the perks FF is offering, it's hard to lure you back into the IE's embrace, so the people were staying.
>
>
>
> And then Chrome appeared. Sleek, minimalistic, inherently fast and shamelessly advertised. You started seeing offers to install Chrome on the Google's search page. It was really hard to avoid or miss. So the people started migrating on it. Including those who were pissed by the slobby form that FF has turned into.
>
> I guess that's when the Mozilla guys started to panic. It became obvious that Chrome was taking their share of the market as well.
>
>
>
> Unfortunately, the people who make decisions at Mozilla found no better way than to start blatantly copying everything that Chrome introduced. Even the version increment policy: i remember the talks like "How are we gonna explain the users that our Firefox 4.9 is as modern and potent as Chrome 12".
>
> But the interface changes were the biggest mistake. First it was that ugly gray default theme of FF4 that only colorblind people could call appealing, killing the status bar and the tabs on top which never made much sense to me. So i had to stick to the 3.6 branch until the awesome guys like Jeremy Morton and the developers of nice add-ons like Status-4-Evar made it possible to actually enjoy using the newer versions.
>
> And now you're trying to take from me the one of the basic, i'd even say fundamental things that Firefox has, forcing me to use the tabs-on-top paradigm i always disliked (in Chrome too). And because of that, i'm losing the rest of the visual appeal that Firefox had to me, since the FF3 Aero theme is no longer working.
>
>
>
> If you (the people behind that idea i mean) really think that the tabs on bottom are really your main obstacle on the way back to the world domination, please think again, because you're missing something. I'm typing this message in the answer form of the Google Groups webpage opened with FF 15.0.1, and i can clearly see the text being entered with lags sometimes. Not to mention the lags i experienced when pressing the "Answer" button on this page to open the answer form. And this is happening on a Core 2 Duo powered laptop which isn't busy with any significant jobs right now.
>
> You see, the non-Chrome UI isn't what makes the people run from FF to Chrome. It's the slowness of your product. FF is nowhere near Chrome when it comes to the JS processing speed, memory management and security. It's their turf now, and i doubt that you guys have enough manpower to challenge Google on that.
>
>
>
> But for some reason i still didn't give up on FF. Moreover, i made it my default browser again, after more than a year of Chrome serving that purpose. You know why? Because i got tired of not having a convenient session management functionality, not being able to see the page titles somewhere other than the tab tooltip, not being able to repoen the closed tabs by middle-clcking the tab bar, the "reopen closed tabs" function putting them in the end of the tab bar instead of the place they were at before closing (oh wait, maybe it was because i also installed the extension to put the newly opened tabs in the end of the tab bar, oh well), the recent PepperFlash lags i experience in the flash games. Et cetera, et cetera...
>
>
>
> You see, it's these little things that seem unimportant when considered alone, but together they create what one can call a user experience. Something that just makes using the product convenient. And something which can be worth switching to another product over.
>
> Until now, Firefox was my #1 choice when the comfort of usage was considered. At some point i managed to configure everything just the way i liked it to be, and, for the years ensuing, i was only making minor tweaks to make everything perfect to me again if something was changing.
>
>
>
> But now the only undeniable advantage of Firefox over ANY other browser - an almost infinite customizability - is in danger. Those who pull the strings seem to have decided to make a total Chrome clone out of Firefox, killing the main thing that keeps people using it. Because if there's no visual difference between these two, then why taking the slow and heavy one when you can have the faster and more lightweight thing with the same face.
>
>
>
> You may think it's a good idea, and that people will most likely give in and accept anything you feed them. And for some time, you might be right, because it takes time to finally realize that there's nothing in Firefox that i would tolerate its disadvantages for. But once you cross this line and it becomes clear that it's easier to configure Chrome to fit my needs (more or less) than to keep Firefox be what it once were out of the box, i'll switch to the former and forget FF like a dream which started out nice but turned into a pale nightmare.
>
>
>
> Please don't make this mistake. Don't fix what's not broken. Leave the FF face as it always was, don't change stuff just for the sake of the change. And please, don't treat any difference between FF and Chrome as FF's defect. It might just be otherwise.
>
>
>
> PS: To those who think that some people here express their opinion too aggressively. You know, the civilized way was always to listen to one another and try to understand what everybody wants and needs. When you leave people with no choice but to either accept any changes to push on them or quit FF for good, it's you who puts us to stress. And when cornered, people start taking things personal. You never asked us if we wanted this change, so why acting all so surprised when you see how we dislike your idea?
>
>
>
> PPS: To those whose position is "whatever makes development easier is THE right thing to do". Each time i download Firefox, its website tells me that i'm getting something "different by design", a "browser that's got your back". Ever wondered what this means? For me, it means that Firefox is being made with respect to its users, and with taking their opinion into consideration.
>
> You call us the vocal minority whose voice can be ignored because we're just a drop in the bucket of the Firefox user community and the rest doesn't seem to give a damn. But you see, right now the people who you're trying to ignore are mostly the most devoted FF users, with years of FF experience behind their backs. They were with you from the beginning, they were a part of that Firefox miracle that once showed the world that there can be an alternative to Internet Explorer. Well, maybe we really are a drop in the bucket, but does it seem that the rest is gonna be so passionate and determined in defending your decision? Or maybe they just don't give a damn as well and use whatever there is to use.
>
> Tomorrow Google pulls another trick off its sleeve, or launches yet even more powerful advertizing campaign, and will you be so sure that those people are gonna stay loyal to FF? I doubt so. But there will surely be much less hardcore Firefox fans who would be spending countless hours on the various forums trying to convince the hesitant ones that Firefox is still worth using.
>
> Firefox main power was always the passion of the people who enjoy using it and contributing to it, not the ones who would quit on it in no time. Please don't make people think that there is no more stuff to love about Firefox.
>
>
>
> PPPS: Sorry for this being such a long message. But for once in a long time it feels like there's something important to lose, and i think it's worth fighting for.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. H.D. 10/26/12 10:06 AM
I'm kind of new to this whole "Google Groups" thing, so forgive me if I'm bad at this.

I don't know about everybody else here, but I'm not against the whole "Tabs on Top" thing as much as I am against them FORCING US INTO IT. That's what I dislike about YouTube, Wikia and many other websites: they make huge layout changes and force it on everybody despite how many people protest it. So I'm definitely FOR leaving it a customizable option.

Currently, I haven't switched to 16.0 for fear that I'll get automatically updated behind my back to the next one (which will doudtlessly have tabs on top enforced).

~H.D.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 10/26/12 3:26 PM
2012/10/26, ttfitz...@gmail.com <ttfitz...@gmail.com>:
> If tabs-on-bottom goes away, I might as well switch to Chrome - my
> kids both tell me I should anyway.

You might want to consider SeaMonkey, given that Google Chrome has
Tabs on Top anyway.

SeaMonkey uses the same rendering engine as Firefox and I believe it
still has the regular user interface layout, including tabs-on-bottom.

Many add-ons that work in Firefox have also been made for SeaMonkey,
given that its add-on architecture is more similar to that of Firefox
since SeaMonkey 2.0. SeaMonkey and Firefox also use the same plugin
architecture, so that plugins made for Firefox also work in SeaMonkey.

-Mart.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. dat...@gmail.com 10/27/12 7:56 PM
Please continue to allow tabs on the bottom.

I use the "Firefox 3 Theme for Firefox 4" and
support well over a dozen family and friends who
also use Tabs on bottom as well.

I would hate for this option to disappear.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Drake 10/28/12 2:45 AM
From what I have read in the posts and Bug Fixes, the "Developers" are trying to mimic Google Chrome. We can save our outcry because our input is just noise to them. Just look at how we are dismissed like children who "don't know what's best for them"!  There is more than a bit of irony in the the developers' arrogance. In FORCING users to accommodate the will of the developers - kind of "code rape" as it were, where THE USER HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO SUBMIT, the spirit of Mozilla is destroyed. Harsh language - yes; but is it not true? It is also truly a shame. I might as well use Chrome since it's faster. In fact I may download it today. Sadly, I see Firefox going down the path of Ubuntu and Microsoft 8 where an cadre of mighty developer Gods ponder and then decree to the little people how it will be. But now the little people are moving on to worship different developer Gods. Firefox it was nice to you!
unk...@googlegroups.com 10/28/12 12:25 PM <This message has been deleted.>
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mr. Sarge 10/28/12 3:49 PM
Please, please do not remove the tabs-on-bottom feature. The
functionality that it provides is a must-have for me. If you remove
it, I'll be forced to abandon Firefox and use something else. And
nobody wants that. So, please, listen to your users and just don't
remove tabs-on-bottom.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. mvo...@gmail.com 10/28/12 7:41 PM
I've been using FF since v1, and I'd like to thank all FF developers for a great browser.

When FF4 was released, I didn't like the UI and reinstalled v3.6.
fortunately, I came across the 'FF3 for FF4' theme which enabled me to upgrade to new versions.

That theme wasn't updated for a while and (not being a programmer/developer) I had to work really hard to adapt it to the last FF versions.
And now - instead of looking forward to a new version, I just wonder each time how difficult it's going to be making the necessary changes.

Please keep the option to set 'Tabs on Bottom'.

Thank you.
 
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. dmitry....@gmail.com 10/29/12 3:07 AM
Okay, lemme reply to this in somewhat extreme way, so that the underlying flaws of your logic are clearly visible.

On Friday, October 12, 2012 9:40:32 AM UTC+4, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> What's so bad about copying
> features/behavior from eg Chrome?

Let's approve copying some feature/behavior from IE6 for example. It's also a browser, and having a big (but sometimes bad) fame in a lot of people's eyes. Why don't we do some stuff like it does, it would be cool wouldn't it?

> >  From what I've read above (I didn't read all of it), this would make
> > things a little easier for the developers.

> This alone is an good enough reason.

Oh, you know what would be the best then? To shut down any development or bugfixing completely. That would be just the easiest way for the developers, and hence, according to your logic, the good enough reason to do it.

> > But what about the users?  Are they of no importance when compared to the
> > developers?  The UI changes you have made are generally disliked on the
> > forums I've mentioned it in.

> Which doesn't mean much. In general, you'll find that especially those
> people say something who dislike something. Those, that are in favor, they
> say nothing.
>
> To me, it sounds as if those that oppose this change seem to be afraid of
> changes. Seem to want that there is a standstill. I really don't quite
> understand the problems people imagine and hope, that the devs do NOT let
> go of the changes and continue to improve Firefox just like they used to.

Now, the most extreme of my propositions.
Alexander, do you need all two of your legs? Or maybe both of your arms? I say you do not, let's make a change and remove one. I think the right one you need the least.

What? You don't want to do it? You've mentioned this idea to all your friends and family and they don't find it good either? Man, this doesn't mean much. You see, only those who dislike something say something, but most people who favor my idea - they just say nothing.
Plus, i believe you don't wanna let go of your arm because you're simply afraid of the change. You seem to want that there is a standstill in your limb count. I don't quite understand the problems you imagine and hope that we do NOT let go of my idea and continue to improve your body configuration.

Well, i'm sure that by the time you finished reading the above you already wanna break my fingers for typing something like that. But you see, some people might value their browser options just as much as you value your body integrity. And telling them to give it up for the sake of the change makes as much sense as telling you to give up your arm or leg for the same reason.

Sincerely hope you're feeling well,
Dmitry
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Alexander Skwar 10/29/12 3:27 AM
Hello

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:07 AM,  <dmitry....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, lemme reply to this in somewhat extreme way, so that the underlying flaws of your logic are clearly visible.
>
> On Friday, October 12, 2012 9:40:32 AM UTC+4, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>
>> What's so bad about copying
>> features/behavior from eg Chrome?
>
> Let's approve copying some feature/behavior from IE6 for example. It's also a browser, and having a big (but sometimes bad) fame in a lot of people's eyes. Why don't we do some stuff like it does, it would be cool wouldn't it?

If it does "cool" stuff - yeah, why not?

>
>> >  From what I've read above (I didn't read all of it), this would make
>> > things a little easier for the developers.
>
>> This alone is an good enough reason.
>
> Oh, you know what would be the best then? To shut down any development or bugfixing completely.

If you say so.

> That would be just the easiest way for the developers, and hence, according to your logic, the good enough reason to do it.

That's not my logic.

> Well, i'm sure that by the time you finished reading the above you already wanna break my fingers for typing something like that. But you see, some people might value their browser options just as much as you value your body integrity.

Stupid comparison.

I still don't get, what you people whine about. I'm using Fx 17 now
with tabs-on-top
and don't see any of your proplems. Guess it's probably, because using
a browser for
only like 8h per day isn't enough…

Alexander
--
↯    Lifestream (Twitter, Blog, …) ↣ http://alexs77.soup.io/     ↯
↯ Chat (Jabber/Google Talk) ↣ a.s...@gmail.com , AIM: alexws77  ↯
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. tekw...@gmail.com 10/29/12 10:57 AM
I find it ironic that this discussion is hosted by the company that created the browser that firefox is being whittled away at to become. I'll never understand the "less is more" mentality. Firefox's advantage was customization and removing options makes it less useful. I don't like chrome and refuse to use it. If Firefox is becoming nothing more than a chrome clone I have to wonder why it even exists. I have tried tabs on top and find it inconvenient, not better. If this "less is more" trend continues and options like tab position are removed I'll be forced to find another browser. Maybe I'll start using Opera or Konqueror.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Robert Buecheler 10/29/12 11:50 AM
As a lurker, I know my position and know that Developers only listen
to their peers, but I still have to throw in my 10 cents into this
ramble so I come out of lurking mode.

I, as many others, have used Firefox for almost a decade.
It was lightweight, customizable, and less prone to vulnerabilities
due to quick security patching.

BUT... things are changing...
I started to use tabs on top when they became available only because
of its usefulness of adding an extra "row" to the size of the viewable
page. Unfortunately, by moving the tabs to the top, toolbars stayed
below, adding at times confusion to the mix. I have grown accustomed
to the toolbar chaos, while the browsing window is now detached from
its tab and separated by several unrelated toolbars. Yes, it was meant
to group applications and their toolbars together, but IMNSHO it did
just the opposite.

Due to the latest problems with Adobe's Flash Player, I had to switch
to Chrome, but still use Firefox for most of my tasks.

Having said that, understanding developers' reluctance to carry too
much bulk (which was the reason of Firefox becoming big in the browser
"market" taking the fight against IE who was bulky and proprietary) I
don't doubt that they will remove the tabs on bottom support code just
to make the software slim.

...and with this I will return to lurking mode
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. light...@yahoo.com 10/30/12 1:05 AM
I just want to express my support and agreement to this thread. The strength of Firefox has always been its extreme customizability that allows people to create interfaces that they themselves find the most comfortable and easy to use. It deeply angers and saddens me that the developers are tearing this foundation down, and enforcing their own preferences upon the users with no regard to their preferences.

For years I have used the elegant and straightforward three-layer interface with tabs at the bottom, and I see no purpose or reason for altering this system. There are no benefits for putting tabs on top of everything else, except arbitrary aesthetic choice. The only thing this change would do for me is a slightly more inconvenient user experience.

I implore you, Firefox developers: do not give up the very thing that made your browser the greatest in the first place: the ability for the user to decide their own user experience.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. sarge.ro...@gmail.com 10/30/12 5:42 AM
I completely agree, Jeremy. Mozilla needs to stop trying to dumb down FF. There's no compelling reason to remove tabs-on-bottom. They apparently just want to do it so they can point at FF and say "See? It's just like Chrome!" If you've got a better explanation for the bone-headed decision to narf tabs-on-bottom, I'd like to hear it.

In my opinion, adopting the FF 4+ UI was the worst mistake Mozilla has done in recent memory. They should have offered the new UI as an option, NOT as the default. Now it seems they're doubling down on that mistake. They keep going this way and they're going to drive FF right off a cliff.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. srs...@gmail.com 11/1/12 10:32 PM
I've been increasingly disappointed with the direction Firefox has been going since Firefox 5 and I can guarantee that if tabs on top are implemented I will switch to another browser. End of story.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. joosti...@gmail.com 11/2/12 12:12 PM
What we need is some sort of petition.  Hopefully the developers will start caring about what users want again (ah, those were the days) if we get enough votes to keep tabs on bottom.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. templ...@gmail.com 11/2/12 2:56 PM
Why on earth would they take this functionality away?  I don't even understand the argument for keeping tabs on top.  This is supposed to be a customizable experience, right?   I am keeping Firefox 15 (with a Firefox 3 theme) until i am forced out of it.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. jorl...@gmail.com 11/7/12 3:56 AM
Just read through this whole discussion thread, and while all the points and arguments that I might bring up have already been stated, I'd like to add my voice to those who do not want to loose the tabs-on bottom option.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/7/12 7:44 AM
I've had the impression that the browser component of Seamonkey essentially *is*
Firefox, just as Firefox was originally the browser component of the old Mozilla
Suite.

As such, I would have expected that for the browser.tabs.onTop config option to
be removed from Firefox would result in its also disappearing from Seamonkey,
sooner or later, unless the Seamonkey devs specifically decide to retain it (and
to deal with the hassle of having bigger differences from the Firefox "upstream"
codebase).

Is this not actually true?

--
       The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Every time you let somebody set a limit they start moving it.
   - LiveJournal user antonia_tiger
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Philip Chee 11/7/12 9:24 PM
On 07/11/2012 23:44, The Wanderer wrote:
> On 10/26/2012 06:26 PM, Mart Rootamm wrote:
>
>> 2012/10/26, ttfitz...@gmail.com <ttfitz...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> If tabs-on-bottom goes away, I might as well switch to Chrome - my kids
>>> both tell me I should anyway.
>>
>> You might want to consider SeaMonkey, given that Google Chrome has Tabs on
>> Top anyway.
>>
>> SeaMonkey uses the same rendering engine as Firefox and I believe it still
>> has the regular user interface layout, including tabs-on-bottom.
>>
>> Many add-ons that work in Firefox have also been made for SeaMonkey, given
>> that its add-on architecture is more similar to that of Firefox since
>> SeaMonkey 2.0. SeaMonkey and Firefox also use the same plugin architecture,
>> so that plugins made for Firefox also work in SeaMonkey.
>
> I've had the impression that the browser component of Seamonkey essentially *is*
> Firefox, just as Firefox was originally the browser component of the old Mozilla
> Suite.
>
> As such, I would have expected that for the browser.tabs.onTop config option to
> be removed from Firefox would result in its also disappearing from Seamonkey,
> sooner or later, unless the Seamonkey devs specifically decide to retain it (and
> to deal with the hassle of having bigger differences from the Firefox "upstream"
> codebase).
>
> Is this not actually true?

This is not actually true.

Phil

--
Philip Chee <phi...@aleytys.pc.my>, <phili...@gmail.com>
http://flashblock.mozdev.org/ http://xsidebar.mozdev.org
Guard us from the she-wolf and the wolf, and guard us from the thief,
oh Night, and so be good for us to pass.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. dougl...@gmail.com 11/8/12 8:02 AM
I support the maintenance of tabs on the bottom and have been a Firefox user for over 8 years. The main draw is it's customization and reliability. I feel that maintaining important long-time features should be a priority. Especially since long-term users are less likely to dump Firefox and go elsewhere at the sight of something new.

Thanks
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/8/12 8:56 AM
On 11/08/2012 11:02 AM, dougl...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 7:55:50 AM UTC-4, Jeremy Morton wrote:
>
>> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>>
>> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just need
>> to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better" (Chrome
>> does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind is
>> blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different browser
>> if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>>
>> It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so be
>> it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>>
>> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next to
>> the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>> Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>> Firefox better.
>>
>> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to be
>> the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the users
>> (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant minority and we
>> should count!)
>
> I support the maintenance of tabs on the bottom and have been a Firefox user
> for over 8 years. The main draw is it's customization and reliability. I feel
> that maintaining important long-time features should be a priority.
> Especially since long-term users are less likely to dump Firefox and go
> elsewhere at the sight of something new.

Concurred.

In my case, I've been using Firefox and its ancestors since before the Netscape
Suite code was released as Mozilla, in the days of (at the latest) AOL 4.0.

I disliked the move to "tabs on top" as default in the first place, but I didn't
object strongly enough to speak up at the time, because - as was pointed out
prominently in some of the original announcements of the change - it was
completely optional, and anyone who wanted to could always switch back.

 From my perspective, that original argument - "if you really don't want tabs on
top, you will be able to easily move them back down" - sounded like a promise to
users that that option will remain available; I recognize that the developers
may not have intended it that way, but from the perspective of someone who
really *doesn't* want tabs on top, that is the way it came across. Removing that
option would be breaking that promise, which is just very bad form; I already
long since don't trust the Firefox developers to make development decisions
which I would consider correct (or perhaps even merely sane), and this would
make it that much harder for me to convince myself that that distrust is
unjustified.


One of the great strengths of Firefox, and the single largest reason (aside from
perhaps inertia) why I haven't even bothered seriously trying out any other
browsers in most of my time with it, is its customizability. I've already gotten
the Firefox UI tweaked to just about exactly the way I want it; none of the
other browsers match that UI, and none of them that I know of can be tweaked and
customized to even a similar degree.

If a feature I rely on is removed, I have three choices: 1) search for another
browser which can be tweaked sufficiently to produce the UI I want, 2) stick
with the last pre-removal version until an alternative shows up, or 3) try to
fork Firefox.

The last time a behavior I rely on got broken, I went with option 2. Just this
past month I finally found a way to fix the broken functionality enough to let
me upgrade from Firefox 3.x; prior to that, I was at the point of seriously
considering option 3.

I really don't want to get stuck with an abandoned Firefox version again,
especially not so soon - but if the option to have tabs directly below the
toolbars is removed, I will once again be faced with those three choices, and I
am not at all certain which one I'll choose.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. WaltS 11/8/12 9:16 AM
Everyone asking to keep Tabs-on-Bottom is missing the fact that Mobile
Firefox, and Firefox OS is the focus of development. IMHO

For consistency it will have to be removed from the desktop version.

<snip>

>
> I really don't want to get stuck with an abandoned Firefox version again,
> especially not so soon - but if the option to have tabs directly below the
> toolbars is removed, I will once again be faced with those three choices, and I
> am not at all certain which one I'll choose.
>

As long as it is around for the desktop I will chose Firefox.

--
Fedora 17 (64-bit) KDE 4.9.2
Thunderbird Beta (17.0) Install and test it
One state should not decide an election
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/8/12 9:52 AM
On 11/08/2012 12:16 PM, WaltS wrote:

> On 11/08/2012 11:55 AM, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> On 11/08/2012 11:02 AM, dougl...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> I support the maintenance of tabs on the bottom and have been a Firefox
>>> user for over 8 years. The main draw is it's customization and
>>> reliability. I feel that maintaining important long-time features should
>>> be a priority. Especially since long-term users are less likely to dump
>>> Firefox and go elsewhere at the sight of something new.
>>
>> Concurred.
>>
>> In my case, I've been using Firefox and its ancestors since before the
>> Netscape Suite code was released as Mozilla, in the days of (at the latest)
>> AOL 4.0.
>
> Everyone asking to keep Tabs-on-Bottom is missing the fact that Mobile
> Firefox, and Firefox OS is the focus of development. IMHO
>
> For consistency it will have to be removed from the desktop version.

I don't see how that remotely follows.

It should never be necessary to sacrifice perfectly functional features in one
place just because they won't be used (or can't be made to work) in another. If
the two channels are that different, then they should be part of different
development lines, rather than being tied that tightly together.

>> I really don't want to get stuck with an abandoned Firefox version again,
>> especially not so soon - but if the option to have tabs directly below the
>> toolbars is removed, I will once again be faced with those three choices,
>> and I am not at all certain which one I'll choose.
>
> As long as it is around for the desktop I will chose Firefox.

I would have been inclined to say the same thing. Firefox has been the best
browser for my purposes for a very long time, and I would never have considered
any other.

The trouble is that if it changes in the wrong ways, it stops being the
"Firefox" I said that about. Some behaviors and principles which I consider
entirely fundamental have already been broken, albeit not beyond the ability of
add-ons to fix; too many more changes, especially if they can't readily be fixed
by add-ons, may finally push it over that line.

I suspect that the core problem is one of development philosophy; there has been
evidence building for some time that the philosophy of the active Firefox
developers, and the direction in which development is going, no longer more than
approximately matches my own. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be anything
else out there which comes any closer.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Millwood 11/8/12 12:43 PM
>
>
> Everyone asking to keep Tabs-on-Bottom is missing the fact that Mobile
> Firefox, and Firefox OS is the focus of development. IMHO
>
> For consistency it will have to be removed from the desktop version.
>
> <snip>
>

I see.  And next, we'll have to swipe across the screen to move to a new
tab, even with a mouse.  This is the windows 8 disease.  Touchpad
tablets and mouse navigated desktops are different, since what's easy
and hard are almost completely opposite for the two interfaces.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Matt Brubeck 11/9/12 11:34 AM
On 11/8/2012 9:16 AM, WaltS wrote:
> Everyone asking to keep Tabs-on-Bottom is missing the fact that Mobile
> Firefox, and Firefox OS is the focus of development. IMHO
>
> For consistency it will have to be removed from the desktop version.

None of the people responsible for Firefox UX design or UI development
has made this argument.  In any case, it wouldn't make much sense.  For
example, Firefox for Android tablets has its "tabs" on the side.
Forcing tabs-on-top on the desktop would do not make it more (or less)
consistent with the mobile version.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. gamest...@gmail.com 11/10/12 7:36 PM
Taking away tabs on bottom has completely ruined firefox for me. I have now disabled automatic updates and will never update my firefox again. In the meantime I will hope that something better comes along. I detest chrome and IE and was always a Netscape user until firefox took over. I am extremely disappointed in the poor design choices. Please reconsider this terrible decision and give us back our functionality. Listen to your users, regardless of how they express themselves. The arrogance and talking down to people attitude shown by the devs when people express their frustration in a strong manner leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I expect more from people in a position like that - I would not accept customer service like that from anyone. It's customer disservice.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. EE 11/11/12 10:33 AM
On 2012-11-10 20:36, gamest...@gmail.com wrote:
> Taking away tabs on bottom has completely ruined firefox for me. I have now disabled automatic updates and will never update my firefox again. In the meantime I will hope that something better comes along. I detest chrome and IE and was always a Netscape user until firefox took over. I am extremely disappointed in the poor design choices. Please reconsider this terrible decision and give us back our functionality. Listen to your users, regardless of how they express themselves. The arrogance and talking down to people attitude shown by the devs when people express their frustration in a strong manner leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I expect more from people in a position like that - I would not accept customer service like that from anyone. It's customer disservice.
>
Tabs below toolbars have not been completely removed yet.  You can set
this in about:config to false:
browser.tabs.onTop

I hope that setting continues to work.  The arbitrary removal of that
option from Thunderbird made a lot of people unhappy.  The equivalent of
Rise of the Tools extension for Firefox would be a lot more complicated
because Firefox has more toolbars.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. John Bird 11/11/12 11:34 PM
I don't understand all the hoopla about this - I am running latest nightly
which still has option Tabs on Top I can check or not.

I presume it will stay like this - as the votes to keep it seem pretty
strong.   I remember when the page loading status was removed with the
status bar - (the idea being that the whirly on the tab was enough) that the
opinions were many enough that it came back.

John Bird

New tab options John Bird 11/11/12 11:37 PM
I have a site I open a lot on a new tab, and it appeared on the new tab as
one of the choices of pages to open -  once I accidentally clicked the X
option to remove it and it has never returned.   Obviously it is stored
somewhere as a page to not add to the new tab options....

How can I get it back, as I would like it to be on the new tab options


John Bird

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. WaltS 11/12/12 5:09 AM
On 11/12/2012 02:34 AM, John Bird wrote:
> I don't understand all the hoopla about this - I am running latest nightly
> which still has option Tabs on Top I can check or not.

I would check your about:config settings. It appears you may have
changed the pref for browser.tabs.onTop to false somewhere down the
line, and have forgotten. By default it is set to true, and Tabs on Top
only.

--
Fedora 17 (64-bit) KDE 4.9.2
Thunderbird Beta (17.0) Install and test it
And it is said that "The [insert deity of choice] helps those who choose
to help themselves."
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/12/12 5:32 AM
On 11/12/2012 02:34 AM, John Bird wrote:

> I don't understand all the hoopla about this - I am running latest nightly
> which still has option Tabs on Top I can check or not.

Oh? Have they reverted bug 755646, then?

> I presume it will stay like this - as the votes to keep it seem pretty
> strong.

But the bug requesting/suggesting that it be removed is still there; it hasn't
been WONTFIXed, none of the developers who argued in favor of removing the
option have posted to say "okay, never mind" or otherwise recant the suggestion
so far as I'm aware, and the majority opinion among developers who've bothered
to post about it still seems (by aggregate of posts I've seen on the subject so
far) to be in favor of doing it.

All of which seems to support the notion that even if they aren't removing the
option yet, they still think it *should* go away - which, since they're the ones
who actually have the decision-making power, is still frightening to people who
want the option to remain.

I prefer not to depend on a "presume" in that kind of context. I *would* prefer
to be able to trust the developers to make "the right decision", or at least a
decision I can live with - but they've failed on that count often enough in the
past that I simply no longer do.

> I remember when the page loading status was removed with the status bar -
> (the idea being that the whirly on the tab was enough) that the opinions were
> many enough that it came back.

I wasn't around for that discussion; where did it take place, and approximately
when? I'd like to compare the discussion then to the discussion now, and see
whether they really do seem similar in volume, in tone, and in overall opinion.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gervase Markham 11/12/12 8:30 AM
On 11/11/12 03:36, gamest...@gmail.com wrote:
> Taking away tabs on bottom has completely ruined firefox for me.

I'm sad to hear that. But can we end this thread please? This forum is
for coordination of Firefox development, and has a long subscriber list.
I suspect the people you would need to convince are not necessarily in
this group but, regardless, everyone has made their point.

Gerv


Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/12/12 9:24 AM
On 11/12/2012 11:30 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:

> On 11/11/12 03:36, gamest...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Taking away tabs on bottom has completely ruined firefox for me.
>
> I'm sad to hear that. But can we end this thread please? This forum is for
> coordination of Firefox development, and has a long subscriber list.

People who post on the bug to object to doing this at all have been directed
here (yes, apparently to this specific thread).

If the development-discussion newsgroup-mailing-list-hybrid-thing is not the
correct place to present objections to the course of development, including
specific decisions which appear to be being made, where *is* the correct place
to do it?


Regardless: As long as the decision to remove the option to turn off "tabs on
top" is still being considered, and as long as people who object to that
decision still care enough to speak up, discussion like this - whether in this
single thread or otherwise - will continue. The only way to actually prevent
that would be by way of moderation.

By saying "can we end this thread please?" when the question is still up in the
air, you are effectively saying "can you stop caring?" - or, even worse, "having
to listen to people say they care is bothering me, so please shut up about it".
I'm relatively sure neither is what you intended, but - at least to me - that is
how it comes across.

Repeated gratuitous posts about the same point from the same person (or same
few people) would be one thing, and might be legitimately objected to,
especially if it rose to the level of flooding. Continuing new unsolicited posts
from *new* people about the same point, however, are simply each additional
person making their opinion heard, and adding their voice to the discussion; at
the very least, those additional voices serve to help indicate the number of
people who do care about the feature in question.

> I suspect the people you would need to convince are not necessarily in this
> group but, regardless, everyone has made their point.

The ones who would need to be convinced are the developers, who would either
implement the change or not implement it. If the developers don't frequent this
forum, where *do* they hang out, and where do they carry out the
non-technical-implementation parts of the discussions underlying Firefox
development?

It's long since been made clear that comments not in support of "how to best
implement a fix" are not welcome on Bugzilla bugs, so obviously such discussion
doesn't happen there; if it also doesn't happen here, where does it happen?
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. kbro...@gmail.com 11/12/12 9:28 AM
To get this topic to die the note in
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/firefox-3-theme-for-firefox/
would need to be rescinded.

Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> dev-apps-firefox mailing list
> dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-apps-firefox
Re: New tab options Michael Verdi 11/12/12 11:32 AM
You can drag a bookmarked site (or one in your history) on to the new tab page. More info here https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/new-tab-page-show-hide-and-customize-top-sites#w_add-a-site
- Michael
--
Michael Verdi • support.mozilla.org • irc: verdi
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Michael Lefevre 11/13/12 3:31 AM
Well, if the people who need convincing are not reading, then it's
unlikely that any useful point has been made. How would you suggest the
point is made otherwise - more bugzilla comments? direct email to
developers? I assume not... An simple way to demonstrate that the point
has been made would be for someone involved in making the decision to
acknowledge that comments have been heard.

Would it be too much for ask for a decision one way or the other?  A
decision was previously made to remove this feature in two steps. Now we
are stuck neither here nor there - the plan of record is still to take
the second step, but it's missed at least Firefox 16 and 17 (and so I
presume isn't going to happen before Australis is released), and the bug
is unassigned. So not only is the "discussion" stuck in an endless
unanswered stream of complaining, but the code is stuck as well - the UI
is half-way removed, but the code is being maintained (and reducing that
maintenance was a substantial part of the reason for taking it out, as I
understand it).

Michael
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. gloria....@gmail.com 11/13/12 4:19 PM
> [snip snip]



Hear hear!  I agree completely - this is the second FF feature that I always use which is now disappearing: I am sticking with FF 15.0.1 because later versions don't have "Send link" in the right-click menu any more, and now "Tabs on bottom" is being threatened too.

Bug 755593 (dated 2012-05-16) says "I think it is time to make controversial changes to simplified and modernized the browser"  If that kind of thinking underlies Firefox & T-bird updates these days, it explains a lot. How sad!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gervase Markham 11/14/12 3:36 AM
On 13/11/12 11:31, Michael Lefevre wrote:
> Would it be too much for ask for a decision one way or the other?  A
> decision was previously made to remove this feature in two steps. Now we
> are stuck neither here nor there - the plan of record is still to take
> the second step, but it's missed at least Firefox 16 and 17 (and so I
> presume isn't going to happen before Australis is released), and the bug
> is unassigned. So not only is the "discussion" stuck in an endless
> unanswered stream of complaining, but the code is stuck as well - the UI
> is half-way removed, but the code is being maintained (and reducing that
> maintenance was a substantial part of the reason for taking it out, as I
> understand it).

If you can provide references to the relevant bugs (both the original
one, and the follow-up one), I will chase this up for you.

Gerv


Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gervase Markham 11/14/12 3:38 AM
On 12/11/12 17:24, The Wanderer wrote:
> People who post on the bug to object to doing this at all have been
> directed
> here (yes, apparently to this specific thread).

So it seems. That does not mean that they were correctly directed.

> If the development-discussion newsgroup-mailing-list-hybrid-thing is not
> the
> correct place to present objections to the course of development, including
> specific decisions which appear to be being made, where *is* the correct
> place
> to do it?

I think my point is that the objections have been presented. Continuing
to present them again and again is unlikely to win friends and influence
people. Even if it is different people each time.

Gerv

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/14/12 5:51 AM
The original bug, about removing the feature entirely:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593

The follow-up, about hiding the UI for the feature (as a means of deprecating
the feature, and a first step towards removing it):

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755646

Thank you for paying attention to this issue.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 11/14/12 11:34 AM
Hi,

For those of you who don't know me, I'm the Firefox module owner. If
you're not familiar with the Mozilla project governance structure, you
can read more about what it means to be a module owner here:
http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/module-ownership.html . The "Firefox"
module contains all of the code that makes up the desktop Firefox user
interface, including the tab strip.

I have not read through this entire thread. I have skimmed through it
as it progressed, and have seen a lot of confusion and
misunderstandings. I'm sorry I didn't step in to clarify sooner.

We have no concrete plans to remove tabs on bottom mode from Firefox
in the near term. Removing the mode is an idea that has been proposed,
and amongst the development team it has several proponents, for many
reasons. I won't get into them here - I don't want this to devolve
into a debate of the validity of those reasons. There currently isn't
a strong driver for entirely removing tabs-on-bottom mode, so we
haven't invested any effort into doing it. It's quite possible that
future work on the Australis redesign will become a strong driver, and
if that happens we will remove the feature. That could happen
relatively quickly. That activity will be visible in the relevant
Bugzilla bug, as with any other code change to Firefox. And I'm sure
it will be discussed in depth, here and elsewhere.

As Gerv suggests, I don't think it's useful to continue this current
discussion any further. None of the arguments being presented are
novel, and none of the discussion is relevant to currently active
work.

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 11/14/12 11:39 AM
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:31 AM, Michael Lefevre
<mjl+...@michaellefevre.com> wrote:
> Would it be too much for ask for a decision one way or the other?  A
> decision was previously made to remove this feature in two steps. Now we are
> stuck neither here nor there - the plan of record is still to take the
> second step, but it's missed at least Firefox 16 and 17 (and so I presume
> isn't going to happen before Australis is released), and the bug is
> unassigned. So not only is the "discussion" stuck in an endless unanswered
> stream of complaining, but the code is stuck as well - the UI is half-way
> removed, but the code is being maintained (and reducing that maintenance was
> a substantial part of the reason for taking it out, as I understand it).

What kind of decision are you looking for? The UI for toggling tabs on
bottom was hidden by default, as a first step towards removing the
feature entirely. We're currently in a steady state where the code is
not actively being worked on, so the maintenance cost is negligible,
and the Australis redesign hasn't yet forced our hand in removing it.
When it does, we will.

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Michael Lefevre 11/14/12 11:51 AM
On 14/11/2012 19:38, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:31 AM, Michael Lefevre
> <mjl+...@michaellefevre.com> wrote:
>> Would it be too much for ask for a decision one way or the other?
[...]
>
> What kind of decision are you looking for?
[...]
> We're currently in a steady state where the code is
> not actively being worked on, so the maintenance cost is negligible,
> and the Australis redesign hasn't yet forced our hand in removing it.
> When it does, we will.

It seems I wasn't asking for a new decision, but clarity on what
decision(s) had already been made, which I think you've just provided,
in this post and the longer one you made a few minutes before.

Thanks

Michael
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Oliver Doepner 11/14/12 7:16 PM
Hello everyone,

I agree with the folks who want to keep the tabs-on-bottom option. I prefer it, too. Most advantages have already been mentioned by others.

I have also been a user of Jeremy Morton's retro themes and I am frustrated and saddened that he is planning to move away from Firefox due to the prospect of having the tabs-on-bottom option taken away.

One minor point I could add to the debate: On the Add-Ons page (and maybe other "special" pages), the address bar disappears with tabs-on-top, but it stays with tabs-on-bottom. I have my bookmarks toolbar on the address bar (next to the search box) and find it odd when the whole address bar disappears.

To Asa Dotzler et al: Please listen to your users. The passion and the outcry in this thread should be proof enough that you would lose a lot of mindshare and enthusiasm from long-time users if tabs-on-bottom would be removed

Thanks
Oliver


Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gervase Markham 11/15/12 1:51 AM
On 14/11/12 13:51, The Wanderer wrote:
> The original bug, about removing the feature entirely:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
> The follow-up, about hiding the UI for the feature (as a means of
> deprecating
> the feature, and a first step towards removing it):
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755646
>
> Thank you for paying attention to this issue.

Thank you for these. However, it seems that Gavin has helpfully provided
the clarity people are seeking, so there's not much for me to do.
Thanks, Gavin :-)

Gerv



Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. br....@gmail.com 11/15/12 2:55 AM
I'm confused.  There seem to me to very few ways to effect a change in behaviour.  One of them is to show by force of numbers how unpopular something is  - that is why it is called un - popul- ar.      It strikes me that you intend to go ahead with it on the basis that "most" people will like it/ see the sense in it/because you think it is the best thing to do.   Telling people not to complain because it will annoy you, suggests that you intend to press on, hell or high water, even if a majority of your users don't like it.

If you are saying that the more people who complain about this change, the LESS likely it is to reverse it, what alternative strategy do you suggest?

I have a suggestion for measuring usage of tabs on bottom:
1) in your next release, remove the configuration option entirely.
2) at the same time, provide a plug-in to restore the functionality.
3) keep track of how many people download the plug-in.

If by the next release the figure is significant, e.g. in the tens of thousands, this should give you a reason to keep the functionality going.

Brian Williams
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. John Small 11/15/12 3:19 AM
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:34:40 UTC, Gavin Sharp <ga...@gavinsharp.com>
wrote:

> As Gerv suggests, I don't think it's useful to continue this current
> discussion any further. None of the arguments being presented are
> novel, ...

You can't know that there will never be a new argument presented. You
haven't even read the entire thread and you can't know that someone
will never add something new to the discussion. And even if there is
nothing new to say, the continuing growth of this thread should be
considered as an indication of how many Firefox users would be unhappy
if this feature was removed.

> ... and none of the discussion is relevant to currently active work.

Maybe it's not "currently active work" but you yourself said that
removing the tabs-on-bottom might be part of some future design
change. Given the dizzying rate of changes to Firefox users can't
afford to wait until it it becomes "currently active work". If they
did wait then the change might be a "done deal" before they had a
chance to register their concerns/preferences/complaints on the issue.



--

John Small
(remove z's for email)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. John Small 11/15/12 3:29 AM
On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 19:38:53 UTC, Gavin Sharp <ga...@gavinsharp.com>
wrote:

> and the Australis redesign hasn't yet forced our hand in removing [UI for toggling tabs on
bottom].
> When it does, we will.

Are you saying that no matter how the user base feels about this, the
change will happen if some theoretical design change dictates it? If
so, then this high-handed, arrogant disregard for user preferences is
not how one maintains and grows a user base.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Alexander Skwar 11/15/12 4:30 AM
Hi

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM,  <br....@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm confused.  There seem to me to very few ways to effect a change in behaviour.  One of them is to show by force of numbers how unpopular something is  - that is why it is called un - popul- ar.      It strikes me that you intend to go ahead with it on the basis that "most" people will like it/ see the sense in it/because you think it is the best thing to do.   Telling people not to complain because it will annoy you, suggests that you intend to press on, hell or high water, even if a majority of your users don't like it.

That's something which I've got to object to. What makes you say,that
" a majority of your users don't like it "?

Just because of the people who were vocal here? That's not a good basis for such
a conclusion. Mainly only posted here, who objected. But that's actually pretty
normal. If somebody doesn't have a problem with a proposed change, why should
he post?

If you say that " a majority of your users don't like it ", then I'm
going to say, that
the majority is in favor and just says nothing. The "silent majority".
But, to be fair,
we both don't know who's correct. I'm not correct and neither are you.


Alexander
--
↯    Lifestream (Twitter, Blog, …) ↣ http://alexs77.soup.io/     ↯
↯ Chat (Jabber/Google Talk) ↣ a.s...@gmail.com , AIM: alexws77  ↯
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/15/12 5:38 AM
On 11/15/2012 07:30 AM, Alexander Skwar wrote:

> Hi
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:55 AM,  <br....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm confused.  There seem to me to very few ways to effect a change in
>> behaviour.  One of them is to show by force of numbers how unpopular
>> something is  - that is why it is called un - popul- ar.      It strikes me
>> that you intend to go ahead with it on the basis that "most" people will
>> like it/ see the sense in it/because you think it is the best thing to do.
>> Telling people not to complain because it will annoy you, suggests that you
>> intend to press on, hell or high water, even if a majority of your users
>> don't like it.
>
> That's something which I've got to object to. What makes you say,that " a
> majority of your users don't like it "?

I don't think he did. I think he gave that as a conditional ("even if"), and was
responding to the implications of the attitude expressed by the request.

I saw the same problem, but I couldn't come up with a way of expressing it which
didn't seem so confrontational as to get me dismissed as a whiny crank.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/15/12 5:52 AM
On 11/14/2012 02:34 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:

> Hi,
>
> For those of you who don't know me, I'm the Firefox module owner. If you're
> not familiar with the Mozilla project governance structure, you can read more
> about what it means to be a module owner here:
> http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/module-ownership.html . The "Firefox" module
> contains all of the code that makes up the desktop Firefox user interface,
> including the tab strip.
>
> I have not read through this entire thread. I have skimmed through it as it
> progressed, and have seen a lot of confusion and misunderstandings. I'm sorry
> I didn't step in to clarify sooner.
>
> We have no concrete plans to remove tabs on bottom mode from Firefox in the
> near term. Removing the mode is an idea that has been proposed, and amongst
> the development team it has several proponents, for many reasons. I won't get
> into them here - I don't want this to devolve into a debate of the validity
> of those reasons.

Where would be an appropriate place to get into those reasons, and potentially
have such a debate?

Relatedly, if there has been enough discussion of this idea among the
development team for it to be clear to you that it has several proponents, where
has that discussion taken place? Was it only the posts from developers on the
original bug, or is there more to it than that? (If the former, where did the
discussion which led to the decision to file the original bug as a "we're
currently planning to" statement take place?)

I've had the persistent impression for some time now that no small part of the
discussion underlying Firefox development - including, specifically, the
discussion on the basis of which decisions about the direction of development
are made - actually takes place "behind closed doors", i.e., not in any
publicly-visible location. I certainly hope that's not true, but if it isn't, I
haven't been able to find the publicly-visible location where that discussion
takes place; it doesn't seem to be taking place here on the "app development"
newsgroup-mailing-list-hybrid-thingy, which would seem to be the theoretically
correct location, and policy seems to forbid it taking place on Bugzilla.

> There currently isn't a strong driver for entirely removing tabs-on-bottom
> mode, so we haven't invested any effort into doing it. It's quite possible
> that future work on the Australis redesign will become a strong driver, and
> if that happens we will remove the feature. That could happen relatively
> quickly. That activity will be visible in the relevant Bugzilla bug, as with
> any other code change to Firefox. And I'm sure it will be discussed in depth,
> here and elsewhere.

Will that discussion have any non-negligible chance of changing that "will" to a
"won't"?

> As Gerv suggests, I don't think it's useful to continue this current
> discussion any further. None of the arguments being presented are novel, and
> none of the discussion is relevant to currently active work.

Isn't it more appropriate to discuss concerns about planned future changes in
advance, rather than at the last minute?
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. br....@gmail.com 11/15/12 3:18 PM
On Thursday, 15 November 2012 12:30:42 UTC, Alexander Skwar  wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
> ↯ Chat (Jabber/Google Talk) ↣ a....@gmail.com , AIM: alexws77  ↯

You misunderstood me.  As explained by the Wanderer, I was pointing out that by telling people not to repeat the complaints, it is showing a disregard for user dissatisfaction, even if, in fact, it turned out that a majority were dissatisfied.  Surely if there was any point in continuing Netscape onto Mozilla, it was to provide a web browser with popular support.  If no attempt is made to find out just how many users will be alienated by this move, then the developers have lost their way and are moving into some kind of narcissistic "we know best" sphere.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. br....@gmail.com 11/15/12 3:24 PM
I wholeheartedly agree with everything you say.  It looks like the users of Firefox are some kind of necessary evil.  I'm guessing that it is just too, too difficult to survey the global userbase, and would presume that there must be a tame "focus group" of university freshmen who are being used to extrapolate the required bells and whistles for the users at large.  If so, they are probably the same bunch of kids who told the Microsoft developers that ribbons would be sexier in Office products.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. wisdomof...@gmail.com 11/15/12 5:09 PM
If they remove the option I'll fork the firefox repo, if no one else does it, and put it back.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gervase Markham 11/16/12 3:46 AM
On 15/11/12 10:55, br....@gmail.com wrote:
> If you are saying that the more people who complain about this
> change, the LESS likely it is to reverse it, what alternative
> strategy do you suggest?

I am saying that the module owner has made his position clear in this
group and, unless you have new information to add (and adding additional
people to the list of those who personally object is not 'new
information') then there is no point in continuing the discussion.

Gerv

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 11/16/12 6:01 AM
I can see two possible points to it.

One is that while no individual person added to that list may constitute "new
information", if the total number of those who have indicated they do grows
large enough - for whatever value "large enough" may be - that aggregate may
indeed be "new information", in regard to the indication it provides of what
fraction of the userbase this may be important to; if there is any chance that
user opinion and preference (which are irrespective of rational argument) may
sway the eventual decision, which the module owner seems to have said has not
yet been made, then contributing towards that aggregate can still be valuable.

The other is related to what I used to see referred to as the Blowjob Principle.
That principle states approximately that if someone does something which is
good for you but may not be good for them, you should provide them with positive
feedback, so that the result of doing it is better for them, and they will be
more likely to do it again. The (I think) converse of that principle is that if
someone does something which is bad for you but may not be bad for them, you
should provide them with negative feedback, so that the result of doing it is
worse for them, and they will be less likely to do it again.

By that line of reasoning, if the continued posts objecting to removing "tabs on
bottom" become more bothersome to the developers than having to deal with
keeping it would be (or, after the fact, would have been), the developers are
then more likely to decide that keeping the feature is the lesser of two evils.

One counterargument to that is that nobody likes being bullied, and the
developers might be more likely to either dig in their heels or simply give up
working on the project. Another is that in this case, all a given developer
would have to do is craft an appropriate killfile rule, and the potentially
bothersome posts would - from their perspective - just disappear.

Both of those counterarguments are valid, but the original principle is valid as
well; at this point, it is not clear which one(s) would win out in the end.


All of that said, I'm not particularly planning to continue to post arguing for
keeping the feature at this point, although I would like to see the reasons for
removing it explained and discussed/debated in an appropriate context (so that
appropriate counterarguments can be formulated and presented). If the idea of
removing it ever does see forward progress, I'll very likely resume objecting
vociferously at that point, but with the module owner's word that it's not
likely to happen soon I do - as you seem to be saying you also do - have
higher-priority projects to work on.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 11/16/12 8:31 AM
2012/11/15 Oliver Doepner <oliver....@gmail.com>
> One minor point I could add to the debate: On the Add-Ons page (and maybe
> other "special" pages), the address bar disappears with tabs-on-top, but it
> stays with tabs-on-bottom. I have my bookmarks toolbar on the address bar
> (next to the search box) and find it odd when the whole address bar
> disappears.

I remember one way to move away from about:addons was to use Ctrl+L to
open the URL open dialog an then open about:blank or some other URL.

The about:addons page also contains back/forward buttons and they work
as they do with webpages.

Unfortunately, these back and forward buttons cannot be right-clicked
for a menu to move more than one step back or forward in browsing
history.

Additional ways to access bookmarks in that situtation;
* Ctrl+B opens the Bookmarks sidebar (this reduces screen real estate,
but the sidebar can be closed);
* Firefox button, Bookmarks sub-menu;
* Alt or F10 → Bookmarks menu (both options take more clicks, but
should achieve the same objective); or
* Alt+B, which should directly open the Bookmarks menu.

-Mart.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. br....@gmail.com 11/15/12 3:18 PM
On Thursday, 15 November 2012 12:30:42 UTC, Alexander Skwar  wrote:
> Hi
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 11/16/12 10:33 AM
Several points have been brought up since my last reply, and I'd like to
clear up some misconceptions:

- this list is not the right venue for gathering "user feedback"

This is a development discussion newsgroup, meant to be used by the Firefox
development community. An extremely small minority of our users (i.e. less
than 0.001%) are even aware of this list's existence, let alone know how to
or feel motivated to post to it, and if we only listened to feedback from
this list we'd be doing our user base a big disservice. The venues we do
have for user feedback have been mentioned previously - feedback aggregated
from input.mozilla.org and support.mozilla.org are much more
representative, but even those are relatively small, biased samples.
Getting better at gathering user feedback is something we continually need
to work on, but it's impossible to be perfect here.

This is the primary reason why I suggested that it's not useful to continue
this thread - it's become a pile of "me toos", and collating for/against
votes is not a useful use of this list. Some valid points and questions
were raised, but they get drowned out by the noise - no Firefox developer
has the time to weed through this thread and pick out only the good bits.

- that we'd go through with a change even though hundreds or even thousands
of people are upset with it means that we don't care about users

We have on the order of hundreds of millions of users. "hundreds" or
"thousands" of users is a very small portion of that number. At this point,
any change we make to Firefox - even the most minor - will result in some
upset users. It becomes very easy to be paralyzed by that fact - there is
no way to keep 100% of our existing or potential new users happy. Not
changing anything isn't an option either, because it means we'll lose
relevance, which in turn means that we'll lose our ability to have an
impact on the Web, which is our primary mission. So we need to use our
judgement to make the best decisions we can, and when we do that we're
going to inevitably upset some people. I'm sorry if you're one of them, but
I hope you understand that we don't mean it personally :)

- where do the decisions get made, and where is the right place to discuss
the decision process or arguments for/against?

Relevant development discussion primarily occurs in three places (roughly
in decreasing order of frequency/importance): Bugzilla, IRC, and this
newsgroup. All three of those are public venues, and anyone is free to take
part. But that doesn't mean that everyone who can take part gets an equal
vote in the outcome of the decision - Mozilla's decision making process is
not democratic, and your ability to influence outcomes depends on the trust
you've built within the community.

Semi-related plug: we're going to start having weekly Firefox Desktop
Development meetings (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Meeting), and I
intend for that meeting to become a place where decisions are made (or
assigned to specific people to be made).

(Inevitably, some discussion also occurs in person or in other meetings,
but this is relatively rare. The Firefox development team is quite spread
out geographically.)

Gavin


On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Gavin Sharp <ga...@gavinsharp.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> For those of you who don't know me, I'm the Firefox module owner. If
> you're not familiar with the Mozilla project governance structure, you
> can read more about what it means to be a module owner here:
> http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/module-ownership.html . The "Firefox"
> module contains all of the code that makes up the desktop Firefox user
> interface, including the tab strip.
>
> I have not read through this entire thread. I have skimmed through it
> as it progressed, and have seen a lot of confusion and
> misunderstandings. I'm sorry I didn't step in to clarify sooner.
>
> We have no concrete plans to remove tabs on bottom mode from Firefox
> in the near term. Removing the mode is an idea that has been proposed,
> and amongst the development team it has several proponents, for many
> reasons. I won't get into them here - I don't want this to devolve
> into a debate of the validity of those reasons. There currently isn't
> a strong driver for entirely removing tabs-on-bottom mode, so we
> haven't invested any effort into doing it. It's quite possible that
> future work on the Australis redesign will become a strong driver, and
> if that happens we will remove the feature. That could happen
> relatively quickly. That activity will be visible in the relevant
> Bugzilla bug, as with any other code change to Firefox. And I'm sure
> it will be discussed in depth, here and elsewhere.
>
> As Gerv suggests, I don't think it's useful to continue this current
> discussion any further. None of the arguments being presented are
> novel, and none of the discussion is relevant to currently active
> work.
>
> Gavin
>
unk...@googlegroups.com 11/23/12 12:01 PM <This message has been deleted.>
unk...@googlegroups.com 11/23/12 12:01 PM <This message has been deleted.>
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 11/23/12 3:31 PM
Hi, Gavin, Asa, et al.

The writeup herein should be something novel this time.

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Features/Desktop/Panel_Menu
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Tab_Strip_Visual_Redesign ,

When looking at mockups ^ of possible future Firefox UI's, I got an
idea that the mechanism that underlies the Firefox user interface
should be changed in such a way that it could be possible to easily
move the tab bar and other strips anywhere a user likes — either to
top of the window, or bottom of the upper side, or bottom of the
window, left/right of the viewport, etc. This would render the
tabs-on-top/tabs-on-bottom discussion moot.

I wonder if a new bug or thread should be created around this...

----
I have now grown used to using tabs-on-top, because I have a very
large amount of tabs divided between four windows, and the best way to
access them quickly is to move the pointer to the edge of the screen
and use the scroller (on the notebook's touchpad) to reach the desired
tab.

The other argument for tabs-on-top is the screen real estate
situation, especially with netbooks and the onset of the widescreen
aspect ratio. The latter has in part taken away some space, as some
operating system user interfaces have never taken this into account,
given that they were developed during a time that preceded the
(forced?) popularization of the widescreen aspect ratio.

People who dislike tabs-on-top may be satisfied with an extension that
would allow them to use the old-style UI (the current situation), or
they can turn to using SeaMonkey.

-Mart.

2012/11/16 Gavin Sharp <ga...@gavinsharp.com>:
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. 0'Grady 11/23/12 7:03 PM
On 10/14/2012 15:11, HarveyG wrote:
> On 10/12/2012 16:11, yggd...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, October 12, 2012 4:59:30 PM UTC-4, HarveyG wrote:
>>> On 10/11/2012 21:20, HarveyG wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/10/2012 21:24, HarveyG wrote:
>>>>> I am posting here because one of your Firefox themes was automatically
>>>
>>>>> disabled when I updated from FF15 to FF16 today:
>>>
>>>>> Firefox 3 Theme for Firefox 4+
>>>
>>>>> http://ffaddons.game-point.net/ff3ff4/
>>>
>>>>> I am not familiar with the technical problems involved but I have used
>>>
>>>>> that theme for a long time and was very disappointed. In your
>>>
>>>>> explanation you mention that it has something to do with this tabs on
>>>
>>>>> top/bottom development/design issue, which I don't claim to
>>>>> comprehend.
>>>
>>>>> All I care about is being able to continue using that theme. To
>>>>> that end
>>>
>>>>> I posted elsewhere and got enough hints how to fix it to work with
>>>>> FF16,
>>>
>>>>> which I did, and have uploaded it for others if they're interested:
>>>
>>>>> http://www.mediafire.com/file/3xgfl0zhvfpe832/ffe_ff3ff4@game-point.net_HarveyG.xpi
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> To install, download and open manually with FF.
>>>
>>>>> My only modification is in the install.rdf file where I set it to
>>>>> expire
>>>
>>>>> with Firefox 99.0, which won't be around for awhile yet. :) Further
>>>>> info
>>>
>>>>> posted at moz.gen and moz.sup.ff.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> The Firefox 3 design & theme is far superior to the bland, colorless,
>>>
>>>>> pale shades of gray, illegible, user-unfriendly, awkward Firefox 4+
>>>
>>>>> theme(s) and layout(s), and I hope to keep it forever.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your good efforts, really appreciated.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>> Seems fairly popular, 77 downloads so far...
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Now 156 total downloads after 2 days:
>>>
>>> http://i50.tinypic.com/34yscyd.png
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So it seems popular despite the limited advertising - solely by a few
>>>
>>> mentions on these mozilla newsgroups a couple of days ago. Word of mouth
>>>
>>> travels fast.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One caveat...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> When I installed the next version of Firefox (16.0.1), it phoned home
>>>
>>> then said this add-on (theme) was incompatible and disabled it. To fix,
>>>
>>> remove it, then reinstall manually by opening the .xpi file from
>>> Firefox.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you haven't downloaded it yet, it's still available at:
>>>
>>> http://www.mediafire.com/file/3xgfl0zhvfpe832/ffe_ff3ff4@game-point.net_HarveyG.xpi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------
>>>
>>>    WORKS FINE WITH FIREFOX 16.0.1
>>>
>>> --------------------------------
>>>
>>> ;) :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> HarveyG
>>
>> Thanks for posting this. Cannot stand the new crap interface.
>>
>> Why is copying Chrome the new direction of Mozilla? If I wanted to use
>> Chrome I would . . . use Chrome!
>>
>
> Thanks for your feedback.
>
> Now 335 downloads after 4 days!!
> http://i49.tinypic.com/rcn9d1.png
>
Thanks a lot! That mediafire link appears to still be working. I also
found this related link on the reviews page: http://bit.ly/T3lwy3
Where there's a will, there's a way... :)

--
0'Grady
unk...@googlegroups.com 11/24/12 2:16 AM <This message has been deleted.>
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gervase Markham 11/26/12 1:11 AM
On 24/11/12 10:16, Dmitry Semionin wrote:
> Would you be so kind so much as to share the current view of the
> development team on the topic in question, so we don't have to
> persuade the unnamed people in a random way? You want us to stop
> complaining, i fully agree. Let's be constructive at last.

See Gavin Sharp's post to this group. He is the Firefox module owner.

Gerv

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. kuba...@gmail.com 11/26/12 2:40 AM
Tabs on top is simply madness! Who's coming up with these ideas? Not people who use PCs to work smoothly, it looks. You incomparably more often change between tabs than input a new address in the bar. WHY TRAVEL FARTHER with your mouse??

And while I'm at it, what about bringing back the colour to the icons? Are we all colourblind, that it doesn't make a difference to the way we subconciously navigate the mouse cursor to the button of a given colour. Can we not recognise it much quicker than reading the grey mass of similar shapes??

Of course it makes a difference, of course it slows the user down by requiring additional attention from him. A milisecond at a time, but adding to a more fatiguing experience by the end of a day rather than a more transparent and satisfying one.

Well done you team of let's-break-it-as-it's-too-good team of designers. Why don't you put your efforts elswhere?

Thanks

Marek
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. christophe...@gmail.com 11/27/12 7:01 PM

I want my tabs on bottom. so keep them there. IT just makes more sense and is easier to use that way.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/28/12 10:30 PM
On Saturday, September 1, 2012 10:46:59 AM UTC-5, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
 
> Uh.  Fewer bugs is an advantage for users.  Basically, most of the items
>
> above either lead to fewer bugs or directly lead to the "better
>
> performance".
>

But wouldn't there also be fewer bugs if you just quit making unnecessary UI changes?

And hasn't anyone noticed that there haven't been ANY positive comments from users about the change?  This is not going to be a popular change.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/28/12 11:22 PM
On Friday, November 16, 2012 12:33:39 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> We have on the order of hundreds of millions of users. "hundreds" or
> "thousands" of users is a very small portion of that number.

This should be simple to figure out.  Useful changes always have defenders among users.  Have you found one yet who is happy about this change?
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/28/12 11:22 PM
On Friday, November 16, 2012 12:33:39 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> We have on the order of hundreds of millions of users. "hundreds" or
> "thousands" of users is a very small portion of that number.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Dave Townsend 11/28/12 11:36 PM
I'm happy with it

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. WaltS 11/29/12 5:16 AM
I like Tabs on Top.

--
All I want to do is rant!
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/29/12 12:00 PM
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 1:36:13 AM UTC-6, Dave Townsend wrote:
> I'm happy with it

Right.  You're obviously an unbiased, ordinary user.  What exactly does this change do for you?

You know, you guys want courtesy from users and supporters, but I'm not sure the courtesy runs the other way.  I'm looking in vain for where you try to determine how many people any change is going to piss off.

It's not my problem, but have a look at this if you want:  http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2623355 .  Take a look at how many posts those guys have.  That tells you how much time they have spent supporting Firefox.  And look at what they're saying.  Yeah, it's a small sample, but it's typical.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/29/12 12:13 PM
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 7:16:35 AM UTC-6, WaltS wrote:
....

My reply was intended for Townsend's message, although it might suffice for yours also.  Look, you guys know you can't please everyone, but I'm telling you, you're angering a lot of your ardent supporters.  Have a nice day.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Martijn 11/29/12 2:37 PM
Op 29 nov. 2012 14:20 schreef "WaltS" <wls1...@removeyahoo.com> het volgende:
>> This should be simple to figure out.  Useful changes always have defenders among users.  Have you found one yet who is happy about this change?
>>
>
> I like Tabs on Top.

That's not what the issue is about. Tabs on Top is by default.
The change that was made, is about removing the choice of Tabs on Bottom.

Regards,
Martijn


> --
> All I want to do is rant!
>
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/30/12 2:11 PM
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:37:59 PM UTC-6, Martijn wrote:
> That's not what the issue is about. Tabs on Top is by default.
> The change that was made, is about removing the choice of Tabs on Bottom.

Martijn, there are two kinds of users.  Those who have tabs on top probably don't care if they remove the tabs-on-bottom feature.  Those who have tabs on bottom just might care!  In fact, they might be really pissed off.

Gavin Sharp is using that old argument unless there is a massive protest, anyone who complains must be part of a vocal minority.  So my question to you (an him) is whether you can find even one ordinary user anywhere who wants the tabs-on-bottom option removed.  You must have noticed by now that there are plenty of users who are really angry about it being removed.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/30/12 2:11 PM
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:37:59 PM UTC-6, Martijn wrote:
> That's not what the issue is about. Tabs on Top is by default.
> The change that was made, is about removing the choice of Tabs on Bottom.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/30/12 2:19 PM
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:37:59 PM UTC-6, Martijn wrote:
> That's not what the issue is about. Tabs on Top is by default.
> The change that was made, is about removing the choice of Tabs on Bottom.

Sorry, Martijn, I misunderstood your post and replied by mistake.  I'm using an older computer at the moment, and this forum makes it extraordinarily hard to read and manage messages.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 11/30/12 2:19 PM
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:37:59 PM UTC-6, Martijn wrote:
> That's not what the issue is about. Tabs on Top is by default.
> The change that was made, is about removing the choice of Tabs on Bottom.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 11/30/12 2:38 PM
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 2:11 PM, <Vanilla...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Gavin Sharp is using that old argument unless there is a massive protest,
> anyone who complains must be part of a vocal minority.  So my question to
> you (an him) is whether you can find even one ordinary user anywhere who
> wants the tabs-on-bottom option removed.  You must have noticed by now that
> there are plenty of users who are really angry about it being removed.
>

That's really not the argument I made at all. The point I made is that this
forum is not the right venue for gauging user feedback (be it negative or
positive). Even if it was, user feedback is not the sole basis for the
decisions we make.

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Chris Peterson 11/30/12 3:48 PM
On 11/30/12 2:38 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> That's really not the argument I made at all. The point I made is that this
> forum is not the right venue for gauging user feedback (be it negative or
> positive). Even if it was, user feedback is not the sole basis for the
> decisions we make.

hi Gavin, do we have telemetry data for Tabs on Bottom users?

The number of users is probably low because Tabs on Bottom is not the
default. However, those users specifically chose Tabs on Bottom and
would be annoyed (to say the least) if the option was removed.


chris

PS - Tabs on Bottom forever! :)
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. winds...@gmail.com 12/23/12 5:53 AM
Please keep Firefox customizable. We the users should be able to decide where we want the tabs to go. It's an interface. We should decide what we want it to look like. Not the developers.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. olaf 12/26/12 9:54 AM
Am Sonntag, 23. Dezember 2012 14:53:41 UTC+1 schrieb winds...@gmail.com:
> Please keep Firefox customizable. We the users should be able to decide where we want the tabs to go. It's an interface. We should decide what we want it to look like. Not the developers.


+1


I don't want to be patronized!!

And also (imho) it is conceptually wrong as stated by someone else in a previous posting:

"Having the controls within the tab area (that is: location bar, bookmarks toolbar, etc) implies that I'm doing all my browsing inside a single tab, when that's not what I want at all.  I'm doing lots of things with lots of tabs; I'm doing very little that constitutes "within this tab", as far as the navigation controls are concerned."

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. zwat...@gmail.com 12/28/12 8:21 AM
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 6:55:50 AM UTC-5, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
>
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
>
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
>
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
>
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
>
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
>
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>
> Firefox better.
>
>
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
>
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
>
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeremy Morton (Jez)

here's my two cents worth, if you turn firefox into a one step behind copy of google chrome, why use firefox, just switch to chrome and have the up to date model.
might want to think on that before trying to copy another companies' browser
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. ta...@barndog.com 12/30/12 5:04 AM
On Sunday, December 23, 2012 6:53:41 AM UTC-7, winds...@gmail.com wrote:
> Please keep Firefox customizable. We the users should be able to decide where we want the tabs to go. It's an interface. We should decide what we want it to look like. Not the developers.

I fully agree! I always thought that was what FireFox was all about. What is wrong with leaving it as an option. Or leave the code there for 3rd party development as an extension.

For me Tabs on the Bottom is not an option. This is a matter of accessibility. I have MD, Macular Degeneration. This makes it very difficult to see things on a busy screen.  I have no choice but to have them on the bottom of the toolbars. Where I can find them easily and hey have the whole row. With the tabs on the address line they become too small to make out.

And I am sure there many other visually disabled users out there who feel the same. And people who have Muscular Dystrophy or any other condition that makes it difficult to control the mouse.

Has anyone thought about us?

For now I will stick to the older version that I have been using. At least till I find something else or they fix this problem.

Tazem


Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Chris Peterson 1/1/13 10:06 PM

The currently selected tab is more important (to me) than the current
URL. As such, I think the tabs should be on the bottom, closer to the
content.

If tabs are to be moved above the URL bar because the tabs are not "part
of the current page", then the bookmarks bar should also be moved above
the URL bar for the same reason.

If "tabs on bottom" is no longer available, even as an option, I will be
very sad. :(


chris p.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 1/3/13 9:48 AM
On Friday, November 30, 2012 4:38:25 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> The point I made is that this
> forum is not the right venue for gauging user feedback (be it negative or
> positive). Even if it was, user feedback is not the sole basis for the
> decisions we make.

Even though the subject of this thread is "Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it."?  That's odd because in Bugzilla people are routinely directed to this forum for discussion.

Gavin Sharp wrote:
> The venues we do have for user feedback have been mentioned previously -
> feedback aggregated from input.mozilla.org and support.mozilla.org are
> much more representative....

Input.mozilla.org is chock full of spam and demented user posts.  And here's what I found when I searched SUMO for tabs on top:

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/search?esab=a&q=tabs+on+top
This too is overwhelmingly negative.

The message some people are getting is that comments are NEVER welcome, and that strikes me as a very bad idea.

I don't know exactly how to weight user opinion either, but it's probably a mistake to ignore it.  Here's why you I think need to pay attention.  Firefox is spread not by advertisement, but by users.  I don't see any users installing Firefox on other people's computers because it has tabs on top, but I do see a lot of people who are upset because you are removing tabs on the bottom.  Some will switch and take others with them.  In terms of user support, I can't see anything but a loss here.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 1/3/13 9:48 AM
On Friday, November 30, 2012 4:38:25 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> The point I made is that this
> forum is not the right venue for gauging user feedback (be it negative or
> positive). Even if it was, user feedback is not the sole basis for the
> decisions we make.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Daniel Holbert 1/3/13 12:34 PM
On 01/03/2013 09:48 AM, Vanilla...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, November 30, 2012 4:38:25 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
>> The point I made is that this
>> forum is not the right venue for gauging user feedback (be it negative or
>> positive). Even if it was, user feedback is not the sole basis for the
>> decisions we make.
>
> Even though the subject of this thread is "Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it."?
> That's odd because in Bugzilla people are routinely directed to this
forum for discussion.

I think you're misunderstanding what Gavin ways saying.

You're right that this is a forum where users _can_ submit feedback (and
it's much better than bugzilla for that, as you say).

He was simply saying that this is not the right venue for *gauging* user
feedback (e.g. making sweeping judgements about "what users want"),
because the vast majority of users have no idea that this forum even exists.

> The message some people are getting is that comments are NEVER welcome

I don't think anybody said that.

> I do see a lot of people who are upset because you are removing tabs
> on the bottom.  Some will switch and take others with them.  In terms
> of user support, I can't see anything but a loss here.

It's certainly not an easy decision, and I don't work on the particular
chunk of code in question, so I can't comment on the specifics -- but
it's not as black and white as you're making it out to be.

As has been expressed elsewhere in this thread, there's a significant
maintenance / testing / code-complexity cost to keeping this option
around & functional.  This burden holds us back from working on other
things & making other improvements / simplifications that would advance
Firefox & the web and make a different (overlapping) set of users happy.

~Daniel
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 1/3/13 3:08 PM
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 2:34:52 PM UTC-6, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> I think you're misunderstanding what Gavin ways saying.
> He was simply saying that this is not the right venue for *gauging* user
> feedback....

OK, fair enough.  I misread his comment, possibly in response to the tone of this discussion.


> ...it's not as black and white as you're making it out to be.

Not black and white.  I'm presenting one point of view, same as you.

I know there are always some complaints about any change, so how do you weigh these complaints?  There is one clue in this case.  Even in the transition to Gnome 3, which generated so much opposition in the Linux community, Gnome 3 still has a large number of supporters.  But in the case for removing tabs on the bottom, I see very little support outside an inner circle of developers.  The comments I have seen are overwhelmingly negative.  This doesn't seem like a good sign.

I think you really need to approach major UI changes with a lot of sensitivity to users, and I'm not sure their opinions were sought or considered prior to making a decision.  Am I correct?  This seems like a danger sign.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 1/3/13 3:08 PM
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 2:34:52 PM UTC-6, Daniel Holbert wrote:
> I think you're misunderstanding what Gavin ways saying.
> He was simply saying that this is not the right venue for *gauging* user
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. VanillaMozilla 1/3/13 3:18 PM
This forum is doubling all my posts.  Terribly sorry.  I really don't
want to say any more anyway.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Art Kocsis 1/3/13 4:38 PM
At 01-03-2013 12:34 -0800, Daniel Holbert wrote:
>On 01/03/2013 09:48 AM, Vanilla...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Friday, November 30, 2012 4:38:25 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
>>> The point I made is that this
>>> forum is not the right venue for gauging user feedback (be it negative or
>>> positive). Even if it was, user feedback is not the sole basis for the
>>> decisions we make.
>>
>> Even though the subject of this thread is "Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it."?
>> That's odd because in Bugzilla people are routinely directed to this
>forum for discussion.
>
>I think you're misunderstanding what Gavin ways saying.
>
>You're right that this is a forum where users _can_ submit feedback (and
>it's much better than bugzilla for that, as you say).
>
>He was simply saying that this is not the right venue for *gauging* user
>feedback (e.g. making sweeping judgements about "what users want"),
>because the vast majority of users have no idea that this forum even exists.
Oh really! There have been over 206 posts to this forum on this thread since it was started last Aug 28. More than any other thread that I can recall and for a much longer time. I can count on one hand the number of respondees that favored (or were even neutral about), tabs on top. If that doesn't give you a good idea of what users want - or especially what they do NOT want - then I can't imagine what would.

Perhaps the "vast majority" of users don't know about this forum but of those that do and have posted here, over 90% strongly opposed eliminating removing tabs on bottom yet this is dismissed time and time again as being non-meaningful, non-representative or don't-bother-me-I've-heard-it-already. What I see here is a consistent state of denial, a continual rape and gutting of Firefox functions with an attendant loss of market share, and a steady stream of excuses for the loss.

Regarding the "right venue" for user feedback, if you are referring to the feedback button in the help menu - that is a joke! Every time have I tried to send feedback that was negative the submit refused to work. Yet, strangely enough, would work if the comment was positive. And the limitation of (IIRC), 140 chars is ludicrous for any meaningful suggestion.

In any case, once a "feature" is released or function removed, it is too late - feedback has no meaning. No one is going to admit to a mistake.


>> The message some people are getting is that comments are NEVER welcome
>I don't think anybody said that.
Pretty close if not spot on. They are certainly not encouraged. Yet it is the users who do read and post here that should be listened to more than any. They are the "power users" that recommend to and install software for - browsers - the "point and shoot" crowd. I suspect that no one here has not recommended or installed FF on at least a couple of dozen computers. That was your major source of new users. However, I, for one, am no longer doing that.


>> I do see a lot of people who are upset because you are removing tabs
>> on the bottom.  Some will switch and take others with them.  In terms
>> of user support, I can't see anything but a loss here.
Exactly. This issue is just one of many that are destroying Firefox but it does seem to be the one hitting more people's "buttons".


>It's certainly not an easy decision, and I don't work on the particular
>chunk of code in question, so I can't comment on the specifics -- but
>it's not as black and white as you're making it out to be.
>
>As has been expressed elsewhere in this thread, there's a significant
>maintenance / testing / code-complexity cost to keeping this option
>around & functional.  This burden holds us back from working on other
>things & making other improvements / simplifications that would advance
>Firefox & the web and make a different (overlapping) set of users happy.
Improvements??? Sorry I haven't seen any. The "extra" work would be unnecessary if you hadn't tried to move the tabs in the first place. Now one mistake is compounding another. From the loss of market share it looks like you are making more user users unhappy than happy. But even if it is more work, if you don't supply a product that people want then what is the point of supplying anything?

The whole assumption that a URL is associated with a page instead is false. Only rarely does one look at the URL to identify a page. It is the title that describes and identifies a page and it is the title that appears in the tab, not the URL.

Art

Doubling of posts (was Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it.) L. David Baron 1/3/13 4:50 PM
On Thursday 2013-01-03 15:18 -0800, VanillaMozilla wrote:
> This forum is doubling all my posts.  Terribly sorry.  I really don't
> want to say any more anyway.

To briefly examine the headers of your preceding post, you sent your
post to the same forum in three different ways:
  To: mozilla.dev....@googlegroups.com
  Cc: dev-apps-firefox <dev-apps...@lists.mozilla.org>
  Newsgroups: mozilla.dev.apps.firefox
These three are all mirrored to each other; you're lucky it didn't
show up three times (maybe one of them is stuck in a moderation
queue somewhere).

I've filed https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=814207 to
suggest a way the underlying systems could avoid this problem, but
until that is fixed, it's best to only post to one of the inputs to
the forum (and to only post to a mailing list input if you're
subscribed to it).

-David

--
𝄞   L. David Baron                         http://dbaron.org/   𝄂
𝄢   Mozilla                           http://www.mozilla.org/   𝄂
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 1/3/13 5:10 PM
As I've already explained, 206 posts to this forum comes nowhere close
to being a representative sample of our user base's opinions, for many
reasons. The insufficient size of the sample, bias caused by obvious
barriers to entry, and negativity bias are the major ones.

We've already enumerated the reasons why we think tabs-on-top is the
best default. We've already enumerated the reasons why we will likely
need to remove support for tabs on bottom in the future. None of this
discussion is producing any new important information, and we're
mostly going in circles and rehashing previous arguments. The Firefox
development team is not going to revisit these decisions.

I know that these decisions have upset some people. I'm sorry if
you're one of them. But it's impossible for us to avoid upsetting
anyone given the number of passionate users and contributors that we
have, so we need to move on, and continue trying to build and maintain
the best browser that we possibly can.

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Mart Rootamm 1/3/13 7:48 PM
2013/1/4 Art Kocsis <Art...@sbcglobal.net>
> The whole assumption that a URL is associated with a page instead is
false. Only
> rarely does one look at the URL to identify a page. It is the title that
describes and
> identifies a page and it is the title that appears in the tab, not the
URL.

I beg to differ on this one. Given the rampant phishing attacks nowadays,
the address bar associated with the page is now more important, because
users must check (or at least keep in sight) the validity and security of
the domain they are visiting.

Since many websites user smart URLs, the title of a page or article is
often already in the URL.

Many people also use multiple tabs and some even reduce the minimum tab
width to see more of them in a single window, so the tab title is often
deprecated, while the address bar is usually always visible.

In Microsoft Windows the window title is not visible by default, so the
workaround to see the page title is to set Firefox to show the menu bar to
also see the window titlebar.

For the people who wish to stay with Tabs on Bottom in the longer term,
there are several options:

* Firefox Extended Suport Release (ESR).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Firefox#Extended_Support_Release
Version 17 has been set to be the next ESR branch. People can stay using
the ESR version and get security updates for just that. The only caveat is
that Firefox ESR releases are supported for 54 weeks; after that there is a
jump to the next ESR release (24.0.x).

* SeaMonkey.
It uses the same rendering engine as Firefox, but keeps the classic user
interface. With SeaMonkey, the advantage is that the user interface should
not change much with the ESR release jump, as it would in Firefox. — AFAIK;
I must add that SeaMonkey has been very consistent throughout the years.
New versions of SeaMonkey are released in concert with new releases of
Firefox.

* Maybe a Firefox extension to keep tabs on bottom?
* Use an older version of Firefox, be it the ESR version or some other. The
drawback is that at some point it will be buggier and less secure than
newer versions, and in time website support for it will wane (à la Google
and its properties).

-Mart.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 1/3/13 8:37 PM
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 7:10:55 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> The Firefox
> development team is not going to revisit these decisions.

Yes, we got that impression.  I think the problem is that decisions are made by a small group of people, without ANY consultation with the community as far as I can tell.

While this may be convenient, it causes a lot of friction.  Sometimes the community turns out to be right, and they could save you some grief.  It's a pity we can't soften your hard line a little.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Vanilla...@hotmail.com 1/3/13 8:37 PM
On Thursday, January 3, 2013 7:10:55 PM UTC-6, Gavin Sharp wrote:
> The Firefox
> development team is not going to revisit these decisions.

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Justin Dolske 1/3/13 8:56 PM
On 1/3/13 8:37 PM, Vanilla...@hotmail.com wrote:

> I think the problem is that decisions are made by a small group of people, without ANY consultation with the community as far as I can tell.

Sorry you disagree, but adding further hyperbole to this thread really
isn't helping to make your point.

> Sometimes the community turns out to be right, and they could save you some grief.  It's a pity we can't soften your hard line a little.

And sometimes they're wrong. In absolute terms, where the tabs are is
fairly minor change. You might take a look in the mirror at who's taking
the "hard line" here.

Justin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 1/3/13 9:31 PM
On 01/03/2013 08:10 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:

> As I've already explained, 206 posts to this forum comes nowhere close to
> being a representative sample of our user base's opinions, for many reasons.
> The insufficient size of the sample, bias caused by obvious barriers to
> entry, and negativity bias are the major ones.

I acknowledge these points.

> We've already enumerated the reasons why we think tabs-on-top is the best
> default.

And while I disagree with them (or the versions of them I've managed to dig up
from whatever historical places they were presented at the time when the default
was changed, which I think are the only versions of them of whose existence I'm
aware), I have no problem with changing the default, as long as I can still
change to a non-default should I want to do so.

> We've already enumerated the reasons why we will likely need to remove
> support for tabs on bottom in the future.

I don't recall having seen this. Where was this done?

Actually, to quote an earlier post in this thread (by me, responding to you):

> On 11/14/2012 02:34 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:

>> We have no concrete plans to remove tabs on bottom mode from Firefox in the
>> near term. Removing the mode is an idea that has been proposed, and
>> amongst the development team it has several proponents, for many reasons. I
>> won't get into them here - I don't want this to devolve into a debate of
>> the validity of those reasons.
>
> Where would be an appropriate place to get into those reasons, and
> potentially have such a debate?

I never got a response to either of the two halves of this question, and I do
not recall having seen either of them addressed in any other context.


The only thing I recall having seen which leans in the direction of an
explanation of the reasons for this probably-pending removal is a vague comment
(repeated in a few different places) indicating that there will be vague and
nebulous "increased maintenance costs" and difficulty implementing unspecified
"other features". That does not resemble an enumeration, to my mind.

It might be helpful to this whole issue if it could be explained in more detail
what these otherwise-nebulous costs and features are, why the costs would be so
high as to not be worth bearing, and why the features would be so desirable as
to be worth the trade-off.

The only hint in that direction which I recall having seen is that one of the
features might be "Firefox Mobile" and/or "Firefox OS". I presume the former is
"the port of Firefox to 'mobile devices' such as smartphones", and the latter is
something vaguely analogous to Chrome OS, but beyond that I know nothing about
either.

As far as maintenance costs go, I recall having seen several people offer to
help with whatever work would be necessary to keep this option available,
although it's not yet remotely clear what such work might be. As far as I'm
aware, none of them have gotten any responses.

> None of this discussion is producing any new important information, and we're
> mostly going in circles and rehashing previous arguments. The Firefox
> development team is not going to revisit these decisions.

Where and when were these decisions made? Is there a publicly accessible record
of the discussions involved, such as e.g. a mailing-list archive or an IRC log,
or even simply a Bugzilla entry?

I would like to see what the arguments made for and against were, and confirm
the nature of that discussion for myself.

> I know that these decisions have upset some people. I'm sorry if you're one
> of them. But it's impossible for us to avoid upsetting anyone given the
> number of passionate users and contributors that we have, so we need to move
> on, and continue trying to build and maintain the best browser that we
> possibly can.

I'm not sure I agree that it's impossible to avoid upsetting anyone. It may not
be possible to do so while continuing to attempt to follow the shifting tides,
but I somehow doubt anyone would get upset about your simply retaining the
status quo in terms of features and UI.

I can see why you might not want to do that - to shift into "maintenance mode"
and simply provide bug fixes and performance improvements and so forth - but
there does come a time in any project when that is in fact the right thing to
do. Firefox isn't necessarily there yet, but it isn't necessarily not there yet
either. (Even emacs isn't there yet AFAIK, but AFAIK they also haven't started
dropping features yet either. Their relatively modular design may be a
contributing factor in that.)

Regardless, I do agree that we need to "continue trying to build and maintain
the best browser that we possibly can". However, I strongly disagree that a
browser without tabs-on-bottom is better, all else being equal, than one which
is not.


I think my position on this and related issues can be summed up approximately
as:

If you ever remove any feature which has ever been the default, you are making
the wrong decision.

Exceptions can be made for features which *no one* cares enough about to speak
up in support of, but not for much of anything short of that.

--
    The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Every time you let somebody set a limit they start moving it.
   - LiveJournal user antonia_tiger
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. si...@simonster.com 1/3/13 10:03 PM
On Friday, January 4, 2013 12:31:24 AM UTC-5, The Wanderer wrote:
> If you ever remove any feature which has ever been the default, you are making
>
> the wrong decision.

Well then, I'll bet you're upset that Firefox doesn't ship with Infoseek as a search engine option, that Clippy is missing from Office, and that your computer is missing its turbo button.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 1/4/13 6:11 AM
Although I might have been mistaken, I didn't think Infoseek was still a going
concern by the time Firefox offered an integrated search-engine box, much less
that it had ever been the default; according to my memory, the very first
default search engine from the moment the search box was added was Google.

Regardless, since Infoseek per se no longer exists, the decision of whether to
support it as a search-engine option would be entirely out of the Firefox
developers' hands. It's not so much that they removed the feature as that the
ground on which the feature stood was pulled out from under it.

"The feature is broken and cannot be fixed", where "cannot" is a very strong
term, would be another exception - this one falling *beyond*, rather than short
of, the "no one cares enough about the feature to speak up in support of it"
exception.


Clippy would almost certainly fall under the "no one cares enough about the
feature to object" exception. (If someone *did* care enough to object back when
it was first removed, the correct approach would have been to retain it as a
non-default option until that could be determined to no longer be the case.)


The old "turbo button" would almost certainly fall under the same, at least by
now.

Additionally, I'm not sure it's clear that the existence of a "turbo" button was
a "default"; I only ever saw one computer with one, that I recall, and the only
time that computer was run in "non-turbo" mode was when specific programs
wouldn't work properly at the higher speed. There are very few such programs
left anymore, and there are alternate ways (e.g. emulators with speed-cap
options) of getting them to work when necessary - so the basic underlying
feature of "let not-designed-to-be-fast programs work" was not removed, its
implementation was simply changed.



Regardless: yes, of course there are corner cases and exceptions. Absolute
statements are almost never "true without exception". I didn't bother to include
another paragraph or three outlining the shape of those exceptions in detail,
because the post was overly long and wordy as it stood; I thought the one
sentence I did add - about the "no one cares enough to object" exception - would
be enough, since it should cover the vast majority of all exceptional cases, but
apparently I was mistaken.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Gavin Sharp 1/4/13 10:35 AM
The reasons have been enumerated in this thread: maintaining multiple
modes in the UI has a cumulative effect on the testing matrix we need
to cover while developing, and so the the costs to maintaining
off-by-default features outweighs the benefits to those users, in our
estimation. That's the reason we'd remove the feature. We haven't yet
encountered all of those maintenance costs directly, and so we haven't
yet invested in removing the feature. We'll have more specifics when
that happens, and it will be detailed in the relevant bug.

I replied to your question about "where decisions get made" in
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla.dev.apps.firefox/Oral-S5Z8HQ/jq0s1wVc-ycJ
. Firefox OS and Firefox mobile are not relevant to this discussion at
all - they are separate projects with mostly separate engineering
teams. I go into some detail about why people volunteering to maintain
a feature we want to drop is not a realistic solution at
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593#c37 (and my next
comment). In brief, development resources don't scale that way, due to
coordination and opportunity costs.

"retaining the status quo in terms of features and UI" is not a
sustainable position in the market, and would result in us failing to
accomplish our mission, for what I think are fairly obvious reasons.

Gavin
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 1/4/13 12:29 PM
On 01/04/2013 01:35 PM, Gavin Sharp wrote:

> The reasons have been enumerated in this thread: maintaining multiple modes
> in the UI has a cumulative effect on the testing matrix we need to cover
> while developing, and so the the costs to maintaining off-by-default features
> outweighs the benefits to those users, in our estimation. That's the reason
> we'd remove the feature.

I do not recall this having been stated this way, and even so, I do not consider
this to constitute an "enumeration". However, this is not an entirely
unreasonable position to take.

Unfortunately, without more details as to the specifics involved, it is
impossible to counter the "the costs outweigh the benefits" argument; without
knowing exactly what those costs and benefits are, it's impossible to weigh them
against one another. As you say, the costs may not yet have been fully
encountered, and so not be amenable to proper valuation; however, in that case
it seems just as hard to say that they *do* outweigh the benefits as that they
don't.

There's also the question of how you weigh the benefits to users. Certainly some
users disagree with your estimation of the balance, at least on the extremely
limited data which appears to be available.

> I replied to your question about "where decisions get made" in
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla.dev.apps.firefox/Oral-S5Z8HQ/jq0s1wVc-ycJ
> .

You did, yes. I considered that post before, but did not see it as providing a
response; now that I look back at it, I think I see how it does seem to attempt
to address the question of "where would be an appropriate place to get into the
reasons why removing the tabs-on-bottom mode has proponents among the developers".

However, it is still somewhat problematic to try to identify such a place. The
three places you cited are Bugzilla, IRC, and this newsgroup.

Bugzilla would not be appropriate. Attempting to engage in such discussion by
posting comments on an existing bug report tend to either get slapped down as
offtopic (in the case of an already-filed bug) or get ignored for the same
reasons. Observation seems to indicate that a new bug filed in an attempt to
engage in such discussion is likely to either get completely ignored, or quickly
closed as either INVALID or WONTFIX.

We have already been attempting to discuss it on this newsgroup, and you have
explicitly declined to get into the reasons here. As such, presumably you do not
think this newsgroup is an appropriate place to get into it either.

That just leaves IRC. It is considerably harder to engage in such discussions on
IRC as an outsider, both due to the much smaller limits on what can actually be
said at a time (which if nothing else serves to inhibit the ability to get such
a conversation started there) and due to the need to actually catch the right
people when they're present and paying attention and not busy with other things
(which can be difficult for some people, depending on conflicting schedules),
but I'll admit that although I've been in-channel for some weeks now I haven't
actually tried to speak up. Is that the venue of which you were thinking?

(For what it's worth: I tried to attend the weekly Firefox Development meetings
of which you spoke in that linked message, but unfortunately they appear to
begin only half an hour before the beginning of my hour-long commute to work,
and to take place at least in part via some proprietary mechanism called Vidyo -
of which I had never previously heard, and to which I doubt I have access -
rather than e.g. in an IRC channel, although there is such a channel set up for
what is referred to as "backchannel".)


Also, off of all of this: what about the question of archives? Are there IRC
logs kept? If the discussion took place on Bugzilla or here on this newsgroup,
what were the bug numbers and/or about when did it take place?

> Firefox OS and Firefox mobile are not relevant to this discussion at all -
> they are separate projects with mostly separate engineering teams.

Okay. Thank you for correcting my mistaken impression. I'm relieved at least to
know that this doesn't seem to be another case of a misguided attempt to force a
unified interface on versions of a program designed for different contexts.

> I go into some detail about why people volunteering to maintain a feature we
> want to drop is not a realistic solution at
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593#c37 (and my next
> comment). In brief, development resources don't scale that way, due to
> coordination and opportunity costs.

That's a near-direct quote of the linked-to comment, and I can understand that;
I've certainly seen enough of maintenance-effort bleed-over in reading the LKML.
(Although, when I read that comment before, I interpreted it more as a
dismissive comment than as an actual response to the people attempting to make
the offer.)

In the following comment, however, you say:

> If we could magically grow our development contributor base (we're always
> trying, but scaling is hard), we'd like them to focus on features that in my
> opinion have much greater and broader impact than maintaining tabs on bottom.

If you have a choice between getting more contributors who prefer to focus on
features which matter to them first (and work on other things as a lower
priority if at all) on the one hand, and not getting those contributors at all
on the other hand, wouldn't the former obviously be better?

Speaking as someone who might indeed be interested in doing that, I could easily
see myself starting in that one small area and growing interested in other
areas, and proceeding to make contributions potentially well beyond just that
one - in your estimation - small thing. Without the "seed" of working on the
thing I currently do care about, however, I would be unlikely to ever get into
those other areas at all.

It's one of the core principles of open-source development: people work on what
they want to work on, and it's no good trying to force them to work on things
they aren't interested in at the expense of the ones they are. (That does, of
course, apply just as well to us trying to talk you into retaining this feature
as it does to you trying to convince potential contributors to work on one thing
rather than another.)

> "retaining the status quo in terms of features and UI" is not a sustainable
> position in the market, and would result in us failing to accomplish our
> mission, for what I think are fairly obvious reasons.

I'm not sure I do see what those reasons are (or, indeed, that it's necessarily
not a sustainable position), so perhaps they're not obvious after all.

Mind, I'm certainly not against adding new features and modifying the UI and so
forth. I simply think that such features should always be added in such a way
that it's possible to continue as if they were not present (or at least never
notice them if you don't want to use them), and such UI modifications should
always be configurable and reversible.

As such, I *am* against the *removal* of features, as a general rule -
especially if those features have ever been enabled by default.


The addition of tabs to the browser is a good example of a "continue as if they
were not present" feature addition; all you had to do was enable "hide the tab
bar when only one tab was open", set Firefox to open links and popup windows and
so forth in new tabs rather than new windows (which I think may have been the
default), and then just never invoke any of the "open a new tab" UI hooks, and
you could continue as if tab support was not present. This continued to be true
right up until various dialogs (such as the add-ons manager) were moved into
tabs, and the fact that doing so broke that ability is one reason why I think
doing that may not have been a good idea.

I didn't *do* that, of course; I used tabs heavily almost from the moment of
having the option, and use them to a fairly ridiculous extent nowadays. But the
option to do so was there. I hold up the introduction of tabs into Firefox as an
example of the *right* way to do a feature introduction.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. The Wanderer 1/4/13 12:41 PM
On 01/04/2013 03:29 PM, The Wanderer wrote:

> The addition of tabs to the browser is a good example of a "continue as if
> they were not present" feature addition; all you had to do was enable "hide
> the tab bar when only one tab was open", set Firefox to open links and popup
> windows and so forth in new tabs rather than new windows (which I think may
> have been the default),

Correction: "new windows rather than new tabs". I'm afraid I got this backward,
and missed it before sending.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Art Kocsis 1/6/13 6:12 PM
At 01-03-2013 20:10 -0500, you wrote:
>As I've already explained, 206 posts to this forum comes nowhere close
>to being a representative sample of our user base's opinions, for many
>reasons. The insufficient size of the sample, bias caused by obvious
>barriers to entry, and negativity bias are the major ones.
I never said or implied that 206 posts were a large sample but when
over 90% of the responses are in agreement it certainly is a indisputable
indication of the desires of the population. Any legitimate scientist
that got a 90% response would know something was up, even for very small
sample sizes.


>We've already enumerated the reasons why we think tabs-on-top is the
>best default. We've already enumerated the reasons why we will likely
>need to remove support for tabs on bottom in the future. None of this
>discussion is producing any new important information, and we're
>mostly going in circles and rehashing previous arguments. The Firefox
>development team is not going to revisit these decisions.
That's right - Damm the torpedos! Full steam ahead! You've enumerated and enumerated trying to justify your decisions and totally ignoring what your customers want. A sure fire path to oblivion. If you won't deliver what customers want they will go elsewhere. A 30% drop in market share over the last year or so should indicate that they are doing just that.


>I know that these decisions have upset some people. I'm sorry if
>you're one of them. But it's impossible for us to avoid upsetting
>anyone given the number of passionate users and contributors that we
>have, so we need to move on, and continue trying to build and maintain
>the best browser that we possibly can.
All the passionate users I have seen want the tabs to stay on the bottom. I have yet to see a "passionate" hurrah for moving them. I suspect the passionate contributors all want to create something new and different, that is supposed to be "better" and something that they can "own". It is not very exciting to just make FF more reliable and fix bugs like the memory leaks that have been crashing FF. [Just another "little item" that has been ignored since before v3.]

Art

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Art Kocsis 1/6/13 7:23 PM
At 01-04-2013 05:48 +0200, Mart Rootamm wrote:
>2013/1/4 Art Kocsis <Art...@sbcglobal.net>
>> The whole assumption that a URL is associated with a page instead
>> is false. Only rarely does one look at the URL to identify a page.
>> It is the title that describes and identifies a page and it is the
>> title that appears in the tab, not the URL.
>
>I beg to differ on this one. Given the rampant phishing attacks nowadays,
>the address bar associated with the page is now more important, because
>users must check (or at least keep in sight) the validity and security of
>the domain they are visiting.
>
>Since many websites user smart URLs, the title of a page or article is
>often already in the URL.
You are entitled to your opinion but it does not seem to jive with
reality. I just did a random sample of about 50 web sites and not one
of them had a clear title or description of the page contents. On those
that even tried, the title in the URL is obfuscated by all the encoding
of spaces and special characters and is nearly unreadable, let alone
readable quickly. Even for those URLs that are readable, the descriptive
info is at the end of a long URL that would be cut off in most windows.
The titles, OTOH, are all displayed in clear text and are quite readable.

Regardless, only the more literate user is going to look and understand
a URL. The majority of users (and the most vulnerable), will never give
them a glance. This judgement of the user population is consistent with
the seeming basis for the continued "dumbing down" of Firefox.


>Many people also use multiple tabs and some even reduce the minimum tab
>width to see more of them in a single window, so the tab title is often
>deprecated, while the address bar is usually always visible.
That is true and while I am arguing that tabs on bottom is preferred over
on top, the best and proper place for tabs is on the side. Placing tabs
vertically in a side panel allows 30-40 tabs to be easily stacked (as in
a list), and the list/tab width can be instantly adjusted with the mouse
from 1 pixel to the full width of the screen. And it also eliminates an
entire row of header space. This gives the user total control of the tab
display with a natural and convenient GUI.

Opera invented tabs and they are still a leader in placement. In Opera, a
simple right click allows you to place tabs at any side you choose - left,
right, top or bottom. There are a couple of FF extensions that implement
vertical tabs. I challenge you to try one for a few days. My bet is
that you will not want to go back to horizontal tabs, that is assuming
you typically keep more than a half dozen tabs open. And that is also
assuming that the continual changes to FF haven't broken the extensions
again.


>For the people who wish to stay with Tabs on Bottom in the longer term,
>there are several options:
Or switch to Opera.

Art

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Art Kocsis 1/6/13 7:53 PM
At least M$ was capable of admitting they had made a mistake.

Also, Clippy did not have any advocacy groups pleading for its
retention. Instead, it was mostly the target of jokes. But, hey,
it got her a rich husband so it couldn't have been all bad.

Art




Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. 0'Grady 1/11/13 10:34 AM
On 11/23/2012 21:03, 0'Grady wrote:
> On 10/14/2012 15:11, HarveyG wrote:
>> On 10/12/2012 16:11, yggd...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, October 12, 2012 4:59:30 PM UTC-4, HarveyG wrote:
>>>> On 10/11/2012 21:20, HarveyG wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10/10/2012 21:24, HarveyG wrote:
>>>>>> I am posting here because one of your Firefox themes was
>>>>>> automatically
>>>>
>>>>>> disabled when I updated from FF15 to FF16 today:
>>>>
>>>>>> Firefox 3 Theme for Firefox 4+
>>>>
>>>>>> http://ffaddons.game-point.net/ff3ff4/
>>>>
>>>>>> I am not familiar with the technical problems involved but I have
>>>>>> used
>>>>
>>>>>> that theme for a long time and was very disappointed. In your
>>>>
>>>>>> explanation you mention that it has something to do with this tabs on
>>>>
>>>>>> top/bottom development/design issue, which I don't claim to
>>>>>> comprehend.
>>>>
>>>>>> All I care about is being able to continue using that theme. To
>>>>>> that end
>>>>
>>>>>> I posted elsewhere and got enough hints how to fix it to work with
>>>>>> FF16,
>>>>
>>>>>> which I did, and have uploaded it for others if they're interested:
>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.mediafire.com/file/3xgfl0zhvfpe832/ffe_ff3ff4@game-point.net_HarveyG.xpi
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> To install, download and open manually with FF.
>>>>
>>>>>> My only modification is in the install.rdf file where I set it to
>>>>>> expire
>>>>
>>>>>> with Firefox 99.0, which won't be around for awhile yet. :) Further
>>>>>> info
>>>>
>>>>>> posted at moz.gen and moz.sup.ff.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> The Firefox 3 design & theme is far superior to the bland, colorless,
>>>>
>>>>>> pale shades of gray, illegible, user-unfriendly, awkward Firefox 4+
>>>>
>>>>>> theme(s) and layout(s), and I hope to keep it forever.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for your good efforts, really appreciated.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Seems fairly popular, 77 downloads so far...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now 156 total downloads after 2 days:
>>>>
>>>> http://i50.tinypic.com/34yscyd.png
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So it seems popular despite the limited advertising - solely by a few
>>>>
>>>> mentions on these mozilla newsgroups a couple of days ago. Word of
>>>> mouth
>>>>
>>>> travels fast.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One caveat...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When I installed the next version of Firefox (16.0.1), it phoned home
>>>>
>>>> then said this add-on (theme) was incompatible and disabled it. To fix,
>>>>
>>>> remove it, then reinstall manually by opening the .xpi file from
>>>> Firefox.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you haven't downloaded it yet, it's still available at:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.mediafire.com/file/3xgfl0zhvfpe832/ffe_ff3ff4@game-point.net_HarveyG.xpi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>    WORKS FINE WITH FIREFOX 16.0.1
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> ;) :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> HarveyG
>>>
>>> Thanks for posting this. Cannot stand the new crap interface.
>>>
>>> Why is copying Chrome the new direction of Mozilla? If I wanted to use
>>> Chrome I would . . . use Chrome!
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for your feedback.
>>
>> Now 335 downloads after 4 days!!
>> http://i49.tinypic.com/rcn9d1.png
>>
> Thanks a lot! That mediafire link appears to still be working. I also
> found this related link on the reviews page: http://bit.ly/T3lwy3
> Where there's a will, there's a way... :)
>

Still works fine with Firefox 18.0!
Why doesn't the add-on author update it himself?
Loss of interest?
--
0'Grady
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. land...@gmail.com 3/16/13 4:05 PM
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 7:55:50 AM UTC-4, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"

....
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeremy Morton (Jez)

One, I don't believe we are a minority.Some people just don't know they can change it, maybe because like those in government, they think they know what's best and have removed the right click option.
I Don't want to have to 'travel' any farther than necessary with a 'mouse' from page to tab than I have to. Once my tabs (pages) are open, i want to traverse between them, without regard to location bar, bookmarks or menu... Tabs should be directly above the pages, period. I 'turn off' the menu (use Aurora button) and location bar input field is gotten to by Alt+D... Putting the 'tabs on top' is making things more difficult not more productive...
Either leave the option to choose, or leave them on bottom or better yet, give us the choice to dock them Anywhere, left, right, bottom of window, even float..
fyi, i am currently using Aurora without window decoration (opensuse/kde), maximized with tabs on top to see if i can live with it. so far, not terrible, but still want the choice.

Landis.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. pczer...@gmail.com 3/25/13 9:10 PM
On Thursday, August 30, 2012 6:04:39 AM UTC-4, B.J. Herbison wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 7:25:37 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Perhaps there are arguments for having tabs on top. But they are no reason to force everyone to comply.
>
>
>
> There certain are reasons to force tabs on top (or to otherwise limit flexibility). Fewer options mean:
>
>
>
> - Easier to create UI designs that look good (standard and add-ons).
>
> - Less code.
>
> - The code is more likely to be correct.
>
> - Fewer cases, so a higher percent of the cases can be tested.
>
> - It's less likely that a new change will break something, because of the reasons above.
>
> - Better performance.
>
> - Easier to optimize.
>
>
>
> The effect for each change is small, but cumulative.
>
>
>
> I don't always agree when Firefox developers want to reduce options, but I do recognize there are advantages to simplifying.


BJ your list is BS.  It says the same thing in every line just worded differently.  They all boil down the 'the programmer is too lazy to do the job right".
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. David Boothe 3/25/13 9:19 PM
WOW I can hardly believe that I am reading that the FF team is going
to do this.  REALLY??? The main reason I use FF is that it allows me
to use my browser how ->I WANT IT TO BE<- not the way someone else
thinks it looks best.  Tabs on top just plain suck.  It is the most
idiotic layout ever designed into any software.  I don't want to have
to look several lines down a page to find my menu WTF???  I have read
some say that it makes code easier and less likely to be buggy.  That
is pure BS.  If one can code one can code.  Damn it don't start
locking things down in FF and PLEASE do not use that horrid chrome as
something you want to look like.  Chrome has the worst interface of
any price of software I have ever used and I have been using computers
since 8086s.  Stop already with the concept of making things look all
fluffy and glitzy instead of making software that is actually usable!
God what a stupid idea this one is.
RE: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. joakimsen 3/26/13 6:56 PM
It is only an illusion.

Firefox only does what it deems to be in your best interests.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. Typhoon007 7/22/13 1:33 AM
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 5:25:50 PM UTC+5:30, Jeremy Morton wrote:
> Currently there is a bug for removing tabs-on-bottom mode:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=755593
>
>
>
> Several people have voiced concern about this proposal because, well, a
>
> bunch of people use tabs-on-bottom mode.  And not because they "just
>
> need to realize that the UX team is right and tabs-on-top are better"
>
> (Chrome does it, so hey, who are Firefox to go against the way the wind
>
> is blowing).  Look, what's the point in calling yourselves a different
>
> browser if your whole raison d'etre is to go along with other browsers?
>
>   It might cause some extra overhead to maintain tabs-on-bottom, but so
>
> be it!  It's worth it for the great extra functionality.
>
>
>
> I propose that this bug be closed with WONTFIX.  I use tabs-on-bottom
>
> because I *prefer it that way*.  I like the tabs to be there, right next
>
> to the document being displayed.  For me, it's much nicer for usability.
>
>   Firefox is the only major browser that offers this?  GOOD!  It makes
>
> Firefox better.
>
>
>
> I (and I suspect quite a few others) would have to seriously consider
>
> switching to a combination of Seamonkey and Chrome if this bug were
>
> implemented.  I urge you now to close this bug and not implement the
>
> suggestion.  You need to decide whether Firefox development is going to
>
> be the latest whims of the UX team, or actually giving a damn about the
>
> users (yes OK we're in a minority, but we are still a significant
>
> minority and we should count!)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jeremy Morton (Jez)

some thing I don't understand about all these explanations givens for removing tabs on bottom mode is the argument that the tabs on top mode will move all the browser controls into a tab control and that the browser controls will be removed from future versions.
But keeping tabs on top puts the most less used vertical area- the address bar - in between the most used areas -the content area and the tab bar- in a browser. the main reason one migrated from IE to FF is that it had tabbed browsing and it was configurable. FF was one the first browsers which gave both these capabilities at the same time.
moving the tabs to the top may be a good way forward for reducing maintainability and bugs induced by keeping old code or somethings which I don't know as a end user. But I still strongly feel that this feature could be reimplemented in a new way compatible with the Australis UI platform rather than dropping the idea altogether.
This would not be too difficult If the brilliant minds in Mozilla Corp. spent a little more time thinking of ways to implement tabs on bottom as a new feature in the new UI rather than keep the old feature from old UI and force a bug and then remove the feature altogether as a bug fix. That is too lazy. and the millions of users who use you code have better expectations of you lot.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. EE 7/22/13 4:46 PM
Safari also has tabs below the toolbars.  I do not see how tabs on top
saves space if the tabs are not drawn in the titlebar area.  I like the
title bar, and do not want to lose that.  I like to see the name of the
page at the top of the window.  I also like the tabs below the toolbars.

I have also heard that the add-on bar is going to be removed as well as
the ability to create other toolbars.  Just where are the buttons in the
add-on bar supposed to go?  There will not be room for all those buttons
in the navigation toolbar plus the address bar.  Does that mean that I
have to put the address bar in the bookmark toolbar and move most of the
bookmarks out of there?

Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. thebart...@gmail.com 7/30/13 3:41 AM
I support 'tabs on bottom' because I find it quicker & easier to drag and drop links from a webpage to the tab bar. the tabs are also closer to the work when moving from one tab to another which, I do frequently.
John.
Re: Tabs-on-bottom mode: keep it. luuu...@gmail.com 8/27/13 4:13 AM
Dne torek, 28. avgust 2012 13:55:50 UTC+2 je oseba Jeremy Morton napisala:
Firefox developers didn't completely remove tabs-on-bottom. To move tabs back to bottom, just go to about:config, find browser.tabs.onTop and set it to False. And Tabs-on-bottom will come back!
More topics »