Why should ordinary user have to tweak the program after updating?

[Greywolf]

From mozilla.support.thunderbird:

On 14/11/2011 6:05 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
[...]
> I have been using Firefox for as long as it has been in existence, even
> by its previous names, and the current versions are the most stable I
> have seen. There are several things that users can do to assure
> stability. First, make a new profile if you are having strange problems
> no one else seems to have.
> Second, disable all your extensions, and see if that gets rid of your
> instability. If it does, then add them back 1/2 at a time, and find the
> culprit.
> Third, don't try to keep a FF session active for a month, or even a
> week. This kind of software isn't designed for long-term continuous use.
> Fourth, make sure that if you use themes, and/or personas, they are
> designed for your version.
> Fifth, Disable, or uninstall plugins you don't need, and USE. This may
> include Java, WMV, etc., IF you don't use them.
> Sixth, make sure that you send crash reports to Mozilla.
> Seventh, keep your version CURRENT.
> Eighth, make sure that when you install a new version, your firewall
> recognizes it.
[...]
Ron, I know you mean well, and it's all excellent advice.

However, the days of leaving it up to the user are long past. The
average naive user, who just wants to surf ans facebook and such isn't
going to do any of this stuff. And IMO (s)he shouldn't have to.
Releasing updates that require precautionary maintenance in order to
work as they should is something that's OK for hobbyists, but not for
ordinary users.

Cross-posted to mozilla.dev.usability, where I'm probably being ignored.
;-(.

HTH
Wolf K.

[Greywolf]

On 15/11/2011 8:34 AM, Greywolf wrote:
> From mozilla.support.thunderbird:
>
> On 14/11/2011 6:05 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
> [...]
> > I have been using Firefox for as long as it has been in existence, even

Sorry, cross-posted from mozilla.support.firefox.

Wolf K.

[André Neves]

> Why should ordinary user have to tweak the program after updating?

Do you mean to *add* the new tweaks, or to *remove* them?

I don't think one can accomodate both sides.
So I would be inclined to err on the side of improvement.

> improvement
I guess this is your cue, Wolf K? :)

> Releasing updates that require precautionary maintenance in order to work as they should is something that's OK for hobbyists, but not for ordinary users.

I think one needs most of that maintenance even if not upgrading.
But we are usually just not aware of it.

At least all Ron's points seem to apply, except the points 7 and 5:
- 7 because you're going against it on purpose (... another discussion);
- 5 because you just do it once, on installing the theme - since
you're not updating.

[Desiree]

"Greywolf" <wek...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:hfydnYBHZ9vs5V_T...@mozilla.org...

Why would a browser NOT be designed to have a session active for a month? I
know Fx is not but Opera is so why not Fx? Why would you think a user should
be delighted to have to continuously open and close Fx? It takes time to
reopen the last session when that session has 50-100 tabs. Fx should be
stable enough, without excessive RAM usage and proper release of RAM when
minimized to the task bar for long periods, to not need to be closed and
reopened more than once a month. With Opera, you never shut down because
that shuts down Unite and then others cannot fetch files off your file
server, etc. Besides who wants to have to restart Fx frequently? That is an
irritant that should not be a part of any browser. Opera properly releases
RAM on minimization. I read yesterday that Memshrink team says part of the
RAM problem with Fx is memory leakage from extensions but if the RAM problem
can be solved then Fx should be stable enough to not require shutdown except
when one is forced to reboot their computer which for desktop users might be
once or twice a month (Microsoft Tuesdays).

[Ron Hunter]

I totally disagree with the idea that an application should be left
running when not in use. Loading FF on my system takes only a couple of
seconds, and assures that I get a minimal system load each time I
restart. Most of the problems with FF RAM usage growing when minimized
relate to extensions, or so I am told. As for Opera, that is quite off
topic, and if, as you say, it sets up a file server for sharing, would
violate my ISP terms of service. I reboot mostly when I do MS updates,
but some programs still require a reboot when installing, or
uninstalling, so keeping FF up all the time isn't likely if you do a lot
of installing, and uninstalling. As for the time to load 50-100 tabs,
that is no longer an issue as they won't load until clicked on.
Frankly, the idea of keeping 50-100 tabs open is just as unreasonable as
keeping a FF session up for a month. According to Testpilot runs, only
3% of users ever use more than 10 tabs. I normally use no more than 4
or 5, and that is pretty rare.
Note that if your program releases RAM when minimized, then the restart
of it will take almost as long as if it had been terminated, and will
greatly increase the memory fragmentation, and overhead for memory
management.

[Desiree]

"Ron Hunter" <rphu...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:kNSdnTDWjpOii17T...@mozilla.org...

> On 11/15/2011 5:01 PM, Desiree wrote:
>> "Greywolf"<wek...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>> news:hfydnYBHZ9vs5V_T...@mozilla.org...
>>> From mozilla.support.thunderbird:
>>>
>>> On 14/11/2011 6:05 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
>>> [...]

>>>>>>>> Third, don't try to keep a FF session active for a month, or even a
>>>> week. This kind of software isn't designed for long-term continuous
>>>> use.

First of all, I suggest you try Opera. It is an excellent browser but not
perfect as none of the browsers are that. The reason I came back to Fx was
after having only Fx 1.5 until Fx4 (and using Opera mostly for the past two
years) was because Piro finally introduced TBE3 for Fx4. Tabbed Browser
Extensions (which was the first extension written and was written for
Mozilla Suite back about 2000 and then ported to Firebird later), was the
reason I started using Mozilla Suite around 2001 and fell in love with
tabbed browsing. I continued to love this extension through Fx 1.5. Then it
would not work on Fx 2 without considerable hacking and then worked sort of.
It worked better on Fx 3 (with no hacking needed) but not well. Only with Fx
4 is Piro back with the greatest of all extensions working fantastically
well. It is now TBE3 and broken into several smaller extensions instead of
just one large one.
Opera Unite would not violate your ISP's TOS because the file server, and
all the other servers, are hosted on Opera servers. But Opera isn't the
subject here so I won't say anymore.

You actually believe that I should start Fx every few minutes? I use the
computer about 8-10 hours a day but in not one session. I go cook a meal,
vacuum the house, go running, etc. inbetween using Fx. So, I should shut it
down repeatedly every day? That's makes no sense. I never shut down my
computer. It runs 24/7/365 and I see no reason why my browser should be
constantly shut down. I don't shut down Word, or Ping Plotter Pro, or
WinAmp, or Outlook Express, etc just because I am not sitting at the
computer for awhile.

The entire point of tabbed browsing is to be able to have 50 or more tabs
open. If you only have 3-5 tabs open just use windows. You don't need tabs
if that is how you use a browser. All my browsers usualy have 50-100 tabs
open. Opera has no memory problems because of this. Iron does but that is
because of the stupid sandboxing of each tab. Even on SeaMonkey (which I
would use all the time if Piro would port TBE3 to it so I could have the
excellent mail client built into it) I have 50-100 tabs open. TBE has tree
style tabs vertically on the left and can group them in various ways, etc.
After using TreeStyle tabs I had an awful time using other browsers with
tabs horizontally across the top and not grouped (until recently on Opera).
I know many users who stayed with Fx 1.5 for TBE and tree style tabs until
Fx4. The extension is extremely addictive.

I had read that Fx8 insanely refuses to load all tabs on start! I cannot
fathom having to wait for it load later when you click on it. I would never
allow such a feature. Of course, TBE overrides dumb stuff like that. All
tabs should fully load with their thumbnails (how else do you know where
each tab is if it doesn't load on start then there will be no thumbnail so
you can locate it in the tree) on start. If I start a saved session within
the current session, why in the world would I not want all tabs to load?
That is why I would start a saved session within the current session. If I
did not want all tabs to load when I start Fx, and am asked by Session
Manager what session to start, and I click on "previous", why would I click
on previous? I always click to load the previous session and I want the tabs
available all the time. I don't care how long it takes to start Fx because I
rarely close Fx! I have a desktop not a laptop that I have to lug around. I
have a desktop by choice so that I can keep it and my browser running 24/7
with rare reboots, no shutdowns of the computer, and rare shutdowns of the
browsers. (I always have at least two browsers running).

Fx has horrible bookmarking and that, along with history, has never been
substantially improved in all the years I have used Mozilla browsers. (In
fact it has gone backwards because as of Fx4 you can no longer control how
much history it saves) and bookmarks are still in one, long, very unwieldly,
very slow to scroll column so you are forced to get an old buggy extension
to give your bookmarks columns! Opera does that automatically. That is one
big reason I have so many tabs open all the time. Opera, on the other hand,
handles booksmarks and history superbly but I can't use TBE3 with it. So, I
remain with Fx as the default browser because of TBE3 and because it saves
text in text boxes if it is closed or crashes and Opera does not. But I am
not upgrading 4.01 probably for at least for a year. There should be no need
to upgrade a well planned, well developed browser more than once a year
except it should have security patches during that year but not upgrades to
full new versions where extensions have to be checked, etc.

It is not necessarily true that if a program properly releases much, but not
all, of its RAM when minimized for a long period (like hours or overnight)
will be slow to start up. Opera is not slow to start up and if it was using
250,000k RAM and while minimized down to 60,000k for instance it starts back
up fast. Fx is currently using 560,000k and I only have 2GB RAM and the
nVidia mobo doesn't allow adding more. Fx will not release any on minimize.
The Fx Memshrink team's blog says the RAM problem is likely mostly from
extensions. So, I welcome Mozilla looking in this, listing the extensions
that leak the most (maybe TBE is a bad leaker...I have no idea), and trying
to get the authors to fix the leaks.

Fx, (actually starting with Phoenix) in the beginning, was the geeks
browser. It has lost its way over the years. Those of us who worked hard to
help build it by testing all those buggy, half finished builds before Fx1.0
ended up being rewarded with the decision to abandon us. We are not
"typical" users who use 3 or 4 tabs.

Lastly, I run virtual machines both on VMWare Workstation 7, Virtualbox and
Microsoft Virtual PC. It takes time and hassle to shut down virtual machines
so I can reboot the host so, of course, I will avoid rebooting until I see
an obvious need which on my aging Dell gaming machine is about once every 3
to 4 weeks (unless reboot is required for installing something but I don't
do much installation these days except maybe on the virtual machines).

We all use computers differently and browser makers as well OS makers need
to be aware of this an try to accomodate to the needs of different users. Fx
though has thrown its fate into the hands of the group of users who are
ignorant of computers and have no interest in learning about computers.
Those users are fickle and will not see any reason to be loyal to Mozilla.
>

[Jay Garcia]

On 16.11.2011 08:01, Desiree wrote:

--- Original Message ---

> We all use computers differently and browser makers as well OS makers need
> to be aware of this an try to accomodate to the needs of different users. Fx
> though has thrown its fate into the hands of the group of users who are
> ignorant of computers and have no interest in learning about computers.
> Those users are fickle and will not see any reason to be loyal to Mozilla.

I manage (Wizard) 50+ AOL/Compuserve forums, am responsible for several
form replies (over 1000 monthly) for the Mozilla Contribute arena, help
with Mozilla Feedback and various other Mozilla Support venues. I seldom
have more than six to eight tabs open, not windows (takes more resources
and harder to keep up with). I am neither ignorant of computers, do have
an interest in learning more about computers, not fickle and can find a
whole bunch of ways to be loyal to Mozilla. Firefox is my browser
because it works, Thunderbird is my email and news application because
IT works and I have SeaMonkey installed for support issues when they
arise. And I've been closely involved with a lot of these folks since
Netscape was released in October of 1994. Am not a "geek" or a
programmer, just a regular user with a mission. With that in mind, just
WHO are you speaking of anyway?

And however, you do have the right to express an opinion.

--
Jay Garcia - www.ufaq.org - Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Thunderbird
Mozilla Contribute Coordinator Team - www.mozilla.org/contribute/
Mozilla Mozillian Member - www.mozillians.org
Mozilla Contributor Member - www.mozilla.org/credits/

[Ron Hunter]

My computers all run 24/7 365. I use them several times a day, and at
odd times, including during the night. I also have an application that
monitors for substitute teacher jobs, and alarms if one comes up, so
that needs to run all the time.

> The entire point of tabbed browsing is to be able to have 50 or more tabs
> open. If you only have 3-5 tabs open just use windows. You don't need tabs
> if that is how you use a browser. All my browsers usualy have 50-100 tabs
> open. Opera has no memory problems because of this. Iron does but that is
> because of the stupid sandboxing of each tab. Even on SeaMonkey (which I
> would use all the time if Piro would port TBE3 to it so I could have the
> excellent mail client built into it) I have 50-100 tabs open. TBE has tree
> style tabs vertically on the left and can group them in various ways, etc.
> After using TreeStyle tabs I had an awful time using other browsers with
> tabs horizontally across the top and not grouped (until recently on Opera).
> I know many users who stayed with Fx 1.5 for TBE and tree style tabs until
> Fx4. The extension is extremely addictive.
>

I don't keep many apps running. There is the one for checking for sub
jobs, and TB, and my file manager open now. If I don't use it, I shut
it down. It gives me a clean slate when I start up.
The way I use the computer would benefit not at all from tabs, unless I
want to follow a link without losing my place on a webpage. The FF8
feature of not actually opening a tab from a previous session until the
user accesses it is to avoid extremely slow startups, and high initial
RAM usage. It is optional. I really don't believe you use 50-100 tabs
in a session in such a way that they won't need updating to make sure
your information is current anyway. For those addicted to many tabs, FF
provides Panorama, which is a tab manager. Try it, you might like it.

> I had read that Fx8 insanely refuses to load all tabs on start! I cannot
> fathom having to wait for it load later when you click on it. I would never
> allow such a feature. Of course, TBE overrides dumb stuff like that. All
> tabs should fully load with their thumbnails (how else do you know where
> each tab is if it doesn't load on start then there will be no thumbnail so
> you can locate it in the tree) on start. If I start a saved session within
> the current session, why in the world would I not want all tabs to load?
> That is why I would start a saved session within the current session. If I
> did not want all tabs to load when I start Fx, and am asked by Session
> Manager what session to start, and I click on "previous", why would I click
> on previous? I always click to load the previous session and I want the tabs
> available all the time. I don't care how long it takes to start Fx because I
> rarely close Fx! I have a desktop not a laptop that I have to lug around. I
> have a desktop by choice so that I can keep it and my browser running 24/7
> with rare reboots, no shutdowns of the computer, and rare shutdowns of the
> browsers. (I always have at least two browsers running).
>

I have a desktop, a laptop, a netbook, and a smartphone. My wife also
has a desktop. All but the netbook (its for traveling) stay on all the
time. When I finish a session, I shut down the FF application. I also
shut down apps on my iPhone when I am done with them. The only times my
computers are shut down is when we have a power failure, which is not
rare enough, so I have UPS on the desktops.

> Fx has horrible bookmarking and that, along with history, has never been
> substantially improved in all the years I have used Mozilla browsers. (In
> fact it has gone backwards because as of Fx4 you can no longer control how
> much history it saves) and bookmarks are still in one, long, very unwieldly,
> very slow to scroll column so you are forced to get an old buggy extension
> to give your bookmarks columns! Opera does that automatically. That is one
> big reason I have so many tabs open all the time. Opera, on the other hand,
> handles booksmarks and history superbly but I can't use TBE3 with it. So, I
> remain with Fx as the default browser because of TBE3 and because it saves
> text in text boxes if it is closed or crashes and Opera does not. But I am
> not upgrading 4.01 probably for at least for a year. There should be no need
> to upgrade a well planned, well developed browser more than once a year
> except it should have security patches during that year but not upgrades to
> full new versions where extensions have to be checked, etc.
>

I totally disagree that Ff has horrible bookmarking. It appears you
haven't discovered the power of the bookmarks toolbar, which offers the
features you were complaining about not having.
Check it out.

> It is not necessarily true that if a program properly releases much, but not
> all, of its RAM when minimized for a long period (like hours or overnight)
> will be slow to start up. Opera is not slow to start up and if it was using
> 250,000k RAM and while minimized down to 60,000k for instance it starts back
> up fast. Fx is currently using 560,000k and I only have 2GB RAM and the
> nVidia mobo doesn't allow adding more. Fx will not release any on minimize.
> The Fx Memshrink team's blog says the RAM problem is likely mostly from
> extensions. So, I welcome Mozilla looking in this, listing the extensions
> that leak the most (maybe TBE is a bad leaker...I have no idea), and trying
> to get the authors to fix the leaks.
>

You can Google for 'problematic Firefox Extensions', and get some of
them. If your system is limited to 2GB, then keeping 100 tabs open is
probably not a good use of resources. I suppose it is ok if they are
mostly text based, but graphics on webpages that are tabbed eats RAM in
wholesale lots. This also makes your idea of leaving everything running
all the time even less practical. It may be time for a new computer,
preferably one with more 'elbow room' (an more CPU horsepower).
Generally, the larger the RAM footprint of an extension is, the more
likely it is to have memory leaks. In any case, if you load a 400MB
extension, then it WILL cause FF to use more RAM, obviously.

> Fx, (actually starting with Phoenix) in the beginning, was the geeks
> browser. It has lost its way over the years. Those of us who worked hard to
> help build it by testing all those buggy, half finished builds before Fx1.0
> ended up being rewarded with the decision to abandon us. We are not
> "typical" users who use 3 or 4 tabs.
>
> Lastly, I run virtual machines both on VMWare Workstation 7, Virtualbox and
> Microsoft Virtual PC. It takes time and hassle to shut down virtual machines
> so I can reboot the host so, of course, I will avoid rebooting until I see
> an obvious need which on my aging Dell gaming machine is about once every 3
> to 4 weeks (unless reboot is required for installing something but I don't
> do much installation these days except maybe on the virtual machines).
>
> We all use computers differently and browser makers as well OS makers need
> to be aware of this an try to accomodate to the needs of different users. Fx
> though has thrown its fate into the hands of the group of users who are
> ignorant of computers and have no interest in learning about computers.
> Those users are fickle and will not see any reason to be loyal to Mozilla.
>>
>
>

I disagree that Mozilla has abandoned us Geeks. FF is still the most
modifiable, configurable, and customizable browser available. Yes, it
caters to the 'average user' in many ways, but maintains its roots
underneath all that.

[Greywolf]

On 16/11/2011 10:32 AM, Ron Hunter wrote:
[...]

> My computers all run 24/7 365. I use them several times a day, and at
> odd times, including during the night. I also have an application that
> monitors for substitute teacher jobs, and alarms if one comes up, so
> that needs to run all the time.

[...]

I use to do that too, until I did a few calculations about how much
power they use. Even asleep, a desktop with several "sleeping"
peripherals plugged in can use 100 watts or more. That adds up to 60KWH
per month or more. A wall wart consumes about 1 KWH per month, even when
it's not charging the laptop battery. And so on. All those "low-drain"
thingies we have around the house add up to an astonishing amount of
power overall if left on. I've seen estimates of 5-10% savings if they
were turned when not in use, which for most people is at least 12 hours
a day. Granted, some devices must be on 24/7, but there aren't very many
of those.

HTH
Wolf K.

[Jay Garcia]

On 16.11.2011 08:54, Greywolf wrote:

--- Original Message ---

Yes, we all have different useage requirements. My home network consists
of a 6-camera surveillance system that runs on a DVR PC, so that stays
on 24/7/365. I have 8 PC's running but two stay on all the time, the
rest are turned off at night. I have always recommended that the average
user (whatever that is) power down at night.

[Ron Hunter]

Well, I figure that if I get 1 half-day job a month it will pay for all
that electricity usage. Fact is that I get an average of 2 full day
jobs a week from that program. The alternative is either missing the
jobs, or staying at the computer 24/7 hitting return to update the job
search, monitor on, and all that. So which is more wasteful?
I am more than willing to pay for the convenience of not having to pull
all those plugs, and replug them each day, several times.

[Ron Hunter]

IF a computer system isn't going to be used for 8 hours or so, then
powering down might be feasible. Mine very rarely go more than 4 hours
at a stretch without use. I am sure I am not the average user.
I buy energy-star appliances, and most of them are pretty frugal with
electric use. My monitor is lit by LEDs, and it turns off after 3
minutes of non-use, and in standby used about 3 watts/hour. The
computer reduces the Vcc to 1.7 volts, and the processor slows to 1.2GHz
when not being 'stressed'. The printer uses about 3-5 watts. The
router and modem, I am not sure about, but shutting down the cable modem
is not advisable for several reasons, not the least the long time it
takes to resync, and the program I keep running all the time.

Everyone has different needs, and most people take at least some care to
keep their bills under control.

[Justin Dolske]

On 11/16/11 6:12 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:
> On 11/16/2011 10:06 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 16.11.2011 08:54, Greywolf wrote:

This thread really isn't relevant to usability anymore, if it ever was.

Please take it to email or alt.power-management.flonk.flonk.flonk.

Justin

[The Real Bev]

On 11/16/2011 06:12 PM, Ron Hunter wrote:

> Everyone has different needs, and most people take at least some care to
> keep their bills under control.

We haven't turned on heat for years, maybe decades. Electric blankets
work just fine, especially in the living room with all the computers and
electronic stuff running most of the time.

AC is something different, but we went without it for 30 years so I
figure we've got another 20 years before we have to worry.

--
Cheers, Bev
----------------------------------------------------------
A spokesperson for 60s band 'the animals' has today made a
public apology saying they were mistaken and there isn't a
house in New Orleans after all.

[Greywolf]

On 16/11/2011 10:18 PM, Justin Dolske wrote:
>
> This thread really isn't relevant to usability anymore, if it ever was.

True, it's drifted OT, but my initial post was about usability from the
plain, ordinary, non-geek, non-hobbyist, non-power user's POV. Which is
basically, "Don't mess with what works!"

Unfortunately, the dev team is fixated on improving all kinds of things,
resulting in unexpected changes to the UI, sudden failure of add-ons,
pop-ups that demand user intervention to re-adapt FF top the user's
settings, etc and so on and so forth. None of this will endear FF to the
plain, ordinary etc user. Quite the contrary, in fact. IMO, of this
keeps up, people will just switch to programs that are easier to use
from their POV.

Hope This Helps!
Wolf K.