Recommended Posts

It's extremely easy to get glass in firefox with the glasser extension:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/7336

With just glasser + stylish you can make fx look as good as ie7:

post-159052-1243087771_thumb.png

I know that I'm talking natively.

The sooner it's implemented into the Firefox the quicker I free up extensions that use up memory.

Probably take them ages to implement anything.

How long has Vista been out and still no glass support?

Not bashing, just saying, I know bug fixes come first...

It requires them to re-write how they draw web pages (3.5+ support Glass windows, but you can't use web content inside those windows because it breaks)

I personally don't see the need for it in the main window, the current UI is fine IMO and fits in pretty good.

It requires them to re-write how they draw web pages (3.5+ support Glass windows, but you can't use web content inside those windows because it breaks)

I personally don't see the need for it in the main window, the current UI is fine IMO and fits in pretty good.

You can get glass just like ie7/chrome in 3.0/3.5 right now with one extension (glasser)....I dont see how they need a major rewrite to get it working.

Somehow I don't see Mozilla adapting Microsoft API's for the taskbar tabs, simply for the fact that Firefox is intended to be a Universal browser; available on muliple platforms. Linux and Mac OS X wouldn't be able to use such tab API's, and no sense in implamenting them for the sake of only one platform.

Somehow I don't see Mozilla adapting Microsoft API's for the taskbar tabs, simply for the fact that Firefox is intended to be a Universal browser; available on muliple platforms. Linux and Mac OS X wouldn't be able to use such tab API's, and no sense in implamenting them for the sake of only one platform.

there's plenty of things they do only on certain platforms, I don't see why they couldn't do that for Win7

When you enable Glass in a window with HTML content, you gets bugs like this and this.

And Mozilla have no problem implementing platform specific features when it provides better integration into the base OS (on Windows, it does it's own alerts, on OS X it does them through growl, on Linux it does them through libnotify). And there's already a "progress in taskbar" patch that is nearly finished.

Somehow I don't see Mozilla adapting Microsoft API's for the taskbar tabs, simply for the fact that Firefox is intended to be a Universal browser; available on muliple platforms. Linux and Mac OS X wouldn't be able to use such tab API's, and no sense in implamenting them for the sake of only one platform.

No offense but thats such an ignorant post, why not take available of an api on one platform to make the browser better? AFAIK firefox will be integrating with things on OSX that windows doesn't have either in the future.

Taking advantage of the api probably wouldn't be too difficult and wouldn't make firefox any les of a "Universal Browser" Your post makes NO sense at all.

No offense but thats such an ignorant post, why not take available of an api on one platform to make the browser better? AFAIK firefox will be integrating with things on OSX that windows doesn't have either in the future.

Taking advantage of the api probably wouldn't be too difficult and wouldn't make firefox any les of a "Universal Browser" Your post makes NO sense at all.

All I'm saying is I would imagine it to be inefficent cost wise an resource wise (number of developers and programming power) to cater to each and every platform's specifics for a single program, not to mention a possible invitation to bugs or such a huge base code that it becomes bloatware.

All I'm saying is I would imagine it to be inefficent cost wise an resource wise (number of developers and programming power) to cater to each and every platform's specifics for a single program, not to mention a possible invitation to bugs or such a huge base code that it becomes bloatware.

It's not exactly a massive or very difficult feature to implement you are making it WAY bigger than it really is and blowing things completely out of proportion, and would hardly make it "bloatware"

talk about making a mountain out of molehill.

It's not exactly a massive or very difficult feature to implement you are making it WAY bigger than it really is and blowing things completely out of proportion, and would hardly make it "bloatware"

talk about making a mountain out of molehill.

A molehill becomes a mountain when you keep adding things; some Windows 7 Aereo, a taskbar tab API here, an OS X Cocoa with a side of Aqua there, a little Linux Jetpack a dash of Microformat APIs, etc.

(Let's not even get into layers for Extentions, Java, MAPI, CCS, SSL, etc. ;Standard for Popular Web Browsers)

It's apparent that Firefox isn't as efficent as IT COULD BE

Under the umbrella of Mozilla, Gecko is actually a much bigger project in technical terms than Firefox is. For example, there is much more Gecko code than there is code specific to Firefox, which is an application we built on top of Gecko.

Source: http://boomswaggerboom.wordpress.com/2008/...under-the-hood/

I believe this is why Chrome is beating Firefox in terems of raw performance speed, because it doesn't implament all this crap.

chrome is not noticeably faster than fx at all on my system, and thats not why its faster. It's because chrome is built on a faster rendering engine (webkit) and their js engine (v8) is faster as well but not by a whole lot. Firefox 3.5 beta has many speed improvements and isn't much slower than chrome at all.

And chrome is pretty much featureless compared to fx imo, it's lacking a lot of basic features like smooth scrolling and proper bookmark management an extensions arent even fully implemented yet.

Your posts seem to imply that making firefox better on each platform makes it "slow" which is not true.

Also firefox is already completely cross platform on both OSX and linux while chrome is still in VERY early stages being ported to those.

Your arguments make little to no sense.

A molehill becomes a mountain when you keep adding things; some Windows 7 Aereo, a taskbar tab API here, an OS X Cocoa with a side of Aqua there, a little Linux Jetpack a dash of Microformat APIs, etc.

(Let's not even get into layers for Extentions, Java, MAPI, CCS, SSL, etc. ;Standard for Popular Web Browsers)

It's apparent that Firefox isn't as efficent as IT COULD BE

you speak like firefox on every operating system is installed from 1 installer...

  • 6 months later...

There may be more firefox users on linux per capita, but overall I think Windows has most firefox users. Call it self interest but I think that they should start by implementing things that affect the majority of users instead of taking Adobe's route and implementing something that people have been demanding on a platform that only affects a few people (cref: Adobe Flash 11 x64 linux)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • According to Microsoft, Cause: One of the drivers controlling the device notified the operating system that the device failed in some manner.   https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/error-codes-in-device-manager-in-windows-524e9e89-4dee-8883-0afa-6bca0456324e
    • This looks awesome, I will request access via Steam later this afternoon!
    • Personally, I’ve found that it’s usually worth investing in the infrastructure you don’t want to replace later, especially cabling. Running Cat6A (or better, depending on your needs) during an upgrade is relatively inexpensive compared to having to re-cable a few years down the road. For switches I try to balance current specs with realistic growth. If my budget allows it Ill choose switches with higher uplink speeds which leaves room for expanding later on, but I don’t necessarily overspend on access ports if the endpoints won’t benefit from them anytime soon. One lesson I’ve learned is that planning for scalability pays off. It’s much easier to add devices, VLANs, or higher-bandwidth workloads when your network infrastructure already supports it than to replace hardware later.  What is your budget like?
    • I hate the term, "future-proof." We saw it back in the 90's / 2000's, if not before. You cannot future-proof anything, since there is no definition of how far into the future you plan on prepping for. Best idea is to tell us what you currently have and what its use is at the moment, and we can then offer ideas about some areas that might need an upgrade and other areas that can be left alone.
    • I can agree that it is being used in a small capacity. I worked for a company where their engineers still used XP, and when asked why it was because their sensor software wasn't compatible with newer operating systems and the software was discontinued so they couldn't upgrade the software. Given that the sensors were still in use by companies, they had to continue using XP to support the sensor, otherwise the price to the company would have gone into the millions or billions. Our response was simple: Ok, you can keep the XP machine. But we're removing it from the network. "But then it can't access the Internet or folder shares!" Yup, kinda the point. If someone wants to continue using an unsecure OS they can do, I have no problem with that. But it should be isolated. Simple. I had a fight with a guy in the engineering department for weeks before he finally relented. But we digress.   What do I plan on doing to commemorate the anniversary? Nothing. I have fond memories of the OS, but at the end of the day it's just an OS. If I had some time I might see if I could install it on my Raspberry Pi for a laugh. But my reflex memory with today's OS ideas would probably get me frustrated and I'd uninstall it after 5 mins.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      539
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      269
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      154
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      99
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!