Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Aug 2010 19:21 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones Today, Mozilla released the fourth beta of Firefox 4.0. After a period of what I would call stagnation, the Mozilla team are back on track with delivering interesting UI concepts. They were sensible enough to copy Chrome's excellent tabs-on-top UI, but have now also added something called Panorama, a new and very interesting way of managing your open tabs.
Thread beginning with comment 438189
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Wed 25th Aug 2010 19:34 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

How about they fix those 10 year old CSS bugs instead of piling in more bloat and bling.

Mozilla have lost the plot. The Firefox brand has become more important to them than actual users.

Reply Score: 10

RE: Comment by Kroc
by basic on Wed 25th Aug 2010 20:00 in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
basic Member since:
2010-08-25

Are you out of your mind? You expect Aza Raskin to fix a CSS bug? Or do you want more CSS bugs?

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Comment by Kroc
by spiderman on Wed 25th Aug 2010 22:20 in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
spiderman Member since:
2008-10-23

Actually there are several people working at Mozilla and even more working on Firefox.
If you look at the changelog you will realize that this feature is one among tons of other features, including bug fixing, accessibility improvements, standard compliance, performance improvements and a ton of other non-sexy changes.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?resolution=FIXED,VERIFIED&c...

This feature is osnews worthy because it is visual and everybody like sexy interfaces.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Thu 26th Aug 2010 10:13 in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

I had already read that entire list. I’m talking about bugs that were filed in 2001, 2003 and the like. Maddening, infuriating, needless bugs that refuse to get fixed because of a priority on shiny things.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Kroc
by deathshadow on Thu 26th Aug 2010 03:09 in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
deathshadow Member since:
2005-07-12

Can I assume that was a indirect reference to the little flamewar related to the new bullshit stance on 915?

Or as I call it (and said on bugzilla) "How about before you start implementing specifications that aren't even out of draft you finish off specifications that have been recommendations for over a decade?"

Welcome to the reality of open source -- if it's not flashy or trendy, and a coder can't toot their own horn over it, and it's not quite big enough for people to give money to set a bounty on it, don't plan on it EVER being fixed.

Which of course is how TWELVE YEAR OLD entries like bugzilla 915 are shuffled around with half assed status changes, until we get the current "Who gives a ****" status of "irrelevant"

So not only is firefux the same fat slow unstable pig it's always been, they've now pretty much said they could give a shit about the existing finalized standards and instead only care about specs not even out of draft... in other words crap like CSS3 and HTML5 which nobody has ANY ***** BUSINESS USING ON PRODUCTION WEBSITES.

After all, that's what DRAFT means! I swear, it's IE 5 all over again.

Edited 2010-08-26 03:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Comment by Kroc
by Beta on Thu 26th Aug 2010 12:28 in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

How about they fix those 10 year old CSS bugs instead of piling in more bloat and bling.

Some bugs are expensive to fix with regards to time, with little obvious gains. How should they balance developer time between that and implementing HTML5?
Some CSS features are behind (like overflow: ellipsis), but I understand their rational in bug comments…

Mozilla have lost the plot. The Firefox brand has become more important to them than actual users.


Did anyone using Chrome bitch this much about missing MathML support before it appeared? No… I think you’re being rather harsh on Mozilla. They’ve got people playing in the interface as well as all the developers they had previously working on Gecko.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Thu 26th Aug 2010 15:29 in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

As DeathShadow said above, in open source nobody wants to do the grunt work. There’s a reason why IE has the only full implementation of CSS 2.1, they paid their developers to the do it. A broken implementation is worthless and negatively effects everybody—100% complete, or not at all. Microsoft saw the importance of getting CSS2.1 done-and-dusted before working on HTML5. How am I supposed to have faith in Mozilla to implement HTML5 when they can’t even finish a ten year old job?

I can’t count the number of websites where #915 would have made a *big* difference to me, but Mozilla call it irrelevant because it’s old and unused *BECAUSE THEY MADE IT RARE AND UNUSED BY NOT IMPLEMENTING IT*. A self-fulfilling arsehole weasel get out—don’t implement something so developers can’t demonstrate practical uses, and then claim the feature isn’t needed anyway anymore and nobody will miss it.

Reply Parent Score: 2