As the boys of Mozilla-HispanicThis year Firefox It will give its users a few improvements both in the visual section and in its performance.
new topic
Let's start with the most relevant that the new versions of Firefox. A new topic called Australis (and I don't know why it looks more and more like Chrome) we can find it for Windows, Mac y GNU / Linux. The result is a cleaner and more heterogeneous interface, with rounded and very elegant tabs.
New home page
We can also see a new home page (about: home), which not only brings together the most visited websites, the most used applications and the recent sites, but also adds the instant messaging contacts.
All very nice, but I only have 2 questions:
- Won't this affect browser usage?
- What service will be used for instant messaging?
Other improvements
Firefox will include other improvements which show us in Mozilla-Hispanic, and we can see below:
- New download panel that will allow you to manage them from the main user interface.
- A network timeline, and a JavaScript debugger.
- IonMonkey, a new JIT compiler for JavaScript.
- New improvements to Firefox's memory and garbage collectors will avoid those undesirable occasional pauses.
- A Firefox service will correct wrong Windows optimizations, resulting in faster startups.
- Information will be provided to the user about which add-ons are slowing down Firefox.
- The session restore functionality is being redesigned to make it faster.
- Click to start a plugin. With more and more Flash ads screaming every day, this functionality cannot come fast enough. Similar to Flashblockyou'll basically need to click on a plugin for it to play or run.
- Transparent installation of popular plugins like Flash.
- Online PDF viewer, based on the pdf.js library (available as complement) will allow you to get rid of a plugin.
- Link sharing on Twitter, Facebook and Gmail, as implemented by Firefox Share, a Mozilla Labs project that is about a year old. Hopefully, the architecture will allow additional services like Pinterest and Diaspora to be registered.
- Connecting to Firefox will allow users to register with Firefox and access their information on the web including passwords, forms, history, and access to Sync.
- A network installer will reduce download times and make the installation a better guided process. As the Firefox installer grows in size, this will bring a better experience to users on slow connections.
- Reader Focus, it will remove side panels, headers, footers and other related content from a web page to focus on the actual content: a news story, a blog post, an article. Similar to Readability.
- Integrated translation.
This is undoubtedly excellent news and I at least look forward to the final result. The resemblance to Chrome may have its advantages, as it could attract browser users from Google. I also see the unified options menu to the right of the address bar very successful. All these changes and others can be seen in the Mozilla wiki.
Source: Mozilla-Hispanic
Images: Mozillalinks.org
It is seen that they are going to do whatever the mozilla ones are not to end up as it operates.
No offense, but I'm tired of the comparison with Google Chrome for everything, that if it now copies the interface, that if this, that if the other….
And? Is it bad that I copy the good of Chrome and that together with the good that Firefox already had, it makes it an even better web browser?
To begin with, the resemblance I do not know where it is, do you say it by a unified search and address bar and by some rounded tabs and by the tools button? It will be the only thing, apart from then many of those changes do not arrive, or do otherwise….
That is what everyone said with version 4 of Firefox, and you will tell me where the resemblance is… ..it's really, it's very easy to use what everyone says, »Firefox is becoming more similar to Google Chrome every day» but already CANSA.And more to say it without foundation ...
First of all: Do not offend anyone with your comment. It is your opinion and I respect it. Now, there is something contradictory in your comment:
So do you know or don't you know? That is why I say it, because of the design of the tabs, because of the tools button ... etc. You're giving me the reason that they do look alike. I am not criticizing the fact that Firefox copies Chrome, from the outset it seems great, because Google's browser has many good things. And it seems to me that everything I said has foundation. But I don't know, maybe I'm wrong.
Who cares if they are copied? Better, so no one will have an excuse and everyone will come to the warm bosom of Mozilla, where fonts render much better, and reading on the web is a delight (?)
Copies bother me
Even oxygen bothers you xD.
I like how it's going to look, but… Any date?
Fuck it doesn't bother me either, I like originality, nothing more
Friend, better make us a list of the things that you like so as not to throw yourself a ball XD ...
HAHAHAHA +1
But if I just said that I don't like carcamal copies
I think these changes are coming for Firefox 12 😀
XD
If at this rate I will take my revenge as I did with elav for a comment from a loooong time ago and KZKG ^ Gaara for calling me EMO.
Keep it up and it will be your turn hahaha
Well, not me, since they copy the good things and that the copy is good. And sometimes even the copy comes out better than the original; D
And last if you consume a lot… there will always be Firefox 10 ESR!
I go back to Firefox. Enough of Chromium 😀
I find it extremely attractive, I would have to see how they are displayed in KDE, but I really like them 😀
I imagine they will be independent of Oxygen GTK and KFirefox and of course, they would look good
Well, it seems to me that the click to start the plugins will facilitate navigation, also the design of the new tab that is now by default (although as always there were already accessories that did something similar) and the lecotr approach is something that always I liked Opera, for example, the horizontal adjustment of the pages, which on small screens (netbooks) helps a lot.
I can send you to the RAE because you have been reading the blog for a long time:
http://www.rae.es
Come on, that was a simple mistake, he pressed one key before another ... don't be so fussy hahaha
And you correct the other article, the one on VLC
Personally, I don't like the chrome interface, I would prefer that firefox adopt the style of the extension Oxygen KDE As the default interface, it is really very nice and pleasant (I would only change the icons for more aesthetic ones).
As for the functionalities, as long as they do not affect performance, welcome: D.
It looks very good, it is true that it has an "air" to Chrome, but at least it does not keep your browsing data to offer you advertising and tailor-made results and who knows how much else.
LOL!!!! +1!!!
+10 😉
I like that they find different options
I wonder if it was like before that I was only internet explorer
I mean the more option is better for me I say
Actually that "before" never existed, there were always options to IE. That people did not think about those things, or notice them, or disgust IE is another thing.
The difference was that when Firefox emerged it was born plowing an Anti-IE sentiment in order to have relevance. And it worked for him of course.
Anti-IE sentiment was coming from Netscape 🙂
Why Netscape? But if Netscape was a monopolistic, proprietary, anti-standard (and bloatware) browser, and incidentally, it failed because it lost the browser war that it started. Unless it's "all the dead are good guys" I see no reason to be sad about Netscape.
In fact, even if they tell me that Netscape was someone's father, I don't understand how someone can be hating the killer of
his fathera browser. I knew humanity is wrong, but not to that degree.But also, if it had been for Netscape, why didn't that feeling arise immediately accompanying any of the "no IE" options that there were?
Well yes, by Netscape that could be all that you say, but it was the first to show us that IExplorer was not the only thing on the market. Unfortunately he lost due to the monopoly campaign applied by Bill Gates and for which he went to trial. Also, thanks to Netscape today we have Firefox 😉
Let's see, Microsoft with the issue of the browser wars, simply made mistakes ... or rather, let the errors come to light.
NetScape offered what IE didn't, simply because IE didn't exist. Then, when Microsoft released IE, it made a very nasty way for vendors to force IE on users.
Just when this ended and NetScape lost, the antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft began, where it was decided that Microsoft had to split into two, almost dissolve, or something like that. But they appealed and went to another trial, where the final decision is that B.Gates cease to be the wholesaler or boss ... and so on until today.
In other words, the anti-IE sentiment comes from the fact that Microsoft with IE used VERY dirty techniques to achieve a monopoly on browsers.
At least that's how I see it 😀
@elav
They say that history is written by the winners, but in this browser war, history has been written by the losers and look at how they have transformed it.
All that you say is real only if it is credited as IE's merits.
IE was the one (and he is the first) who showed us that not everything was Netscape, because Netscape was a monopoly when IE was born and it was a monopoly when IE wanted to open a niche in the market.
It could also be said that thanks to IE it is that today we have Firefox, because it is recognized that Netscape was born the "altruism" of releasing the code and creating Mozilla just because it went bankrupt (which I suppose it believed that it could survive this way, having - supposedly- "0" costs and only profits), but would never have stopped embracing the Private Software model that always worked for them, just as the rest of the companies that have not failed, including MS, Apple, Adobe , etc.
Fortunately Netscape lost and it was the best thing that could happen to us, because that way the best browser won (which although many do not believe it, Netscape was not the best, not even close), because it won the relay and not the dominant one, because it was only that defeat that was born something that many are grateful today. And there would be more reason to be glad if IE had not copied the bad tricks that Netscape taught it: create its own "standards" and seek to stifle the competition. Another merit apart from IE is that thanks to IE the browsers, free or not, are free.
@Gaara
Both Microsoft and Netscape made mistakes, just like in a real war. The difference, as you say, is that Microsoft is aired, or as I said above, history has been written by the losers, Microsoft has been left as the only supervillain and Netscape as a martyr they have made him a saint, in addition to obscuring or directly changing some facts.
When MS released IE, Netscape played bad and dirty. Taking advantage of his domain, he began to skip more the standards and put things only supported by him and we already know what the "webmaster" are like to put things just for the sake of being new and leaving Standards and Consortia thrown away. This gave rise to non-standards-compliant websites, Netscape-only websites, websites with "Download Netscape" signs, and browser sniffing.
As a result of this, IE had to go after Netscape's steps by copying "its standards" so as not to be incompatible with the web or appear defective and also had to contaminate its UserAgent to be confused with Netscape, not to be denied when making requests to the servers, skipping sniffing, posters, etc. I think even today it is possible to see that Netscape footprint in IE's UserAgent.
It is true that when IE was a few years old (and was on his version I think 4) and was already on the ropes and on the verge of "dying before being born" that MS also began to tighten the pliers and apply dirty tactics to counteract the dirty tactics from Netscape. In the end the MS muscle was stronger and we already know who bit the dust.
Regarding the antitrust lawsuits against MS, it is true that I no longer remember much and in itself at that time things were cloudy because it was a mixture of things, it was one all against MS, but what I am clear about is that contrary to what people usually think, Netscape's royo had to do with little, nothing more than something anecdotal in some statement and that judgment did not really revolve around browsers, contrary to what that many think today.
Almost everything was due to demands for the "inquisitive deals" that MS made with the hardware manufacturers, for the boycott and dirty campaign at that time very, very strong that MS made to GNU / Linux -and to GNU, to the FSF, to Free Software- (how much was the stigma towards Free Software that is the cause that there were people who no longer wanted to be associated with the name of Free Software and the further they saw it for them the better. That is the emergence of Open Source , the one who owes the skin to whoever disgusts him) and to BeOS if I remember correctly, so that they were not implanted and for certain practices (supposed or not) that consisted of secrets in Windows with which MS could make more advantageous products those of the competition.
This final antimopoly trial came to nothing and MS was as is:
- Bill Gates retired after several years because he wanted to.
- The manufacturers who were the ones who complained the most quietly eat Windows because "there is no option" and they are truly happy with it.
- The other software manufacturers are still silent, perhaps because their paranoia has passed or because something changed in MS or because they had no other choice because no other platform helped them to generate (some) money. And just thinking cold is hard not to think that those speculations were always supported by tantrums.
- And the people of Free Software managed to get them out of the way to the point of sectioning it since their voice today has almost no weight / noise and if it is heard it is seen as "Taliban and extremist" (I reiterate, MS's efforts had effect in stigmatizing it) an idea that since then and until today is not even reinforced by MS, paradoxically that work has been in charge of "OpenSource" throughout this time.
In the lawsuits the closest thing to the issue of browsers was because MS gave IE away, but not because it was dirty against Netscape but because the people who sold it Mosaic (or the name it had at that time) did not sell it for a fixed price but for a percentage of the sale price that IE will have. As IE turned out to be offered free they did not charge anything, NOTHING. If I remember correctly, MS did lose this and I believe that this gave rise to the issue of the possibility of dividing the company, etc.
Now, leaving aside that story is that the Anti-MS yes it comes from that time.
However, the Anti-IE no. I don't know if you lived through that time, but at that time no one disliked IE, except perhaps the fanboys who got very involved in the trial soap opera and shit on everything that smelled like Bill Gates. But if the Anti-IE sentiment was normal, why didn't people adopt some of the alternative browsers that already existed at that time and didn't wait until Firefox came out years later to start showing that activism? Why were people happy with the best and powerful IE browser to date?
Let's see. You are right about something: Netscape Navigator was the first to be closed and commercial, as it is also true that it included its own extensions that are only supported by it. Now, what you say:
I could not tell you because at that time I did not know that the internet existed, but it is very similar to what we find on the sites of Hardware manufacturers when they say, for example:
So Microsoft has learned well since then and continues to do so today. In fact, as far as I know, and according to a documentary that talks about that issue, precisely Bill Gates was taken to court for things like that, for wanting to cover everything, that is, Monopoly. Anyway.
You are also right with that that thanks to IExplorer today we can have Firefox due to Netscape's decision to open the source code so that its browser would survive. However, I do not agree with you on something:
All that very nice but why after winning the battle did IExplorer continue to do with the standards what came out of its parts? Because it wasn't until version 7 or 8 that they started to change this. IExplorer 6 was and is disgusting viewing websites that have to be hacked so that they are displayed as they should in that browser.
Wow ... without thinking twice, amazing O_O .
My respects for your comments, and without even thinking twice or consulting someone else I say: «Would you be interested in sharing articles, posts, writing in <° Linux and thus be able to enjoy paragraphs like these?»
About the Anti-IE feeling nope, I did not live it, I'm only 22 years old
My experience with IE was never pleasant, at the age of 14 I was already developing websites (pure HTML, using only 'notepad') and honestly, IE always bothered me, I found that "something" was missing ... that it didn't do "something Well, come on, it was never a great or wonderful experience, I used it and that's it, because I didn't know anything else. Then I found Firefox (v1.x), needless to say, to this day :)
From there, I understood (discovered) that there was "something else" outside the company with M, that MS was not everything. But I didn't give it much importance, at that time I enjoyed games too much and, haha, like almost every kid of that age, I adored cracks, games were the most important thing, and I was a Windows fan.
regards
That word does not appear in the RAE
Courage seriously. Don't you get tired? Do you think that after the objective and instructive comment that Ares has written, someone gives a shit about yours about the RAE? Come on man..
Do not play the young man, you have been a carcamal for 2 years
@elav
Because I could do it and there was no reason to stop doing it, I had already learned that doing those things was profitable since the web was going to revolve around them (which by the way was like something I wanted to do from the beginning) and also any possible competition was going to have them raw since I had to guess IE and run after his footsteps. If you notice it is something that for example continued to do with .doc, .xls, etc.
Besides that not everything was achieved, there were still enemies and MS wanted to go for more and continued against Opera with some boycotts of which I do not have much data now.
Perhaps today it sounds like excessive ambition to go against the minority Opera, but at that time it was a logical action; With the fall of Netscape, the competition would benefit. Of course, IE was that competition, but Opera was too and neglecting it could become an executioner in the market, which of course MS did not want. That is, perhaps MS did not want to exterminate Opera, but it did prevent it from growing up and being its next killer, which it seems it succeeded.
IE6 arose in 2001, a time that although today it can be said that the browser war "had ended" at that time the present and the future were not so clear and it seemed that the fire would continue (Mozilla already proclaimed itself strong as a threat, although it would not come to concrete anything until years later), so I understand that IE6 was made armed prepared to continue in the war and crush enemies.
When IE7 and later emerged MS folded (little by little) to the standards I don't know for what reason, maybe because it changed its mentality, maybe because it would be at a disadvantage if it kept doing it, etc.
Normal when you want to adapt the web "of today" to a browser of almost 13 years that is also the result of a war of anti-standards.
@Gaara
ha ha ha xD, thanks for the compliment, but the truth is that I don't have much to say, except for a couple of things that I drop in the occasional comment I have nothing of value to contribute.
I have always been about to write about two or three topics, but in between a matter of time since they are very "flaming" since there is no way to soften them I have never specified it, however if one of those days comes, I already know that I have this door open . Thanks 🙂
So if I tell you that before that MS was cooler than Google and Apple together, you can't imagine it.
Today it is not uncommon for Google to be seen by some as a "big brother", as a "be evil"; but do you remember a few years ago when everyone !! adored Google like a good-natured godfather and was the coolest company in the galaxy? So or more was MS.
What I am going to say neither takes away nor puts reality on IE, but what you say is a matter of experience. So as you say, more or less 8 years ago I also did the same and in a self-taught way I started making sites. The result in my case is that IE seemed super compliant because it was the one I used to make the sites and to view the sites (from here I learned that the browser one uses to create is always magically "compliant"). And not only for me but all the websites were made for IE or at least "old-fashioned". Then I gave other browsers a chance and saw that "they" were a nightmare. Fortunately I simultaneously learned about norms and standards and about the good (and now disgraceful) of XHTML. Here for a short time I relived again the phenomenon of "my browser shows it well then the rest is wrong" (since IE or noIE, they all give more or less extra problems where they worked) but that is something else and luckily I entered in reason.
@Courage
And surely there are more xD