
>>Yeah but ff2 is now unsupported so the move to 3 is now imperative from a security point of view.
If you say so. I figured AdBlock and NoScript were imperative from a security point of view far more than the browser itself.
>>Hmm not sure what you mean ff2 and ff3 ui aren't all that different and you can use another theme easily enough... e.g. Aero Silver Fox 3.0.2 looks good on ubuntu and windows.
I don't care about that particularly. I care about having a UI that doesn't blink, bleep, pop things up, or otherwise do anything on the screen without my explicit orders to do so. To the extent FF2 wants to do so by default, I've found that easy to disable. FF3, less so. Furthermore, I recall not being able to resize the add-bookmark dialog and a bunch of other stupid, unconfigurable annoyances that, to be fair, I can't remember. Have they fixed that, either?
>>I agree that this is a big change but I think the pain is worth it long term.
Okay, I didn't get that memo. What, exactly, makes this worth it? My understanding is that this database-based bookmarking system is supposed to be faster. I tried it; it wasn't. Otherwise, it appears to store a whole heck of a lot more... stuff, for lack of a better term, that serves no purpose apparent to me. A text-based format is universal. A database is a pain unless you know databases.
Note: this is a serious question. I truly, genuinely want to know why I, or anyone else, should regard this as an improvement.
>> you can still import and export HTML so its not that difficult to ExportHTML > clean up > ImportHTML
See, I tried that. It didn't work. Also, what I decrapify is all that extra garbage FF insists on stuffing into my bookmarks file. Here's what I do:
sed -r --in-place=.bak3 's/(ADD_DATE|LAST_MODIFIED|LAST_CHARSET|LAST_VISIT|ICON_URI)="[^"]+" //g' bookmarks.html
...to the bookmarks files on both of my machines, followed by using diff to keep them synchronized. I like doing it like this. That import/export stuff in FF3 doesn't seem to work well.
>> you still have control over the chrome.
Tying in with the next point: this is admittedly true, but I maintain that it is only a partial solution. Furthermore, being able to hack stuff isn't exactly the same as having a truly configurable UI. My understanding is that some of IE's interface shortcomings can be dealt with by mucking about in the Registry, too.
>>Don't overstate your case. It undermines credibility.
Fair enough, but the principle is the same: who gets the ultimate say in how I use my computer? Microsoft arrogantly won't let you turn that stuff off. Mozilla won't either. Firefox is more hackable, but I say again, the principle is the same.
>>I would say that although I was initially sceptical, the new lookup behaviour of the address bar is very good once you get used to it.
Pet peeve time: I do not have words to describe how infuriated I get when people say this. And they do. So often. Honestly, it's great that so many people like it. I understand that. I don't want it removed. But I, personally, don't. I, personally, have a way of working that suits me, and apparently I'm not alone in that. It's great that it works for others. But no matter how awesome anyone thinks a given UI feature is, it ought to be able to be disabled easily.
>>It enables you to quickly search your bookmarks and your history - very very cool.
I already have that. In fact, I have plugins that work better: Enhanced Bookmark Search, Enhanced History Manager, Flat Bookmark Editing, Locate In Bookmark Folders, and OpenBook. Maybe things have improved, but last I checked, I could not replicate the same functionality under FF3. Speed might matter if I was running this on, say, a low-speed ARM processor. But nothing I own, even the boxes that are several years old, show the slightest bit of sluggishness searching either of those things. Also, searching history would be irrelevant to anyone who likes to clear it out regularly.