That's the version I already have... What's wrong with it?
As a new comer to firefox, it's the only look I've ever seen.
You can also make some changes to firefox like changing the colour of the button and editing the homepage (about:home)
It's hard to say exactly what is different. I liked the simplicity of the previous version without the gradients, roundedness, etc. Now a few of my addons also look really weird (for example, odd outlines showing up, strangely sized icons), etc. It's not awful-- but it's far from an improvement in my opinion, so why change it? And why not let it stay the same?
Everyone seems to be complaining that FF is trying to emulate Chrome, and I agree-- that's not why I use FF. In fact, if that's why I used FF, I'd just use Chrome. The developers seem to have really missed the point.
I'll check out modifying it a bit myself. Thanks for the idea. I'd just rather not do it manually (and it might still not allow all options to be modified).
Hm. I haven't had much happen although a couple times things have jumped around a little bit when it loads, but almost too fast to see-- certainly too fast to be bothered by it.
I have, however, had FF getting stuck a little more than usual and then having to wait for it to catch up (basically almost freezing for a few seconds, maybe a minute). It has done that before, but I think it may be due to the speed change. I'll keep an eye on it.
I've decided to set an initial delay of "30" instead of "0" to see what happens.
My computer has recently been incredibly sluggish, especially when Firefox has had a number of tabs open. Let's see it that helps. I'm a bit worried that speeding up Firefox means taking a lot of ram/processing power.
My solution has been, reluctantly to no longer use the Fox as my primary browser. I never really did even when it was set as the primary. That setting governs which browser is used for preview in my editor, in general which browser is used when the OS sees a call to open a web page. For a long time now I've used Opera for most browsing. Anyways, I've set Chrome now as the default because it's less of a problem and its developer tools are better integrated than Opera or Firefox. It's also usually very good and fast should the OS decide it needs to launch a web page. One thing I don't like about it, and this might not be its fault, it makes updating Adobe products less automated. That has pluses and minuses though and might be a new approach on Adobe's part in general, but I think it's just how the Adobe update process reacts when Chrome is the primary.
For the moment, my computer is running faster. Admittedly, I have less open today. So, we'll see.
But if it keeps being this difficult to continue with FF, I probably will end up using Chrome. I'm disappointed in Mozilla for not producing a better browser, however. It might not be easy to make FF faster, but it should be possible-- after all, Chrome has done it. And FF has always seemed to have some sluggishness issues-- overusing RAM in various versions, etc. And, beyond that, I just don't like the current direction of development for FF. Each new update seems worse than the last, although it's important to upgrade for security (and functionality sometimes).
My suggestions to Mozilla:
1. Improve the speed of Firefox. Really. Actually do it-- it must be possible. (Even if that's by version 20, or 30, whatever, just do it.) And not as a workaround, or in a way that uses too much system power-- RAM, CPU, whatever.
2. Stop making the browser worse. It was fine as of v3-4. So keep that. Don't keep messing with the UI, and don't make it a Chrome look-alike. The whole reason people use FF is to NOT use Chrome. If FF is becoming Chrome, we may as well all switch over anyway. At his point FF is sort of like a broken/outdated version of Chrome.
(3. Stop coming up with a new "version" every 1-2 months! Who thought this was a good idea?)
Wow, it does. And it makes it clear that I'm not alone in this. I've seen a few other people out there complaining, but that article makes it pretty clear that FF/Mozilla is seriously misguided. I guess they don't want to be a good browser any more.
Is it entirely open source? Can a group of programmers just take it and fix it, leaving Mozilla behind? Or would that violate something? Mozilla shouldn't be in charge of FF any more (or perhaps their other products, from what that article says).