Surprises in Firefox 29 - Comments Page 2

Please do not consider this 2nd reply a spam or vile gossip. There have been recent talk that the "AddBlockPlus" Firefox add-on is causing much memory hogging! I had disabled ABP a few weeks ago and the sluggish keyboard issues had disappeared from my system. Today, re-enabling ABP has brought back those unresponsive keyboard problems again. YMMV!

Now that you mention it, I was a bit hassled by the switch but have already forgotten it. I too prefer a more arms length relationship to Google. Plus the AdBlock Plus add-on for Firefox is pure gold; I have had it for years, and I don't have to hunt for a replacement, if there even is one. I am sticking with Firefox.

I am a long-time FFx user, and I have much appreciated the new quick-paced rollouts of improvements and bug fixes -- until now. When the orange button appeared (25?), I changed back to the classic menu bar as soon as I could figure out how to do it. When 29 came out, my first reflexive thought was, "....gods, they've ruined it! They're trying to make it look like IE and Chrome." But I tried it and found it clumsy and annoying, rather than cool. I was relieved to find the classic theme restorer and applied it immediately. I also discovered that the Addons Bar was removed in FF29, and I didn't like that either. Fortunately I found an extension that resrores that as well: http://mzl.la/1hanCxM (called "The Addon Bar (Restored)", if that link does not work), I use FFx as my primary browser, and I have it tricked out with many extensions that I find useful for dozens of things that can't as easily be done in the other browsers. But it is slow to start (fine - all those extensions) and has been more slugghish lately, with more "Not Responding" waits, and it does not play well with Chrome apps. So I also use both Chrome and Opera. Chrome (with fewer addons) seems a little bit faster than FFx, but Opera (with only a few extensions) is lightning compared to both. I have plenty of memory, so I sometimes have all three running at once, and sometimes switch back and forth depending on the task. I use IE only when necessary. So no, I don't like the look of Firefox 29 native, and I doubt they will roll it back. But I find FFx so useful for so many things that I will keep it as my primary, as long as I can maintain my current customization, or something close.

I see it as a great improvement. Firefox is pretty much the only browser I use.

I like the new FireFox...I really don't see what all the whining is about. I guess some people are just resistant to change even if it is for the better....

Firefox is not friendly to YOU TUBE. I can download the videos to my computer and play them there but I prefer to preview a video before downloading. It is easy to download videos on Internet Explorer and Chrome. Firefox should address this problem (unless they do not have a proper agreement with YOUTUBE.)

Otherwise I really like Firefox.

Once I removed a few new toolbars I really didn't find a difference in the appearance from version 28.

This update wasted a couple of hours finding out where controls were now hidden and putting things back where I want them - and that is my main complaint, where was the Mozilla message telling me where things had been moved to, and how to resume my former layout? How was I (and probably millions of other users) to relate three obscure bars to a drop down menu?
Once again, designers and analysts have assumed everyone's knowledge is the same as their own level of geekery.
It certainly seems very much slower, by a factor of five or more.

I use FireFox almost exclusively. It took about a week to get used to the new UI. No reason to go back. Besides, no matter how much change FF does, it can't come close to the BS that Microsoft puts us through. Chrome is OK but still prefer FireFox.

After being a faithful FF user, for many years, last year I began using Google Chrome and love it.

I began to lose my "love affair" with FF, when, it started to try to be like Chrome. I thought, at the time ... Why, be like Chrome??? FF has it's own identity and I like it. As time went on, I became more and more upset with FF and it's so called "improvements." By this time, I had installed Chrome and began to use it more and more. I too, like the "quick response time" and got use to using the Extensions, for added enhancements. Now, FF does have more Add-Ons, than Chrome has Extensions, but, Chrome is improving, in this area.

Then, FF made a decision, that I felt should have been MY decision ... Stopping the usage of JavaScript, for everyone!!! There are still Add-Ons that will "stop" JavaScript from being enacted, while you are browsing ... But, FF simply will NOT let you use Java Scripts, period. I didn't like that decision, either. I never had any issues with JavaScript and my PC's security was excellent. I was well protected and very happy with my own arrangement, on my PC.

Bob, has written several article about the difference of Java and JavaScript. They are NOT the same and all of the security issues, are with Java. The following is from the Java website.

"How is JavaScript different from Java?

The JavaScript programming language, developed by Netscape, Inc., is not part of the Java platform.

JavaScript does not create applets or stand-alone applications. In its most common form, JavaScript resides inside HTML documents, and can provide levels of interactivity to web pages that are not achievable with simple HTML."

Please note ... JavaScript was developed by Netscape, Inc. Netscape is part of Mozilla, so why has FF chosen to stop the using of JavaScript??? Again, JavaScript does not have the "security" issues, like Java does.

Then, my final straw was when they made sure, that their new CEO resigned, due to "Political Correctness." That resignation, finally did it for me and not only did I stop using FF ... I also, completely uninstalled FF!!! As it stands today, I will have nothing to do with FF and I really do not care what FF does or doesn't do.

Not sure where browsers and internet are heading but I don't think it bodes well for the average user. Everybody sees greenbacks in everything they do and don't care about so called improvements unless it brings in more money, not customer satisfaction. I have noticed a push by Microsoft and Firefox to incorporate Adobe and if you don't have it or use it you don't have access to many sites or their video software. And everything is open and if possible, in the cloud. Not sure if cloud is workable as far as security. With the proper know how everything is open for the picking and there is NO SECURITY.

After running WaterFox for a few hours, and deleting tabs so only Bob's page is displayed, Working Set was 800 MB. After restarting WaterFox, Working Set went to 300 MB.

WaterFox is a 64-bit FireFox. Annoyingly, you can't have both Water and Fire; only one will run. WaterFox's version lags Firefox. http://www.waterfoxproject.org/

Bob's praise for Chrome prompted me to run it, and I remembered why I ignore it. It automatically updated itself, without asking. Boo! And I could not figure out how to get Zoom In/Zoom Out buttons on the menu. Hiss!

My IE developed problems when I switched from Norton to Avast! a few months ago and it basically stopped working. I got to the point where I anticipated a complete Windows reload was in order, so I ditched IE in favor of Chrome. I seem to recall trying FF but not liking it for one reason or another. However, I'm not in love with Chrome, either, so maybe I'll give this new FF a try.

A few versions back there was a mishap with the monthly updates and so I learnt, the hard way, to wait for the reviews of the new version before upgrading FF.
Now we have a complete change of the way it works: I am a developer and my work is already hard enough without having to contend with the idiosyncrasies of a program that doesn't now how to stay put.
For the time being I am still with 28 and gradually switching to Pale Moon: on day, perhaps, I will attempt to customize FF to my needs. For me it is a tool.

For many, we want nothing to do with Mozilla. Current events dictate reasons why. Besides, IE 11 on Windows 7 or 8 works great, as does Chrome.

It was the excessive chrome and overall layout of FF that led me to choose Google Chrome instead. If Mozilla had gone to this design a couple years ago I'd probably be using FF now. That being said, I think this drastic change was a bad move on their part, it was pretty much guaranteed to annoy most users. It was the same when Canonical switched to the Unity desktop (same with the changes between Gnome 2 and Gnome 3 in general), it annoyed many Ubuntu users and drove them to other distros. This is the kind of thing developers really need to check with users on before implementing them.

In FF29, although the appearance has changed ("Why have they made it look like Chrome?") I haven't found any difference in the hotkeys or keyboard access to menus. I hardly ever use the mouse for anything other than selecting within a web page.

I have been using FF (and occasionally trying the other major browsers) for about 12 years. My main reason for using FF rather than Chrome is Crome's less convenient access to bookmarks using the keyboard - all my bookmarks, not just a few of them through shortcuts or the bookmark toolbar.

Reminds me of New Coke

Been using FireFox for years. I prefer it over all others that I've tried....including IE. Currently I have version 29.0.1 on both my laptop and desktop....along with Windows 8.1.
I do have AdBlock Plus installed. I had not noticed any change in speed. Also have used Ghostery for about a year to smother tracking.

So far no problems except for a compatibility problem with Yahoo Mail...on just my laptop. But after uninstalling FireFox completely and then reinstalling it....all compatibility problems disappeared. I'm going to stick with it.

I have used Firefox for years because I like the look of it -with the Nautopolis theme. If I didnt I would just use Chrome. But after the way FF has been going lately I switched to Cyberfox which keeps the old FF look. Pale Moon also retains it.