Well, that guy should clearly have gotten fired when he let "new major revision number every 6 weeks" get past him out the door, anyway, cause he's clearly professionally incompetent.
This is just more evidence; the change they wish to make -- of which I too am intolerant -- is one that they should not make for a *very good reason* -- a reason which I would place bets lots of the people who are naysaying have mentioned, but which I note none of this coverage seems to mention:
It's *wrong*.
The items they wish to move "inside" the framing of the tabs *are not items which are different on a per-tab basis*; those items *do not belong inside the tabs*.
So, what they're doing is violating one of the standard WIMP design/layout metaphors, which was done that way for very good reason: because it's intuitive the way it is.
But then, it doesn't surprise me much to find that Firefox, like Android, is in pretty dire need of adult supervision.
Posted Dec 10, 2012 0:24 UTC (Mon) by cortana (subscriber, #24596)
[Link]
> The items they wish to move "inside" the framing of the tabs *are not items which are different on a per-tab basis*; those items *do not belong inside the tabs*.
They don't? The state of the back/forward/refresh buttons and address bar are different for each tab.
Security implications for user interface changes?
Posted Dec 10, 2012 0:57 UTC (Mon) by hummassa (subscriber, #307)
[Link]
Yeah, they are not "the global addressbar, stop/refresh button, back/forward button"... they are "that tab's addressbar and buttons".
Just imagine: if instead of opening a lot of tabs you just opened a lot of windows, each window would have its addressbar and buttons. Then, if you use a tabbing window manager (that groups windows of the same program in tabs), then you would have exactly what Firefox and Chrome has today.