digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Mozilla release mockups of Firefox 3's Places (bookmarks + history) (PIC)

people.mozilla.com — Places is a central area for bookmarks, browsing history and downloads in one spot with thumbnails and tagging.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • NoNamesLeft, on 10/23/2007, -24/+40Look's nice for Vista users but what about OS X, Linux etc? The OS X port of 2.xx in particular is a disgrace, the widgets look like they came straight from 1995.
    • Mejogid, on 10/25/2007, -2/+20The nightly builds are already vastly improved, with better startup speed, general performance, integeration (eg. with growl, better MIME behavior), native form widgets and - incredibly, for nightly builds - stability in my experience. I will agree that Firefox 2 is a disgrace on OS X, but it's been great watching the GTK and OS X versions being brought up to scratch.
      • thebankshow, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12integeration ? is that the generation of integers?

        Seriously though, I'm glad they've decided to move forward with the Places concept. IMO it's a long awaited innovation in browser user experience. Also pretty excited to see the microformats and SVG implementations.
    • Piedramente, on 10/17/2007, -1/+11Agreed. I was wondering how it would look in XP as well.
    • FuckDigDotCom, on 11/07/2007, -8/+6Um, ***** osx.
  • brklynmark, on 10/25/2007, -11/+83As long as it doesn't crash every time it opens a PDF, I'm down.
    • dshPls, on 10/25/2007, -4/+28iGoogle and Digg always give me freezes and slowdowns, and I'm on a superfast machine too. It's probably a mix of FF and AJAX though, not just one or the other.
      • Piedramente, on 10/25/2007, -0/+20The same keeps happening to me. Especially during digging or burying.
      • raynar, on 10/25/2007, -2/+17It's because Digg would rather have fancy comment effects instead of just threading them like slashdot. Come on digg, you took THAT idea, take the whole thing!
      • kelson, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The only browser I've had freeze on digg was Opera 9.x, and it's considerably improved in the Opera 9.5 alpha. Firefox 2 and Opera 8.5 on the same box handle it fine. And I don't even have that fast a computer.
      • Tenoq, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well I do have a fast computer, and it freezes all the time. I've all but given up using Digg on that machine. Think I'll go back to 1.5... it was a helluva lot faster and more compatible.
      • ogremidget, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You could try blocking all images on Digg. This works great for slow computers.
    • MrViklund, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Strange. Have never had that problem in all my years of Mozilla Suite and Firefox use. Allot of problems that people are having usually aren't general problems with Firefox. But anyway. Hope 3.0 solves your problem.
    • toastgodsupreme, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6Why even open pdfs within a browser window? Tell acrobat to simply open them outside a browser. Some ***** just should not be integrated. OH NO! Look! I now have TWO windows! a browser and my pdf viewer! WOE IS ME!
      • donte, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1You know if IE did the same thing, you'd probably raise hell about how crappy the browser is. But let's just ignore the fact that FF has flaws (lots of them) and call the user stupid. I like your approach.
      • exomni, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6If I ever had to open PDF's in a seperate program, I would immediately switch web-browsers.

        Opening PDF's within a browser is a simple, core requirement of any web-browser.
        • WhereAmI, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Should be a simple core requirement. Adobe are the people to blame.
      • luchid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Not to sound like an advertisemente, but go download Foxit Reader. The fastest PDF reader... It's free too...
      • DeviantSeptum, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3The original poster is 100% correct. It's the browser's job to render HTML documents. Requiring it to also be a PDF viewer is the road to bloat. By ethnanmccarthy's logic, the browser should also render Word, LaTeX, postscript, Excel, and so on and so on. There's no real benefit --- NONE --- to having it open in the browser window compared to spawning an external app but there's huge design benefits to keeping an application simple.
      • mfearby, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4I'm with you there, sport. I cringe every time I click on a link without noticing that it's a PDF and regret not right-clicking and saying "Save Target As". The number of times frigging Acrobat has locked up my web browser (both IE and Firefox) is enough to swear you off the dreaded things for life. Seriously, Adobe... A bloody document reader shouldn't be such a great, big, elephant for Christ's sake!
    • ucg1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21Only a fool uses the PDF plugin (in any browser, especially a single-threaded browser that becomes unresponsive until a plugin is done working). Just let it download and launch your PDF reader. There are no benefits to using the plugin.
    • khoa1708, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19i use foxit reader and haven't crashed
      • WhereAmI, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1But we don't get to do it in firefox.
    • Tyr7BE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Yeah for me it grinds to a halt when there are a lot of comments. Only seems to have started happening with the new comment system, though I could be wrong.
    • bman784, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Acrobat is slow like nothing else and will crash the browser. I use Foxit, which is much much faster and worlds better.
  • o2unix, on 10/10/2007, -7/+16WOW! I like.
  • culley, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6Can't wait for it to beta to be released, i don't care if its buggy, it can't be worse than 2.0 edit well it can be i don' care.
    • vemerge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7What?
    • CAD420, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1uh...isn't the beta already out? I've been using Minefield for quite some time now.
      It's been nice seeing the progress they've been making after each nightly build.
    • iofthestorm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You should try nightlies, they are actually quite stable and a lot faster than 2.0.
  • ZephyrNinety, on 10/17/2007, -22/+45Looks slick, but I could do without the Vista-ness.
    • mimilena, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22Umm... that's only if you're using Windows Vista. It blends into the theme you're using.
      • matthewf01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2where's the Glass?
        • asurroca, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I'm guessing you've never actually used Vista... In most windows, the "glass" is only around the dragbar at the top and surrounding the window. IOW that mockup is a pretty standard Vista window...
      • asurroca, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7FF3 is (finally) using the OS's native schemes for everything, so don't worry, it'll look like a full-blown OS X program in OS X, and a full-blown Vista program in Vista, etc. etc.
    • darkNiGHTS, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Ummm that would be because of the fact that it's on Vista. lol.
    • kettlechips, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Ummmmm, yeah.
  • AmazingAndrex, on 10/10/2007, -31/+3Doesn't look that great. =/

    I'll stick with Opera.
    • whataboutdave, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Oh, you Opera folk. Firefox could cure cancer and you'd still swear your love for Opera.
  • mudface, on 10/10/2007, -30/+3Yuck! How about a pic running on Mac OS X?
    • coheedcollapse, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13If you really can't imagine that same thing with the mac window setup, you have very bad visual skills.
  • n8r0n, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Good to see that mconnor is getting that "revert to backup" option he/she wants...
    • luserspaz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1mconnor would be the Firefox lead dev, which makes him faaborg's boss. Usually you implement the things your boss wants.
  • alwaysmc2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4pretty :-)
  • MrViklund, on 10/17/2007, -6/+12Very cool. Can't wait for Firefox 3! :)
    One browser to rule 'em all...
    • rye134, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15Umm one browser to rule them all?
      Isn't that the problem we've had with IE? Don't you see by having these multiple browsers it creates competition which in turn means better products for us? If everyone used firefox what incentive would mozilla have to improve their browser? And if everyone used firefox, wouldn't 1337 h4x0r5 want to switch targets from IE to firefox?
      • kelson, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I absolutely agree. Multiple browsers give us competition on features. Multiple rendering engines give us competition on capabilities. Look at all the CSS3 properties Safari is adding to the next release, or Opera's implementation of SVG, or the WHATWG features working their way into Gecko, WebKit and Opera. Then go back and look at how little IE changed from 2001-2004, when it was still the undisputed leader.

        Each browser picks its priorities and makes its innovations. People try it, discover what they can do, produce demonstrations and create demand for those capabilities in other browsers. In the end, everyone wins.

        If anyone's interested, I've written more on this topic at http://www.alternativebrowseralliance.com/why.html
  • flytronix, on 10/10/2007, -25/+3bloatware
    • bryan986, on 10/10/2007, -17/+3I agree, I don't need or want any of this junk
      • Sanicle, on 10/21/2007, -0/+0Looking pretty and being bloatware are NOT ubiquitous. If anything this could decrease the bloat factor since integrating Firefox into the look and feel of different OSes will probably mean it can use already existing interface elements rather than using it's own and adding to ram usage that way. My only worry is that all the work on localised themes could detract from efforts into creating new features
  • ggwarpig, on 10/10/2007, -14/+2looks like screen shots of Microsox. they better not ***** this up.
  • CrackedTech, on 10/17/2007, -5/+67Did anyone else feel like they were looking at photoshopped image of WMP 11?
    • hmbrown, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1The exact first thing I thought of too. And the reason for switching:

      "Because it looks freaking cool."
    • dracflamloc, on 10/10/2007, -12/+1Looks like I'll be sticking with ff2
      • WhereAmI, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I'll soon make a website with some certain aspects for people like you. Be sure to check your email!
  • snapcase, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Looks like they are trying to make the layout more confusing than it currently is to me. I like their current setup better.
  • moman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+40Looks cool but looks complicated. I fully support adding cool new features but I hope they also keep the simple bookmark system for users like me who don't need/want any frills
    • pwnmasta, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Mozilla Firefox Classic mode.
    • VeganG, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Yeah, I never asked to have the bookmarks, history, and downloads in one place. Those are all very different things, why would I want them together?
    • zwaldowski, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Bookmarks are still pretty much the same for people who don't organize them.
  • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Looks pretty nice, FireFox 3 is looking better and better. Right now firefox looks like complete ass in vista.
  • NikoKun, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6wow, nice... I just hope my extensions wont crap out once version 3 is released...
    • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5They might. But most of them get updated pretty quickly
      • WhereAmI, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Or you can update them yourself. The XPI is just like a zip, all you need to program is 7 zip and notepad2.
        And knowledge. Probably important.
  • toastgodsupreme, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10I'm still waiting for some quicksilver-like items. More keyboard functionality for quicker navigation.

    http://labs.mozilla.com/2007/07/the-graphical-keyboard-user-interface/
  • Protoss, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Nice. Is this in the nightly builds yet?
  • hadak, on 10/10/2007, -13/+47Why do we need to keep packing more and more ***** in to firefox? Isn't it bloated enough? Honestly. Firefox should be a "core"...and if you want all this extra *****, it should be in the form of extensions....extensions that you can enable and disable at will, to preserve startup times and disk space. Can we work on something important instead? How about my firefox using up to 1gb of memory? How about it *locking up* whenever I open a couple of digg tabs, or try to digg a comment or article? There are plenty of improvements aside from the UI. In the end, it's JUST a web browser. Making it respond faster, and giving you the *option* of adding on extra bloat is what should make it stand apart.
    • manstein01, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11I haven't had the other problems many have stated, save for the memory leak issue. But I completely agree, FF should be about a simple small stable web browser. I don't need fancy bookmark areas or the ability to download web applications and use them offline.
    • toastgodsupreme, on 10/10/2007, -6/+7Agreed. It should be a basic platform which people can add plugins to so that they can customize it to how THEY browse.

      It shouldn't give us a ***** ton of features, that's not it's job. That's the plugin system's job to handle.
    • Ancestor, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21So, the only logical conclusion would be that, err... you want to remove Bookmarks and History? Because that's all there is to it. Mozilla isn't adding anything, they are redesigning and improving the features that have been there forever. They are making them more useful and actually lighter.

      Seriously, now they can't even CHANGE anything (let alone add any new features whatsoever) without people screaming "OMG BLOAT".
      • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Thank you good sir
      • logic, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well, I've removed the Bookmarks menus/windows from my Firefox completely :-) Haven't had a use for it since the Del.icio.us Bookmarks extension came out.
      • jer2eydevil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I am glad to see that someone actually stood up to say something to all these nay-sayers!
    • exomni, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0I think bookmarks and history should be included in a bare-bones web browser, though it would be cool to handle them as plug-ins, and have a bit of choice over how they work.
    • zwaldowski, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17So, wait, are you saying BOOKMARK FUNCTIONALITY should be a plugin? Tagging and places are OPTIONAL, in case you haven't read any of this before, and bookmarks themselves (organizing aside) are much, much faster due to the SQLite system. Go back to using IE.
      • Tenoq, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Why not? That way you can go with whatever bookmark system you like. Obviously FF will ship with a bookmarking system: but the option of disabling that and upgrading/changing to a different one would be great. It's *exactly* how the great IM client Miranda is designed. It ships with a whole bunch of messaging protocols, messaging window styles, contact list styles... but you can disable and remove any of them and replace them with something more suitable. It would be simple AWESOME if FF introduced that level of modularity.

        It's unlikely though - I have no doubt the increased flexibility would scare off the 'simple' users, no matter how easy it was to use. Just like Linux, really. :p
        • zwaldowski, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Yes, but what people want to download a browser (after already reviewing that they NEED a new one) and then review MORE over vital systems in the browser. Y'know what they'll say? "***** it, I'll just go back to the blue E."

          Digg, please give us simple HTML. What's so wrong with a bold tag, or emphasis?
      • logic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Yeah, I really do think bookmark functionality should be an extension. Not everyone likes the way Firefox handles bookmarks. Lots of people use delicious, or Google, or something else entirely. You shouldn't have to know XUL/JS to remove a feature that a significant number of people don't have any use for.
    • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8All they are doing is combining bookmarks, history ect.. into one place and actually make it LIGHTER using SQlite. And it will not look like vista on other platforms, the mock up is simply in vista.
    • kretik, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I agree. Then the Mozilla devs can blame ALL the memory problems and crashes on the extensions, instead of just the ones they can't explain away.
  • democracysucks, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7For Linux users, I strongly suggest checking out Epiphany. It is much faster than Firefox, integrates well with GNOME, and has features like Adblock and this sort of "places" feature included by default. It tags bookmarks rather than placing them in folders, and typing in the location bar will instantly yield results from both bookmarks and history. It's quite nice.
    • exomni, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Plus it's based on Gecko, so it has all the compatibility of Firefox.
    • MrSpontaneous, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Why would I want to integrate a Gnome browser with KDE?
  • sargentr, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4eww, looks like IE 7. and that isnt fun to use. hopefully this does it better.
    • zwaldowski, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3It's a mockup in Vista, what do you expect? The Linux version will look like GTK+, and the Mac version will look like Aqua.
  • fatas, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5Looks way to "Vista", I guess MS developer teams have the blue print for IE8
    • zwaldowski, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6It's a mockup in Vista, what do you expect? The Linux version will look like GTK+, and the Mac version will look like Aqua.
  • eh270, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4Wow, that looks exactly like Safari's bookmarks viewer, except it has tags. wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
    • exomni, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Question is: can we type tags into the URL bar to come up with a drop-down list of bookmarks, a-la epiphany?
      • luserspaz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0That's planned, yes. Current nightly builds let you search by URL or page title in the URL bar, but the plan is to include tags and bookmarks there as well.
  • exomni, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4ewwwww... looks all Vista-like. And Vista looks like *****.
  • zwaldowski, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Note to Mozilla: do all mockups cross-platform, just in case users think you're using Windows Vista menus in Linux. /sarcasm
    • guardian653, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Well... I would like a better file dialog in the *nix port
      I'm serious--I need my thumbnails....
  • stormmind, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0Looks nice, but what if I have more than 3 tags? More like 10-20? OS-developers really have big problems designing interfaces. I wonder why...
    • xmuskrat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Mozilla isn't an OS developer. And why would you want 20 different tags for a website? If you did that for each of your bookmarks, it would be a rats nest. I usually never use more then 5.
  • morphie, on 10/10/2007, -8/+1Yeah, I'm with stupid. What's with the vista-looks? :)
  • jhuebel, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2This is all fine and good, but when are they going to fix all the lockups and slowness in 2.x?
    • gaurav4u99, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3IE 7 is slower than FF2 anyday
      • jhuebel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't actually CARE about IE7. I want Firefox to be better than what it is now. You bash IE7 (granted, it deserves it), but you don't refute the claim that FF2 is slow and unstable. The existing problems need to be fixed first, then add new features.
  • radiofrequency, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1That looks hideous. Is that Vista?
  • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I'm sure they won't sue the vista design in other OS's you fools. And it's a MOCK UP
  • james.mattson, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1WTF it looks like Vista and IE7. ugly.
  • bigern75, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9take a look at all the mock ups
    http://people.mozilla.com/~faaborg/files/granParadisoUI/
  • nonconformist, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1Looks like a Photoshopped hack of Media Player 11. Reading further down the bottom left of the image it says its a concept that may not even be used. $10 says it wont be used.
  • smitjel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Who needs all this fluff when you've got del.icio.us? There's no way I'd go back to storing bookmarks locally.
  • strom, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Can anyone tell me the name of the fonts used for this mockup?
  • digsuxx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0anyone know how the export file will work for these bookmakrs?
    • iofthestorm, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It should export to the same html format it used to, or at least that's how it worked in the firefox 2 alphas when they first started experimenting with places and before they decided to pull places from firefox 2.
  • sumguy231, on 10/10/2007, -6/+0Oh my god, it's bloated crap like this that makes me glad I switched back to IE in the first place. I remember when Firefox was a "lightweight" web browser, now it won't even think about starting on my 386. Call me when someone makes a web browser without features which receives no updates or improvements whatsoever.
  • Rileyper, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Wow, this is the most i have seen on digg that now hates firefox
  • sx66gns, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0looks like *****.
  • Chicken001, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1): Vista makes my penis frown.
  • joe90210, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1looks awesome, the vistaness is sexy
  • cmgarcia, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Am I the only one that thinks the actual tags themselves, with the circular-rectangular thing, look really bad and out of place?
  • crayak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Its seems like when ever something new comes out everyone has to hate on it. Lets reserve the hating for when its actually in beta at least. Personally I think given their current track record they probably know what the hell there doing.
  • donkeySays, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Hello there, kindly improve the download manager please? Resume, proper error checking etc. I have to open Opera to download stuffs, how ironic.
    • luserspaz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0The download manager did get improvements. Cross-session resumable downloads landed not long ago.
      • Jeremy23, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I've been waiting for that feature since 2003 for back when I had dial-up. They took so long implementing this, I've got broadband in my area now. ;)
  • xdevit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2People bitching about it being vista themed.. here..
    http://people.mozilla.com/~faaborg/files/daf/platformUI_bookmarksManager.png
  • carl25, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1wonder if the ram issue is fixed, and why my firefox crashes more than twice a day
  • akatsuki, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I have no idea from that image what makes Places cool or different than any other History/Bookmarks view except for buttons in different places. It doesn't appear they made the coolness of Trailblazer history (something that was just so ridiculously amazing that I still can't believe nobody has incorporated it) nor are there any other indications of why this is better. Someone please explain why anyone should care....

    Frankly they should declare Firefox 4 as a standards and optimization release. Only new CSS/HTML standards, and all other coding on heavy duty speed and memory optimization.
  • U5K0, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Hi I recently learned that firefox usage in my country is very close to 50%. I suggested on a few ffx sites that some kind of PR event be organized in honor of the occasion. But despite the positive opinions of comment posters one parson's attempts seem to not be enough. I'll be publishing an article about it shortly. I was just wondering if someone would care to help a bit.

    rgds

    U5K0

    http://www.spreadfirefox.com/node/28308
  • Enisity, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i like it but it looks to windows vista ish...i like but...it looks like something that iE7 should look like...: but still nice job
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.