Recent answers to tabs belowhttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/10006342014-07-15T07:20:01-07:00Locking this thread, as it has gone off the original topic a few times. Please start you own support2014-07-15T07:20:01-07:00the-edmeisterhttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634?page=2#answer-604152<p><em>Locking this thread, as it has gone off the original topic a few times. Please start you own support thread.</em>
</p>Hi djeddie2014, I'm puzzled that you're running a Flash game but your task manager does not show plu2014-07-15T07:02:03-07:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634?page=2#answer-604147<p>Hi djeddie2014, I'm puzzled that you're running a Flash game but your task manager does not show plugin-container.exe. Have you forced Flash to run inside firefox.exe? (I don't think it affects overall memory use, but that isn't a supported/tested configuration.)
</p>Hi oneforall, Mozilla often relies on the Add-on developer community to fill in gaps in Firefox. As 2014-07-15T06:56:11-07:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634?page=2#answer-604146<p>Hi oneforall, Mozilla often relies on the Add-on developer community to fill in gaps in Firefox. As long as Classic Theme Restorer is working well with current and test releases of Firefox, Mozilla can and most likely will focus on other priorities. It's a small not-for-profit organization with a big mission, and it's hard to see putting something else on ice to rebuild the UI again.
</p><p>I certainly appreciate that some extensions stop working due to interface or other changes in Firefox, and that's annoying, but this usually does not happen to the most popular extensions. Also, CTR is open source, so if it stops getting updating, any motivated developer will be able to pick up where it left off, and I imagine there would be plenty.
</p>I agree they are doing like kde did with konqueror saying people did not want it which was a lie. I 2014-07-15T06:45:23-07:00oneforallhttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634?page=2#answer-604140<p>I agree they are doing like kde did with konqueror saying people did not want it which was a lie. I said to them to that putting WONT FIX when people started to complain and then when people still commented any way including me they closed it. I and many others complained in #kde chat and finally they opened it up again and finally brought back konqueror. 1 ) this used to work right out of the box all that is in the classic plugin but it is a pain in the but to use because we have to go way over click click click just to change something that was simple right click etc out of the friggin box 2) you should also know that plugins are not dependable to work next release which is really a horrible idea to stick this in a plugin in the first place. not just tabs but all the other features too. 3) not that we are asking for some of the new not to be there to because we aren't . We want the choice .I'm stuck with 27/28 now and no security fix and just like all the corporate pigs Telecoms, NSA and the lisat goes on, refusing to listen to people so is firefox now. so sad.
</p>Problem is 1) plugins are known to break on next release. 2)the plugin doesn't work and it is in no 2014-07-15T06:34:18-07:00oneforallhttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634?page=2#answer-604135<p>Problem is 1) plugins are known to break on next release. 2)the plugin doesn't work and it is in no way even close to how iseay it was to move the tabs as it is now. This is NOT progress because it does not replaces it or make it any better. It makes it worse. 3) 1 is more than enough reason and a darn good one at that. Plus refusing to listen to people when they start to complain and putting WONT FIX to end the complaints is as bad as kde did with konqueror till the finally listened to people and brought it back. . So I can not use this useless plugin because it fails to bring back the quick easy to used great feature it used to be right out of the box and not all in it works. click click click to change things is backwards and NOT progress at all. I'm stuck with 27-28 now with no security fixes and I will not recommend ff any more. You are as bad as the Telecoms. NSA corporate pigs that refuse to listen to the support etc. sad that a great community died. The plugin is in no way the proper way here and I think I explained it more than enough.
</p>ok i have download 31.0 beta but for some reason it is struggling and freezing
up when i try to see 2014-06-16T00:04:03-07:00djeddie2014https://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634?page=2#answer-591845<p>ok i have download 31.0 beta but for some reason it is struggling and freezing
up when i try to see videos or if i have 8 tabs open it dos not matter its memory leak just really bad .600MB and the more i open the worst it gets.
</p><p>I just try to play a flash game this is insane the memory Firefox 31.0 is using my god please fix this dam memory leak 1.3G TO 1.6G of mem
</p>sour grapes - waffles
2014-06-14T05:20:33-07:00the-edmeisterhttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634?page=2#answer-591135<p>sour grapes - <em>waffles</em>
</p>you ask for everyone to help make Firefox better but Firefox team don't want to make it better cos w2014-06-13T23:45:13-07:00djeddie2014https://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-591036<p>you ask for everyone to help make Firefox better but Firefox team don't want to make it better cos when we the people ask. all you do is try to fix something that's not working for us.since version 24 and up.............
right know i cant see videos or open up tabs like i use to cos of Firefox memory liking using up half of my ram 2.2GB sucks
</p>a2jc4life,
Please note that if you wish to use tabs on bottom using userChrome.css or an extension, 2014-06-04T07:54:59-07:00moseshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-586333<p>a2jc4life,
</p><p>Please note that if you wish to use tabs on bottom using userChrome.css or an extension, I'll provide those options below:
You can use either of the following add-ons.
</p>
<ul><li> <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/tabs-on-bottom/" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/tabs-on-bottom/</a>
</li><li> <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/classicthemerestorer/" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/classicthemerestorer/</a>
</li></ul>
<p>If you don't want to install an add-on, put the following style in the <em>userChrome.css</em> file and restart Firefox. You can use <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/stylish/" rel="nofollow">the Stylish add-on</a> instead, if you have it installed.
</p>
<ul><li> <a href="http://kb.mozillazine.org/UserChrome.css" rel="nofollow">http://kb.mozillazine.org/UserChrome.css</a>
</li></ul>
<hr>
<pre>@namespace url(<a href="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul);" rel="nofollow">http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul);</a>
/* The above line should appear only once in the file */
#TabsToolbar { -moz-box-ordinal-group: 99 !important }</pre>
<hr>
<p>Also see
</p>
<ul><li> <a href="/en-US/kb/how-to-make-new-firefox-look-like-old-firefox" rel="nofollow">How to make the new Firefox look like the old Firefox</a>
</li></ul>
<hr>
<p><strong>One of the developers recently posted this explanation</strong>
</p><p><a href="https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/user/1079955" rel="nofollow">MikeDeboer</a> said
</p><pre>Each setting you see in a computer program you use requires work; when a developer wants to build something new or improve something, he or she has to go through each related (hidden) setting and test if it still works like before and do that on each platform Firefox runs on. That's Apple's Mac OSX, various flavours of Linux and various flavours of Windows, including Windows XP. This costs time, lots of it, and that amount grows exponentially with each setting that's added. This comes on top of our work to continuously fix, improve and innovate Firefox. <br> <br> That's why we also removed the tabs.onTop preference. Awesome community members, who were unhappy about that change, created the Classic Theme Restorer add-on. They deserve our collective hugs.
</pre>
<ul><li><strong>For more linked help articles and the full quote please also see</strong> <br> <em>Why have you changed design in new Firefox 29.0?</em> <a href="/questions/998084#answer-566525" rel="nofollow">/questions/998084#answer-566525</a>
</li></ul>a2jc4life,
I've seen hundreds of complaints over the past few versions about the inability to put 2014-06-04T07:52:44-07:00moseshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-586330<p>a2jc4life,
</p><pre> I've seen hundreds of complaints over the past few versions about the inability to put tabs on the bottom (or at least the ability to do this easily).
</pre>
<p>Tabs on bottom was removed in Firefox 29 in order to streamline UIs with Mobile and Desktop platforms. This can "easily" be restored using a 3rd party add-on or using the userChrome.css file to do this (I have the code if you need it)
</p><pre> The RSS button disappeared a few updates ago, with no explanation. (And now the add-on many of us were using to restore it breaks the browser with this most recent update)
</pre>
<p>The RSS icon (now called Subscribe) is in the <code>about:customizing</code> page of Firefox (can also be found by going to the new menu and clicking Customize. In regards to the broken add-on, most of the times after the release of a new Firefox version, add-ons may become incompatible or not work as intended. It's up to the developer to address these issues and update it accordingly. You can contact the developer from their add-ons page.
</p><pre> I don't know if it's just some glitch on my end or part of the design, but I don't have the lower status bar anymore since 29, either.
</pre>
<p>I'm assuming you're talking about the Add-on Bar or Status Bar. The Status Bar (the bar that showed "Loading <a href="http://support.mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">support.mozilla.org</a>", etc, is gone. (I haven't seen it in Linux but I don't pay attention to that). There's an extension to restore that
</p>
<ul><li><a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/status-4-evar/" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/status-4-evar/</a>
</li></ul>
<p>As for the add-on bar, see <a href="/en-US/kb/what-happened-to-the-add-on-bar" rel="nofollow">What happened to the Add-on Bar?</a>. This can also be installed via an extension called Status-4-Evar
</p>
<ul><li><a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/status-4-evar/" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/status-4-evar/</a>
</li></ul>
<pre> It doesn't make sense to spend numerous man-hours on dubious "improvements" of added features that the average user isn't even aware of, much less using, at the expense of basic functionality.
</pre>
<p>Please note that developer decisions and feature requests are outside of the scope of this forum. The forum is intended for single user questions not long discussion threads Especially on topics that are themselves not within the scope of the forum.
You could consider the developers mailing list
</p>
<ul><li><a href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/firefox-dev" rel="nofollow">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/firefox-dev</a>
</li></ul>
<p>Or to an alternate discussion forum such as
</p>
<ul><li><a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/</a>
</li><li><a href="http://forums.mozillazine.org" rel="nofollow">http://forums.mozillazine.org</a>
</li></ul>
<p>Administrators have confirmed that the Australis/Firefox 29 Development subject is off topic.
</p><p>See <a href="/en-US/kb/mozilla-support-rules-guidelines" rel="nofollow">guidelines</a> current guidelines include
</p><pre>* Posts in the Mozilla support forum must be either questions about the use of Firefox, .... Users who post about things other than Mozilla support will be directed to an alternative discussion place .....
* Create one thread and only one thread for each subject you want to discuss.
* For support requests, do not re-use existing threads started by others, even if they are seemingly on the same subject. Ask a new question instead.
</pre>
<p>Any feedback given here should be redirected to Mozilla's developer feedback site at <a href="http://input.mozilla.org/feedback" rel="nofollow">input.mozilla.org/feedback</a>
</p>I apologize in advance if this comes across as snarky; I am sincerely asking. What exactly are all 2014-06-04T07:38:31-07:00a2jc4lifehttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-586315<p>I apologize in advance if this comes across as snarky; I am sincerely asking. What exactly are all of these great new functions that the developers are spending so much time working on? It seems like every time I turn around there's a new update to Firefox (which inevitably breaks all of my add-ons because those folks can't keep up, either), and I haven't seen ANY useful functionality added in many, MANY generations of the software. However, I do keep seeing basic functionality disappear.
</p><p>I've seen hundreds of complaints over the past few versions about the inability to put tabs on the bottom (or at least the ability to do this easily). Tabs on the bottom are very obviously an extremely core functionality for a large number of Firefox users. The RSS button disappeared a few updates ago, with no explanation. (And now the add-on many of us were using to restore it breaks the browser with this most recent update). I don't know if it's just some glitch on my end or part of the design, but I don't have the lower status bar anymore since 29, either.
</p><p>It doesn't make sense to spend numerous man-hours on dubious "improvements" of added features that the average user isn't even aware of, much less using, <em>at the expense of</em> basic functionality. We shouldn't have to resort to add-ons to do fundamental things in Firefox; add-ons should be for all of those extras.
</p><p>I'd like to see the developers focus their time and attention on making sure that the "basic" functions of Firefox work smoothly and securely, so end users don't spend hours every few months chasing down new add-ons to do the same basic things with every update, "and let the add-on developers" focus on enabling extra features.
</p><p>I really don't care if my browser can sing and dance if it can't even enable me to surf the internet efficiently.
</p>Actually I am now having a look at the Sea Monkey Project. http://www.seamonkey-project.org/ no mul2014-05-15T04:21:45-07:00ikeepbeeshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-575837<p>Actually I am now having a look at the Sea Monkey Project. <a href="http://www.seamonkey-project.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.seamonkey-project.org/</a> no multi row tab support is a disapointment but tabs are below where they should be by defult as it used to be up until 4 years ago when someone decided that tiny crapy touchpads would control our lives. Cor-el sorry but Not a hope I will ever use FF 29. It's simply ridiculous to ask people to do what all of you are asking people to do simmply to get tabs below where they belong. I can only hope that this creates a fork and somebody fixes this crap. Even the one small change I had to do for the past 4 years was more than I should have had to do and now your all asking me to make major code modification to get firfox to work. Just what type of Drugs are you people on. Unbelievable Crazy stupid FF 29 is not usable on a desktop computer.
</p>It would be better to see if you can find ways to tweak and modify the current Firefox release to yo2014-05-14T10:42:26-07:00cor-elhttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-575459<p>It would be better to see if you can find ways to tweak and modify the current Firefox release to your liking.
</p><p>There are extensions to achieve this and Firefox can be easily styled with code in the userChrome.css file without the need of extra extensions.
</p>
<ul><li><a href="http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&amp;t=2824649" rel="nofollow">http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=38&amp;t=2824649</a>
</li></ul>
<p>If you tell us which changes you would like then we can help you with that.
</p><p>You can use the Stylish extension and search the userstyles website for styles.
</p>
<ul><li>Stylish: <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/stylish/" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/stylish/</a>
</li></ul>
<ul><li><a href="http://userstyles.org/help/stylish_firefox" rel="nofollow">http://userstyles.org/help/stylish_firefox</a>
</li></ul>
<hr>
<p>See also:
</p>
<ul><li> <a href="http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&amp;t=2057009" rel="nofollow">http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&amp;t=2057009</a>
</li></ul>Hi James, What you say is true. For anyone who simply hates the 29 build of FF this seems to be th2014-05-13T14:37:08-07:00ikeepbeeshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-574946<p>Hi James, What you say is true. For anyone who simply hates the 29 build of FF this seems to be the best answer. Its still based on FF but without the craziness of FF 29. They are stable and security is keep up to date as fare as I know. I am using Both at the moment but I am more inclined towards Palemoon. I don't know what FF 31 will look like but if palemoon or waterfox takes on the characteristics of FF 29 in its current format I simply will not use it I will have to find something else. Fortunately Moses has indicated that Both of these options will not follow FF 29 blindly and functionality will be kept and looks like they are on a winning horse as many new customers like me will come looking. So instead of promoting all these crazy strange workarounds and code modification that people should NEVER be asked to do just to have a functional browser you might consider promoting these two alternatives a bit more freely.
</p><p>Asking or telling people to make mega changes to a brand new product is NOT A SOLUTION
</p><p>The very good thing is I have a system that simply loves the 64bit versions as I have 64 Gigs of ram so finally I have a browser that can run properly with minimal slowing down when I have several hundred tabs open. Great Success&nbsp;!!!
</p>Note that those so called 64-bit builds are not based on Official source from Mozilla as there are n2014-05-13T08:24:53-07:00Jameshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-574746<p>Note that those so called 64-bit builds are not based on Official source from Mozilla as there are no Win64 releases of Firefox yet and the only place to get Win64 at moment from Mozilla is on the unstable Nightly development channel and these are mainly built for breakage/regressions purposes.
</p><p>PaleMoon is based on 24 ESR rather as the next ESR will be based on Firefox 31.0
</p><pre>.
.
.
</pre>
<p>edit: I am not implying that the PaleMoon builds are based on these Win64 Nightly builds as some may misread it as including a certain wolf somebody. Just pointing out that Mozilla does not have any Win64 builds made except for those unsupported ones on Nightly development channel. <a href="https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Supported_build_configurations" rel="nofollow">https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Supported_build_configurations</a>
</p>ikeepbees:
Here's a little more information about those browser.
Waterfox
native 64 bit
the UI will2014-05-13T04:43:03-07:00moseshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-574587<p>ikeepbees:
</p><p>Here's a little more information about those browser.
</p><p><u>Waterfox</u><br>
</p>
<ul><li>native 64 bit
</li><li>the UI will <b>NOT</b> be changed to Australis at any time (at least that's what the developer says)
</li><li>Based off 28.0
</li></ul>
<p><u>PaleMoon</u><br>
</p>
<ul><li>Based on Firefox ESR
</li><li>64/32bit
</li><li>Will <b>NOT</b> get Australis (AFAICT)
</li></ul>
<p>These two are pretty good alternatives. At least you'll still be on Mozilla source code and have the customizability that Firefox has.
</p>OK so here are the best options I have discovered that suit my needs and allow me to continue using 2014-05-13T01:01:32-07:00ikeepbeeshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-574463<p>OK so here are the best options I have discovered that suit my needs and allow me to continue using Firefox without using Version 29 which I consider totally unusable on a desktop environment. There are 2 alternative forks of FF which are available and at this time they both support Tabs below the address bar. The first is <strong><a href="http://www.waterfoxproject.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.waterfoxproject.org/</a></strong> which is a native 64bit browser based on FF and the second is <strong><a href="http://www.palemoon.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.palemoon.org/</a></strong> which has both 32 and 64 bit versions and a portable version all based on FF each still with desktop compatibility and security. After looking at the FF ESR version it appears it is due for the version 29 demolition team within the next month or so but I don't know if it will get the Full Monty of version 29 or not. I will wait and see. In the mean time I will use these different forked versions of FF and hope that at least one of them will keep desktop compatibility into the future and just maybe there is a bit of help here for others struggling with the new FF changes
</p>The Waterfox project is a solution to the memory problems in Firefox? It would run on 32 bit Window2014-05-12T18:07:09-07:00zoli62https://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-574311<p>The Waterfox project is a solution to the memory problems in Firefox? It would run on 32 bit Windows as well?
</p>Ho Zoli62, For the moment I am trying http://www.waterfoxproject.org/ which is a native 64bit versi2014-05-12T17:57:30-07:00ikeepbeeshttps://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-574307<p>Ho Zoli62, For the moment I am trying <a href="http://www.waterfoxproject.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.waterfoxproject.org/</a> which is a native 64bit version of FF so depending on what happens with Waterfox yes I will definitely consider the ESR version. having a look at it now. Waterfox is the closest thing to a fork that I can find that still works properly so maybe its a suitable solution for others with issues surrounding FF 29
</p>Possibly you can try the ESR version of Firefox. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations2014-05-12T17:33:18-07:00zoli62https://support.mozilla.org/ar/questions/1000634#answer-574301<p>Possibly you can try the ESR version of Firefox. <a href="https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/faq/" rel="nofollow">https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/faq/</a>
</p>