Dúnadh an snáithe seo agus cuireadh sa chartlann é. Cuir ceist nua má tá cabhair uait.
I want Firefox's current setup and look returned to build 28.0 as default
I am currently using Firefox 32.0.3 now on my Windows XP machine and I hate the look and find it difficult to navigate customizing the thing. It took fifteen minutes to set everything up to even come close to resembling what I used to have. Even with the Classic Theme Restorer it is horrendous. Will Firefox be able to restore the look and feel of 28.0? I would appreciate it if the next update went back to the classic settings and appearance as a default. The only reason I updated was due to supposed vulnerabilities in 28.0, otherwise I would never have upgraded. And as it is, I am seriously considering returning to 28.0 as it is, because honest to God, I cannot stand this thing. I wish I had a screenshot of how it used to look to show as a comparison to how it looks now.
Well, I'm at the local library today and trying the 24.8.1 esr. Honestly I can find no difference between it's look and interface from that of 28.0 And that's actually a good thing since with security up to version 32 (if an earlier post in this thread by Cor-El is accurate), it would allow me more leeway before having to update to something using Australis. So I think I may well look into the 24 esr. I am honestly surprised that firefox didn't develop an esr for 28 though, given that I'm sure someone had to have known that some people might balk at the new interface for various reasons.
I do apologize, again, as my comments aren't intended to upset anyone, and hope that my suggestions in my immediately previous post will be taken under advisement. I understand why you guys thought people might like Australis. But the only analogy I can think of for the frustration I feel towards the interface (both in look and functionality) is to compare it to both Windows Vista and Windows 8. (And to a lesser extent, 8.1, which did receive mildly better reception.) I hate to even make this comparison as I feel that both of those OSes are an insult to everyone. But it does seem to fit.
A little history on why I found the changes so jarring and unwelcome, if I may: I got into Firefox around....I honestly forget the version. But I started using it somewhere around 2007-8. Prior to that I had been using Opera, and after a virus infection, about the only good thing the company that fixed the machine (and fixed I use very loosely) was to put Firefox on it. I admit it took a mild amount of getting used to, but with each successive version, I got to like it more and more. By 24, I believed that the developers had found a phenomenal interface for the browser, and I absolutely adored 28.0, as it seemed to tweak the very few issues 24 had had (mostly with tvtropes.org and a few other sites) and yet never had to make anything particularly frustrating for users. version 29, however, was where the other shoe dropped for me. Between the drastic change of the look, the changes in the general interface and options and the like, I ran back almost immediately to 28.0, which I was both comfortable with and knew (for the most part) how to adjust if anything felt wrong or off. Usually thanks to the help menu.
When 32.0 rolled around, I tried upgrading again, once I learned of Classic Theme Restorer. However I quickly learned that despite the name, it did little more than provide a skin to change the look of 32 to resemble 24-28. Unfortunately, this was about all that it did, as even after getting help on here on how to fix some of the issues, such as the ability to at least partially customize the buttons, I learned that the new interface remained, rather than returning to the classic theme interface. To say the least I found this irredeemably frustrating, especially since the new browser began having issues where if a page would not load properly, or else was a website where if you added something to it you would need to hit reload to see the changes, the new browser, in addition to confusing me as to how to adjust it to run similarly to 24-28, would not reload the pages properly, and in some cases would not do so at all. The reload button wouldn't even light up to indicate it was possible to reload it, and even the odd extra reload button inside the URL bar (something that immediately vanishes if you customize the buttons so that you can have the reload button with the forward, backward, home, and whatever other buttons you choose to have in versions 24-28) wouldn't work. Add to this that at times even when it did reload at all, the URL itself would go missing, the page would still refuse to properly reload, and the like, etc. etc. I again returned to 28.0 (I would have gone to 28.1, as it is at least marginally less vulnerable to exploits at the moment., but the old website that offers you the list of older versions doesn't have a listing for 28.0.1 for some reason. Had there been a 28.0.2 or 28.0.3 available, I would have jumped to one of those instead since there would be less likelihood of exploits for them at the moment) and have largely stuck with it since.
As I say, I am testing the 24.8.1 ESR right now on my library's machine, and it seems to run more or less perfectly, looking very much like 24-28, and with the same interface I have been most comfortable with. I will probably jump to this in a few days since it is more secure than 28— again, this is according to cor-el, a moderator, earlier on this thread, it has security up to 32.0.3— although the library is using windows 8. However since the ESR and 28 both seem to run the same on 8 as on XP, I am reasonably confident that it will work properly on my XP machine.
I did look into Pale Moon, as I said the other day, however I learned two things almost immediately: 1) It does not support XP (aside from some odd side build that is not intended for desktops or laptops, but rather for netbooks, and as such I won't risk my machine on it) and 2) it is running a bad rip off of version 18 of Firefox. Now while I am well aware that the reason pale moon exists is due to what can best be described as a kind of internet backlash against Australis (Wikipedia even says flat out Pale Moon was created as a response to the dislike for Australis by users of the browser), it seems that they went too far in the other direction.
I won't even get into "Waterfox", which frankly just smacks of trying to rip you guys off altogether.
Seamonkey, again, I did try this on the library's windows 8 machine and while it doesn't look a thing like Australis, it instead looks almost like it's trying to resurrect Netscape, which I find just flat out weird. (Though I still use Netscape Composer to write my fan fiction since it's easier to do that and then just put the new webpage in the fiction creator in the two fiction websites I frequent, so I guess I'm not one to talk.)
The one thing Seamonkey does do, which I suggested and still do suggest Firefox consider (though to be fair, again, I do understand why this might be a long time coming, if ever) is finding a way so that users of the browser can choose which version of the interface and appearance they want. I have genuinely come to love Firefox in general, but versions 29-33.1 have left me feeling incredibly frustrated, due to both interface, the way it handles pages, and general appearance. I stick with Firefox due to it being, in my opinion, the best choice out of all possible browsers, and have stuck with 28 out of not only a certain level of comfort that it provides in addition to being reasonably easy to understand and navigate the interface if I need to have something adjusted, but due to the fact that 28 protected me from one of my own goof-ups, when I accidentally mistyped the address for youtube into it, by blocking an apparently infected site that the mistyped URL would have otherwise lead to, so I suppose I feel a certain loyalty to that version in general— and while I'm here let me also offer my profuse thanks to Firefox's developers for that feature, as I would have lost my only computer to infection otherwise— however had the new interface and appearance not been implemented with 29 on up, I would have had no problem upgrading to the most current versions.
Again, I would love to see it be possible for users to be able to decide which interface to use, as well as what theme. I imagine there are plenty of people who do like Australis. But I am equally sure there are just as many who don't. The fact that a Classic Theme Restorer (which again, seems to be only a skin to cover the appearance of the browser, rather than actually restoring the classic interface) and Pale Moon exist is proof of that. Seamonkey might be a nice alternative (and was at one point run by Mozilla, who are responsible for Firefox as well, though it seems ownership, or at least development of Seamonkey, has since changed hands), but it still isn't Firefox, which again, I feel is the best browser available. The one thing that Seamonkey seems to do that I would like to see Fiorefox do, is allow the choice to be there for users for the interface and theme. To be honest, I would have loved it if the classic interface and appearance was the default, while the Australis appearance was the available theme skin, but that's just me.
I apologize for the somewhat rambling nature of this post, but I felt I should make a more thorough explanation of my issues with 29 on up and my reasons for having stuck with 28 (though again, I may soon jump to 24.8.1 ESR) for as long as I have, as well as to reiterate and hopefully do so with more clarity, my suggestions for making Firefox more accessible to those who still wish to use it without having to worry about the frustrations of the new interface from here out, even though I realize it may not be entirely possible to implement them right away, if at all.
Edit: Thanks for the info on Seamonkey's requirements, Finitarry. :)Read this answer in context 👍 0
All Replies (20)
What changes would you like to see that the CTR extension can't provide?
A lot of changes to the appearance can be done via code in the userChrome.css file or possibly Stylish.
Actually, by sheer luck, I found I do have a screenshot of how it used to be. I'm adding it to this, and also adding a screenshot of how 32.0.3 looks. This, combined with the fact that customizing firefox didn't open an entirely separate window just to adjust the toolbars and the like makes me wonder why such massive changes were made. I'm glad classic theme restorer restores the squared tabs, of course, but why install rounded tabs, or that annoying orange button to begin with? Why make it look so different from what everyone already knew and liked? Anyway, the screenshots are shown below. You'll notice that in the one marked youtube screenshot, everything looked natural and didn't have any difference in coloration between the menu button and the icons bar and said icons bar did not require me to go into a convoluted and confusing 'customize' menu (that had icons in it I did not understand) and have to find the stop and reload icons (which I have since done) and put them ON the icons bar to use it. The older URL bar would have a star on it that would show you if you had the site bookmarked. The current version doesn't. And that's WITH the classic theme restorer in place. Seriously, why didn't Firefox just take what was already there and simply fix the issues instead of making such massive changes to the entire setup that would require the existence of a 'classic theme restorer' to begin with? I understand some of this might be nitpicking, but it's how I honestly feel. I hated having to go through all this just to get the thing to even remotely look similar to what I originally had, and even then, I don't get exactly what was there. I feel that Firefox took a great setup and ruined it with every version past 28.0.
Athraithe ag Marc7 ar
And it's getting worse. Now the reload button isn't even showing that it can be used on the bar via the icon. I have to use the one on the URL bar, and now the URL's not even showing up in said bar. Okay now I have to downgrade. Just to get things back to normal. How do I save my bookmarks? I'm going to have to do a complete uninstall and reinstall of 28 I think.
Athraithe ag Marc7 ar
Why not use 24esr? The security there is at least up to version 30, but the interface is that of 24.
What's 24esr? I've never heard of it. And I prefer the interface and look for 28.
Athraithe ag Marc7 ar
If you plan to do a complete uninstallation/reinstalling, you can save your bookmarks by exporting the places.sqlite from the Firefox profile folder
- Go to Start -> Run
- Type %APPDATA%\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\xxxxxxxx.default(x's are random characters)
- Look for places.sqlite and copy/paste it somewhere safe.
Once you uninstall/reinstall Firefox, you can place the places.sqlite file back in the same place you found. Here's some more info on where Firefox stores data
Firefox 24 ESR is an old version of the ESR line of Firefox. ESR is used for businesses and large organizations with their own dedicated IT team. The current version of ESR is 31.1.1 and it is up-to-date with Firefox 32.0.3. Firefox 24 ESR has the old interface (pre-Australis/Fx29) but with the newest bugfixes. You can give that a try if you wish to revert to the old interface but still be protected
The ESR version is a special Firefox version aimed at organizations that stays at the same major version for 7 regular Firefox releases (10, 17, 24, 31) and only receive minor security updates.
There are currently two supported ESR versions, Firefox 31.1.1 ESR and Firefox 24.8.1 ESR. There is a button on the all.html page to toggle between the two versions: Show | Firefox 31 | Firefox 24
If you do not see an item on a toolbar and in the Customize palette then click the "Restore Defaults" button to restore the default toolbar setup
- "3-bar" Firefox menu button > Customize > Show/Hide Toolbars
- View > Toolbars
Tap the Alt key or press F10 to show the Menu Bar
- Right-click empty toolbar area
Huh. Is it possible for a version of this to be made for 28? Cause like I said, I like the interface for 28, along with it's basic setup. I prefer this to any and all other versions I've had. Don't get me wrong. I adore the browser itself, but versions 29 and up just never seem to work right for me, as I mentioned before, just navigating websites caused it to cease showing the URLs, the reload button would not work, forcing me to use the one in the URL bar (which itself bugged me as I'm used to the star that indicates if a site is bookmarked, which I believe came in during version 28, though I might be wrong) and the confusing setup that's required just to customize where the buttons are, along with buttons I neither understood nor cared about). Basically, version 28 felt like the perfect fit for everything I needed, and compared to the mess 32.0.3 was, I ended up reverting back to 28.0 anyway. All the changes made on 29.0 and up felt like they were trying too hard to make it seem 'cool', when it was already more or less perfect as it was. This is why I'm wondering if the next version can just return to the setup, look, and feel of 28, but with the fixes in place to protect the user's machine. I may jump to version 28.0.9, since it's the last version and according to the info on the security fixes, only 28.0.1 seemed to have any trouble with anything known, so I might go to that. But an ESR version of 28, or even just using the basic setup and interface of 28 with fixes for the security problems known to exist in 28.0 (or perhaps a version of the next build designed to look and feel like 28.0 as an optional alternative to the newer and flashier versions that admittedly, others probably like) might be a worthwhile idea to pursue, as I know I'm not the only one who has stated they dislike the newer versions and the Classic Theme Restorer is a nice idea, but it only masks the issues immediately visible in 29.0 and above, it doesn't really seem like it fixes them from my personal perspective.
There is no version 28.0.9. There was a 28.0b9, but that is older than 28.0. There is no 28esr either.
I'm not sure I understand. How is 28.ob9 older than 28.0?
The old 28.0b9 was the ninth Beta build of 28.0 Release. There were nine Beta test builds for Firefox 28.0
On average there are six to twelve Beta test builds, usually nine, for a Release. If you use the 28.0b9 or any build with a b on end of version (instead of 28.0 Release) you will be on the Beta channel which currently has 33.0 on it (at 33.0b9 currently).
What does 'Beta channel' mean, exactly? Is that similar to esr?
On the subject of esr, do they just keep getting updates, or does that stop at some point? Because I am considering the esr of 24, since it has the same interface as 28, or so has been said here. I'm also curious as to why there isn't an esr version of 28.0 Was that a conscious decision, or was it just because there was one for 24? I would think they would do one every few sets since the releases tend to come fast and furious. Like...I dunno, an esr version every 3-4 releases.
Come to think of it, are individuals even allowed to get the esrs? I mean, I'm a writer, not a college or something.
The Beta channel of Firefox is the last stage before Firefox gets pushed to the millions of Firefox users. There are currently three pre-release channels of Firefox
- Nightly/central (pre-alpha) download at nightly.mozilla.org
- Aurora (alpha) download at http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#aurora
- Firefox beta download at http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/channel/#beta
Mozilla's put up a table where each version of Firefox gets moved from channel to channel. That has all the information about release dates for each channel
ESR will NOT retain the previous 28.0 look. Once the code switches to the Australis code, it'll stay like that. You can customize it to your liking as always though. ESR also receives the most important bug fixes since it is aimed at large businesses/organizations.
Anyone is able to use the ESR version. I use it. For more info on ESR:
24esr has the interface of version 24. The latest version of 24esr has the security of version 30, or perhaps a bit more (not sure exactly what security level 24.8.1esr has). Anybody who can download it can use it.
24.8.1 ESR has the same security level as 32.0.3
So what will 24ESR look like? Cause if you look up above, some are saying it will share the 24 appearance, while you're claiming it will look like version 31 at the least. I've hated the australis look since 29, and the screenshots I put up above show some of the other issues I had with the new look even after trying to use Classic Theme Restorer.
Also, I was away for the last week, which is why I haven't replied until now.
Athraithe ag Marc7 ar
As was said above the 24 ESR is based on well 24.0 Release so it has the look of 24.0. The 24.0 ESR just got security and allowed stability updates.
However the old 24 esr is no longer supported as it did not get a update when 33.0 and 31.2.0ESR (based on 31.0) were Released. The last update for 24esr was 24.8.1 back in September.
So is it still usable, just not getting updates, or not even downloadable now, or what?
You can still download it. It is no longer getting updates (but if you do not want it to update to 31esr, disable automatic updates). I am still using it. I dislike Australis. My regular browser is now SeaMonkey.