Các câu trả lời gần đây cho Print preview button is missing with Firefox again.https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/13673442022-03-04T16:36:28-08:00There are now several posts about this on the new feedback site connect.mozilla.org (which has repla2022-03-04T16:36:28-08:00paul921https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1487368<p>There are now several posts about this on the new feedback site <a href="http://connect.mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">connect.mozilla.org</a> (which has replaced <a href="http://mozilla.crowdicity.com" rel="nofollow">mozilla.crowdicity.com</a>). You can access this new site using your Firefox login. I would encourage anyone who has an opinion about this to visit the new site and leave some feedback.
</p>I completely agree with ace54858. Some self-centred person thinks the Chrome print layout is better 2022-02-24T16:52:35-08:00brox1026https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1485948<p>I completely agree with ace54858. Some self-centred person thinks the Chrome print layout is better than the old Firefox print preview and has unilaterally decided everyone else is an idiot. Well, in my opinion the designer of the new layout is the idiot. It is utter Cr**!
</p>jscher2000 said
Thanks, KM77. 1600 is pretty good, I thought it might be more in the 1280 range. In 2022-02-20T13:06:07-08:00KM77https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1485189<em><p>jscher2000 <a href="#answer-1485168" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>Thanks, KM77. 1600 is pretty good, I thought it might be more in the 1280 range. In your case, the height might be more limiting because the preview is resized to fit within the height.
This is a little complicated to hack around (he says, after 4 hours of trying). I'll try to look at this again in a few days or next weekend.
</blockquote>
<p>I do appreciate you trying. I also use a multi-row bookmark script which limits the height even more in the new print preview. Everything is working fine with ESR but hopefully there's a longer-term solution.
</p>Thanks, KM77. 1600 is pretty good, I thought it might be more in the 1280 range. In your case, the h2022-02-20T10:29:15-08:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1485168<p>Thanks, KM77. 1600 is pretty good, I thought it might be more in the 1280 range. In your case, the height might be more limiting because the preview is resized to fit within the height.
</p><p>This is a little complicated to hack around (he says, after 4 hours of trying). I'll try to look at this again in a few days or next weekend.
</p>jscher2000 said
KM77 said
I'm visually impaired as well. No amount of increasing the size of a docum2022-02-20T06:02:45-08:00KM77https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1485144<em><p>jscher2000 <a href="#answer-1484963" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote><em><p>KM77 <a href="#answer-1484833" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>I'm visually impaired as well. No amount of increasing the size of a document in that small window is helpful when it only cuts off the page. Not being able to preview in a full size screen is just not an option for visually disabled people.
</blockquote>
<p>Hi KM77, could you tell me the width of the page area of the browser at your normal zoom level.
</p><p>On my diagnostic page linked below, that is the "innerWidth" (left number on the 4th line in the box):
</p><p><a href="https://www.jeffersonscher.com/res/resolution.php" rel="nofollow">https://www.jeffersonscher.com/res/resolution.php</a>
</p><p>That number may be lower than your screen resolution if your system scaling (for example, Windows text size) is higher than 100%.
</p><p>One of the obvious issues with the Firefox 84+ combined preview/setup design is that the setup panel on the right consumes 250 pixels of width. Therefore, as your available width goes down, the preview has to get smaller and smaller. Hopefully someone can come up with a workaround for that, such as making the setup panel roll-up/float, or making it horizontal.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>1600
</p>KM77 said
I'm visually impaired as well. No amount of increasing the size of a document in that smal2022-02-19T03:12:38-08:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1484963<em><p>KM77 <a href="#answer-1484833" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>I'm visually impaired as well. No amount of increasing the size of a document in that small window is helpful when it only cuts off the page. Not being able to preview in a full size screen is just not an option for visually disabled people.
</blockquote>
<p>Hi KM77, could you tell me the width of the page area of the browser at your normal zoom level.
</p><p>On my diagnostic page linked below, that is the "innerWidth" (left number on the 4th line in the box):
</p><p><a href="https://www.jeffersonscher.com/res/resolution.php" rel="nofollow">https://www.jeffersonscher.com/res/resolution.php</a>
</p><p>That number may be lower than your screen resolution if your system scaling (for example, Windows text size) is higher than 100%.
</p><p>One of the obvious issues with the Firefox 84+ combined preview/setup design is that the setup panel on the right consumes 250 pixels of width. Therefore, as your available width goes down, the preview has to get smaller and smaller. Hopefully someone can come up with a workaround for that, such as making the setup panel roll-up/float, or making it horizontal.
</p>I'm visually impaired as well. No amount of increasing the size of a document in that small window i2022-02-18T17:51:46-08:00KM77https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1484833<p>I'm visually impaired as well. No amount of increasing the size of a document in that small window is helpful when it only cuts off the page. Not being able to preview in a full size screen is just not an option for visually disabled people. The only solution I found so far was downgrading to ESR version and using firefox –allow-downgrade command to override downgrade protection in order to continue using my original profile. I know this is not a long-term solution but I hate being forced to change browsers after using Firefox over 15 years. I hope they reconsider forcing this terrible change.
</p><p>I installed ESR to a new location rather than installing over 97.0.1 so we're able to use both versions now. To be safe I created a new profile for ESR, copy/pasted my original profile data into the new profile, then followed instructions in link below to open ESR with –allow-downgrade command to bypass downgrade protection and open with my original profile settings. I did have to re-enabled Print Preview using <a href="http://tab.mo" rel="nofollow">tab.mo</a> / print.tab_modal.enabled set to false. I now have Print Preview back and my bookmarks and apps seem to be working fine. Be safe and backup if you decide to try.
</p><p><a href="https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/#product-desktop-esr" rel="nofollow">https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/all/#product-desktop-esr</a>
</p><p><a href="https://www.trishtech.com/2020/08/how-to-downgrade-firefox-to-firefox-esr-in-windows/" rel="nofollow">https://www.trishtech.com/2020/08/how-to-downgrade-firefox-to-firefox-esr-in-windows/</a>
</p>jscher2000 said
ace54858 said
not only do you have to up the size to even be able to read anything y2022-02-15T09:55:31-08:00ace54858https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1484001<em><p>jscher2000 <a href="#answer-1483712" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote><em><p>ace54858 <a href="#answer-1483701" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>not only do you have to up the size to even be able to read anything you print classic set to 100 was great now you have to set it to 115-120 to get the same as it was with classic
</blockquote>
<p>On screen, right, not on the printout?
</p><p>Yes, unless you are displaying a maximized window at Full HD, the preview doesn't use the available space efficiently. I think there is a bug on file to address this in part, but I'm not sure whether it will get traction. There is an unofficial hack to fix this, which involves the community-supported workaround of a userChrome.css file. Here's an old post on that: <a href="https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1320798#answer-1415936" rel="nofollow">https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1320798#answer-1415936</a>
</p><p>see before this major crap merge with classic look you could set the size 100% was prefect now with this new crap have to change the scale to 115-120 to get the same size print with it set at 100 is way to small to read. guess they either don't belive in or have ever heard the term if it ain't broke don't fix it. and they went and broke what was perfectly fine and working and went and broke it to stupid to ask what users want.
</p>
</blockquote>can we at least have print.tab_modal.enabled back again
2022-02-14T12:05:15-08:00Yet-Another-firefox-user-from-way-backhttps://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344?page=2#answer-1483732<p>can we at least have print.tab_modal.enabled back again
</p>ace54858 said
not only do you have to up the size to even be able to read anything you print classic2022-02-14T07:57:57-08:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483712<em><p>ace54858 <a href="#answer-1483701" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>not only do you have to up the size to even be able to read anything you print classic set to 100 was great now you have to set it to 115-120 to get the same as it was with classic
</blockquote>
<p>On screen, right, not on the printout?
</p><p>Yes, unless you are displaying a maximized window at Full HD, the preview doesn't use the available space efficiently. I think there is a bug on file to address this in part, but I'm not sure whether it will get traction. There is an unofficial hack to fix this, which involves the community-supported workaround of a userChrome.css file. Here's an old post on that: <a href="https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1320798#answer-1415936" rel="nofollow">https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1320798#answer-1415936</a>
</p>
<blockquote>the heders suck it's either you have them or you have nothing at all on classic you could set to have no header and still have the page # and date but not in this new crap it's either you have both or none at all.
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, this aspect of the old Page Setup dialog is missing. I'm not optimistic it will be added to the setup panel (which already is getting a big long). The workaround is to edit the header and footer fields manually in about:config. More info in this post: <a href="https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1357645#answer-1458911" rel="nofollow">https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1357645#answer-1458911</a>
</p>firefox.complaint said
cor-el said
(please do not comment in bug reportshttps://bugzilla.mozilla.or2022-02-14T07:50:05-08:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483711<em><p>firefox.complaint <a href="#answer-1483547" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote><em><p>cor-el <a href="#answer-1482190" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>
(<i>please do not comment in bug reports<br><a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html</a></i>)
</blockquote>
<p>I don't see why we shouldn't. It IS a bug.
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If it's a bug on file, you don't need to comment unless you can help code the solution. Sometimes bugs attract a lot of "me too" and "hurry up" comments and then the developers block all comments, even ones that are useful for solving the bug.
</p>this new print preview is nothing but a major pile of flaming crap classic is a heck of a lot easier2022-02-14T05:54:40-08:00ace54858https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483701<p>this new print preview is nothing but a major pile of flaming crap classic is a heck of a lot easier to use, easier to set up, this new flaming pile of crap in harder less options and all out a major pain to even use not only do you have to up the size to even be able to read anything you print classic set to 100 was great now you have to set it to 115-120 to get the same as it was with classic the heders suck it's either you have them or you have nothing at all on classic you could set to have no header and still have the page # and date but not in this new crap it's either you have both or none at all. NO one asked for this page setup and print preview merge crap NOT ONLY was is a majorly bad idea it was pointless bring back classic option STOP trying to FORCE crap on your user's it NEVER END'S well. user's want options. forcing crap on to your user's will only end in having LESS USER"S in the End nothing more. trying asking your users what they want. stop and think a gaming company pulls crap that players don't like guess what happens they stop playing the game and the word get's around and the gaming company losses Money.
</p><p>BRING BACK CLASSIC PRINT PREVEIW UNMEARGE THIS CRAP PAGE SETUP AND PRINT PREVIEW ARE 2 SEPERAT THINGS THERE IS NO REASON OR NEED TO MERGER THEM VERY BAD IDEA NO ONE WANTS THIS CRAP!
</p>cor-el said
(please do not comment in bug reportshttps://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette2022-02-13T12:40:36-08:00firefox.complainthttps://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483547<em><p>cor-el <a href="#answer-1482190" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>
(<i>please do not comment in bug reports<br><a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html</a></i>)
</blockquote>
<p>I don't see why we shouldn't. It IS a bug.
</p>Hi MelanieS, maybe I can suggest a slight improvement:
MelanieS said
This what I have to do, as far2022-02-12T08:28:00-08:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483275<p>Hi MelanieS, maybe I can suggest a slight improvement:
</p>
<em><p>MelanieS <a href="#answer-1483228" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>This what I have to do, as far as I can tell, with the new and deplorable Print feature.
Use Ctrl-P for Page View.
Take hands off keyboard and use mouse/touchpad to tap the page. Then use arrow keys or Page Down key to scan through pages OR take hands off keyboard to make a fiddly hand movement with mouse/touchpad to click on the forward or back arrows to scan through pages.
</blockquote>
<p>You can change panes using the keyboard. After Ctrl+P when the "Destionation" selector has the focus, either:
</p>
<ul><li> F6 F6 (next frame, twice)
</li><li> Shift+F6 (previous frame, once)
</li></ul>
<p>The focus should be on the preview document just as though you clicked on it. Then Page Up/Page Down or arrows.
</p>
<blockquote>Hit Tab key NINE TIMES to reach and highlight Pages button; then hit Down arrow key THREE TIMES to access the box for indicating the page(s) I want printed; then hit Enter; then type page range I want printed, OR take my hand off the keyboard and make a fiddly hand movement to access the Pages button and the Custom line, then type page range I want printed.
Hit Enter to print.
</blockquote>
<p>This following slightly faster but still fiddly (note that the number of tabs may vary depending on the features of your printer):
</p><p>F6 Tab Tab Tab Tab C [enter pages] Enter
</p><p>F6 switches to the right pane, Tab focuses Destination, Tab moves focus to Copies, Tab moves focus to Orientation, Tab moves focus to Pages, C changes the value to Custom and opens the field for entering pages and positions the insertion point there.
</p>
<blockquote>One of the main reasons I've preferred Firefox for years is because it appeared to be designed by smart people. This design is not smart. Go back to being smart and fix it.
</blockquote>
<p>It seems we are in a mouse-oriented world. I'm pretty sure the old preview isn't coming back, but the proposal to add a new keyboard shortcut to go directly to the system print dialog would be helpful to you. (I don't know whether that will make it into Firefox 98.)
</p><p>Other tweaks to the current design certainly are possible (and many have already been requested). It sounds like you would benefit from an accelerator key for Custom pages. You can propose that and/or other specific changes on either:
</p>
<ul><li> Mozilla's "Ideas" site at: <a href="https://mozilla.crowdicity.com/" rel="nofollow">https://mozilla.crowdicity.com/</a>
</li><li> The bug tracking system at: <a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/</a>
</li></ul>MelanieS said
My chief complaint is that there almost no keyboard commands available with the new P2022-02-12T08:13:57-08:00sasgrwhttps://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483272<em><p>MelanieS <a href="#answer-1483228" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>
My chief complaint is that there almost no keyboard commands available with the new Print function.
</blockquote>
<p>I appreciate the passion and I, too, an am extremely keyboard heavy user. I'm willing to try the new interface provided it has the same features (and presumably more if it's an "improvement") as before. I use the same keyboard sequences you do (alt+f,v to see the preview, alt+g for the pages to print).
</p><p>Ignoring the business side of things and the physical strain and removing emotion from the comments, I think you can still do (most) what you want to do all with the keyboard. When the new print dialog first comes up, the focus is in the "destination" box. If you shift+tab (backwards) twice, the focus is on the page navigation area at the bottom of the preview area. You can (back) tab to the single left and right arrows (the double arrows go to the beginning or end) and press enter to see the next or previous page. Or you can back tab some more past the left double arrow and the focus will be on the preview area itself. When the focus is on the preview area, then page up/down and arrow up/down work to scroll the area.
</p><p>The main thing that's missing is once you've paged through the preview area, there's not a fast way to get to the print button in the dialog or to the "print using system dialog" button. You have to tab a bunch of times (either forward or backward) to get there. In the old print preview, alt+p would take you there.
</p>I agree to all users and support all who want FIREFOX to bring back the old classic Print Preview in2022-02-12T07:35:43-08:00marschall3https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483260<p>I agree to all users and support all who want FIREFOX to bring back the old classic Print Preview in the file menu!
Firefox made a BIG mistake with the new format.
</p>I want to explain why I hate, loathe, and despise the new Print function in Firefox and why I want t2022-02-12T05:09:17-08:00MelanieShttps://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483228<p>I want to explain why I hate, loathe, and despise the new Print function in Firefox and why I want the previous Print View function to be returned.
</p><p>My chief complaint is that there almost no keyboard commands available with the new Print function.
</p><p>I have worked as a production typist for more than 20 years. My income depends on how fast I able to type, and I know that every time I have to take my hands off the keyboard for even a second, I'm wasting time, and that means I'm losing money. It also means I'm putting strain on the hand that uses the mouse/touchpad and on my rotator cuffs. (I have developed something called "trigger fingers" on one finger on each hand from years of typing. I have to keep those fingers wrapped in tape while I'm working. Trust me, I know something about repetitive motion injuries.)
</p><p>Speed is not as essential when using the internet, but being able to use keyboard commands still makes a huge difference when printing a long series of articles.
</p><p>I do not automatically print every page in a document. That can be a huge waste of paper and toner. I always check the document in Print View and choose the page range I want printed. For me, printing is not a matter of Ctrl-P and Enter.
</p><p>These are the movements I used with the previous, highly efficient Print View:
</p><p>Use Alt-F-V for Print View.
Use Page Down or arrow keys to scan for correct page breaks, number of pages wanted, etc.
Hit Esc to leave Print View.
Click Ctrl-P for Print.
Use Alt-G to access box for selecting page range to print. Then type page range I want printed.
Hit Enter to print.
</p><p>I didn't have to take my hands off the keyboard, and I didn't have to look at the Dialog box.
</p><p>This what I have to do, as far as I can tell, with the new and deplorable Print feature.
</p><p>Use Ctrl-P for Page View.
Take hands off keyboard and use mouse/touchpad to tap the page. Then use arrow keys or Page Down key to scan through pages OR take hands off keyboard to make a fiddly hand movement with mouse/touchpad to click on the forward or back arrows to scan through pages.
Hit Tab key NINE TIMES to reach and highlight Pages button; then hit Down arrow key THREE TIMES to access the box for indicating the page(s) I want printed; then hit Enter; then type page range I want printed, OR take my hand off the keyboard and make a fiddly hand movement to access the Pages button and the Custom line, then type page range I want printed.
Hit Enter to print.
</p><p>I've had to do too much excess hitting OR I've had to take my hand off the keyboard for an extended period and look at the screen the whole time to find the right boxes or buttons. This is incredibly inefficient in terms of time, hand movements, and eye movements. It is bad design.
</p><p>One of the main reasons I've preferred Firefox for years is because it appeared to be designed by smart people. This design is not smart. Go back to being smart and fix it.
</p>Hi rcargen1, Print Preview and Page Setup have merged with the print command. If you need to access 2022-02-11T14:45:56-08:00jscher2000https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1483033<p>Hi rcargen1, Print Preview and Page Setup have merged with the print command. If you need to access settings that Firefox doesn't list on the settings panel, you'll need to use the "Print using system dialog" link down near the Print button.
</p>where did print prieview go ? messing up my whole business to print orders and packing slips la2022-02-11T09:02:31-08:00rcargen1https://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1482986<p>where did print prieview go&nbsp;? messing up my whole business to print orders and packing slips labels. big tech messing with things that work again about:config print.tab etc doesnt work why do yoy keep messing with things i cant a cces printer settings like before all messed up
</p>jscher2000 said
However, since you edit out other parts of the page, I think you would benefit from2022-02-11T00:21:02-08:00sasgrwhttps://support.mozilla.org/vi/questions/1367344#answer-1482815<em><p>jscher2000 <a href="#answer-1482808" rel="nofollow">said</a></p></em>
<blockquote>
However, since you edit out other parts of the page, I think you would benefit from trying the Print Edit extension:
<a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/" rel="nofollow">https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/print-edit-we/</a>
</blockquote>
<p>Thanks for the reference. I took a look at the extension and it doesn't provide anything more useful that I can't already do in the code inspector window.
</p><p>It's a shame the old print preview can't still be supported. I'm all for progress and improvements but in this case, functionality was removed, even if I was using print preview in an unexpected way. For the time being, I have to use the new print preview to see how the page looks, close the preview, edit the page, preview again, close the preview, edit the page some more, etc. Quite time consuming.
</p>