搜尋 Mozilla 技術支援網站

防止技術支援詐騙。我們絕對不會要求您撥打電話或發送簡訊,或是提供個人資訊。請用「回報濫用」功能回報可疑的行為。

Learn More

Am I the only Mac user disappointed with Firefox 86's "improved Print functionality?"

  • 10 回覆
  • 2 有這個問題
  • 98 次檢視
  • 最近回覆由 jscher2000

more options

Firefox 86 for Windows gets a beautiful new Print dialog, with great Print Preview and other functionality. The Mac? Nope!

And there is no technical reason for this! Chrome/Vivaldi/Brave all have a similar dialog box that makes it easy not to waste paper when a website insists on printing a second page for a single word.

Come on, Mozilla! A little feature parity would be nice – especially for such basic functionality!

被選擇的解決方法

Does Firefox on Mac have this preference and, if so, does it make any difference:

(1) In a new tab, type or paste about:config in the address bar and press Enter/Return. Click the button accepting the risk.

(2) In the search box in the page, type or paste tab_mo and pause while the list is filtered

(3) Double-click the print.tab_modal.enabled preference to switch between classic (false) and new (true)

從原來的回覆中察看解決方案 👍 1

所有回覆 (10)

more options

選擇的解決方法

Does Firefox on Mac have this preference and, if so, does it make any difference:

(1) In a new tab, type or paste about:config in the address bar and press Enter/Return. Click the button accepting the risk.

(2) In the search box in the page, type or paste tab_mo and pause while the list is filtered

(3) Double-click the print.tab_modal.enabled preference to switch between classic (false) and new (true)

more options

OMG! Yes! Thank you! I wonder why this setting wouldn't have been enabled by default? Would it be a bug, perhaps?

jscher2000 said

Does Firefox on Mac have this preference and, if so, does it make any difference: (1) In a new tab, type or paste about:config in the address bar and press Enter/Return. Click the button accepting the risk. (2) In the search box in the page, type or paste tab_mo and pause while the list is filtered (3) Double-click the print.tab_modal.enabled preference to switch between classic (false) and new (true)
more options

There are still numerous bugs to be squashed, but I don't know whether any are specific to Mac, Windows, or Linux.

The new print experience has been getting turned on gradually for different groups of users through the Normandy system. That's the same system used to distribute Studies, in case you might have disabled those.

more options

It may be that many users have not come across it yet! I only updated yesterday morning (23/02), but din't print from Firefox till late in the evening, ebay receipts! Threw me at first but was annoyed more than anything, especially as I had only just fitted a new black cartridge and the print quality was on best and unable to be changed! Usually I have 4 options, draft b/w, best b/w, draft colour or best colour! I discovered the option today to opt back to the olde version print box, click print and in the options list click 'Print Using System Dialo', on my Mac it is at the bottom of the print options list and in blue like a link. Clicking it switches the print box back to the old system. The only downside is that it is a one time hit, it needs to be done each time one prints! What I don't understand is why we have inadequate systems foisted on us, or systems that are incompatible with devices after a short period making them obsolete! Is it corporate greed, trying to force us to continually update, even when what we have is extremely adequate for the uses we need them for! When will the manufacturers and developers realise not all of us need all the bells and whistles. and it just makes it even harder for many of the older generation to keep up, no wonder so many do not want to know when it comes to computers, smart phones and the digital age!! It may be that they will be dead soon, either by covid or plain old age, but it is not the attitude to have, and remember everyone is getting older!

more options

I think I found another bug. After finally locating the box for two-sided printing, I checked it. I decided to print this thread as a test. The dialog box informed me that it would require 7 pages, regardless of whether or not the box was checked.

Two-sided printing did work, but the page count in the dialog box was not reduced accordingly.

more options

wmff said

I think I found another bug. After finally locating the box for two-sided printing, I checked it. I decided to print this thread as a test. The dialog box informed me that it would require 7 pages, regardless of whether or not the box was checked. Two-sided printing did work, but the page count in the dialog box was not reduced accordingly.

It's probably better to read pages as numbered pages rather than sheets of paper.

more options

jscher2000 said

It's probably better to read pages as numbered pages rather than sheets of paper.

On the other hand, in Brave/Vivaldi/Chrome, it will change from "8 sheets of paper" to "4 sheets of paper", depending on the state of that checkbox.

If Firefox could do the same, it would make it eminently more useful and informative. It is nice to know how much paper is being used, especially if you are getting low and might have to reload.

more options

A Windows10 user here. This unwanted, unsolicited "improved Print functionality" has been forced on our systems without any notice or warning. It is NOT an improvement. It forces an unreadable, un-sizable, miniature full-page image with a less than complete 'control' panel that takes up significant real estate on the right hand side of the screen. It doesn't even have full access to options. Whose bright idea was this? It is impossible to read the text to find out what would be printed - unless you have a large screen monitor. Not useful on laptops screens, smaller desktops, etc. I'm glad some of you FIrefox duffers post the configuration names that can be used to turn these horrific changes off. There were 3 of them. I hate having to waste my time hunting down this information to revert back and get a workable print preview. Firefox eliminated the ability to send feedback.

more options

Similar problem....but on Windows and with the GUI. It's too laborious when printing just the first page/cutom number of pages - too many key/mouse strokes. The old 'multiple choice' option should be reinstated.

To print 1st page: Old GUI: 1 click on 'Pages' [which has a default of 1], then 'Print'

              2 clicks

New GUI: click 'All', click 'Custom', click on the page range field, type '1', then 'Print'

              4 clicks & a key-stroke

To print page range: Old GUI: 1 click on 'Pages' [which has a default of 1], type page range*, then 'Print'

              2 clicks & key-strokes
                        [* 'cursor' automatically placed in page-range field]

New GUI: click 'All', click 'Custom', click on the page range field, type page range, the 'Print'

              4 clicks & a key-stroke

Sorry, but that is not an improvement.

more options

rob3109buy said

Similar problem....but on Windows... To print 1st page:
  • Old GUI: click on 'Pages' [which has a default of 1], then 'Print' (2 clicks)
  • New GUI: click 'All', click 'Custom', click on the page range field, type '1', then 'Print' (4 clicks & a key-stroke)
To print page range:
  • Old GUI: 1 click on 'Pages' [which has a default of 1], type page range*, then 'Print' (2 clicks & key-strokes [* 'cursor' automatically placed in page-range field])
  • New GUI: click 'All', click 'Custom', click on the page range field, type page range, the 'Print' (4 clicks & a key-stroke)

For me, Windows doesn't fill in Pages with 1 when I click the bubble next to Pages in the system dialog, I have to type it myself. (If I try to Print without filling it, Windows gives me an error.)

It sounds as though it would be a good default for Firefox, when you click Custom, to (A) put the cursor in the page range box, and (B) if it's blank because you didn't previously enter a range, enter a 1 there (or if each platform does it differently, whatever is the default for your OS). You could file a new bug (request for enhancement) for that: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/