Talk:Firefox2/Features: Difference between revisions

* [[User:cardmagic|cardmagic]]: Allow cross-domain Ajax requests if the crossdomain.xml policy file allows it, similar to Flash's policy: http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/knowledgebase/index.cfm?id=tn_14213

* [[User:djst|djst]]: My proposal for making things easier for the user would be to broaden the autocomplete drop-down list of the address bar to also include Bookmark Search results (currently available from the Bookmarks sidebar). This would mean you could type e.g. "weather" in the address bar, and the result list would include your weather forecast bookmarks, even if their actual addresses didn't contain the word "weather". The Bookmark Search feature, as it is now, is hidden and probably unused by many people. (Apologizes if this is the wrong place for feature suggestions.)

* [[User:Beltzner|Beltzner]]: this is the right place; I'd also suggest that you add comments on the discussion page of the [[Places|new bookmark and history system]] breakout page since this falls into that particular bucket.

* [[User:frozeen|frozeen]]: As I and my wife are both using Firefox but on different profiles in Windows it would be a great thing to be able to use the same bookmarks as well. Today it is only possible by using a theird party program, but it shouldn't be that hard to implement in your browser.

"Firefox 2 will aim to build on the success of Firefox by addressing issues related to the problem of managing the vast amounts of information available on the Internet. Our goal is to provide a browser that helps users manage and organize their online information channels."

Wow, that sounds a whole lot like what Netscape Marketing once said about Netscape Communicator 5 and its planned SmartBrowsing functionality. But thankfully the notes you've put here is more than screenshots. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Minh Nguyen|Minh Nguyễn]] <small class="plainlinks">([[User talk:Minh Nguyen|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Minh Nguyen|contribs]], [http://mxn.f2o.org/index.html blog])</small> 14:04, 4 Dec 2005 (PST)

* [[User:ruko|ruko]]: To use firefox in companies, larger organisation, even smaller workgroups with few people doing the support, it would be very helpful, to have the possibility to do a central configuration or administration: (1) set or change configuration,  (2) install extensions,  (3) allow or disallow users doing various settings or extensions installation.

* [[User:shadowchaser|shadowchaser]]: I completely agree with the comment about MSI packages. MSI packages are an absolute must if Firefox wants to make ANY inroads in the business or enterprise markets. Many IT departments are VERY "Microsoft" centric, and extensively leverage Active Directory or other deployment technologies. Companies are not going to bother installing Firefox manually on every desktop - they need to be able to deploy it automatically to thousands of machines automatically using Windows Installer (MSI). Adding this feature, and support for Windows Policies (ADM templates, etc) would make a HUGE dent in the IE market share. Remember all the reviews of Firefox when it came out? Most people completely wrote it off in corporate environments, saying how most would not deploy it without MSI or policy support. IT shops need automatic deployment, and the ability to force their evil ways onto users (ie/ lock out features). I disagree with tim's comment about an IE fake mode - copying IE exactially would lead to serious trademark issues. Firefox has already strived to have a similar look and feel to Internet Explorer - the only thing I would suggest is to natively support the Windows "Favorites" OS feature. You might want to take a look at the "Open Office" team. They resisted and fought for years against MSI, then finally gave in and now Open Office 2.0 supports it. Why? It's the ONLY way to make inroads into large "Microsoft Shop" corporations.

* [[User:mh166|mh166]]: After updating (or after installing) an extension it should not be necassary to restart Firefox. It's really anoying if you got dozens of sites opened and have to restart for updates taking change. I'm software developper of my own, too. And I think there should be possibilities for updating without restarting (haven't worked with plugin(systems) yet, but will do). So: why is it necessary atm?

* [[User:Kamasutra|Kamasutra]]: Yes, the new session restore feature (not related to sessionsaver extension) should solve the problem indirectly. However, the fact remains that it is only a workaround to this specific problem. Since Firefox 2 does not involve any core changes this is fine, but when core changes are made for Firefox 3 this may be something to consider.

* [[User:matthew|matthew]]: When I'm saving a file and Firefox detects, that I'm on to overwrite another file with the same name, I'm only able to overwrite the existing file or abort, start again and rename it from the beginning. It would be nice, if Firefox shows me a dialog, like Konqueror does, for renaming the file "just in time".

* Veeven: Correct display of complex script languages (most Indian languages). IE6 in WinXP SP2 shows [http://te.wikipedia.org/ this page] correctly, but Firefox 1.5 does not. I expect that I would be able to see webpages in my native lanugage comfortably with Firefox 2. Most Indian users will benefit from this.

* Veeven: Anti-aliasing of fonts makes web pages look better. I think it may not be possible for Firefox 2.0. But, it is much needed to improve the visual look of any web page. [http://www.w3.org/Amaya/ Amaya] does it already.

* momendo: JPEG2K has been released as a standard and there has been very little movement in the browser world to support it. We have a chicken/egg scenario where browsers don't really need to support it unless there is a strong need. JPEG has become a very popular format for photos. Digital cameras don't support J2K but if it's supported in the browser, the case becomes really strong to support it. There is a bug filed for it [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36351 here.] J2K can really improve image quality and save bandwidth. PNG overlaps some of the features of J2K. But I would argue J2K has better PSNR and can be lossy if needed. Once it's in trunk, it can be used in tags like Canvas with alpha channel.

* [[User:NisseSthlm|NisseSthlm]]: Private data is both a good thing and a bad. Mostly the Firefox' saving of private data is making the surf experience better, but sometimes you don't want Firefox to remember the websites you've visited during a period of time for one reason or another. At work, for example, you'd want Firefox to remember your Google searches in "Saved Forms" for future access. But on coffee breaks you might want to surf private stuff and "saved searches" would only clutter and disturb when the coffee break is over. By clearing your Private Data you erase everything without consideration. For "coffee break surfing" it would be nice to have a "Stealth Mode" that doesn't save any private data. This Stealth Mode should be fairly easy to switch on and off. I believe all of us use our browser for "important" as well as nonsense surfing and since the nonsense surfing is impossible to distinguish for "Clear Private Data", you'd want to be able to tell the browser that, for now this surfing is nonsense and shouldn't be remembered.

* [[User:chiklit|chiklit]]: This has probably been said tons of times but it would be nice to see a reduction in memory usage in Firefox 2.0. Just in viewing this page with no other tabs open FF is using nearly 50mb of memory, while the same page on IE or Opera uses nearly half that.

* [[User:apocalypse|apocalypse]]: Some extensions consume a lot of memory. I just have installed 3 or 4, thoose that I use to work. With 4 tabs opened and just 30 minutes of usage firefox's using 93 MB. It should have a way to control the extension producting.

I want to propose that features such as Anti-phishing is added as a default plugin that can be removed as any other plugin. Whereas I am totally for having Anti-phishing pre-installed in a new Firefox install, I see it as a major problem if we don't make it easy to disable or remove the function.  

* [[User:p@tr1x|p@tr1x]]: We all know that Microsoft's IE 7.0 will include 'Anti-Phising' technology. I think most of you know that Google has released an extension for Firefox 1.5 that gives the users some level of protection against Phishing attacks. As Phishing/Spoofing becomes one of the most prevalent forms of internet attacks I believe it would be foolish to introduce a product for the masses, like Firefox, that doesn't include this type of technology. How many of you have used the extension Adblock combo'd with Filterset.g? Do these types of programs act as a potential threat to 'free-speech'? I don't believe they do because I don't believe that web content providers have guaranteed access to my computer. I choose to enact a filter that prevents certain content from appearing. Whitelist/Blacklist/Heuristic analysis of web-content is not a violation of free-speech. Don't let any SPAMMER/Spoofer tell you otherwise.

'''Good solution for AccessKeys conflicts''' (see [[AccessKeys_solution]])

[[User:Luyseyal|Luyseyal]]: As data-entry intensive applications relentlessly migrate to Web applications, support for quick entry hotkeys becomes more desirable. Firefox, as a next generation browser, should integrate the need for Web applications to assign hotkeys with its goals for accessibility. This could be accomplished through an application-specific role which can be easily disabled.

Is this planned for 2.0? We already know there are 1000+ people asking for it. [[User:Ashibaka|Ashibaka]] 14:26, 30 Dec 2005 (PST)

One of the difficulties for me in recommending FF to casual computer users is the fact that building out their browser with extensions is more than many casual users may want to handle. Whereas I have fun searching out and finding new extensions, these casual users just want to start the system and have it work. It would be helpful if I could export some or all extensions (or URLs of extensions) that are in my system. I could then email this file to a casual user and they could import it in one step. I am aware that an extension that does something similar exists now (Mass Installer); however, I feel this is a basic extension management feature that should be built into the system. Furthermore, this is NOT a request for creation of a 'standard' extension bundle -- your set of standard extensions is likely to be different than mine. Instead, I would like the opportunty to 'publish' my own default set that can be installed by my family and friends. [[User:Emellaich|Emellaich]]

[[User:justkeeper|justkeeper]]I wonder if you can add this function:just turn off some features by default,and pack them in the extensions.If the user wants to turn on it,the browser automatically prompts and leads the user to download the extension,it would be just more suitable for a lot of users who are used to the traditional and integrated way of providing functions.And you can have some saving on size too.

Another issue with extensions. I often hear complaints about FF being buggy when it is running great for me. Often the complaints can be traced back to problems with extensions. The problem, as I mentioned previously is that I do not believe the 'average' web user will be willing to put in the time to manage extension issues. They will blame FF for all of the problems. I believe that extensions are both FF greatest strength, and potentially its greatest weakness (due to bugs introduced). I have two thoughts on alternatives for addressing this.

2) Introduce a technical rating system for extensions. Currently, there is a one to five star rating on home pages to indicate approval of the extension. Introduce a new rating that only pertains to the stability of the extension. This rating would appear next to the extension's name in the extension manager. If problems were occuring with an extension, a user would be able to see which of their extensions were reported by others to be buggy or caused conflicts with others.

* [[User:frozeen|frozeen]]:  A really nice thing in FF 2.0 would be to make it possible to move tabs. Sometimes you open alot of tabs but you want to change the order in which they appear. A simple drag n' drop functionality would be very nice!

The tree view tabs and group mode are really incredible from [http://piro.sakura.ne.jp/xul/tabextensions/index.html.en#screenshots Tab Browser Extensions]. Although I see there are concerns about the stability of this code (I had some myself), I believe adding this functionality would be WELL worth it. Anticipating a possible response, I don't think this would be of interest only to power users. Tabs have become mainstream and people are already familiar with hierarchies as far as their file system. I really hope to see a stable addition to Firefox with this functionality. [[User:Brettz9|Brettz9]] 05:54, 18 Feb 2006 (PST)

== Tabs: Session-saving ==

[[User:aia|aia]]: I would like to suggest the feature and ability of "session-saving" in Firefox. The addresses in the open tabs would be saved either automatically or by choice before you close Firefox. The next time you start Firefox you could choose to load the saved session's addresses back into tabs in Firefox.

I would like to suggest dual pane view.  Handy for us folks with wide monitors.  We could see twice as much content on the page for the many pages that are narrow.  In other words firefox would have the screen split in the middle, with a left and right pane.  A web page would first fill the left pane and then move onto the second pane.  Similar to how reading pane in MS word works.