Jon wrote: > I've been through a dozen of these posts about 1.4's UX (wherein I > learned that the developer takes quite an attitude toward > "complainers," "whiners," and layabout do-no-gooders, so I'll expect a > witty retort that the developer's been through millions of them). I > wholeheartedly agree with the points above. I'll make a bullet list > of wishes, since I want you to know I take this seriously and I'm not > a "whiner". Also I hope to be listened to. I generally love Firebug > and have written emails complimenting it, and I have thanked the devs > for their hard work and a great useful tool. So here we go: > > - Lose the "on/off" functionality. *Since this is an add-on* the > close button shouldn't "quit", or change settings in the background, > etc etc. Want to quit Firebug? Tools->Add-ons->Disable. > this is worse then what is going on now. You must restart firefox to have plugins disabled and enabled. and unfortunatly due to the nature of firebug being a debug utility, it dramatically slows down webpages. Up to atleast 2x slower. Turning FB on and off is a common occurance, and having to restart my browser everytime for thsi just doesn't make any sense. > - Go back to the old "visible/invisible paradigm" rather than the new > "off/minimize" paradigm. Call what you now consider the "Minimize" > button's functionality the "Close" button. The "minimize" feature is > superfluous if the "close" button does what any other addon's "close" > button does, which is disappear (but continue to work for us when we > need it in a few minutes.) > i agree, i like the its on or its off, no minimize. if i want more screen realiestate i just detach FB from the tab > - Firebug should run all panels, by default, for any domain, on any > web page, on any tab. We can always set the preferences to "disable > for all pages" or "enable for all pages" > ummm no, firebug makes your html and css and js rendering super slow, as it checks and tracks all of this. > - The Net tab should show me all the requests that have been going on > before I displayed firebug, that means what happened while minimized, > without refreshing the page. I thought this was the way it worked > before which is why I'm surprised we need to refresh now. Did it not > work that way before? Regardless, Firebug should always have been > paying attention. The resources are minimal to do this and un- > streamlining the add-on to gain 20K of resources is a poor trade. > the internets don't work like that. There is more to resources then just RAM overhead. such as cpu cycles and networking stuff, as well as i/o bandwidth and such. How is firebug going to know about something when its not activated, coding ESP is not feasible. Im a big fan of not having software of plugis sniff my network connections with out me telliong it to do so on a specific address. > - You seem to be convinced that people need to get used to new button > placement even if they were poorly placed to begin with. You can > categorize the interface as mimicking a standalone application > (minimize restore and close, _ [] X), but you can also categorize this > as an addon with its own rules as before - Plus if you keep moving > buttons around and you piss off your current users simply to gain > (millions of brand new???) users. > who cares long as it does the job its not like anyone is paying for thsi shyt neways.
~kara > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
