I actually like the new 1.4. I felt it was a great step forward. 1.5 is even better as well.
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of nroussi Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:52 AM To: Firebug Subject: Re: Firebug 1.4 - A step backwards? I agree fully with sir_brizz. I really never understood why people just dont get the cliche "If it is not broken, dont fix it." Maybe the developers have a vision for FB and I too am not in alignment right now with that. I thank whoever mentioned webkit. I have installed that and now I can remove the annoying Vista version of FB. Thanks On Aug 17, 5:04 pm, sir_brizz <[email protected]> wrote: > I think all that ever needed to be said about how far backwards > Firebug went in usability and interface design has been said numerous > times and it isn't going to be changed. I'm of the opinion that, while > Firebug was originally (1.0-1.2) the standard for in-browser > javascript and event debugging, since then the debuggers in WebKit and > Opera have far eclipsed it in terms of speed, user experience, > usability, and design. They have lots of nice features that are not > implemented in Firebug, they work in (what seems to be) more sensible > way, and they are extremely fast. > > That said, I still use Firebug in my day to day work. Every time I > install a new Firebug version, I browse to the UI xul file and move > the off button the left of the other buttons because I hate where it > is and I hate how it works. I'm looking forward to future 1.5 versions > that will hopefully have the On By Default option with Off > blacklisting sites, which will bring it much closer to the 1.2 > functionality (which I, personally, view as the optimal model for > future versions of Firebug partially because I see it as the most user- > friendly and usable version of Firebug). > > Now, I'm not trying to say that jjb and honza and others are ignoring > what people are concerned about here. They simply have a vision for > Firebug going forward that I am not (and probably never will be) in > alignment with. > > On Aug 17, 8:28 am, dan_m2k <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm interested by johnjbarton's reponses. > > > I share the frustration shared by, nroussi, amongst others. > > > I feel that the take-away for this is that the activation model > > clearly doesn't meet the majority of user's expectations in how it > > works, in that a lot of users (myself included) feels that it doesn't. > > It isn't a bug as such, it seems to be a flaw in the usability in the > > latest "Vista" release of Firebug. My rationale for this is that > > seasoned Firebug users simply don't get how it works. I'm still at a > > loss how to enable this for some sites and not others. > > > As per john's specific comments -- my suggestion would be to go back > > to an activation model that works in way that users understand. > > > And finally, given my success of cleansing Firefox and any library, > > profile data (After backing up of course) I stand by it as a method to > > fix all of these niggles as per my experience. > > > On Aug 17, 2:44 pm, nroussi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Well, I am glad to see that it is not just me that is frustrated on > > > this issue. I thought I was being difficult. The comparison of 1.3 to > > > XP and 1.4 to Vista actually went through my mind too :) even though I > > > used FB mostly on OSX. > > > > Please read comments: > > > > On Aug 14, 4:58 pm, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 14, 12:42 pm, nroussi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I have been using Firebug for a very long time and this version forced > > > > > me to install Opera with dragonfly. I design and develop pages and I > > > > > We would be interested in your experience, especially if you see > > > > things you would like in Firebug. > > > > I would like to be able to do what I could do in 1.3. Disable FB for > > > gmail lets say in one tab and enable it for the sites that I am > > > working on in another tab. > > > > > > want to be able to disable it for specific sites like gmail and also > > > > > enable it for specific sites (like the ones I am working on). This > > > > > always on/always off is a really bad idea. If it was done to save > > > > > I don't know what you are saying here. What is "always on/always off"? > > > > Such a thing wasn't done. So its not a bad idea, its just somehow your > > > > Firebug is broken or its not working how you expect. > > > > Well I installed from scratch and using OSX with FF3.5. When I click > > > on the bug icon and it opens up, it stays on for all sites. If I click > > > off, it is still on when the page is refreshed > > > > > > memory then I guess the developers of Firebug forgot who their target > > > > > audience is. > > > > > I don't think so. What makes you say that? > > > > I had read somewhere on a forum posting that the reason the feature of > > > a per site on or off was removed to save memory and memory should not > > > be an issue. > > > > > > Dont get me wrong, I appreciate a free product and I > > > > > appreciate the work behind firebug. It is a shame though to not be > > > > > able to use it anymore. > > > > > Let us know if you want help to fix your Firebug. > > > > > > If there is anyone that installed firebug 1.3 on Firefox 3.5 please > > > > > let me know as I dont want to use Opera. > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > On Aug 14, 10:07 am, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 14, 2:11 am, dan_m2k <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I'd agree. Though the latest build has solved a lot of the > > > > > > > problems > > > > > > > that I've found of late, the lagest Firebug does feel like it's > > > > > > > fallen > > > > > > > backwards - the activation model being one of the main bugbares. > > > > > > > > The firebug icon (colored/greyed out) is counter intuitive as it > > > > > > > often > > > > > > > fails to respond to the 'enable all panels' or 'no panels' > > > > > > > options - > > > > > > > therfore giving no meaningful feedback, and likewise there is no > > > > > > > If you can help us reproduce this we can fix it. > > > > > > > > intuitive way to find out you've accidentally enabled for > > > > > > > everything, > > > > > > > until, say, you find that gMail has issues loading as it's going > > > > > > > thru > > > > > > > Firebug. > > > > > > > Any suggestions? I'm not sure what you mean by "accidentally". Do > > > > > > you > > > > > > mean "I set On for All Web Page" then forgot I had set it because > > > > > > the > > > > > > UI does not change when this option is set? > > > > > > > > The various other issues relating to console logging being hit and > > > > > > > miss, the inspector failing to highlight the selected > > > > > > > node/failing to > > > > > > > keep it selected, and the net tab, make the end user experience > > > > > > > very > > > > > > > frustraiting. > > > > > > > Of course we can't fix these problems. > > > > > > > > A side note to other users - I did have some performance > > > > > > > improvements/ > > > > > > > less glitches by completely removing Firefox and all application > > > > > > > support, library folders and so-forth from my Mac before doing a > > > > > > > reinstall of FF and Firebug. YMMV. > > > > > > > I strongly discourage users from uninstalling Firefox to fix Firebug > > > > > > problems, it almost never works. The reason is simple: the problems > > > > > > are almost always in the Firefox configuration settings ('profile') > > > > > > and uninstalling or reinstalling does not change these settings. > > > > > > > The most effective way to reset your browser is to create a new > > > > > > Firefox profile. > > > > > > > jjb --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
