FireFox version 4 Preview.

[Clint1]

They don't need one on Chrome and chrome works well. Welcome to the future.

Which is probably why Chrome only has ~5% of the market. I can't do without any menu bar......on anything.

[kgun]

They don't need one on Chrome and chrome works well. Welcome to the future.

How secure is that open source browser?

Do you think Opera have studied that code?

An open source code browser will never get a link on this http://www.redcarpetrank.com/ site.

Security is my main concern. And it should be the main concern for the surfer and online shopper.

You don't secure your home and tell the whole world how it is done.

[Clint1]

As I understand it, what they are planning on doing is having some features disabled by default, with enabling such being a user option.

Hopefully that is the case.

Given the forced march toward ever more powerful client platforms, to now believe that a minimalist approach to browser design, with users left to decide which optional features should be activated and how to do so, seems to be more than a little myopic.

Myopia seems to be an affliction experienced by all-too-many in the software field. But if they are not totally removing features and letting the end-user decide, that's a bit less myopic that removing them altogether.

[goldsteinmedia]

I mean you can always choose to stay on 3.6. Yea I know that's not the best idea. We'll really just have to wait and see how thing are with FF 4

[goldsteinmedia]

Which is probably why Chrome only has ~5% of the market. I can't do without any menu bar......on anything.

Yea neither can I, but we're the exception. Most users don't need everything enabled. As long as they let us enable features and hopefully easily I'll be happy.

[Clint1]

Yea neither can I, but we're the exception. Most users don't need everything enabled. As long as they let us enable features and hopefully easily I'll be happy.

As would I. But unfortunately that doesn't seem like that's going to be the case according that quote in my post #2:

"Beltzner admitted that that means taking away user interface controls, and some users are going to scream about it, but it’s necessary to simplify and speed up Firefox."

Note he said "taking away", and not something like "hiding" or "disabling by default with the option to enable", etc.

[morestar]

Looks more like Chrome, presents users with fewer functions.

Mozilla's Firefox 4 has a Chrome tint to it - TechRepublic

Sweet. Now I'm excited for this release. The cleaner they present it to me the easier it'll seem it will be easier to adapt to. I just hope it's a bit faster than usual although Firefox has been nicely loading etc. for the past little while for me.

Thanks for the link and the heads-up deepsand...

[deepsand]

Sweet. Now I'm excited for this release. The cleaner they present it to me the easier it'll seem it will be easier to adapt to.

Cleaner?

Well, if it's "clean" that you want, how about nothing but an Address Bar; can't get much cleaner than that!

It's time to once more repeat : Form follows Function.

Precisely what about FF's UI is "unclean?"

Take note of the fact that the stated goal of Mozilla is not "clean," but "lean," so as to reduce FF's footprint. And, as I've above noted, that involves trade-offs. You cannot have "lean" without a commensurate loss of functionality.

[goldsteinmedia]

But if you can reimplement the features then what's the problem.

[deepsand]

But if you can reimplement the features then what's the problem.

There's the operative word - "if."

"Beltzner admitted that that means taking away user interface controls, and some users are going to scream about it, but it’s necessary to simplify and speed up Firefox."