Mozilla Firefox 3.0 beta 5 is out (portable version), and it’s better than ever. I haven’t used my still-installed 2.x version for weeks now.

While many of Firefox 3′s new features are mostly of interest to web developers, “the rest of us” can also find much to like in it. It’s faster, takes up less memory, looks better, seems incredibly to be more stable than the stable version (!), and I love the new URL bar, where you can start typing something and it usually suggests what you want after just a few characters. In Firefox 2 you had to start typing from the beggining of an URL (which is always the hostname), but now you can type any part of URLs (including paths after the hostname), site names, and it also looks through your bookmarks, so it can work even if you’ve just cleared your browsing history.

Since the dawn of 64-bit Linux distros, they have included 32-bit versions of browsers such as Firefox, because there aren’t 64-bit versions of plugins such as Java (the 64-bit version doesn’t have a plugin) or Flash.

A couple of days ago, however, I was reading the “what’s new” list for Suse 10.3 Alpha 3, and found this entry:

On x86-64: Firefox is now a 64-bit package and uses nspluginwrapper to handle 32-bit i386 plugins if needed.

Naturally, I had to investigate. I downloaded a 64-bit build of Firefox from Autofox, and nspluginwrapper. With that wrapper, I can use Flash without any problems. (Not Java, though; I think Blackdown offers a 64-bit plugin, but it’s Java 1.4.2 only. But I have found out that I don’t miss Java in the browser at all, for the past few days.)

The browser feels faster. I tend to use bookmark folders to open dozens of bookmarks at the same time on different tabs, which actually makes the browser “hang” for a couple of seconds, and those delays seem shorter now. No, I didn’t do any benchmarks. But the overall experience just “feels” better. It even appears to be more stable, though that may actually come from the fact that I’m using a 2.0.0.4pre build, which is the latest version (2.0.0.3) plus bugfixes… or maybe it’s because this version was built with a non-ancient, and possibly less buggy compiler.

I was replying to the following comment by Bruno Rodrigues in the Firefox tab annoyances post, but I think that this deserves a new post; it’s a different subject, and longer than an average comment.

Uhhh? Obviously everyone *knew* that triple-click-control-middle-abcde-enter-enter-space(*) with your leg above your back would close a tab. What would *you* be thinking about? If Apple has close buttons on each tab, and not a single close at the right side, nor no-buttons at all, what do you think is the best user experience?

(*) did you know that most computer-savy users *still* don’t know about the right mouse button? Unbelievable, but true.

Two big problems tere, IMO. First, “triple-click-control-middle-abcde-enter-enter-space with your leg above your back” is a strawman attack. You can’t present something absurd as your opponent’s position, show that it is indeed absurd, and then pretend that you have refuted his original position as well. Middle-click is simple, quick and pratical, and your example isn’t. Sorry, I’ve been reading a lot about logical fallacies on Wikipedia.

Second, you seem to equate Apple with user-friendliness, which is an argument to authority: if Apple does it, then it must be correct. If Apple does it that way, then that must be the most user-friendly way possible.

Well, telling people about the middle button would be a much better idea than introducing multiple “dangerous” close buttons that only get in the way anyway… but maybe that’s just me.

Should the close buttons be added simply because Apple does it? Like I said, I don’t agree that Apple should be considered the “standard” for user-friendliness. If it was, then it would never change, would it? It would already be perfect. But it isn’t.

A thing should be as simple as possible, but not simpler (paraphrasing Einstein). If you take away usefulness (note that I don’t say “features”, but real usefulness) just to make it simpler, you’re making the software less useful. If the software doesn’t do what I want it to do, then it’s not useful to me, even if it’s the most easy to use piece of software in the world… right?

And, historically, that’s what Apple did (I admit that I haven’t used MacOS X yet, though I was familiar with previous versions). Their philosophy was: “normal” users should never need to do this, so we’ll actively prevent people from doing it – even if they happen to be advanced users. For some reason, I have a problem with this kind of attitude. To be fair, I don’t know if it’s changed in OS X.

Besides, “user-friendliness” is a subjective concept. To most people, the most important thing for a piece of software isn’t really being simple, clean, or logical, but simply being what they already know. Between Windows XP and MacOS X, they’d say Windows was more “user-friendly”, merely because, with MacOS, they’d have to learn new stuff – which is the thing people hate the most about computers.

The close buttons on tabs waste space, make it easy to close tabs by mistake, are harder to click on than the entire tab, and there was already a quicker, easier way to do it. People don’t know about it? Find a way to tell them. Hell, pop up an information window the first time a user opens a new tab, or something. It’s much better than adding a redundant, confusing feature that will only make the browser more difficult to use to anyone who already knew how to close tabs quickly.

What’s next? Take tabs away completely, because many people don’t know how to use them anyway, and they only make the browser “more confusing”?

Firefox 2.0 has been out for a while, and the response to it has been mostly positive.

However, there were a couple of changes to how tabs work, and I, for one, didn’t like them at all. Looking around, I found the solution to one of them, and the other one was pretty easy to figure out.

Here’s the changes, and how to “undo” them:

1- “X” close button on every tab

This one, to me, qualifies for the “What were they thinking?” award. Don’t people know that you can close any tab simply by middle-clicking on it (yes, even on Linux)? Not to mention that the “X” button is both harder to click on than the entire tab, and makes it easy to close tabs by mistake, when you just wanted to select it? In other words, there’s already an easy way, and they add a more difficult way, which, besides, can easy lead to mistakes?

Sigh. Sorry about the rant.

Fix: open about:config, look for browser.tabs.closeButtons, and set it to 2 (no close buttons) or 3 (a single close button on the right of the tabs, like in previous Firefoxes – though, again, middle-click makes it useless).

2- tabs don’t get smaller past a certain point; if you have too many, you need to scroll the tab bar to see them all

Maybe I’m weird, but I have tab folders with 10-15 bookmarks of a particular subject, and I like to open them all, with a single click, daily. In Firefox 1.x, the tabs would get as small as they needed to be, to fit in the window. Now, they don’t get smaller than a certain size, and force the user to scroll.

To me, this is annoying. I haven’t found an option to completely disable this behavior, but I can make it virtually go away by reducing the minimum tab width to a much smaller value.

Fix: open about:config, and change browser.tabs.tabMinWidth to a much smaller value, like 1.

In Firefox, on Windows, it’s quite useful to be able to close tabs by middle-clicking on them. But on Linux, by default, what middle-click does (either on the tab or on the main page display) is to open whatever is on the clipboard in the current tab.

But you may prefer middle-click to work as in the Windows version. If so, just open about:config, then search for

middlemouse.contentLoadURL

and change it to False. Simple as that.