FF 5

Guest

RE: FF 5

Post by Guest » Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:22 pm

Drifting off-topic a little also, but since I made a reference to Chrome, I thought [url=http://www.howtogeek.com/58058/how-to-enable-flashblock-in-chrome-and-make-it-5000-more-secure/ t=_self]this[/url] might be appropriate (scroll down a little).

Qbird0
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:53 pm

RE: FF 5

Post by Qbird0 » Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:47 pm

Love it!

alamctg
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:55 pm

RE: FF 5

Post by alamctg » Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:20 am

gaad how stupid can i get. I thought this thread was about Final Fantasy V.LOL. well, since I'm here, im supposed to be talking about Firefox 5.. I havn't tried it yet though. I heard FF5 has no major improvements and It addresses many bugs. Is that true?

Dutch Mountain
Posts: 2801
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 5:20 pm

RE: FF 5

Post by Dutch Mountain » Wed Jun 29, 2011 6:45 pm

<quote user="phantazm">
Just updated FF and only 2 addons were not compatible:

avast! WebRep 20110101
McAfee Siteadvisor 3.3.1
[/quote]
McAfee siteadvisor is working here on FF5 !
Peter


Guest

RE: FF 5

Post by Guest » Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:57 pm

Tried FF 5 and ran into a major deal breaker.

It didn't have to do with add-on compatibility as much as userChrome.css.

They've disabled . . . hard coded in Gecko . . . the ":visited" link line in user css's.

I use that to mark my visited links, both external and internal.

The lines I used on 3.6.17 were
  1. Code: Select all

    a:visited:before {
    content:"97___SNIPPET___A0";
    color: red;
    }
    
That gives me a nice Unicode marker in 3.6.17.

But 5 disables it entirely.

So I went back to 3.6.17

Guest

RE: FF 5

Post by Guest » Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:08 pm

[url=http://i52.tinypic.com/xlle3c.jpg t=_self][img]http://i52.tinypic.com/xlle3c.jpg[/img][/url]

A cache refresh removes them for the next session.

Guest

RE: FF 5

Post by Guest » Tue Jul 12, 2011 2:57 am

In case anybody is wondering . . . NO, I didn't come up with this css code all by my lonesome.

Though it would be ego-boosting to claim it was an original thought, it was in fact a stylish.com piece of code that I modified.

Speaking of stylish, it IS compatible with 5. It's just that 5 wouldn't run the particular css that I cited above . . . sort of an add on within an add on that it wouldn't run.

Since the stylish add on shows how a user css has effects on the UI, I use it to look at these things.

If I like them, I then add them to my userChrome.css and then uninstall stylish . . . on the theory that the less add ons the better.

There probably is a trade off there since the userChrome.css file slows things down too, but I see no reason to keep stylish hanging around when I don't use it that often.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests