spontaneous expressions of mediocrity
It’s widely accepted in the Internet world that Firefox is the end-all, be-all of web browsers. Now that Microsoft’s long forsaken Internet Explorer is starting to show its age to more and more of the general internet using public, people are touting it as such in record numbers. Come with me; wont you, as I describe in detail the intricacies that make the best browser for Windows, one of the worst browsers for the Mac.
Okay now, before we all get up in arms about my blatantly loaded statement, let me clarify a few things first:
However, this cross platform consistency is also where things start to fall apart. To keep Firefox easy to develop across multiple platforms, the Mozilla people used an XML based user interface language, or what they like to call XUL. This, in and of it self is pretty smart. It speeds up development time exponentially, since GUI elements can be styled with simple CSS. It’s also cool for people like me who build websites, as we can easily make our own skins for the app! The problem is that this method of creating the UI opens it up to lots of little inconsistencies that drive Mac people crazy. These inconsistencies are what most of the Mac people who don’t like Firefox are talking about when they say that it just doesn’t feel “Mac-like.”
What do we mean when we say “Mac-like?” Mac applications generally follow a set of Human Interface Guidelines (HIG) set forth by Apple. This helps keep learning curves down and has a lot to do with why the Mac’s fit and finish is so polished. Firefox violates more than it’s share of these HIG elements (not as many as Opera, mind you). For example, in version 1.0, the layout of the preference pane was the same as its Windows counterpart, rather than a traditional OS X layout. This made it different than most OS X applications on the market. With the release of version 1.5, many of these preference pane issues have been fixed, and even applied to the Windows version. However, the customize toolbar menu still suffers from a very un-Mac-like interface.
First of all, control clicking the tool bar should provide you with the menu option of “Customize Toolbar…” rather than “Customize…” Secondly, the customize window should be a sheet, and not another window. All toolbar icons should be displayed on the sheet without the need to scroll. There is a “Restore Default Set” button rather than a group of default icons to drag to the toolbar. The icons are spaced too far apart from each other, and the Go button’s text label floats to the right of the icon rather than underneath. Does this sound incredibly nit-picky? I’m just getting started.
Many of the old preference pane display issues still effect this window, such as improperly sized buttons with text that is not vertically centered. Select menus are the right size, but the font size is too small. Language in the controls and on the window is also inconsistent with most other OS X applications.
While the majority of these “un-Mac-like” discrepancies have been addressed in the new version, some things still glare at us throughout the app. For instance, the use of 12pt Lucida Grande in every window accessible menu, rather than the normal 14pt that is used in the main OS X menu bar—and all other OS X applications, for that matter. There is also extra padding on the left side of these menus, and they don’t use transparency in the background like all other Mac menus do. Do I even need to bring up the Windows 98 inspired form widgets that are completely different than any element in the entire Mac OS X interface?
I understand these are things that most Windows and Linux users roll their eyes at, but they are a big part of why Mac people love the Mac. Things look slick and function the way you expect. You wouldn’t want your car to have power windows on just the passenger door, or to have a crooked turn signal arrow on your dash. Little things add up and go a long way when they are given consideration.
Enough with the anal-retentive interface analyzing. Lets talk about things that really count, like all those cool, new features that set it apart from Internet Explorer, like tabbed browsing. Tabbed browsing is VERY cool, but not quite so new if you were using Mozilla in 2001, Chimera in 2002, or Safari in 2003, like many of us Mac people have been. In fact, Firefox’s tabbed browsing falls a little short when compared to other Mac browsers, such as Safari, Shiira, Camino and Omniweb—all of which have close widgets on each tab, rather than a single widget to the left of the tab bar. Omniweb’s tabs even open in a drawer, can display a preview of the live web page and alert you when new content exists.
Well, how about resizing text? Indeed. A buried feature in IE Win that is hit-and-miss at best. Actually, I don’t believe there has ever been a web browser for OS X besides Opera that didn’t have this feature. Yes, even Internet Explorer for Mac had it (In fact, it was the first browser on any platform to have this feature). And given that Firefox is the only browser for the Mac that doesn’t allow you to place text-resizing icons in the toolbar, I’m afraid it falls in last place as far as this feature goes.
Built in pop-up blocking is pretty sweet, though. It was even sweet when it debuted in Safari more than a year prior to Firefox’s release. Sweeter yet is Safari’s ability to turn pop-up blocking on and off right from the application menu, or better yet, with a keyboard shortcut! In addition to specifying blocking on a site-by-site basis, Omniweb even lets you specify blocking for different ad sizes.
Firefox is much more light weight and way faster than Internet Explorer, as is every other browser for the Mac. Safari and other webkit browsers are even faster than Firefox. The speed at which a program runs isn’t the only thing that makes it faster. Keeping options easy to access often play a bigger roll in over all speed than performance does. Take the simple act of clearing your cache, for instance. A total of 6 mouse clicks in Firefox. In Safari and Camino, it’s only 3 if you don’t use the command+option+E keyboard shortcut.
The reality is, without it’s extensions architecture, there really aren’t any features in Firefox that almost every other Mac browser doesn’t have and even does a better job of. This extensibility, though, is a BIG caveat, and is definitely where Firefox shines. Surprisingly, though, most of the Mac people I see using Firefox don’t have any of these extensions installed. Safari has tons of add-ons as well, but these are much more difficult to make, install and usually come with an additional cost.
While extensions do add quite a bit of functionality, you still have to install them. You also have to worry about them breaking when a new version of Firefox is released, and if you think the stuff coming directly from Mozilla is lacking in Apple HIG compliance, these extensions tend to be much more so with the lacking. Another sad fact is that most of these extensions mimic functionality already at the core of OS X.
This brings me to the deal breakers. The following missing elements are why Firefox is nothing more to me than another browser in which to test my designs:
These things are built into OS X and are freely available to other applications to integrate. I rely on them regularly in many other applications besides web browsers. These deal breakers, coupled with the UI inconsistencies and the simple fact that features in almost all other Mac browsers are more numerous and implemented better, is the reason I consider Firefox to be one of the worst browsers for the Mac.
Now, when you go comparing interfaces and features to other Mac browsers, Firefox certainly doesn’t stand up. However, when you go comparing them to Internet Explorer for Windows, Firefox is golden! Its interface is easy from an IE Windows transition. It has many more features than IE. It is most importantly much faster and much more secure.
We are fortunate as Mac users to have access to such features as Snap Back, Workspaces, site specific preferences, custom source view with built in FTP and code editing, in addition to all the things that are new to web users on the Windows and Linux platforms. Firefox is a very capable browser on each platform it runs on. It’s just that there are some serious contenders on the Mac platform.
I think it says quite a lot about the Mac platform when the best browser for Windows can’t stand up to most offerings on the Mac. But don’t take my opinion for it. I only use all of these browsers every day. No, no, no, really. Go ahead try them for yourself:
Get Firefox
Get Camino
Get Mozilla
Get Flock
Get Omniweb
Get Shiira
Get iCab
[...] cacies that make the best browser for Windows, one of the worst browsers for the Mac. See full article. This entry was po [...]
This is a good introduction to Firefox on Macintosh’s deficiencies, but it barely scratches the surface.
For instance, try hitting command-enter instead of enter after editing the URL on Mac Internet Explorer, OmniWeb, Camino and Safari. Now try on Firefox. Why would it do that? But it wasn’t accepted as a defect. The developers care more about cross-platform consistency than about platform consistency.
Mozilla Suite already showed that path leads only to destruction.
Steven - I hadn’t noticed that one. Ouch! My intent with this article was primarily to address the features Mozilla highlights on their Firefox web page. I may have to write a sequel to this one, but I encourage any and everyone to rant away in the comments as much as they wish.
P.S. Thanks for the link!
I apologize if it sounded like I was critiquing your article. That wasn’t my intent. I meant it to sound like “Everything this guys says is dead-on, but there’s so much more that could be said.”
It’s funny hearing somebody whining about Firefox “un-Mac-ness” and inconsistencies. Meanwhile Apple release a new UI gimmick with every OS or iApp updates. Which is the standard to follow nowadays? Brushed metal? Pinstripe? iTunes unified gray? Big fortune having the UNO theme to unify this mess. Btw those standard gumdrop “lickable” buttons and form elements looks stupid in specific webpages and Safari can’t even style them from CSS. Firefox is one of the best browsers on Mac especially for webdesigners.
Sebhelyesfarku - Don’t forget the pro apps! These are an entirely new beast altogether. Apple does seem to be the most common violator of their very own HIG. The one thing they are not guilty of (IMO), is making clunky, unintuitive software. This is what many of us think of Firefox.
Check out the nightly builds of webkit. It now allows you to turn off the cute gumdrop widgets and play with all kinds of CSS3 properties. No word on when these will be in the regular Safari, there is some really cool stuff in there none the less.
Camino is better Geko.
Steven - Critique away! The ouch was actually my reaction to what Firefox did when I tried your open in new tab trick.com.com
Sebhelyesfarku , it seems you have made the mistake of thinking that the Mac interface is just about the color of pixels.
Apple does a very good job of extending the Mac experience by creating things that look distinct but act in a natural manner. Firefox attempts to match Apple’s look (and misses by a small amount in a million places) and gives a non-standard behavior. The look could be forgiven, especially if it was consistent within itself; the constantly incorrect behavior can not.
As it is, Firefox is a poorly-designed application, and aggressively bad in terms of Mac interface standards. Its saving grace is that it allows developers to test how their pages will look and behave on a Windows- or Linux-based without actually physically moving to a new system.
(That said, I do hope Apple dumps one of the two gray themes. I suspect the new polished metal theme is going to replace the brushed metal in 10.5, but we’ll have to see.)
Fantastic blog. Thanks!
Still, casual users can use Firefox. I enjoy trying problem pages on several browsers though Safari is my default.
By the way, I recommend to one and all to get Spell Catcher, software which watches your spelling regardless of what software you are using.
It is excellent.
http://www.rainmakerinc.com/
[...] will stick with Safari, using another browser only when I have a problem with a web page. thebigreason:blog » Blog Archive » Firefox: The Best Wor [...]
There is one more thing that bugs me in the Mac firefox. When filling in forms you can tab between text fields but not to submit buttons. This means that I have to go to the mouse to submit the form, a wasted motion. I mainly use Camino because it has this convenient feature.
IMO, Firefox wasn’t really DESIGNED to be used on the Mac anyway. Why they have Mac versions of it I’ll never understand; I was under the impression that Camino was supposed to be the official Gecko browser on the Mac.
As a regular user of all three - Windows, Linux and Mac - I find this article mixed at best. I think most of the people who have posted here are missing the point behind the whole Mozilla Foundation project: CROSS-PLATFORM-COMPATIBILITY. While it is true that Firefox suffers from some quirks and issues on Macs (as it does on Windows and Linux), so do all browsers. If you were to try running Safari on Windows or Linux I am sure you would see alot more problems than you see with Firefox on the Mac. While Mac users might find this to be a shortcoming in what they otherwise consider to be a perfect computing world, the point is that Firefox remains the only browser to work consistently well on all three platforms (interface design issues aside). Also, the best thing about an open source web browser like Firefox is that if you have a problem with something you can submit it to Mozilla (and I would encourage those on this blog to do so) and they will more than likely to fix it almost immediately rather than waiting for the next go around a year or two later like Safari or IE.
Mankai
my eyes! i’m also blinded at having to endure the “un-mac-like” appearance! my eyes! first adobe, now this shit from mozilla! it’s horrible, horribe! it’s like i’ve taken a viagra and gone blind!
I have loved Safari for years. But I’ve recently had to switch to, yes, Firefox, for a number of my own deal-killers:
1) Safari reposistions my main browser window at almost every relaunch. Argh!
2) Safari (still!) can’t bookmark a group of tabs.
3) Safari can’t properly run a lot of web apps, like the blog editor at Blogger, and a number of others upon which I rely on a frequent basis.
I really miss the Mac-ness of Safari. But there are features it lacks that I just can’t live without, and that are included in Firefox (v.1.5 — I should say, I could never warm up to v.1.0). I would love to have an excuse to switch back, but Firefox has been pretty good in the interim. I think your browser of choice is a personal matter that comes down, usually, to what you need to do with it. Safari just doesn’t do what I need it to do.
And, just an aside, I also really miss the dictionary accessibility in Firefox. Tried it in Camino, but for some reason it doesn’t work there either, though it’s a Cocoa app (right?). Anyone know why?
If anyone’s interested, here’s the complete documentation of my conversion to Firefox:
http://systemsboy.blogspot.com/2005/09/yowsa-browsers.html
http://systemsboy.blogspot.com/2005/10/firefox-rocks.html
http://systemsboy.blogspot.com/2005/10/firefox-update.html
-systemboy
Mankai,
“A year or two later like Safari or IE?” I’ll give you that Safari begs to be upgraded outside of the Mac OS X development cycle, but perhaps its too tightly integrated to the OS for this to be a reality.
But, almost a full year passed between Firefox 1.0 and 1.5, which as you know is an eternity in the software world. This latest version contained several features Firefox 1.0.x conspicuously lacked or bugs that desperately needed to be fixed, such as correctly toggling the flag to block cookies not originating from a browsed site. To my knowledge, those of us who want ultimate control of tab behavior still need the Tabbrowser Preferences extension, which is just silly.
I can’t wait until I’m back in the Mac world. With what I have to put up with at home with Windows XP and at work with Fedora Core 4 with GNOME, I can’t wait to get my hands on an OS that actually cares about interface consistency, with a browser that has the same sensibility.
All in all, this was a great read.
Cheers,
–giromide
One more point…
For all the final-version-ness of Firefox, it is still in my mind a work in progress. I like to think of 1.5 as 0.999999.
My main gripe against Firefox on the Mac, besides the whole UI inconcistency thing, is the fact that it still doesn’t take advantage of the builtin proxy settings of OSX.
Even now, in version 1.5, I have to go to the Firefox preferences dialog and change my proxy settings manually when I switch networks with the powerbook.
[...]
davidbisset.com
Firefox: The Best Worst Browser Ever! Not a bashing article, but focusing a little on how it doesn& [...]
The best browsers on Windows are Opera, Maxthon, and Avant (in no particular order). Firefox has a nice plugin system but that’s about it’s only advantage when compared to the browsers above. Maxthon can use either the IE (Triton) engine or Gecko, has a much better implementation of tabs, lots of innovative features like super-drag and drop, and much more.
FireFox is just the most popular IE alternative on Windows but it is by no means the best.
I do not own a mac, though I am charmed by Apple and my next laptop will probably be a mac.
But the HIG by Apple are set by Apple, obviously, and FF is NOT a Apple product; just as iTunes on MS does not behave like WMP does, it is therefore normal that FF does not behave like Safari (which is an Apple-product)
Now most software made for Apple are made more or less following Apple HIG rules, so I figure Mac-users are so used to it they take it for granted, and it probably is a good idea as it gives a uniform user experience. As U said;FF features work similar cross-platform. So why expect it would be tailored to be more mac-like? You tout its the uniform cross-platform experience What would you expect? that FF releases a special version for MS, Mac, and why not, for every *nix/linux flavor on the market?
Ah! But you missed the point here, kiji, I think. The point was not about Firefox not behaving exactly like Safari or Camino, but about it’s interface (shortcuts, preferences, menu options, toolbar customisation) being Mac OS X-like. It’s not just Safari and/or Camino behaving in the way the author wants Firefox to behave, it’s every single application on Mac OS X that behaves the (more or less) same way (give or take some exceptions).
Therefore, I think your statement that iTunes doesn’t work like WMP doesn’t cut it. WMP doesn’t behave like a regular Windows application behaves at all. Should iTunes then follow the quirks of an awkward piece of software like WMP? I’d rather have any given application to follow the interface guidelines the OS it’s running on. And yes, Microsoft has them too, just like Apple. Only they’re not really pursueing, like Apple is, oppressing them on anyone. So, what I’m trying to say here, is that iTunes behaves more or less the way any other Windows application behaves. And also, it behaves like a Mac OS X application is expected to behave. I don’t see why it should be expected to work like the pile of inconsistencies that WMP is.
Since Firefox on Windows and Linux (before there was a version for Mac) was, in my opinion, initially just more or less copying Mac OS X’s look and functionality (especially the way to customise the toolbar), it would make more sense to have it working like a Mac OS X application all the way. That way, Windows and Linux users would get a kick ass user interface experience, and Mac OS X users would be happy because it would behave as expected. Since the user interface guidelines for Mac OS X are definitely the most stringently imposed ones, I think it would actually make more sense to have Firefox behave like a Mac OS X application on all (other) platforms, than to have it behave like a Windows application.
kd - Thanks for the Windows browser suggestions. I knew there must have been other Windows browser alternatives available, but all I ever hear from Windows web developers is how God-like Firefox is.
systemsboy - Sorry for the moderation delay. Your Firefox conversion log is great. I wish I had read it before I wrote this post. As understand it, using the Cocoa API doesn’t automatically give you access to the system dictionary, spellcheck, or services. Programmers can use different API’s for different parts of a program. This is the biggest fault I currently find with Camino.
Thanks for the compliment and the info, M.e.. Liking your blog quite a bit as well.
Too bad about Camino. It’s so close to being a contender. I want to use it, but it just ain’t quite there yet.
Ah well… The wait for the perfect browser goes on…
Cheers!
the problem is gecko, obviously, isn’t cocoa. Since text fields and such are rendered by gecko, even in Camino, they can’t acces the system’s spell checker. Because it’s front end is cocoa, in Camino, dictionary and spellcheck does work in the google search field in the menu bar, for example (great heh
If I remember correctly, attempts were made for Camino to have it’s own text fields, but it was buggy as hell.
The purpose of a browser is to let you navigate between stuff, and to read it when you’ve found it. If a browser fails, or at least is inefficient, in that purpose, then the padding between its menu items is irrelevant. Firefox achieves that purpose with an economy that Safari does not. Everything else is secondary.
I’m a (very) recent Windows switcher and proud owner of a new G4 Powerbook. Having invested heavily on the back of the hype that everything on a Mac “just works”, I fired up the Safari browser with not inconsiderable anticipation.
Imagine my disappointment when, within minutes, I couldn’t find any way of viewing my bookmarks at the same time as viewing my current choice of bookmarked location. The resulting fiasco of endlessly flipping between the two, and scrabbling around with the menu, just to flip through the news was excrutiating.
Imagine also my disappointment when Safari’s own default home page rendered in type so small I couldn’t read it, while Safari cheerfully ignored all my efforts to change the default font and size (yes, I could get round to building my own style sheet and see what happens, but why should I when I’ve a browser that does it already?).
5 minutues later, I had Firefox loaded and I could navigate and see again.
Guys - if you’re presented with a gold plated turd to eat, what matters most - the gold plating, or the turd?
Jesus Cripes, M.e., what the hell have you started here? I feel like i showed up to a circle jerk 10 minutes late and got handed the toast.
I prefer to use a different browser each and every day of the week. This way, I never become hater of other browsers because I never get so used to one that the loss of its features in another becomes a problem.
And I design with one browser in mind: IE 6.
Dave - Wait until you see what I have to say about Dreamweaver tomorrow…
IE 6 Win usage is down to 46% on bottomdwellersmusic.com. 39% Firefox, 10% Safari and the remain 4% Mozilla. Life is getting better. One thing I’ve noticed since using Firefox 1.5 beta for the past few months, it and the new webkit are nearly identical.
I think that Firefox is the worst browser for the Windows too.
“I think most of the people who have posted here are missing the point behind the whole Mozilla Foundation project: CROSS-PLATFORM-COMPATIBILITY.”
I don’t think we’ve missed the point. I know I haven’t. I do, however, deny that the point has any legitimacy. I’ll put this simply: Cross platform code — good. Failing to match interfaces with the platform you’re on — bad.
[...] s suck badly, compared to the great ones that are provided by Cocoa. Apparently, I’m not the only one who feels this way. Feels like it is qui [...]
i’m a fairly diehard camino user, i personally think the js rendering is quicker than in firefox (yes, i’m aware its the same engine), plus its got the look of a mac. that aside, it would be nice to see 1.1 include support for extensions… please?