So, Search bar is necessary.
Do not unify them!.

I’ve tested Chromifox Extreme but I don’t think that’s something I want. Chromifox basically moves the tab bar to the top, but it doesn’t replace the title bar. The extension doesn’t even hide the menu bar (or is it not possible to do so?). In any case, it’s an extension and I don’t expect much from it. Again I thank you for suggesting Chromifox Extreme.

You don’t have to wait. There are several themes that seek to replicate Google Chrome. Perhaps the best is Chromifox Extreme available here: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/10674

If you try it, make sure you get the very latest by going to the “View Older Versions” link at the bottom. (As of this writing the latest is 3.1.1 and it is an xpi file because it has both the theme and the Chromifox Companion extension combined. Companion adds to two buttons like the two on the right side of the Google Chrome toolbar.)

I do like it simple though. Too bad I have to wait until next year to see this coming. :)

Another thing that’s just crossed my mind is how customization would work on both the theme designs. Right now, to the left of my search bar, I have the button to open download history, below that, on the bookmarks bar, I have the buttons to open the history and bookmarks sidebar (I prefer it to opening up the organizer for making small changes to my bookmark layout). Could I do this on that new theme, could I move the reload button back to being a button? On the 3.7 theme, could I move page and tools into the tabs bar if I wanted to? Could I place the back/forward button on the opposite side on the address bar? Both themes seem a bit inflexible looking at them.

location barとsearch barの統合は, CJKのIMEの制御に問題がある。
location barではIMEをOFFとしている場合が多く, 一方search barではIME ONが普通である。
これを統合してしまうと, CJKユーザにとって大きな機能後退となる。
このことを考慮してUIを検討してほしい。

Your last post is unreadable. You should have just posted your reply instead of trying to intersperse your comments (and I know what I said!). An example of a “bad” change?

It is clear why the changes are happening, Firefox looks dated, it needs freshening up.

Oddly, what should be a worthwhile change you seem to be rejecting out of hand without even investigating. Winamp’s installation process is in no way annoying while offering the user the immediate choice of several different skins. In fact, have you actually tried Winamp? Have you actually seen their installation and set up process? If not, shouldn’t you refrain from commenting until you have?

I’ve used Winamp since it first came out, long before AOL got their teeth into it and screwed it up. It used to be the standard for playing mp3′s. Nowadays it’s just a mess, and that mess is made clear during installation where it isn’t even sure what it wants to be.Putting that aside, lets pretend its still a great player and apply its idea of installation of one of two themes. A new one and an old one. The problem here is that most people really don’t even know what a browser is, let alone what it should look like. “This lets me go to websites I like, what do I have to click to make that happen?”. The amount of clicks here is actually crucial and the setup process as it is already has issues that I can see, asking if bookmarks need to be imported when really it should be just automatic. I click a link to download it, it downloads, it’s on my desktop, i click that, it installs. Everyones happy, even mom and pop. Advanced users get to switch to a more advanced install where anything can happen. There have been many studies that have measured how many clicks a user is willing to go through before they give up. Microsoft are the masters of the over complicated install and I remember seeing a video over at channel9 where they were trying to simplify the install process for applications in Vista but actually ended up making it even more complex due to the new security.So while you, me and a whole bunch of people would be happy with all kinds of customisation options during install, it should never be the default to make everyone go through it. IE is a good example of a hugely complicated install that has the option to just do it all for you if you blindly click next.

I also have a recollection that Netscape offered the simple choices of it’s traditional (classic?) and modern skins included perhaps within the installation program, but definitely by menu item.

And look what happened to that.

Finally, I have to wonder why it would be so complex and thus undesirable to offer the user the built-in choice of the now traditional (toolbars/status bar) appearance and the faux Chrome/IE/Safari look. Indeed, wouldn’t the wise thing be to offer this choice rather than hope that all the current users who want to stay with the traditional look will wade through the various options settings to find all those needed to restore the traditional look and not alienate them in the process? Wouldn’t such a choice actually fit with Fx’s mission of offering the user a high level of customization?

I call it a fail when a program has to fork like that into two versions. Linux would be the ultimate example of how forking off code so often leads to more complications. Try asking a new user to choose which Distro of Linux is best for them and they’ll find it hugely complicated. As a developer, do I have to start testing on both versions? Probably, since the new theme requires some underlying changes to way themes are handled. Again, just more complication for something that didn’t need to be complicated at all if people just trusted to Mozilla to come up with a better way to present Firefox today.

Oddly, what should be a worthwhile change you seem to be rejecting out of hand without even investigating. Winamp’s installation process is in no way annoying while offering the user the immediate choice of several different skins. In fact, have you actually tried Winamp? Have you actually seen their installation and set up process? If not, shouldn’t you refrain from commenting until you have?

I also have a recollection that Netscape offered the simple choices of it’s traditional (classic?) and modern skins included perhaps within the installation program, but definitely by menu item.

Finally, I have to wonder why it would be so complex and thus undesirable to offer the user the built-in choice of the now traditional (toolbars/status bar) appearance and the faux Chrome/IE/Safari look. Indeed, wouldn’t the wise thing be to offer this choice rather than hope that all the current users who want to stay with the traditional look will wade through the various options settings to find all those needed to restore the traditional look and not alienate them in the process? Wouldn’t such a choice actually fit with Fx’s mission of offering the user a high level of customization?

this is the most important part for many ppl…

Now whether Firefox is broke visually or not is debatable. The design is certainly dated and when you’re up against the design of IE, Chrome, Opera and Safari, you have to keep changing things up and try and keep pace with what feels modern today, reflecting what is new and important in design, hopefully with a strong eye on usability.

As for what is modern about this mock up, it’s using glass within the interface, not just around the border, it’s taking this idea of folding less used elements up into a button, which is a modern idea that is being used by almost all browsers now. The look of it is certainly more modern than Firefox is now. I could ramble on but they are small changes, not worth going on about.

Offering casual users a choice is a bad thing. It’s just one more step they have to go through and that could be the step where they give up and go back to IE. Switching to and or upgrading Firefox should be as close to a one click deal as it can be I think.

I’ll leave you with a comment of my own, they are such fun.

Those who expect moments of change to be comfortable and free of conflict have not learned their history. – Joan Scott

He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery. – Harold Wilson

Change is inevitable – except from a vending machine. – Robert Gallagher

:)

Two adages come to mind. One is “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” The other is a pro team sports one, ” Often the best trades are the ones not made.”

Great caution needs to be exercised when making drastic changes. Just ask Coca Cola. They leaned the hard way when they introduced the one of the biggest flops of all time with “New Coke”.

Might I be so bold as to suggest this? Don’t just offer one “default” theme? Instead, why not add a step in the installation process where before the installation is completed, the user can choose to start with the new design, whatever it may be or they can opt to stay with the more traditional appearance with the menu, navigation bookmarks and status bar just as they currently are? Wouldn’t be better to not force feed something down everyone’s throats and instead offer them a choice.

FYI-You know who does this? Winamp. In fact, Winamp offers several different choices of skins with nice little previews available all before the newly installed program is first run.