Firefox 3.5 question

[Judy G. Russell]

I just upgraded to Firefox 3.5.1, had been running 3.0.x for a while. One thing I really dislike about 3.5.1 is that you can't close the last tab to a blank screen, the way I've always been able to in the past. You have to open a new tab, then close the last active tab, to have a blank screen. Is there any way to change that behavior?

[Judy G. Russell]

By the way, I tried this fix. Doesn't work.

Closing last tab closes Firefox
1) In the location (address) bar, type about:config
2) In the filter box, type browser.tabs.closeWindowWithLastTab
3) Change this to false.

[Judy G. Russell]

Found the answer:

You have to add the following to user.chrome.css

/* Add tab-close-button to last tab*/
.tabbrowser-tabs[closebuttons="alltabs"] > .tabbrowser-tab >
.tab-close-button { display: -moz-box !important; }
.tabbrowser-tabs:not([closebuttons="noclose"]):not
([closebuttons="closeatend"]) >
.tabbrowser-tab[selected="true"] > .tab-close-button { display: -moz-
box !important; }

[Mike]

I configured FF a long time ago that if only one tab remains, to remove the tab bar (and closing button). Here's Cnet's documentation on it:

Getting rid of tabs when there's only one
This preference hides the tab bar at the top of the set of tabs when only one tab exists:

browser.tabs.autoHide /* set to true to enable hiding */

No editing of other files. :-)

[Judy G. Russell]

I configured FF a long time ago that if only one tab remains, to remove the tab bar (and closing button).No, that's not what I want, Mike. Sounds like that's essentially the Firefox default: if there's only one tab open, then the only way to clear the screen to a blank tab is to close Firefox. What I wanted (and got) is the former Firefox default: every tab has a close button, and if I want to close the last active tab -- if for example it's open to an active noisy website, it can be done (clearing to a blank tab) without closing Firefox.

[Dan in Saint Louis]

if I want to close the last active tab -- if for example it's open to an active noisy website, it can be done (clearing to a blank tab) without closing Firefox.
I have several links on my Bookmarks Toolbar, so I can accomplish the same by clicking on CNN or the weather radar. Very often these days it has been the weather radar (http://www.wunderground.com/wundermap/?lat=38.77978&lon=-93.12012&zoom=7&type=map&units=english&rad=1&rad.num=6&rad.spd=25&rad.opa=70&rad.stm=1&rad.type=N0R&rad.smo=1&rad.mrg=0&wxsn=0&svr=0&cams=0&sat=0&riv=0&mm=0&hur=0&fire=0&tor=0&ndfd=0&pix=0), as our dog is especially sensitive to thunder.

[Judy G. Russell]

I have several links on my Bookmarks Toolbar, so I can accomplish the same by clicking on CNN or the weather radar. Very often these days it has been the weather radar (http://www.wunderground.com/wundermap/?lat=38.77978&lon=-93.12012&zoom=7&type=map&units=english&rad=1&rad.num=6&rad.spd=25&rad.opa=70&rad.stm=1&rad.type=N0R&rad.smo=1&rad.mrg=0&wxsn=0&svr=0&cams=0&sat=0&riv=0&mm=0&hur=0&fire=0&tor=0&ndfd=0&pix=0), as our dog is especially sensitive to thunder.I don't just want to switch to another site, Dan. I want Firefox to do what it's always done: clear to a blank tab. The language I cited, when added to user.Chrome.css does just that in 3.5.1.

[Mike]

This is one of those situations where what works for one person doesn't meet another's needs. :-) ~75% of the time, my first "tab" already is blank, because clicking on a link in any other program opens that page in a new tab. In those few circumstances where I've closed all tabs but the first, but that one has content, I just hit Alt+Home, and I have my blank screen (since I've define my home page as about:blank).

[Judy G. Russell]

This is one of those situations where what works for one person doesn't meet another's needs. :-) ~75% of the time, my first "tab" already is blank, because clicking on a link in any other program opens that page in a new tab. In those few circumstances where I've closed all tabs but the first, but that one has content, I just hit Alt+Home, and I have my blank screen (since I've define my home page as about:blank).That'd work too (I also have a blank screen as home) but I'd rather have the option to do it the way I've always done it. Backwards compatibility for backwards brains, y'know.

[Lindsey]

That'd work too (I also have a blank screen as home) but I'd rather have the option to do it the way I've always done it. Backwards compatibility for backwards brains, y'know.

Yeah, I hate it when software developers change things like that.

[Judy G. Russell]

Yeah, I hate it when software developers change things like that.Especially when there's no NEED for the change. It wasn't broke. Don't "fix" it!

[Lindsey]

Especially when there's no NEED for the change. It wasn't broke. Don't "fix" it!

Amen, sister!

[Mike]

Backwards compatibility...
Indeed. A few things have changed that required me to change how I do things. Nothing critical, and I can adapt, but I wish I didn't have to.

[davidh]

FWIW,

In the new Google Chrome browser, you can close the last remaining open tab, but if you do, the whole browser closes instead of leaving a blank window.

However when you hit "new tab" Chrome displays thumbnails of recently visited sites (as it also does when Chrome first starts up).

I have not even bothered to try to understand whether there is any logic to these behaviors or not :confused:

In Firefox 3.5 , although now unnecessary, I still keep a "new tab" icon on my "address bar" because its icon is more colorful and easier to notice than the new default "new tab" tabbie. I guess I'm finally losing my taste for pure console text based apps such as TAPCIS.

[Judy G. Russell]

Amen, sister!I really don't understand the "change for the sake of change" bit. Add functionality, fine. Required because it conflicts with some security change in the program, fine. But just because you can? Why???

[Judy G. Russell]

Indeed. A few things have changed that required me to change how I do things. Nothing critical, and I can adapt, but I wish I didn't have to.I realize that I am a bit of a stick in the mud about all this, but darn it all -- don't change if if you don't need to!

[fhaber]

Boy, are you gonna hate Win 7.

[Judy G. Russell]

Boy, are you gonna hate Win 7.I have a feeling I will be dragged to Win 7 only kicking and screaming and only when there is no reasonable alternative. I may try Mac first.

[ktinkel]

I may try Mac first.What a tempting opportunity, but no comment. ;)

[Judy G. Russell]

What a tempting opportunity, but no comment. ;)I don't dislike the Mac, Kathleen. It's just that it's so darned expensive compared to a garden variety PC, and half the programs I regularly use don't run except in a Windows emulator. Getting a Mac that would do what I'd need it to do is 2-3 times more expensive than a plain PC of comparable power.

[Mike]

Getting a Mac that would do what I'd need it to do is 2-3 times more expensive than a plain PC of comparable power.
It's the same for me. I use a lot of programs that simply aren't available for Macs. Some that are cross-platform operate differently on the Mac.

I've had to use a Mac at a couple of jobs in the past, but I felt so handicapped, because many of my tools simply weren't available.

[fhaber]

Well, if it's a matter of cost, and you're courageous, there's this...

http://www.expresshd.com/

[Judy G. Russell]

Well, if it's a matter of cost, and you're courageous, there's this...

http://www.expresshd.com/I'm not courageous enough to try something where the website talks about updating the frimware...

[ktinkel]

I don't dislike the Mac, Kathleen. It's just that it's so darned expensive compared to a garden variety PC, and half the programs I regularly use don't run except in a Windows emulator. Getting a Mac that would do what I'd need it to do is 2-3 times more expensive than a plain PC of comparable power.Perhaps so, or perhaps it was so but no longer is. I don’t know first-hand; a friend at Microsoft gave me a copy of Windows to install on my Intel Mac, and I haven’t even opened the box. :o

However, the modern Mac doesn’t emulate Windows. I believe it runs it natively, depending on how you set it up, even with Mac OS side-by-side. As you can tell, I am not an expert, however. And the computers do tend to cost more.

Most important, I really loathe evangelism, of all types. So no PR from me.

[Jeff]

Boy, are you gonna hate Win 7.

I bought a new IBM that I didn't need, two weeks before the SOB's were gonna force the discontinuation of OEM XP. Now I have black HALs I and II, both with XP Pro SP3 and that ain't gonna change any time soon.

[Judy G. Russell]

Most important, I really loathe evangelism, of all types. So no PR from me.You don't need to do a sales job. My boss is doing enough of one. His office computer now is a Mac. And I am surely impressed.

[ktinkel]

You don't need to do a sales job. My boss is doing enough of one. His office computer now is a Mac. And I am surely impressed.That’s interesting. Is he running Windows on it?

[Judy G. Russell]

That’s interesting. Is he running Windows on it?When he needs to. He clearly has it set up to go seamlessly from one to the other, which is most impressive. (It's also a very high end very expensive model.)

[ktinkel]

When he needs to. He clearly has it set up to go seamlessly from one to the other, which is most impressive. (It's also a very high end very expensive model.)The only really expensive Mac at this point is last remaining tower model, the Mac Pro. It is pretty expensive itself ($2400 to $3200, something like that), and it comes with nothing. By the time you get it set up, you are really out some cash. But it is like my old Mac II; you can keep changing out parts and keep it going for a long time. Or that is the theory, anyway.

Several of my consultant friends have the gorgeous 17-inch aluminum laptop set up to run both Windows and Mac OS. That isn’t cheap ($2400), but it is self-contained. I considered an earlier model when I bought the iMac, but I really dislike laptops (end up adding keyboard and mouse anyway) so it seemed silly. And the $1200 iMac was fast enough and grand enough for me.

[Judy G. Russell]

The only really expensive Mac at this point is last remaining tower model, the Mac Pro. It is pretty expensive itself ($2400 to $3200, something like that), and it comes with nothing. By the time you get it set up, you are really out some cash.I'm sure that's what he has. He also has the huge Apple screen which is just plain gorgeous.

[Mike]

I'm sure that's what he has. He also has the huge Apple screen which is just plain gorgeous.
I still think y'all should do what the peons did in Dilbert: they gave the PHB an Etch-a-Sketch and convinced him it was a notebook computer.

[Judy G. Russell]

I still think y'all should do what the peons did in Dilbert: they gave the PHB an Etch-a-Sketch and convinced him it was a notebook computer.That's the other boss. The one who deletes his C drive regularly and introduced a virus to the network and...

[ktinkel]

I'm sure that's what he has. He also has the huge Apple screen which is just plain gorgeous.I have a 24-inch; and the iMac also has one of those. The 30-inch monitor was overwhelming.

I think Al Gore has a setup with three 30-inch monitors arrayed in front of his Mac. Not sure I could figure out what to do with all that display!

[Mike]

That's the other boss.
Oh, then he might be able to figure it out.

[Judy G. Russell]

The 30-inch monitor was overwhelming.Gorgeous, though. I have a serious case of envy when it comes to that screen. But at $1800 or more, a bit rich for my blood.

[ktinkel]

Gorgeous, though. I have a serious case of envy when it comes to that screen. But at $1800 or more, a bit rich for my blood.You could also use it for TV and movies. But it is still expensive. (And the 24-inch isn’t bad for that, either — certainly larger and better than any TV set we own.)

[Judy G. Russell]

You could also use it for TV and movies. But it is still expensive. (And the 24-inch isn’t bad for that, either — certainly larger and better than any TV set we own.)I could, if I watched TV...

[ktinkel]

I could, if I watched TV...Ah, well. Probably wise, all things considered.

[Judy G. Russell]

Ah, well. Probably wise, all things considered.I figure I don't have enough time now to do what I want to do. Heaven help me if I ever got interested in TV shows...

[ktinkel]

I figure I don't have enough time now to do what I want to do. Heaven help me if I ever got interested in TV shows...There is no temptation; you lose nothing! <g>

Although, we did just happen on the Ted Turner channel recently, which was showing an old Marx Brothers movie in B&W, and it was great fun. But most of what we run across is junk.

[Mike]

Ah, well. Probably wise, all things considered.
You're mixing your media. "All Things Considered" is a radio show.

<ducking>

[Mike]

I figure I don't have enough time now to do what I want to do. Heaven help me if I ever got interested in TV shows...
I watch TV while I do other things. That's one place where I really can multitask. There are a few things that require 100% concentration, but most of my chores can be done while I stay aware of what's happening on the tube.

[ktinkel]

You're mixing your media. "All Things Considered" is a radio show.

<ducking>You should duck! :rolleyes:

[Jeff]

There is no temptation; you lose nothing! <g>

Although, we did just happen on the Ted Turner channel recently, which was showing an old Marx Brothers movie in B&W, and it was great fun. But most of what we run across is junk.

I believe that was "Night at the Opera". This is his partial payback for CNN. No commercials. No BS. The real deal. I highly recommend.

http://www.tcm.com/schedule/index.jsp?startDate=06/22/2008&timezone=MST&cid=N

Note that that's set for mountain time.

- Jeff

[ktinkel]

Thanks. I snagged the end-of-July schedule.

[Judy G. Russell]

I watch TV while I do other things. That's one place where I really can multitask. There are a few things that require 100% concentration, but most of my chores can be done while I stay aware of what's happening on the tube.I was married for many years to a man who could not STAND not having the TV on essentially 24-7. We once went on vacation to a wonderful resort in Jamaica and I thought John would have a nervous breakdown until he found a TV in a bar tucked away deep inside the hotel. Now, I luxuriate in the quiet.

[Mike]

I was married for many years to a man who could not STAND not having the TV on essentially 24-7.
I'm currently married to a man who...

Well, actually, he often has it on for background, but it's really not obnoxious. There are plenty of times when we have it turned off, or when he's in a different part of the house where I can't even hear it.

I only have it on for the specific shows that I want to watch--about a half-dozen series, and the evening news. Otherwise, I listen to the radio or the 70+ GB of music on my computer. At low volume.

[Jeff]

Thanks. I snagged the end-of-July schedule.

Enjoy! But on the schedule page, just under "July" notice "MT". Change it, and snag again. Why the time zone is so obscure I do not know.

- Jeff

[Judy G. Russell]

Well, actually, he often has it on for background, but it's really not obnoxious. There are plenty of times when we have it turned off, or when he's in a different part of the house where I can't even hear it.That would be survivable, I suppose. But for me... no. I literally can't stand having that noise all the time. I turn it on once in a blue moon, usually when there's a ballgame I want to see!

[Mike]

I literally can't stand having that noise all the time.
Fortunately, Brent keeps the volume at a low level. Except when he watches Dancing with the Stars and American Idol. I'm willing to give him those.

[davidh]

a TV in a bar tucked away deep inside the hotel. If I'm drinking whiskey, I probably can enjoy the TV with the sound MUTED. :rolleyes:

[ndebord]

That would be survivable, I suppose. But for me... no. I literally can't stand having that noise all the time. I turn it on once in a blue moon, usually when there's a ballgame I want to see!

Judy,

My wife has it on most all the time, and I retreat to my laptop... She loves (and I dislike) all the he/she murdered someone type shows. <shrug>

[ktinkel]

Enjoy! But on the schedule page, just under "July" notice "MT". Change it, and snag again. Why the time zone is so obscure I do not know.Oh, I did that. I have enough trouble sticking to a schedule without needing to remember to subtract two hours from every time! <g>

Last night we watched Grapes of Wrath. Wonderful to see so much of the young Henry Fonda.

[Judy G. Russell]

Fortunately, Brent keeps the volume at a low level. Except when he watches Dancing with the Stars and American Idol. I'm willing to give him those.I sat and watched one episode of Dancing with the Stars, and actually enjoyed it. I suspect that was mostly because of the people I was with and the liquor...

[Judy G. Russell]

If I'm drinking whiskey, I probably can enjoy the TV with the sound MUTED. :rolleyes:Nah, the flickering light would bother me too. Of course, if I was absolutely blind drunk, I might not care...

[Judy G. Russell]

My wife has it on most all the time, and I retreat to my laptop... She loves (and I dislike) all the he/she murdered someone type shows. <shrug>My problem with the cop/legal type shows is that very very few are even reasonably close to accurate. Law & Order was the only one I can honestly say did a pretty decent job. The others usually had me rolling my eyes...

[Mike]

I sat and watched one episode of Dancing with the Stars, and actually enjoyed it. I suspect that was mostly because of the people I was with and the liquor...
Brent likes to watch specific stars. In the past, he has been interested in Mario Lopez, Marie Osmond (his brother used to be a tour guide at the Osmonds' home), Jane Seymour, Priscilla Presley, and Cloris Leachman.

Given that Brent always had a brew in his hand, I'm sure that liquor played a role in it. And usually, he fell asleep part-way through...

[Mike]

Law & Order was the only one I can honestly say did a pretty decent job. The others usually had me rolling my eyes...
Even L&O stretches the imagination sometimes. I'm partial to L&O: SVU, but I've had to laugh when a trace to a perp's computer shows an IP address of 3198.25.9.42. Or when the team is viewing a surveillance photo showing a blurry face or license plate, and the technician clicks the mouse a few times, and the face or plate gets pixellated and then suddenly is clear enough to make a positive ID. (I really could use that software!)

[Mike]

If I'm drinking whiskey, I probably can enjoy the TV with the sound MUTED. :rolleyes:
In the early days of MTV (when it actually played music videos), it was quite common within my circle of friends to tune to MTV, mute the TV, and play an album. (This was before the days of CD players.)

For some reason, it made just as much sense as listening to the actual MTV soundtrack.

[sidney]

I've had to laugh when a trace to a perp's computer shows an IP address of 3198.25.9.42

Maybe that was on purpose, like using 555-**** for a phone number. Although I would have gone with a 10.*.*.* ip address as being less jarring.

[Judy G. Russell]

Given that Brent always had a brew in his hand, I'm sure that liquor played a role in it. And usually, he fell asleep part-way through...He shows good taste in both of those!

[Judy G. Russell]

Even L&O stretches the imagination sometimes. I'm partial to L&O: SVU, but I've had to laugh when a trace to a perp's computer shows an IP address of 3198.25.9.42.SVU isn't nearly as good as the original L&O (Fred Thompson!). Not as accurate by a long shot, so I stopped even trying to watch it a while ago.

Or when the team is viewing a surveillance photo showing a blurry face or license plate, and the technician clicks the mouse a few times, and the face or plate gets pixellated and then suddenly is clear enough to make a positive ID. (I really could use that software!)I want that software too!!!

[Mike]

LOL! (I'm going to tell him.)

[Mike]

Maybe that was on purpose, like using 555-**** for a phone number. Although I would have gone with a 10.*.*.* ip address as being less jarring.
I'm sure that was the point, but yeah, there are other IP addresses that could have been used. And still, some of us would have noticed and laughed.

[Mike]

SVU isn't nearly as good as the original L&O (Fred Thompson!).
I'm not particularly fond of Thompson, though that alone would not prevent me from watching the show. OTOH, SVU sometimes includes Judith Light, whom I really admire. And always, Chris Meloni... <sigh>

I want that software too!!!
So who makes it and why is it not available? <g>

[Dodi Schultz]

Law, procedural, and weird-character devotees are really missing something if you haven't been watching some of the summer series--e.g., "Burn Notice" on USA and, on TNT, "The Closer" and "Raising the Bar" and "Leverage." (And "Monk" returns in a couple of weeks for its final season on USA.)

Not necessarily accurate (Judy, stay far away from "Bar"; it'd make you crazy), but fun.

--DS

[ndebord]

My problem with the cop/legal type shows is that very very few are even reasonably close to accurate. Law & Order was the only one I can honestly say did a pretty decent job. The others usually had me rolling my eyes...


Judy,

Having close family members on both sides of the thin line: Cops and Crooks, I can testify to that.

It's a matter of budget with the CSI crap. Much cheaper to stick them in front of a snazzy microscope/computer/insert your device here than to pay for a real script by real writers.

[Judy G. Russell]

I'm not particularly fond of Thompson, though that alone would not prevent me from watching the show.I like him as an actor.

[Judy G. Russell]

Judy, stay far away from "Bar"; it'd make you crazyI stay away from all of 'em, personally. My brother the doctor and I agree that we both suffer from an inability to suspend our disbelief when watching things that touch on our professions. Both of us tend to yell out "Malpractice!" to the annoyance of others...

And a lawyer friend of mine said she would never go to the movies with me again after I nitpicked Silence of the Lambs all the way through. (The FBI... send a trainee out... alone? R-i-i-i-g-h-t...)

[Mike]

My brother the doctor and I agree that we both suffer from an inability to suspend our disbelief when watching things that touch on our professions.
As does this computer technologist.

If only I had a nickel for every time someone in the room (or theatre) whispered to me, "can they really do that?"

Oh, and it's no better in mystery/thriller books. I wrote to one popular author after a technical person in one of her novels explained that a web site can send a pixel to the screen, which will track everywhere that a viewer subsequently goes. Yeah, it was fiction, but not science fiction.

[Mike]

I like him as an actor.
Ehn.

[ndebord]

I stay away from all of 'em, personally. My brother the doctor and I agree that we both suffer from an inability to suspend our disbelief when watching things that touch on our professions. Both of us tend to yell out "Malpractice!" to the annoyance of others...

And a lawyer friend of mine said she would never go to the movies with me again after I nitpicked Silence of the Lambs all the way through. (The FBI... send a trainee out... alone? R-i-i-i-g-h-t...)

Judy,

Yeah, but... England sent out a trainee against Napoleon and we all know how that worked out!

<wicked grin>

[Judy G. Russell]

Yeah, it was fiction, but not science fiction.Another of my hobbyhorses. There's no reason why good science fiction can't also be good science. (Andromeda Strain is an excellent example of good science fiction that was also good science.) Instead it's usually ridiculous, like people running into an operating nuclear reactor and running out holding their eyes.

[Judy G. Russell]

Yeah, but... England sent out a trainee against Napoleon and we all know how that worked out!England never had an FBI...

[Mike]

...people running into an operating nuclear reactor and running out holding their eyes.
ROFL! Too true, unfortunately...

[earler]

Elizabeth created the first formal secret service under the control of her advisor, walsingham.

[Judy G. Russell]

Elizabeth created the first formal secret service under the control of her advisor, walsingham.A non sequitur if ever I saw one.

[ndebord]

England never had an FBI...

Judy,

If they had, Napoleon would have won... ;-)

[Judy G. Russell]

If they had, Napoleon would have won... ;-)ROFL!!! Yeah...

[earler]

Non sequitur? How so? It was to point out that england had its home version of the fbi some centuries ago.

[Judy G. Russell]

Non sequitur? How so? It was to point out that england had its home version of the fbi some centuries ago.And when did the FBI (as opposed to the CIA) become the secret police? The FBI is the functional equivalent of Scotland Yard, not the SIS.

[earler]

The fbi is scotland yard and mi5 rolled into one. Countries like the uk and france separate the functionns of a national police and the secret police.

[Dan in Saint Louis]

And when did the FBI (as opposed to the CIA) become the secret police?
When they decided they wanted to. A number of FBI investigations appear to have been blown because they did not advise local police of their interest.

[ndebord]

And when did the FBI (as opposed to the CIA) become the secret police? The FBI is the functional equivalent of Scotland Yard, not the SIS.

Judy,

C'mon... back when the Feebs didn't want to go after the Mob, they specialized in black box breakins on leftie fringe types instead. Better question would be how well are the Feebs doing now as our domestic secret police (a job they're not going to walk away from) and has the CIA recovered from their Cheney-induced psychosis where they thought their charter had been changed to allow them to work their stuff at home, abroad and everwhere without any one looking over their shoulders. A clear delineation is necessary and protections need to be put into place to ensure our protections as citizens in a Democracy without destroying the Feds ability to fight terrorism.