|
I also got the 103.0 upgrade (on Ubuntu 20.04LTS if that matters), and it's not visibly different from its predecessor.
I have scaling set on a few sites and it continues to remember that.
The thing that cheeses me off about FF upgrades is the way it, without warning, crashes any newly opened tab if there is an upgrade pending.
So it's effectively forcing me to restart it at its convenience, not mine. Fortunately I'm not one of the people that keep a zillion tabs open, usually no more than 6 or so. </rant>
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
NB: this is for Windows: I 'know' how to do it, but its complex - you have to use userChrome.css - see userChrome.css for Customizing Firefox[^]
I first uncovered this via a forum I frequent, which has a whole set of pages on it: https://www.tenforums.com/browsers-email/183901-firefox-taming-beast-part-2-a.html#post2280830[^]
I'm not sure if part one still exists.
Warning: the .css file has many, many tweaks, and the best approach seems to me to disable all of them, and then enable one-by-one. I am using about two dozen, and could not (right now) say what they all do!
I have adjusted the spacing between bookmarks (the prime motivator), and keep tabs right above the window. The tweaks have survived many FF updates, but if it ever stops working I may not bother again.
|
|
|
|
|
In my search for a solution, I came across suggested css modifications for a lot of other issues. I was not attracted by it - I didn't find css attractive even when I was paid to work with it ...
Maybe I will take a look at the css, if I decide that it is easier than keeping my glasses perfectly clean. It probably is not. But thanks for the advice anyway 
Honestly, I feel somewhat offended when software is delivered that says: This doesn't work properly - fix it yourself. But I guess that is what you must expect from Free and Open Software ...
|
|
|
|
|
I found a workaround, sort of.
In about:config, there is a setting called layout.css.devPixelsPerPx, by default set to -1 which means "Use system setting". If I change the value to 0.75, icons shrink to approximately the old size. Or rather: Everything is shrunk significantly, from the menu line at the top to the status information at the bottom. All web pages come out tiny.
I can use the zoom function to scale up the web pages - I have assigned zoom to the thumb scroll wheel on my mouse, so it is easily accessible, but I have to do it on every new web page I visit. Fortunately, Firefox remembers the zoom factor for each URL, when I later return to the site.
But zoom works only on the web contents, not on the top menu, the tabs line, the URL line or the bookmarks line. So if I want to select menu commands, tabs, or bookmarks by the text label (rather than by icon/position), I must keep my glasses perfectly clean. Typing an URL is almost like typing blindfolded. Selecting 'zoom text only' makes no difference: Zooming affects web page contents only.
On a 2560 by 1280 screen, text 7 pixels tall (in uppercase) is rather small. Icons are 25 pixels tall, 3.5 times as much. This ratio seems to be rather fixed: If you want text of height 14 pixels, you have to accept icons 50 pixels high. I wish I could adjust this ratio.
Maybe the solution is to follow Nelek's advice (thanks, Nelek!): Download the previous version and turn off future updates until they fix it. But honestly: I think of it as a defeat. And another nail in the coffin for Firefox.
|
|
|
|
|
within 2 minutes of each other.
First voice mail this morning. Actual Transcript started with "This is Someone at XYZ company…" They would not even give me their freakin name. Second one started with "this is Danny calling about Rick who you worked with…."
PS Rick is awesome and I gave him a glowing recommendation. XYZ companies number was reported as SPAM and Blocked.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
Rick is amazing. So fast and thorough! He’s worth at least two Dans and maybe even three Stevens.
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
3 stefans is alot though. 3 Stevens sure. But not 3 stefans
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
It’s about 1.13 stevens per Stefan.
But what is the Stephen to Steven ratio?
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
the Stephen to Steven ratio is irational and the Steve to Stephen ratio is .57721
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
I've worked with people who brought negative productivity.
Two of them would be worse than one.
So should we say one Rick is equal to minus two Johns?
|
|
|
|
|
I envy you. I have visual voice mail on my mobile phone with T-Mobile, and when I try to look at it I keep getting stupid questions about "permissions" that I need to give it to use it.
I am happy for you that yours is working.
Moist VonLipvig
|
|
|
|
|
all voice permission must be given in order to proceed in life. The googlina wants all your data and permissions.
To err is human to really elephant it up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
Up close popular note, my friend. (8)
(A more traditionally formed clue)
I have a meeting soon, so may not be able to answer for a couple of hours.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, very good! 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
up close (definition)
popular in
note ti
my friend mate intimate
|
|
|
|
|
That's what I came up with
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming “Wow! What a Ride!" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
I was assuming "intimate" but couldn't justify the "popular note" bit - so easy when you know how!
|
|
|
|
|
You don't need to justify it!
|
|
|
|
|
YAUT!
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you. Mainly features, gotchas, value for money
|
|
|
|
|
Still namecheap. I haven't changed my mind in the last 60 seconds. 
|
|
|
|
|
I usually just use Network Solutions, because domain names are so cheap these days it's not really worth my time to shop around.
I have however, noticed I'm getting "incidents" involving my DNS a few times a month, usually from a spazzy server in the netherlands or some such, although one time it impacted me here.
I'm not sure if that has to do with my provider or just the Internet being the Internet, and me not paying for any kind of uptime.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Afternoon ladies and gents. Haven't been in the lounge in a while, and am back with a question. I'm wanting to register a domain and was wondering if GoDaddy is still the best out there?
|
|
|
|
|
GoDaddy has gone downhill in my opinion. I have found NameCheap.com to be a useful, vanilla, domain registrar. I have used them for years with no problems.
|
|
|
|
|
I use Google Domains, domains.google.com
They are cheap ($12/yr for most domains), fast, simple & you can control everything you need.
Also they don't bug you with spam email & mailers.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
