Is it just me, or have form elements in the 0.8 release of Firefox for OS X taken an exceptional dive in quality? In particular, radio buttons look simply shocking – like something out of the 1980s.
Compare and contrast these two screenshots. The first is of a fragment on the Textpattern web interface in Safari 1.2, and the second is the same region as displayed in the latest release of Firefox (0.8). The third screenshot is of the region in Camino 0.7 – another Mozilla browser.
The first obvious difference is that Safari uses the operating system’s native interface widgets. This seems to be the preferred way of working, with more and more browsers opting to display form elements this way rather than attempting their own representation. With a project as large and catering to as many platforms as Mozilla does, it’s obvious why they’re using their own form elements for the time being at least.
What isn’t initially so apparent is that Safari is using the OS X mini form controls. These are compact, scaled down versions of the standard interface elements that can be used when space is tight. It’s my understanding that Safari selectively applies these based on font size. This not only makes it easier for a designer to work with forms in a small space, it also makes it easier for the user as the interface elements are specifically designed to work in said small spaces. Compare this to Camino, which uses native OS X interface elements, but not the the mini controls that Safari is able to utilize. The difference is marked, and the benefit of the mini controls becomes apparent.
Anyway, the real point of the matter is those radio buttons in Firefox. Just look at them – what a mess! Is this a problem with my system, or do they look like that for everyone? They certainly look fine on Windows.
Comments
I have just wandered back to Safari after using Firefox for a few days. They are both good, but Firefox is still a beta.
In any case it sounds like it’s time to read Why Mozilla Doesn’t Use Native Widgets again.
Good link – thanks. I understand the reason Moz doesn’t use native widgets, but I don’t understand the reason for using pig-ugly ones.
Is there now a standard way of forcing browsers like Firefox and Camino (and IE?) to use old-style rendering? Perhaps it’s implemented as a CSS property?
If not, surely this is needed to prevent “clever” browsers messing up the appearance of design-centric sites?
What about CSS modification of standard html form inputs?
Safari and Camino ignore this CSS, leaving the gadgets looking like a Mac OS/X application. Rather than a creation build by the designer.
This leads to consistency and easy of use. If every form looks different from site to site then won’t that confuse users.
Both are valid arguments.
Mozilla uses XUL for its default widget set and for the most part it does looks like Windows gadgets, but AFAIK they are not native windows widgets. XUL support CSS properties ( well mostly )
Under Linux you can compile FireFox against GTK and get the same effect as Camino but not everything is native, you end up with a sort of hybrid XUL / GTK.
My suggestion, use the one you like. Pulling up more than one browser is something that web developers do for testing. The average person couldn’t care less.
http://www.gurusnetwork.com/discussion/thread/2675/
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/24768
It makes the form widgets better. Much better.