Does anybody know if there's a variable you can set somewhere that controls where new tabs get opened in Firefox?
Since I've upgraded to 3.6 when a new tab gets opened as a result of clicking on a link, the new tab opens directly to the right of the tab I'm on. It used to open the new tab at the end of the tab row. I thought I'd get used to it, but it's been over a week and it's driving me nuts.
If you would like to use the old behavior from Firefox 3.5 and earlier, in which new tabs open at the end of the tab strip, you can set configure this through the advanced configuration.
1. In the Location bar, type about:config and press EnterReturn.
* The about:config "This might void your warranty!" warning page may appear. Click I'll be careful, I promise!, to continue to the about:config page.
2. Search for the preference browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent.
3. Double-click on browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent, which should set the value to false.
If you ever want to change it back, repeat the steps above, which will toggle the value back to true.
For more information about tabbed browsing, see Tabbed browsing.
From: fixrman [#4] 8 Feb 18:17 To: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#3] 8 Feb 18:23
That's your friendly neighborhood fixrman&trade . Oddly, I don't ever remember seeing new tabs appear other than just right of the existing tab. For me I think it would be annoying any other way, but then again I am just a web head.
From: fixrman [#5] 8 Feb 18:31 To: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#3] 8 Feb 18:42
I'm glad it worked out for you. For my part, I am finding 3.6 to be damn buggy. I tried setting the tabs your way and all I get out of it is Manic Geek text in bold in the frames, folder and Thread title sections.
From: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#6] 8 Feb 18:42 To: fixrman [#4] 8 Feb 18:52
I open a lot of pages, and toss them almost immediately. Since in the past they always showed up at the end of the row, I got in the habit of running the mouse over there as soon as I was done reading/skimming/copying/whatever. When they stopped showing up there, I started inadvertently closing tabs that I normally keep open all the time and it was pissing me off.
From: fixrman [#9] 8 Feb 19:01 To: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#8] 8 Feb 19:12
I think there may be some things with Windows 2000 that don't quite work right with FF. Everything is fine with the Elyssa build, which is still 1.9.0.17 (or 3.0.17).
I don't know why there are two numbers for Linux/Mint.
From: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#11] 8 Feb 19:20 To: fixrman [#9] 8 Feb 19:33
I could be wrong, but I think Mozilla is cutting off old/unsupported revisions of operating systems. By old, I mean real old, but Win2K is now considered real old. Again, I could be wrong. I just know I've read about several fairly high-profile apps making that choice, and I think Firefox was one of them. Some companies are getting religion about old browsers, too. They're saying if you wanna use IE6, you're on your own. Can't say I blame any of them. Using software from ancient egyptian times that was broken even when it was current causes a lot of trouble.
I use Linux, and am currently running the Ubuntu 9.10 revision w/ updates.
From: fixrman [#12] 8 Feb 19:33 To: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#11] 8 Feb 19:34
First minimum requirement is 2K. Perhaps there will be another update in a month or so that will make things a bit more stable. Right now 3.6 seems to like to lock the CPU at 100% at times, something it has been known to do before.
From: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#13] 8 Feb 19:38 To: fixrman [#12] 8 Feb 19:38
They do stagger support. But, to be fair, 2K is 10 years old now, and has a lower (and shrinking) installed base than Linux on the desktop. I wouldn't hold my breath while waiting for compatibility issues to get resolved.
From: fixrman [#14] 8 Feb 19:42 To: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#13] 8 Feb 19:54
Well damn! No wonder I'm not doing so hot. Support for me ran out 35 years ago! <G>
Too bad about 2K though. Best Windows OS they made, I can only hope that Windows 9 will reel in the years. Of course, I would imagine in time I may not even use Windows any more. I keep threatening it, but something always happens to keep me from buying a real printer.
From: Cagey (KGWAGNER) [#15] 8 Feb 20:04 To: fixrman [#14] 9 Feb 5:36
Again, I could be wrong about 2K. But, even if I am, the handwriting is on the wall.
I agree it's the best OS Microsoft ever released, but it doesn't give them the kind of control over you that they'd like, so it's a not only a non-starter, there's no hope of that changing. It's time to move on.
Not that it isn't a viable OS - it is - but not for modern Windows applications or surfing the 'net. It would be fine for internal use. If you have hardware/software that needs that OS, you could have a computer set up with it to handle just those things. Then, set up something else with something current. Network the two, and you can use the 2K machine as a print server for the newer stuff as well as a platform for old software, while the the more current machine gets you up and at 'em on the web and with new software. A lot of businesses have to do that because of custom legacy business code that they can't/won't replace because of time/cost constraints.
From: worsel [#19] 9 Feb 5:54 To: fixrman [#18] 9 Feb 7:05
ARF ARF!
quote:
he might still use 98
No, I have modernized with ME!
Actually, I have one laptop (you know the one I mean, KG) that will not allow an install of anything later than Win 9x. I tried w2k, XP, various flavors of Linux, even couple of BSDs. No go.
From: fixrman [#20] 9 Feb 7:07 To: worsel [#19] 9 Feb 7:28
Interesting. I was trying to get my brother to try Knoppix to use as a diagnostic tester and he can't get it to load on the PC or laptop. I don't know for sure how old they are.