Why the fuck do developers do this? First Gnome, and now Mozilla.

what's missing?

>>60951378
file size, timestamp, and url info

>>60950332

>>60951434
Opening a full tab to get information that was previously accessible with a single click is your solution?

>>60951646
ctrl+j

>>60951394
>>60951646
Why do you need any of that "info"?
>file size
Irrelevant in the current year. You have a good idea of the order of magnitude and that's everything you need to know; it's not like some MBs are gonna make a difference.
>timestamp
Also irrelevant. If it's done it's done, Why does it matter if it finished at 5:01 or 5:02?
>url info
You gotta be trolling to be this much of an idiot. Obviously you know where you got the downloads from.

>>60951371
>Why the fuck do developers do this?
>"developers"
Because they now hire based on skin color and sex organs, not on mental capabilities.

>>60951773
I have to do Ctrl+Shift+Y. Is this a GNU/Linux exclusive?

>>60951371
>traditional nordic family
fuck off back to /pol/, thanks.

>>60951987
No, because I'm doing it on windows.

File: 1489137745317.png (5KB, 385x30px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 385x30px

>>60952011
Realized it was a bit shitty worded... I'm on Linux and I have to use Ctrl+Shift+Y, Ctrl+J just selects the address bar.

>>60951371
>Why the fuck do developers do this?
Because said normalfags are the majority of the users

>>60951857
That's fair, there's no significant decisions to be made from that info displayed right there. Another example of how removing unnecessary complexity will trigger some autists, >muh information, >muh wasted space.

But, all that Completed text is redundant.

>>60951394
just go to the fucking folder dumbfuck

>>60951371
If you really need it that much (you don't), you would know how to patch it back in yourself.

But you don't know how, because you don't need it, because you're just looking for an excuse to shit on someone because of some hurr durr social justice bullshit nobody with functional brains actually gives half a fuck about.

File: Screen+Shot+2017-06-18+at+00.23.12.png (285KB, 1412x1014px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1412x1014px

>>60951394
>he can't press ctrl+j
end yourself

>>60951987
>>60952011
Same shortcut in macOS

>>60951371
Why do you need to know anything else other than that your download has completed?

File: traditional nordic family.jpg (144KB, 793x1008px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 793x1008px

>>60951999
>this triggers the impericuck

>>60954073
>macfag is okay with a dumbed down baby-GUI
not surprised

>>60951371
>intimating
???

>>60954183
kek

https://www.ghacks.net/2017/06/17/restore-download-information-in-firefox/

>>60951857
>Irrelevant in the current year. You have a good idea of the order of magnitude and that's everything you need to know; it's not like some MBs are gonna make a difference.
I couldn't disagree more, given that 0byte files are not seen as a download error and happen more often than they should from faulty servers.

Regardless all these are preventative arguments, you could maybe make this case as to why you shouldn't implement these things, but they were already there to begin with, I can't see any justification in removing them. The best thing would be to at least have an about:config flag that displays this information.

>>60952225
>more clicks = more good!
I'm sick of seeing this trend. There's so many fucking things on Android that have dropdown menus consisting of a single element and I'm seeing this on websites now too.

>>60951371
>2017
>almost 2018
>not using download statusbar

>>60951857

You are a faggot and this attitude pisses me off. More information shows people what to expect and can alert them to a problem.

> you have a good idea of the order of magnitude

How do you think people learn things like that? They see it on informational displays.

> why does it matter?

So they can learn how long the downloads take and do other things while they wait?

> Obviously you know where you got the downloads from

The general website, not the exact location. If someone accidentally deletes a file, the might need to download again.

>>60951371
>>>>less intimating

>>60951371
I fail to see the purpose for this change.

>to make things less intimating for the normalfags

Is there really any normalfag in existence who decided to try Firefox and then gave up because there were "mysterious" numbers and letters in the download files menu? I don't know why Firefox is making this change but this cannot be the reason. Even the most tech illiterate people cannot be that stupid.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1354568

>>60954855
>The general website, not the exact location. If someone accidentally deletes a file, the might need to download again.

honestly i have to agree with this,

last time i was on this one website where people upload their beats but if you wanted to download the beat you have to pay since they think you're going to sing along with the beat and all that crap. Just wanted to d/l because it sounded so good.

So i got this addon on firefox and it successfully detected the song as an mp3 file and downloaded instantly, but was curious where the file was kept so i simply went on the d/l menu on firefox and gave me the url with just the beat i wanted.

>>60954855
>More information shows people what to expect and can alert them to a problem.
So with this way of thinking what stops you from bloating everything with all kinds of information? You're full of shit, information like that is meaningless, the only thing that matters is that whatever you downloaded works. If there was a problem, guess what, you will realize it when you find out that whatever you downloaded doesn't work retard.
>How do you think people learn things like that? They see it on informational displays.
You mean like the ones in your file manager, where you realize that a disk images weights GBs and a song only MBs? You're retarded if you think that people depend on that exact menu to learn how to use a computer, more so considering that most of the people who use computers don't even download stuff because their browser is used exclusively for Facebook.
>So they can learn how long the downloads take and do other things while they wait?
Oh, so after I learn that the download was finished at 5:01 I travel back in time and do something while waiting for the download to be done? Great idea bro, now you're going somewhere/sometime.
>The general website, not the exact location. If someone accidentally deletes a file, the might need to download again.
Which can be done exactly like the first time, from the general website. Also can be done clicking on the download and selecting "download again", which works independently of whether the source info is being displayed or not, because guess what, even if the info isn't displayed for you your computer still knows it.
>Reddit spacing
Kill yourself fag. For somebody claiming to be triggered by this attitude you sure showed how little understanding on the issue you have. On top of all of this, that information is still available one click away. Just end your life already, you should've been aborted anyway.

>>60955013
>one line of small information is bloat
just kill me god

>>60955041
Nice strawman queer. Speaks volumes about how you have no argument against any of those points. Consider yourself checkmated and schooled then, kid.

>>60955013
Yeah I recognise posters like you; you're just arguing for the hell of it.
Which is fine, I'm just letting people know that you don't really care, you're just bored.

Mozilla needs to get back to it's 'power users first' approach and leave the normies to Chrome

>>60955067
Do you really expect people to read all that bloat you wrote? You should consider removing that post to make the thread a little more accessible.

>>60955072
Cool story bro, I know posters like you though. You made some retarded claims and your confidence in your own knowledge was invested in them, so after they're exhibited as utterly wrong and you have to reasonable rebuttal, all you can do is attack the credibility of the arguments that destroyed your ignorance in a pitiful attempt to protect your fragile ego. Gotta save face on them anonymous forums right? Fag.

>>60955073
it's too late for that

>>60955013
The size made it easy to tel if file got fucked up.
Also made it easy to see if I'd need to resize image to post on 4chan.

>>60955098
Yikes, I'd hate to have a dependence on attention like this.

>>60955078

I read it all. not hard when you're not a millenial with barely the attention span to read a tweet. he was right on every single thing by the way.

>>60951371
I DONT KNOW WHAT A PNG IS
I WAS JUST TRYIGN OT SAVE A PICTURE
PLEASE HELP
THIS IS TOO MUCH FOR ME

>>60955128
I can tell by your writing that you're the same guy. Why even attempt that?

>>60955128
>file size is meaningless

>want to play some gifv
>"you need to install Microsoft Media Feature Pack"
>"fuck's sake, ok"
>no such pack for LTSB

>Chrome
>everything works

Mozilla is such a joke

>>60951857
Yes it does. Do you think I want to sort through a massive image dump folder looking for what I downloaded a couple hours ago?

>file size
Its good to see that "hotbitch.jpg.exe" is 30 mb and not 3mb before I run it.

>>60951371
Just use Firefox ESR

>>60955147
I'm pretty sure there's an MSU for that which works across all the variants of the same OS version.

>>60955107
It's chrome gonna kill themselves with that adblocker thing? Too bad current firefox is such shit

>>60955137
>Everyone who disagrees with me is the same person.
First anon here. You're really insecure about these chans aren't you? Talk about having a fragile ego kek
>>60955150
>Do you think I want to sort through a massive image dump folder looking for what I downloaded a couple hours ago?
>implying that you don't do that anyway
>implying that you open your files from the browser and not from a file explorer
Also why are you not sorting the stuff you download right after you download it fucking pleb?
>Its good to see that "hotbitch.jpg.exe" is 30 mb and not 3mb before I run it.
Oh you mean right before you run it from the file explorer? Great news, file explorers do show you the size of the file, just as Firefox does with a single click. Not an argument to be honest. Stop autistically complaining about the removal of some insignificant and redundant pieces of information fags.

>>60955178
if there is, it's not in the link provided by FF and I haven't found it through google

>>60955186
>Everyone who disagrees with me is the same person.
I'm not the guy you were originally talking to, it's just an observation. lol how ironic

>>60955186
>Also why are you not sorting the stuff you download right after you downlo
I save everything to a massive 10k file count folder named "a a sort" that I never sort.
>Oh you mean right before you run it from the file explorer?
I clearly said I was opening it from the recently downloaded button, faggot.

>>60955186
>wah stop wanting completely reasonable and visually minor information to be displayed
>just use my autistic system!

I just love the bait answers ITT

>>60955287
you got to love them though

>>60955147
>gifv
You fuckkin what

>>60955330
A retarded fake filename imgur gives to mp4 files.

>>60955354
Oh yea I've come across that.
Their site is such a shitshow, I can't tell if it's a halfhearted attempt to stop people 'stealing' their content or if they're just morons.

File: dumbing down.png (7KB, 472x197px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 472x197px

>>60951371
I hated how they combined the settings for downloads and history, then for search and forms. I wanna remember browsing history (so I can hit back), but not anything else.
what do they have anything to do with each other? at least in old versions I could fix it in about:config. now I can't anymore either.

I also have a gripe about being unable to disable that single tab when there are no other tabs open.

File: never ever.png (24KB, 659x371px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 659x371px

>>60955221
>I save everything to a massive 10k file count folder named "a a sort" that I never sort.
My nigga. This is my latest naming scheme, there's another directory I have called "to sort" that has like nested layers of "sort me" folders in it. What a mess. I'll deal with it eventually.

>>60951371
A good UI gives you information and methods for interacting with this information.
If there is a too much information, the user spend too much time digesting it, if there is not enough information the user spends even more time to find this information.

I don't know what happened in this specific instance, they didn't remove the functionality, they just hid information and you can turn the information back on.
I think it would be better if they were just more clear about their API.
The huge shitshow after they changed to australis was related to them changing the API every week with no easy way to keep track of it all without reading the git commits.
I don't mind that they change stuff, reduce the code size and improve performance and security.
Changing the API is not a problem either, it should just be easy to get the overview.

>>60955527
Yea, I have multiple folders named sort. Ive just been dumping them all into a a sort whenever I refind them. They are usually found in nested folders named "old" that I mine whenever Im both bored and motivated.

I also have a folder full of bookmark json files dating back almost 15 years that I need to restore, sort, and save the worthwhile material.

I usually try to knock out 100 photos at a time.
For the 40gb folder of recovered files to sort I made a program that will look at the contents of a directory and delete anything under the given size. I usually delete everything under 100x100 px. This weeds out thumbnails and avatars too.

Ill look into sorting files by the month they were created and just eliminating them slowly that way. Seems like a less stressful way of dealing with it. Thanks for the suggestion

>>60955729
I'm glad it's not just me.
For reference the date is when the folder was created, those are the pseudo/loose sorted directories, most of them have a subdir of "images/" and "video/", when the master download directory gets too large I sort them by type or some special criteria sometimes into dated folders stamped with the day they were sorted, this helps me when I need to retrieve a specific image that I know I sorted "1 or 2 batches ago". Like you said, breaking them up into sets makes them easier to manage, I can clear a good portion of a set when I have trouble sleeping and there's nothing else to do.

>For the 40gb folder of recovered files to sort I made a program that will look at the contents of a directory and delete anything under the given size. I usually delete everything under 100x100 px. This weeds out thumbnails and avatars too.
That's strange, I also happen to have a directory full of stuff I pulled of a dead hard drive where most of the metadata is broken. Going through that is both fun but also a nightmare because of how chaotic it is. Dupe finding tools help a lot, specifically visipics. I had to write my own wrapper around `file` to do some loose sorting of that directory and pull valid files out of it.

>SJWs unironically offended by the idea of "don't fix what's not broken"
le kek

>>60951394
Why the fuck do you need all that information? Kys

>>60955776
>Dupe finding tools help a lot
I havnt even gotten that far yet. Right now Im deleting everything I know is garbage, and moving stuff that is probably junk to "delete" and stuff I want to "keep". The "delete" is a buffer zone incase I happen to come across an image that is part of a set, and I just happen to not like that image but overally I do like the set. If I recognize it later i can just retrieve it from delete.

After that it gets sorted to the right genera or goes straight into "a a sort", which undoubtable has duplicates.

asfor the dump folder "a a sort", I leave it unmanaged but I will run "mv *.webm ./webm" once or twice a year to move the larger webm files to their own directory because they are both larger and dont thumbnail worth a shit. In the future I will make a sorter that will move the webms into tow folders, sound and no sound, so that I can sort them without worrying about volume levels.

When I tackle sorting my dump folder I will work on giving some stuff names, and the remainder will be renamed in a second sweep once they are in their proper folder.

My biggest killer right now is videos. I went an a several hundred gig downloading spree. I need to delete the shit I honestly dont even want and transcode the rest to x265 or whatever the new meme that is coming out later this year.

bloat

>>60955999
found the mentally ill tranny

>>60951371
i don't get it

>>60951371
I have no idea at all

>>60955776
>>60956114
>visipics
forgot about the other part of your post, though it was mostly addressed in my last message.
Ill look into visipics. Even though Im on linux, I could still just run it over samba or something.
The 40gb folder is actually from the main drive. I accidently deleted a picture that I wanted so I recovered all fo the free space. Kinda sucks though because like 2 days in I forgot what I was even looking for so I started resaving everything that I thought was good.
Whats your "file" wrapper do?

>>60956114
>>60956158
jej
I know how that goes.

>Whats your "file" wrapper do?
Since most of the recovered files came back without names, they were mostly just like 0001 0002 0003 ...
so I just wrote a small script to recursively trawl the directory pulling out files that matched types with files I had in another directory "valids", where I just put in valid files that I wanted extracted ,like a jpg, an mp4, etc. so now I have subdirectories like ".mp4" that have supposedly valid files in them, just all un-named. I tend to go into there every now and then and just open things at random to see what it is and go from there (sort or delete).

>>60956186
>valids
Oh, I think you are talking about a partially recovered image where its only half there.
Run it though tin eye and google reverse search. There might be enough there to track down an intact copy to see if you wanted it or not, and if so resave the good copy.

If youre just sorting based off of extension then you could have done it ith the wild card *

>>60956219
Good idea with the reverse search.

>by extension
No they had nothing. The wrapper moved them into a directory like ".wav" and appended the extension back on to it. So like originally "[000002].wav" was in a folder with A LOT of other files that had a naming convention that was just [####], no extension, the script analyzed the files, guessing their type with `file`, comparing that to one of the desired fetch types I had set, then moved it to a directory like ".wav" and appended an extension just in case.
i.e.
sorting/unsorted/[000002] -> /sorting/.wav/[000002].wav

Corrupt wavs are scary as shit to deal with if you're not looking at the wav form, sudden loud static out of nowhere.

File: valid wav files.png (8KB, 119x549px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 119x549px

>>60956274
>>60956274
I forgot this.

>>60956274
That is fucking horrifying.
I recover with photorec, it put the extensions back on for me automatically.

>wav
Never had the misfortune of dealing with that one

They removed useful information but couldn't even make the downloads menu any more compact so it could show more downloads at once.