Unified toolbar should be below the main menu bar
Categories
(Thunderbird :: Toolbars and Tabs, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
People
(Reporter: product, Unassigned)
Details
"We're not moving the menu bar above the toolbar as that would mean creating many different variations in the layout and window controls.
Sorry but we're not changing this."
We must be living in different worlds. Almost every application I use, in Windows and in Linux, has the menu bar at the top, with the toolbar underneath. None of them have a "unified toolbar". And that is the way TB has been for countless years. You say you are not chnaging this but you DID change this. And made it diferent then what it was before.
"I'm not a decider, but as an update to comment 13 ... with almost 4 million users on version 115, 8 duplicates isn't overwhelming"
I have never used bugzilla before. I am probably not even filing this properly, because I am a newbie. The thread itself is "closed" which makes newbies like me even less likely to try to figure out how to comment. When I compare the number of duplicates complaints here to the number of people how make duplicate reports of other bugs, the number commenting here at VERY significant.
But look what the commenters are saying. That the change that was made with the unified toolbar is making the UI inconsistent with all the other applications they use. And this is true in both Windows and Linux (I can't comment on other environments).
PPlease be responsive to the commenters and saying "No" is not being responsive. In what other Windows and/or Linux applications is there a "unified" toolbar? In which ones is the menu bar above the toolbar? You want a list where they are not?
Firefox, Chromium, Gnome terminal, xed, virtualbox, gnucash, libreoffice, GIMP, Xournal, .... How many do you want me to list?
Currently the only way to achieve the result you are looking for is by using the information at the following link which has been created in the Thunderbird Support Forum.
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/1422908
Thank you for that tip. In this case, that is where I started and I have applied that correction. And each time I update my system, I will have to remember that the correction is needed and figure out how to do it again.
Perhaps I was not clear. The intent of my post was not find a Bug Work Around, but to get the developers to actually fix the bug. As karma would have things, today I happened to run across an interesting similar circumstance. See https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/258679/why-is-ls-suddenly-wrapping-items-with-spaces-in-single-quotes/262162#262162 .
That link describes the situation from around 2016 where "three coreutils maintainers" changed the "ls" command so by default it output filenames in single quotes if those names contained certain special characters. Similar outrage. Such as the following.
"If people want something different, they will opt into it."
"As someone who's used *nix systems for 30 years, I find gratuitous changes like this to be quite annoying." (I have that beat, 45+ years)
"They also violate the Principle of Least Astonishment. "Opt-in" should've been the default here"
"That's still not the way to push such changes. It'd have been way more constructive to have that behaviour opt-in instead of active by default."
But there is a big difference here with the "ls" case. People are not upset that a chnage has been made to the design of TB. I am sure many like the change. The problem is the change was not offered as something one can easily opt-in to. That is the wat to introduce such changes. Then after a while, if there is evidence that the new design is in general preferred, they you can chnage the default and require one to opt-out for the old design. But this change was made does not even provide a simple option for retaining the former behavior.
I greatly appreciate all the work done by all those, paid and unpaid, that maintain the universe of linux software. Think of the positive impact all that has on our collective ability to navigate through our existence. But with that comes responsibility, a responsibility to adhere to a level of professional standards and sensitivy to the community that is served. And in this case, despite best intentions, I think a course correction is called for.
Another comment on the defense that not many complaints have been received via bugzilla. Again, my reaction is "really". in addition to the fact that only a tiny fraction have the inclination or ability to report bugs, the thread for reporting this one is CLOSED. S one must really jump through hoops to report anything.
In addition to that, another defense is this is not a "bug" because the program is doing exactly what the developers want it to do. I am sure many will agree with that "classification". But one cannot say both it is not a bug AND not many people are complaining about it. There is no place to report complaints about design, certainly if its is not considered a "bug" then why would one report anything to "bugzilla". (IMHO, it is a bug, not an operational one but a design one.)
(In reply to james from comment #2)
Thank you for that tip. In this case, that is where I started and I have applied that correction. And each time I update my system, I will have to remember that the correction is needed and figure out how to do it again.
Why? I created it once and it's in my profile folder, so why the need to recreate again.
Are you deliberately using a completely new profile everytime you update ?
If yes, then I'm presuming you are backing up the old one, in which case just copy the 'chrome' folder and put into the new profile.
Perhaps I was not clear. The intent of my post was not find a Bug Work Around, but to get the developers to actually fix the bug.
You were very clear. Just in the same way all the other people who created same bug request were clear about it. Same as all the many comments in various forums are clear about it.
For me it's a deal breaker. In general I like the new Supernova it has many fine qualities and the improvements are still in the pipeline and yes there are going tobe bugs that need ironing out. But on this particular subject, I'm not going to work with something that I consider to be an exceptionally poor decision, particularly since it is so easy to fix. It's annoying and as bad as having a row of pictures that are not level. It's just wrong, but that's my personal stance hence why I also complained many times.
Another comment on the defense that not many complaints have been received via bugzilla. Again, my reaction is "really". in addition to the fact that only a tiny fraction have the inclination or ability to report bugs, the thread for reporting this one is CLOSED. S one must really jump through hoops to report anything.
In addition to that, another defense is this is not a "bug" because the program is doing exactly what the developers want it to do. I am sure many will agree with that "classification". But one cannot say both it is not a bug AND not many people are complaining about it. There is no place to report complaints about design, certainly if its is not considered a "bug" then why would one report anything to "bugzilla". (IMHO, it is a bug, not an operational one but a design one.)
You can say it's not a bug because it was designed to function that way. But for many people it's a bad design so it's perceived as a bug.
It has been complained about by alot of people. A tiny minority will report the problem in Bugzilla, but because it is a duplicate question then it will get marked as resolved as a duplicate. People who are forced to create a new bug on this topic does show the developers that this particular issue is a real problem and it's not just a few people.
Maybe many people do not post anything anywhere because they do not know where to complain or most likely cannot be bothered as they feel it will make no difference. More complain in the various Support Forums and the majority search and find a solution and apply it - such as the 'The Fix' I created in the support forum.
As I type this, that particular question with it's solution has over 4207 views in such a short time, so clearly that question is being searched for by a lot of people.
Description
•