3 ms·
Unfortunately, some of that interaction was barely more than a slightly more polite form of "get off my lawn" whenever it came to add-ons about tweaking the UI.
by usrusr 9y ago
Unfortunately, some of that interaction was barely more than a slightly more polite form of "get off my lawn" whenever it came to add-ons about tweaking the UI.
Mozilla deliberately removed a lot of customizability, but instead of being open about it they made addon developers the scapegoat, sending unhappy users their way while blocking requests for replacement APIs with "you are not supposed to do that kind of UI tweaks anymore". After a decade or so of encouraging UI extensions whenever someone suggested advanced UI features, this is a bit lame.
- Vinnl 9y agoI'll give you that the removal of some customisability is deliberate, but not that it's not interested in listening to the developers. It just has a different opinion than some of them on what should be allowed. That said, there's also a lot of customisability that simply hasn't been implemented yet. I'd name e.g. hiding of the tab bar where Mozilla is clearly seeking a compromise between the potential downsides of removal of UI elements by add-ons and how useful it could be. It just takes time to make it happen, but luckily, Firefox 52 is still an Extended Support Release for quite a while.
- usrusr 9y agoHiding the tab bar to replace it with a full custom implementation, instead of modifying the stock tab bar? That might be reasonable, if APIs are sufficient to fully reimplement all features of stock, with no corners cut. If it's just "done, tab bar hidden, here is a sidebar for you to play in, have fun", then it would be full-on "the emperor's new extension API".