4 ms·

Well, now I'm upset because I didn't know this setting existed, and I prefer the tighter layout! How, exactly does Mozilla measure user engagement of these fea

Well, now I'm upset because I didn't know this setting existed, and I prefer the tighter layout! How, exactly does Mozilla measure user engagement of these features? And if they are using telemetry, how are they accounting for the users that disable telemetry out of privacy concerns? (Which, I assume is a sizable amount of FF users)

ljm 6y ago
Data-driven design like that is really just going to get you to a lowest-common-denominator product.
- marcos100 6y ago
  It's only data-driven when they remove features.
- tablespoon 6y ago
  > Data-driven design like that is really just going to get you to a lowest-common-denominator product. Our data shows people typically use the defaults, so lets get rid of all configuration!
  - chrisan 6y ago
    I had no idea this was even an option to change. I love it already. I'm guessing the feedback they provided in the ticket means they will be keeping this option, thankfully
    - tablespoon 6y ago
      Yeah, I had no idea about it, but flipped it on solely because of this story and I like it. I even enabled telemetry because I'm sick of stuff like this. Personally, I hate the current fad of low-density, white-space-filled UIs. Sure, it might be suitable for some airport kiosk that I'll use exactly one, but for the things I use frequently I want their UI to be as compact and information dense as possible.
- kmeisthax 6y ago
  Wasn't that the whole point of Firefox? To be the browser with 10% of the features that 90% of the users need?
  - dathinab 6y ago
    The problem is FF had once been that "1000% of all features you can imagine most of which are used by at most 1% or 2% percent of users" browser. This was so because of the huge customizability of XUl and other parts. But this became a maintenance nightmare the moment it was put in context with requirements like stability (there where many extensions which made FF unstable) and security (how extensions are sandboxed, how likely they can escape, what damage they can do without an sandbox escape), change (new internal engine, changed rendering pipeline etc.). A Company of Googles size could probably have maintained it, but for FF it became increasingly more infeasible to go on like that. So they switched to remove XUL and support mainly the parts most users use, sometimes adding new features but also removing them if they don't gain any traction in the user base. I personally see little use for the compact density as it just removes some spacing which is mostly vertical. So (at least in my case) using compact spacing doesn't at all create more space for tabs or similar it just adds a view more pixel to the vertical axis of the websites view. But then I'm only using 1080p and HiDPI screens. I guess it might matter if you are still on a 720p screen or alternatively have a high layout scaling (font size etc.) due to other reasons.
    - Schlaefer 6y ago
      > But then I'm only using 1080p and HiDPI screens. I guess it might matter if you are still on a 720p screen or alternatively have a high layout scaling (font size etc.) due to other reasons. That's the most baffling argument to me in this whole discussion. People invest in screen real estate and then devs decide to just fill it with more UI-chrome. How is my bigger screen an open invitation to waste it on buttons, margins etc?
      - anoncake 6y ago
        Unused screen estate is wasted screen estate, I guess. Just like unused RAM and unspent money.
marcos100 6y ago
For this feature, apparently then don't measure. They measured screen resolution and are assuming that only people with low res screens use this feature. And they probably don't measure those who disable telemetry.

ljm 6y ago

Data-driven design like that is really just going to get you to a lowest-common-denominator product.

marcos100 6y ago
It's only data-driven when they remove features.
tablespoon 6y ago
> Data-driven design like that is really just going to get you to a lowest-common-denominator product. Our data shows people typically use the defaults, so lets get rid of all configuration!
- chrisan 6y ago
  I had no idea this was even an option to change. I love it already. I'm guessing the feedback they provided in the ticket means they will be keeping this option, thankfully
  - tablespoon 6y ago
    Yeah, I had no idea about it, but flipped it on solely because of this story and I like it. I even enabled telemetry because I'm sick of stuff like this. Personally, I hate the current fad of low-density, white-space-filled UIs. Sure, it might be suitable for some airport kiosk that I'll use exactly one, but for the things I use frequently I want their UI to be as compact and information dense as possible.
kmeisthax 6y ago
Wasn't that the whole point of Firefox? To be the browser with 10% of the features that 90% of the users need?
- dathinab 6y ago
  The problem is FF had once been that "1000% of all features you can imagine most of which are used by at most 1% or 2% percent of users" browser. This was so because of the huge customizability of XUl and other parts. But this became a maintenance nightmare the moment it was put in context with requirements like stability (there where many extensions which made FF unstable) and security (how extensions are sandboxed, how likely they can escape, what damage they can do without an sandbox escape), change (new internal engine, changed rendering pipeline etc.). A Company of Googles size could probably have maintained it, but for FF it became increasingly more infeasible to go on like that. So they switched to remove XUL and support mainly the parts most users use, sometimes adding new features but also removing them if they don't gain any traction in the user base. I personally see little use for the compact density as it just removes some spacing which is mostly vertical. So (at least in my case) using compact spacing doesn't at all create more space for tabs or similar it just adds a view more pixel to the vertical axis of the websites view. But then I'm only using 1080p and HiDPI screens. I guess it might matter if you are still on a 720p screen or alternatively have a high layout scaling (font size etc.) due to other reasons.
  - Schlaefer 6y ago
    > But then I'm only using 1080p and HiDPI screens. I guess it might matter if you are still on a 720p screen or alternatively have a high layout scaling (font size etc.) due to other reasons. That's the most baffling argument to me in this whole discussion. People invest in screen real estate and then devs decide to just fill it with more UI-chrome. How is my bigger screen an open invitation to waste it on buttons, margins etc?
    - anoncake 6y ago
      Unused screen estate is wasted screen estate, I guess. Just like unused RAM and unspent money.

marcos100 6y ago

For this feature, apparently then don't measure. They measured screen resolution and are assuming that only people with low res screens use this feature. And they probably don't measure those who disable telemetry.