8 ms·

Mozilla hides Compact Mode in Firefox for new users

56 points by Hard_Space 6y ago

KozmoNau7 6y ago
That seems like a really bad decision for all of us using low-resolution displays. 1366x768 laptops are still common, and we need as much vertical space for content as possible.
- rockdoe 6y ago
  It seems like it's just FUD. According to the bug tracker the plan is to run an experiment (including defaulting Compact mode) and see which combinations are actually retained by users: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698171 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698171 There's another bug that I can't find right now that talks about defaulting Compact mode on low-res devices. The whole thing seems to be totally unsettled pending more data.
  - jfk13 6y ago
    > According to the bug tracker the plan is to run an experiment There's a bug on file suggesting an experiment. Whether there is a plan to actually run one is another matter. (I don't know the answer; just wanted to point out that issues in bugzilla are not by themselves evidence of product plans.)
    - rockdoe 6y ago
      True. I found the other discussion: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698244#c1 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698244#c1 Which says that the current Telemetry is not usable (and talks about the defaulting on).
  - e3bc54b2 6y ago
    I wish your first paragraph turns out to be correct. I'm personally not hopeful after Mozilla's track record in recent history. But then again, there is no alternative...
  - avian 6y ago
    I wonder if this kind of experimental approach just leads to software slowly getting worse and worse over time, in many small steps. I feel like human response to changes like this isn't linear: make a thing slightly worse, and most people won't be annoyed enough to do the research, find and change the setting. If it's not a huge step back they'll just live with it, and maybe complain to their IT-savy friend, who will just nod and say "I know". On the other hand, people doing the experiment will see that most of their test subjects don't switch away from the change - mission accomplished, full steam ahead!
    - rockdoe 6y ago
      That seems to be why the experiment outlined is so valuable. It would default both options and look at cross-switching. A/B testing UX, basically?
  - nabilhat 6y ago
    > the plan is to run an experiment (including defaulting Compact mode) and see which combinations are actually retained by users Moving the compact mode setting into the same space as the telemetry switches not included in about:preferences#privacy seems like a great way to cook the statistics. Hanlon's Razor only stretches so far. It's become an established pattern of hiding a feature over next to the telemetry switches, explaining that they'd measure the results with lazy load telemetry - gently defining an unspoken void that's shaped a lot like "well if they wanted the feature maybe they shouldn't have turned off telemetry?".
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- badsectoracula 6y ago
  It isn't just "still common", depending on the stats you find it is either the first or the second most popular for desktops and laptops with 1920x1080 the next most common - and the next few resolutions that follow are actually lower than 1920x1080 (eg. 1440x900). The next higher desktop resolution, 2560x1440, is rarely above single low digits (~3%), assuming it even registers.
juusto 6y ago
I will take it. Better than just yank it out of existence.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  They'll yank it out in the future after proudly claiming that one one uses it anymore (omitting the fact that they can't find it anymore).
- ProAm 6y ago
  Wait one more release cycle. This is how they remove things.
rychco 6y ago
I had read on a previous HN thread that Mozilla intends to remove compact density completely. It’s not functionally unusable, but boy is it irritating to have most of your screen taken up by OS border, window header, Firefox toolbars, the website header/navbar, and some obligatory ads & marketing.
mhandley 6y ago
I'm a longtime Firefox user, but I only found out about compact mode from the discussion on HN when it was first announced it would be removed. I've been using it since and really like it. Can't help wondering whether many more people would be using it if they knew about it.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  Same, just enabled it, love it!
- freeAgent 6y ago
  Given that many screens these days are either 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratio, it makes sense to try and minimize the amount of vertical space/rows of pixels used up by the user interface. Screens these days have much more horizontal space to spare than vertical space. Compact mode increases the amount of content that can be displayed on the screen. I like that.
superkuh 6y ago
Mozilla has been removing features from Firefox to "protect" their users from themselves since version 37.
- andrepd 6y ago
  Why 37?
  - superkuh 6y ago
    That was when they first started requiring all extensions/add-ons to be signed by Mozilla before allowing them to be used in your browser. From that point on users couldn't edit their installed extensions or use extensions from outside the pool of Moz approved ones. And yes, I know that some linux Distros that believe in software freedom have negotiated to be able to provide Firefox without this lock-down (ie, Debian), and that if you use the well hidden unbranded builds available in no repos it's possible too. But 37 was when Moz decided that users shouldn't get a choice and it's been downhill ever since.
    - rockdoe 6y ago
      if you use the well hidden unbranded builds available in no repos it's possible too This is a very weak argument given that it works in the Developer version.
      - superkuh 6y ago
        It is not acceptable to suggest using an alpha/beta as a main daily driver. You may not encounter bugs but they certainly do exist. There's a reason that the developer edition is not the release edition. And yes, developer edition is an alpha/beta. Specifically it's the renamed aurora channel which was the renamed alpha. But these days it functions as more of a beta.
        rockdoe 6y ago
        I think it's quite reasonable to suggest power users to use such a specific version. Especially as the signing is presumably to prevent non-power users from getting malicious ones, which is a real problem. As you admit, the Developer edition is very stable and from the name targeted at exactly the kind of people that want to run their custom extensions. It's not like Minefield nightlies back in the day!
pera 6y ago
I sometimes feel like Mozilla knows exactly what features I love and then they go one by one and remove them (or make them only accessible through about:config) because "nobody use this anyways", then you see threads with hundreds of other users asking to please put the feature back and finally some bugzilla administrator locking the thread because "it's not the right place for this kind of discussions"... I still miss vimperator and a few other XUL era add-ons by the way.
- kenniskrag 6y ago
  Maybe too many power user disabled the telemetry :)
  - arkitaip 6y ago
    Maybe but there are many other methods to figure out user needs and how to implement those needs in the best way.
    - kenniskrag 6y ago
      Which ones (honest question)? I know gathering data with questionnaires. But asking people is a hard problem. "Do you want a faster browser", "do you want more choice in the UI" will lead to a all yes result. If you ask open questions you need much more time to answer the questionnaire and much more time to interpret the data.
      - falcolas 6y ago
        Sit down with a user and watch how they use your product. This is a well known method for seeing how the product is being used, and what causes friction. No interpretation of user input required.
        Vinnl 6y ago
        Mozilla does do that. It looks like that too doesn't seem to give them reason to preserve compact mode. (Though to be fair, UX research like that does indeed highlight what causes friction, not necessarily how many people are strongly attached to features like compact mode.)
twobitshifter 6y ago
I use compact mode with tree style tabs and the tab bar completely hidden. I’m already editing the config to get there but it wasn’t hard for me to find the compact mode. If the argument is that users can’t find it shouldn’t the solution be to make it easier to find? Perhaps that’s not the problem and future UI changes are making managing multiple modes more work for designers.
steinuil 6y ago
Apparently this is in preparation for the new "Proton UI", which is one of those things the design teams in big companies do to justify their existence. I just downloaded Nightly, which already has the Proton UI, and indeed compact mode is hidden behind an about:config option and it's a bit taller than the one featured in the current UI. I really can't fathom why this has to be the case.
- ProAm 6y ago
  If its anything like they did with the URL bar, it will be in about config for the next release, and then gone the release after that.
2ion 6y ago
Well you'll be surprised what garbage Nightly surprised me with today [1]. Seemingly the goal is to remove anything that would let users distinguish UI elements based on habit and visual familarity. When did Safari last change how their tab bar works? Mozilla changes it every year now, planless and clueless. Are there no bigger issues to solve in Firefox? I mean, just remove compact mode if you don't want to maintain it, but playing around after removing it invalidates any excuse that has something to do with reducing maintenance burden. Proton, ha. [1] https://0x0.st/-c75.png https://0x0.st/-c75.png
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- coffeefirst 6y ago
  I don't care about compact mode, but holy crap, that looks terrible.
- dleslie 6y ago
  Edit: forgive my ignorance
  - dralley 6y ago
    "three coloured circles" Uh, I'm pretty sure that's just MacOS
    - kevincox 6y ago
      Still a questionable design decision. But not Mozilla's questionable design decision.
- lol768 6y ago
  It makes it really difficult to tell which tab is selected IME too. It's a shame.
- crocodiletears 6y ago
  Mozilla had some of the most aesthetically well-designed tabs, and they're throwing it away for… that?
LocalH 6y ago
After the huge community backlash, they still push forward with this? Why is modern software development so increasingly user-hostile?
flyingchipmann 6y ago
On 40 inch+ 4k tv monitor or laptop, even compact mode might not be small enough. There is no justification for wasting so much space.
Hard_Space 6y ago
I posted this piece with the usual outrage (I feel strongly about compact mode), but today I installed it in Windows Sandbox and can see very little difference, to be honest, between compact mode and normal mode. That said I agree with comments in this thread to the effect that the option will be removed from about:config in short order, and so don't know what my solution to the problem will be.

56 points by Hard_Space 6y ago

That seems like a really bad decision for all of us using low-resolution displays. 1366x768 laptops are still common, and we need as much vertical space for content as possible.

rockdoe 6y ago
It seems like it's just FUD. According to the bug tracker the plan is to run an experiment (including defaulting Compact mode) and see which combinations are actually retained by users: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698171 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698171 There's another bug that I can't find right now that talks about defaulting Compact mode on low-res devices. The whole thing seems to be totally unsettled pending more data.
- jfk13 6y ago
  > According to the bug tracker the plan is to run an experiment There's a bug on file suggesting an experiment. Whether there is a plan to actually run one is another matter. (I don't know the answer; just wanted to point out that issues in bugzilla are not by themselves evidence of product plans.)
  - rockdoe 6y ago
    True. I found the other discussion: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698244#c1 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698244#c1 Which says that the current Telemetry is not usable (and talks about the defaulting on).
- e3bc54b2 6y ago
  I wish your first paragraph turns out to be correct. I'm personally not hopeful after Mozilla's track record in recent history. But then again, there is no alternative...
- avian 6y ago
  I wonder if this kind of experimental approach just leads to software slowly getting worse and worse over time, in many small steps. I feel like human response to changes like this isn't linear: make a thing slightly worse, and most people won't be annoyed enough to do the research, find and change the setting. If it's not a huge step back they'll just live with it, and maybe complain to their IT-savy friend, who will just nod and say "I know". On the other hand, people doing the experiment will see that most of their test subjects don't switch away from the change - mission accomplished, full steam ahead!
  - rockdoe 6y ago
    That seems to be why the experiment outlined is so valuable. It would default both options and look at cross-switching. A/B testing UX, basically?
- nabilhat 6y ago
  > the plan is to run an experiment (including defaulting Compact mode) and see which combinations are actually retained by users Moving the compact mode setting into the same space as the telemetry switches not included in about:preferences#privacy seems like a great way to cook the statistics. Hanlon's Razor only stretches so far. It's become an established pattern of hiding a feature over next to the telemetry switches, explaining that they'd measure the results with lazy load telemetry - gently defining an unspoken void that's shaped a lot like "well if they wanted the feature maybe they shouldn't have turned off telemetry?".
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
badsectoracula 6y ago
It isn't just "still common", depending on the stats you find it is either the first or the second most popular for desktops and laptops with 1920x1080 the next most common - and the next few resolutions that follow are actually lower than 1920x1080 (eg. 1440x900). The next higher desktop resolution, 2560x1440, is rarely above single low digits (~3%), assuming it even registers.

juusto 6y ago

I will take it. Better than just yank it out of existence.

marcinzm 6y ago
They'll yank it out in the future after proudly claiming that one one uses it anymore (omitting the fact that they can't find it anymore).
ProAm 6y ago
Wait one more release cycle. This is how they remove things.

rychco 6y ago

I had read on a previous HN thread that Mozilla intends to remove compact density completely. It’s not functionally unusable, but boy is it irritating to have most of your screen taken up by OS border, window header, Firefox toolbars, the website header/navbar, and some obligatory ads & marketing.

mhandley 6y ago

I'm a longtime Firefox user, but I only found out about compact mode from the discussion on HN when it was first announced it would be removed. I've been using it since and really like it. Can't help wondering whether many more people would be using it if they knew about it.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
Same, just enabled it, love it!
freeAgent 6y ago
Given that many screens these days are either 16:9 or 16:10 aspect ratio, it makes sense to try and minimize the amount of vertical space/rows of pixels used up by the user interface. Screens these days have much more horizontal space to spare than vertical space. Compact mode increases the amount of content that can be displayed on the screen. I like that.

superkuh 6y ago

Mozilla has been removing features from Firefox to "protect" their users from themselves since version 37.

andrepd 6y ago
Why 37?
- superkuh 6y ago
  That was when they first started requiring all extensions/add-ons to be signed by Mozilla before allowing them to be used in your browser. From that point on users couldn't edit their installed extensions or use extensions from outside the pool of Moz approved ones. And yes, I know that some linux Distros that believe in software freedom have negotiated to be able to provide Firefox without this lock-down (ie, Debian), and that if you use the well hidden unbranded builds available in no repos it's possible too. But 37 was when Moz decided that users shouldn't get a choice and it's been downhill ever since.
  - rockdoe 6y ago
    if you use the well hidden unbranded builds available in no repos it's possible too This is a very weak argument given that it works in the Developer version.
    - superkuh 6y ago
      It is not acceptable to suggest using an alpha/beta as a main daily driver. You may not encounter bugs but they certainly do exist. There's a reason that the developer edition is not the release edition. And yes, developer edition is an alpha/beta. Specifically it's the renamed aurora channel which was the renamed alpha. But these days it functions as more of a beta.
      - rockdoe 6y ago
        I think it's quite reasonable to suggest power users to use such a specific version. Especially as the signing is presumably to prevent non-power users from getting malicious ones, which is a real problem. As you admit, the Developer edition is very stable and from the name targeted at exactly the kind of people that want to run their custom extensions. It's not like Minefield nightlies back in the day!

pera 6y ago

I sometimes feel like Mozilla knows exactly what features I love and then they go one by one and remove them (or make them only accessible through about:config) because "nobody use this anyways", then you see threads with hundreds of other users asking to please put the feature back and finally some bugzilla administrator locking the thread because "it's not the right place for this kind of discussions"... I still miss vimperator and a few other XUL era add-ons by the way.

kenniskrag 6y ago
Maybe too many power user disabled the telemetry :)
- arkitaip 6y ago
  Maybe but there are many other methods to figure out user needs and how to implement those needs in the best way.
  - kenniskrag 6y ago
    Which ones (honest question)? I know gathering data with questionnaires. But asking people is a hard problem. "Do you want a faster browser", "do you want more choice in the UI" will lead to a all yes result. If you ask open questions you need much more time to answer the questionnaire and much more time to interpret the data.
    - falcolas 6y ago
      Sit down with a user and watch how they use your product. This is a well known method for seeing how the product is being used, and what causes friction. No interpretation of user input required.
      - Vinnl 6y ago
        Mozilla does do that. It looks like that too doesn't seem to give them reason to preserve compact mode. (Though to be fair, UX research like that does indeed highlight what causes friction, not necessarily how many people are strongly attached to features like compact mode.)

twobitshifter 6y ago

I use compact mode with tree style tabs and the tab bar completely hidden. I’m already editing the config to get there but it wasn’t hard for me to find the compact mode. If the argument is that users can’t find it shouldn’t the solution be to make it easier to find? Perhaps that’s not the problem and future UI changes are making managing multiple modes more work for designers.

steinuil 6y ago

Apparently this is in preparation for the new "Proton UI", which is one of those things the design teams in big companies do to justify their existence. I just downloaded Nightly, which already has the Proton UI, and indeed compact mode is hidden behind an about:config option and it's a bit taller than the one featured in the current UI. I really can't fathom why this has to be the case.

ProAm 6y ago
If its anything like they did with the URL bar, it will be in about config for the next release, and then gone the release after that.

2ion 6y ago

Well you'll be surprised what garbage Nightly surprised me with today [1]. Seemingly the goal is to remove anything that would let users distinguish UI elements based on habit and visual familarity. When did Safari last change how their tab bar works? Mozilla changes it every year now, planless and clueless. Are there no bigger issues to solve in Firefox? I mean, just remove compact mode if you don't want to maintain it, but playing around after removing it invalidates any excuse that has something to do with reducing maintenance burden. Proton, ha. [1] https://0x0.st/-c75.png https://0x0.st/-c75.png

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
coffeefirst 6y ago
I don't care about compact mode, but holy crap, that looks terrible.
dleslie 6y ago
Edit: forgive my ignorance
- dralley 6y ago
  "three coloured circles" Uh, I'm pretty sure that's just MacOS
  - kevincox 6y ago
    Still a questionable design decision. But not Mozilla's questionable design decision.
lol768 6y ago
It makes it really difficult to tell which tab is selected IME too. It's a shame.
crocodiletears 6y ago
Mozilla had some of the most aesthetically well-designed tabs, and they're throwing it away for… that?

LocalH 6y ago

After the huge community backlash, they still push forward with this? Why is modern software development so increasingly user-hostile?

flyingchipmann 6y ago

On 40 inch+ 4k tv monitor or laptop, even compact mode might not be small enough. There is no justification for wasting so much space.

Hard_Space 6y ago

I posted this piece with the usual outrage (I feel strongly about compact mode), but today I installed it in Windows Sandbox and can see very little difference, to be honest, between compact mode and normal mode. That said I agree with comments in this thread to the effect that the option will be removed from about:config in short order, and so don't know what my solution to the problem will be.