13 ms·

The future Firefox UI

264 points by paulrouget 15y ago

ramidarigaz 15y ago
Strongly reminiscent of Chrome, and I don't think that's a bad thing. Chrome's UI was one of the primary reasons I switched from Firefox.
- VanceRefrig 15y ago
  To me, it looks almost exactly the same. I do enjoy the small bar on the top of the window in Chrome, and now soon to be Firefox
- 51Cards 15y ago
  And for me the Chrome UI is the primary reason I can't stand Chrome and stay with FF. Whatever they do to the default layout in FF doesn't bother me, just keep giving me the option to put it back the way I like it. So far, so good... other than needing a plug-in now to get a bottom status bar.
  - sp332 15y ago
    What do you use the bottom statusbar for?
    - mitchty 15y ago
      Personally I just hover to see where a link goes at times, but chrome's method of showing the link at the bottom after N milliseconds is more than sufficient. It doesn't need to permanently take up pixels otherwise.
      - sp332 15y ago
        Firefox does the same, now. It's almost like Chrome's but it doesn't expand to show the "middle" of a really long link after a second.
      - kstenerud 15y ago
        Except that chrome's version obscures the navigation links in a lot of websites, which means you have to be quick to point and click in order to be able to navigate before the popup info tooltip blocks your click.
        sp332 15y ago
        That doesn't happen (anymore?), because the popup will move out of the way of your cursor if you get close.
        kstenerud 15y ago
        It happens to me all the time when I use Review Board on a big commit (which spans multiple pages). Just had it happen now on the latest Chrome. I have to move the mouse around and play dodge-the-tooltip and hope I get lucky.
    - 51Cards 15y ago
      I use it for the standard things like hovering over URL's and watching page load progress. And I also agree that the pop-up in Chrome works reasonably well for this too... however... FF went and added an 'Add-Ons Bar' to replace the bottom real-estate that plugins wanted to sit in lost by the status bar removal. So now, if I use the Add-on bar, AND allow the Chrome style status pop-up, I loose even more space since the URL is now outside the bottom bar, and I'm left with a ton of unused space on the Add-on bar. FF should have just made the Status label a movable element and allowed it to go back in the bottom bar if desired. Since the bar is going to be there anyhow for some people with plugins then their effort to save UI space just cost me 2x the UI space. It frustrates me that what could have been a simple and flexible change (optional, draggable status label) has turned into a hodge podge of work-arounds.
      - jamesbritt 15y ago
        And I also agree that the pop-up in Chrome works reasonably well for this too... however... However the Chrome pop-up has a tendency to obscure useful page content, especially on (oh, irony) Google docs. I much prefer a devoted status bar. OTOH, I have a WUXGA screen (1920x1200) so I have less need to obsess over vertical screen space. The rise of so-called "HD" screens is one of the tragedies of modern computing that ranks up there with Comic Sans.
      - phreakhead 15y ago
        We are going through a redesign for my company's web app and now we're going to have to insert a tiny bit of blank space at the bottom because Chrome's pop-up statusbar is covering a vital part of the UI! Doh!
  - drgath 15y ago
    You don't need an add-on to get the status bar back. Just enable it: View > Toolbars > Add-on Bar.
    - 51Cards 15y ago
      True, Status bar, no. Status label on the bottom bar, yes.
nxn 15y ago
Very nice, if they actually manage to pull this look off it would probably make it the best looking browser. My only concern is that they wont and that it will still look like crap in linux.
- streptomycin 15y ago
  Personally, I think all these weird modern UIs look like crap, and the relatively standard Firefox UI on Linux is quite nice.
  - nxn 15y ago
    I don't know, that floating button in the top left bugs me in linux. It makes sense in windows because it just blends in with the tabs next to it, but in linux it's on its own line with the tabs showing up below it. The wasted space annoys me to the point that this is one of the main reasons why I do not use Firefox anymore.
    - saulrh 15y ago
      I used to have the same problem, but it turns out that you can tell compiz to hide the title bar. Takes a tiny bit of getting used to (Alt is your friend), but it's pretty nice otherwise. http://jaket.is-a-geek.com/blog/linux/remove-titlebar-on-maximized-windows-with-compiz http://jaket.is-a-geek.com/blog/linux/remove-titlebar-on-max...
    - streptomycin 15y ago
      I'm not sure what you're referring to. On my computer, it looks either like [this](http://i.imgur.com/jZiFO.png http://i.imgur.com/jZiFO.png) or [this](http://i.imgur.com/yHMKH.png http://i.imgur.com/yHMKH.png). No "floating button in the top left" either way.
      - carussell 15y ago
        http://i.imgur.com/d4jjL.png http://i.imgur.com/d4jjL.png
lion0 15y ago
Seems much cleaner. They should do a comparison of how much screen space is used by the chrome vs. other browsers. Can't wait for this to high the nightly / dev builds.
- starwed 15y ago
  I've been running the nightly, and there was a brief period where the tabs were moved into the title bar. Not sure why they backed it out, but I didn't really like it anyway. (I kind of like knowing the title of the page I'm on -- for instance, with this particular link it conveyed semantic information that was missing from the page itself.)
joakin 15y ago
Very good mockup. Hopefully it will get into the main releases without many changes
rglover 15y ago
Wow. I really hope this isn't just speculation and something that's being put into production. Yeah, it looks like a Chrome clone, but it's been done well and with a slight twist. As a dedicated Chrome user, though, it's going to take more than just a coat of paint to get me to switch back. Can't wait to see where this ends up.
- rbarooah 15y ago
  What would you want to see in another browser that would make it worth switching away from chrome?
  - yaix 15y ago
    Be faster than Chrom(ium) with regards to start up speed and JS execution. I abandoned FF after having used it since it was "Phoenix 0.1", because it had become slow and bloated, like NN had been before. Would love to switch back, but not if I can open 5 Chromium instances in the same time it takes to open one FF window.
    - gkanai 15y ago
      Have you tried a new profile? A long-time user will end up with a really crufty Firefox profile. Sync will move all your data to a new profile quickly and you can see what a new profile in Firefox is like.
      - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
        I don't use Firefox at all, but I just did some testing and the first time I started Firefox it took about 3 seconds to show its window. Subsequent starts got faster but always took at least a second and half. Chrome starts before I can say "one".
      - carussell 15y ago
        Sync will not move all your data. I switched to a new profile after installing an add-on that introduced problems and uninstalling didn't correct those problems. I fell back to Sync for the new profile so I could salvage my history and bookmarks from my 2-ish year old profile, but it left out something like 9 months of history, all but two of my tags, and a good chunk of my bookmarks and search keywords (including the ones I'd set up for MXR). I'm not sure if it was buggy, or if Sync was intentionally not tracking the stuff that didn't get copied over. (cf mconnor's blog post a month or so ago about implementing Sync quota caps).
mchusma 15y ago
The final design was awesome, just get rid of the home button and it will be even better. I can't remember the last time I used that button.
- starwed 15y ago
  That's easily removable even now -- right click the toolbar and choose Customize.
- paulrouget 15y ago
  It's not the home button but the home tab: http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/2011/06/10/home-tab-and-new-tab-conceptual-mockups/ http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/2011/06/10/home-tab-and-new-...
  - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
    I love that design, makes me really excited about the future of Firefox. They're finally started to catch up with Chrome in regards to speed of innovation.
bostonpete 15y ago
I can't believe nobody's complaining about the missing dedicated search box. I thought that was everyone's big beef with Chrome. Then again, I haven't used Firefox in quite some time so maybe they've already dropped it.
- jamesteow 15y ago
  Dramatic decisions are often criticized until people accept it and adapt. I remember reading about how consumers wouldn't be able to adapt to a touch screen phone that didn't have a keyboard option.
  - dkokelley 15y ago
    I'm sure you'll still find people who can't get used to the touch screen keyboards. Often it's the vocal minority that we hear loudest.
  - viraptor 15y ago
    Sometimes what actually happens is that people get used to the change and get tired of fighting against. But they still don't like it at all. It's hard to see the difference from outside.
    - jonathansizz 15y ago
      Exactly. Someone might have their leg amputated and complain for a while, then eventually accept it and adapt. This does not mean that having a leg amputated is a good thing.
      - jamesteow 15y ago
        That's not a fair analogy. The alternative to not having your leg amputated in given example is likely eventual spreading of a disease and death. With consumer goods and services often no one forces you to have to accept their changes. No one forces you to use touch screen phones: there are plenty of alternatives which do include a keyboard. Even if you don't like one input box does all approach, you can use previous browsers or browsers which retain the standard model. If you don't like Netflix's price hikes, you can just use another service or don't subscribe at all. Your life won't decline because of it.
jamesteow 15y ago
I would most likely use the full screen view as I never need the menu options anyway (it's also how I use Photoshop). I would likely switch back to Firefox if they executed this.
ori_b 15y ago
So... chrome?
cultureulterior 15y ago
I don't understand why no browser manufacturer integrates tree tabs. It's such a great interface innovation, and everybody is just ignoring it.
- rkudeshi 15y ago
  Chrome on Windows has a flag that you can set to get vertical tabs, but it's a flat list (no tree style). Tree style tabs are the #1 reason I use Firefox (though many of Chrome's other advancements are mighty tempting).
- ori_b 15y ago
  Because to a user that barely understands tabs as it is, it's simply not going to fly. And yes, many nontechnical users do struggle with the idea of tabs.
- carussell 15y ago
  It's not going to happen because that would involve cutting a good chunk away from the side of the content area, standing in the way of pages' Manifest Destiny of extending from the left side of the screen to the right. Having pages like that is a shitty way to browse; people who do it are doing themselves a disservice by reading lines at that width, and screens are wider than ever, but people love full screen windows.
- retro212 15y ago
  Yeah, that's the only reason why I'm still using FF. I'd switch to Chrome months ago, but I can't stand horizontal tabs anymore.
pbreit 15y ago
Why has Firefox been so slow to slim down its UI? The back button is still way too big and the button colors not subtle enough. A browser should disappear into the background to some extent. It's just a window into the interwebs after all.
- aberkowitz 15y ago
  The back button is intentionally bigger as it is one of the most used buttons in a browser. In accordance with Fitt's law, the size allows a user to get to it quicker than a smaller button.
  - dpark 15y ago
    I understand the logic of the bigger back button, but I think it is a poor choice. It's rather awkward-looking, but more importantly it causes the entire toolbar to be several pixels taller. It's an amazing waste of space.
    - starwed 15y ago
      For people who care about such things, you can customize the toolbar and enable "Small Icons".
      - dpark 15y ago
        Thanks. I don't use Firefox much anymore (I keep it setup to use the corporate proxy for the few things that need that), so I'd forgotten about that option.
      - pbreit 15y ago
        It's always the first thing I do but unfortunately defaults matter.
        starwed 15y ago
        Sure, but many like the current default -- on a netbook, I used small icons, but everywhere else I willingly sacrifice a couple of pixels for an easier target.
jgranby 15y ago
I wonder whether this latest proposed redesign will finally have Firefox behaving like, y'know, a native OS X app, or whether it'll be just as shallow as all previous efforts.
- starwed 15y ago
  Curious, since I only recently started using a mac. How does firefox not act like a native app?
  - jgranby 15y ago
    The whole app feels like an imitation of a Mac app. Most obviously on 10.7, the window chrome is wrong. Other small things like incorrect and wrongly sized fonts inside controls, or the whole menu bar disappearing when you use an extension in its own window. When you add everything together, it just feels wrong, like wearing clothes that don't fit. The way they've been updating the UI so far has seen some improvements, for sure, but it's as if they've been patching it bit by bit. I just wondered whether this signalled a change of approach.
    - carussell 15y ago
      > or the whole menu bar disappearing when you use an extension in its own window Could someone explain to me the correct way for a developer to handle this? I've been aware of this problem for a while, and I've newly come to own a Mac, so I've looked into it more and looked at what other apps are doing. There doesn't seem to be a correct solution. I looked at how Safari handles the Web Inspector, and it just adds a new, dedicated Debug menu to the menu bar. This is a no-go in my case. Suppose you're developer faced with a problem similar to the Firefox–extension problem. You have something like an app-within-an-app, or maybe A and B are actually even more closely tied together than that, but independent enough that on any other platform it would be a no-brainer: each one gets its own menu. What do you do for OS X? You can't re-use A's menu items in B, because A's items—in, say, the Edit menu—don't serve B. You can't just augment A's menu set to include B's menus and items, because B's menus and items are so numerous and specific to B and vice versa, that there's just so much clutter from the other's menus and items.
neatoincognito 15y ago
What does it look like with a bunch of tabs open?
yaix 15y ago
Glad they finally copied Chromium. Would be great if they copied it too with regards to startup speed and JS execution speed.
- Aloisius 15y ago
  Firefox 8 nightlies are as fast if not faster than the Dev Channel build of Chrome 14.
WayneDB 15y ago
Where's the mockup for Windows? There are way more people running Firefox on Windows than OS X.
- voxmatt 15y ago
  It's towards the bottom. Just scroll down.
  - WayneDB 15y ago
    Oh, I see. They have 1 mockup for Windows and the rest are for OS X. Brilliant.
    - starwed 15y ago
      These aren't design blueprints. I don't really know why the OP linked to a set of images without any commentary, but it's obvious from the URL that these were part of a presentation. Showing exactly the same changes on every OS wouldn't have been very useful in that context.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
samuelhalle 15y ago
Chrome, is that you?
erickhill 15y ago
I could be an edge case, but I really dislike branded chrome skins that become a part of the window (like the Harry Potter example). Just feels tacky to me.
starwed 15y ago
Folk are focusing on the two changes that make this more like chrome (tabs in title bar, and apparent removal of search bar.) There's more going on here.[1] * Simplified, customizable graphical menus. No idea how well this will work, but it's only a mock-up at this point. * Removal of the forward button, merging the back button with the URL bar. * Refinement of per tab UI. In chrome you still get the browser chrome on pages like preferences or history. * A change in browser chrome when entering fullscreen mode. (Chrome just over-lays the standard UI when you mouse to the top.) [1] If anyone knows the context for these images, would be nice to link it!
- kstenerud 15y ago
  I hope there's an option to put the forward button back in. I use it a lot.
  - gkoberger 15y ago
    If you think about it, the forward button is disabled about 80% of the time -- so it doesn't really need to always be there. The forward button isn't being removed completely; it'll just be hidden when it's not clickable. It will slide out when there's a "forward" URL available.
    - ori_b 15y ago
      Ugh. I hate shapeshifting UIs. Muscle memory depends on stuff being fixed in space relative to other elements.
      - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
        The only element that would shift is the awesome bar, and that's a pretty big target to miss.
      - idonthack 15y ago
        muscle memory is less relevant when mousing. the range of starting positions is large.
beaumartinez 15y ago
The dev tools' UI[1] looks amazing. http://people.mozilla.com/~shorlander/devTools/devTools.html http://people.mozilla.com/~shorlander/devTools/devTools.html
- beck5 15y ago
  Are they going to fully integrate firebug into firefox rather than having it as an extension?
  - gkoberger 15y ago
    As I understand it (it's still somewhat in the planning stages, and things are evolving), Firefox will ship with a set of developer tools which will cover the major use cases (inspector, console, etc). Firebug will be an extension, and will add more advanced functionality. It's being rewritten in JavaScript, and could potentially work on any browser (Firebug and Firebug Lite are going to merge). This is how I understood it when I talked to the Firebug team a few months ago. Mozilla has since hired a ton of people for their Dev Tools team and John J Barton has left Firebug due to lack of funding from IBM -- so I have no clue if things have since changed.
    - sequoia 15y ago
      PLEASE integrate these things carefully and in a sensible way. If I have to use "dev tools" for x, b, and z and firebug for a, y and c that's going to be annoying as hell.
      - dangoor 15y ago
        You will not be annoyed. Promise :)
  - dangoor 15y ago
    http://blog.mozilla.com/devtools/2011/05/25/the-relationship-between-firebug-and-mozilla-developer-tools/ http://blog.mozilla.com/devtools/2011/05/25/the-relationship... tldr; no. Firebug is an independent (but with Mozilla's support and blessing) project and we're also building some great tools that will ship with the browser.
broot 15y ago
I'm glad they finally got rid of that extra search bar, it was ugly and clunky and useless. Any word on when this changes happens for real? I would love a better looking firebug delivery device.
smhinsey 15y ago
I really hope this new tab layout doesn't mean Tree Style Tabs is out of the picture.
stephank 15y ago
I'm not sure what people like about Personas (or the equivalent in other browsers). It always stands out, distracts, and for me even messes up the great website I may be viewing at the time. I'd be much more interested in a CSS extension that lets websites 'bleed' their background into the browser chrome.
jeremyarussell 15y ago
I hope they allow people to keep the old current look if they'd like. I'm more tired of changing constantly then anything, and I love the UI in firefox now. Not that new ideas shouldn't be tried, just that what's not broken shouldn't be "fixed". And I personally don't like chrome because it seems to simple, so trying to turn into Chrome isn't going to win my vote. (but hey, it's about what the mass wants right?)
- gkanai 15y ago
  Firefox will always be the most customizable of any of the major browsers. If you don't like the default theme there are thousands of others to choose from, as there are today.
ahmetalpbalkan 15y ago
I see wasted pixels...
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
dedene 15y ago
That's looking awesome!! Where can we find your blue wallpaper from the back of those mockups / screenshots ?
bradgessler 15y ago
I like that wallpaper. Does anybody have a link to that?
- icebraining 15y ago
  I don't, but here is a content-aware filled version (using PS CS5): http://i.imgur.com/t72Z8.jpg http://i.imgur.com/t72Z8.jpg
- tortilla 15y ago
  He posted it on his blog, http://blog.stephenhorlander.com/2011/08/desktop-backgrounds/ http://blog.stephenhorlander.com/2011/08/desktop-backgrounds...
blauwbilgorgel 15y ago
What I don't like about these Chrome UI's is that they don't respect my OS settings. I am on Windows 7 with the classic NT skin. iTunes and Chrome are one of the few programs that don't respect this skin. While in this case it is simple user preference, in other cases it could mean an accessibility concern, or even give room to malicious attacks: With all these custom browser skins, pop-ups over the HTML body (link destination on hover) and no clear divide between window and application, users won't clearly know the difference between interaction with the browser, and interaction with a smart malicious website. With smart design one could make the bottom browser toolbar appear to be higher, and control the top half with your website. Fake plug-in install modal windows etc.
- Silhouette 15y ago
  > What I don't like about these Chrome UI's is that they don't respect my OS settings Hear, hear. On our new serious workstation, we mostly run a variety of developer tools and browsers, some basic office software, various graphics/DTP/modelling stuff from companies like Adobe and Autodesk, and a bunch of tools to automate things and join the dots. On a quick look, exactly none of the major products there uses the standard Windows 7 UI conventions. I, for one, am sick of: - not knowing which keyboard shortcuts perform frequent tasks like undo/redo, or more generally, not being able to navigate a UI using systematic and intuitive keystrokes; - every application's windows having different conventions for dealing with multiple documents, docking panels, and so on (and making the labels ever-smaller wherever they are, so your documents all look like "C:\users\Fred\..." and your web pages are all "Favourite Site | The S..."); - every application having different and increasingly obnoxious methods of giving you "important" notifications; - every application having different and increasingly obnoxious auto-update policies that break stuff; - every application having different ways to download and maintain plug-ins; - more and more applications trying to squeeze every last square inch of screen space by hiding commands behind a small number of tabs or, worse, meaningless menu-icon-things (we bought large, hi-res monitors for a reason, and having access to browser bookmarks within two clicks is worth far more to us than reading a web site at 2560x1400 instead of 2560x1370); - every application shoving its executables and config files in its own place (not helped by Windows 7's holier-than-thou "you can't put that in that directory" and "are you sure you want to do that" messages); - and many other things that just make day-to-day work horribly inefficient. I wish Microsoft would define a robust, standardised set of UI conventions again, based on usability rather than flashy stuff, and then at least stick to it themselves instead of inventing a whole new bunch of tricks for every new version of Office, IE, Visual Studio and so on. And then I wish other software, including everything I mentioned above and most definitely including Firefox and Chrome, would just follow the conventions or make some effort to collaborate and standardise in connection with Microsoft (or whoever else writes the platform(s) they run on).
sshah 15y ago
Does anyone know if they are planning on bringing back Ubiquity. Of the different lab projects, this one I miss a lot.
- starwed 15y ago
  You can actually download[1] an updated version of Ubiquity that works with even the nightly versions. The commands I personally wrote seem to be broken now, but I think the main pre-installed ones work. [1] Get tip.xpi at https://bitbucket.org/satyr/ubiquity/downloads https://bitbucket.org/satyr/ubiquity/downloads
  - sprokolopolis 15y ago
    Thank you so much for posting this. I have missed Ubiquity.
  - sshah 15y ago
    thanks a lot
mariusmg 15y ago
Yeah, let's make thing more round and diverge even more from the OS look. Morons.
- fictorial 15y ago
  How is name-calling useful to anything here?
ZoFreX 15y ago
While this does look very pretty I'm kinda concerned that they're throwing a lot of good stuff away. I'm running Firefox 5 and it really feels polished, there's so many things I'm still discovering and thinking "hey, that's cool". It's a feeling you most often get when a design has been iterated, and tweaked, and worked on for a long time... I get the same feeling frequently on the Mac I have to use at work. This is prettier, yes. It's also a lot curvier and wastes a lot of space compared to Firefox 5. In particular, vertical pixels are at a premium for me, and Firefox 5 has done a lot to improve this... this is a step backwards, as the main bar at the top is larger. And seriously, those curves take up a ridiculous amount of real-estate - compare those tabs to Chrome or FF5, how many can you get on your screen?
- dpark 15y ago
  > In particular, vertical pixels are at a premium for me, and Firefox 5 has done a lot to improve this... this is a step backwards, as the main bar at the top is larger. Really? Looks like an improvement to me, because tabs have now consumed the titlebar area. The tab area itself is larger, but the total change is a reduction in the amount of vertical space used. > And seriously, those curves take up a ridiculous amount of real-estate - compare those tabs to Chrome or FF5, how many can you get on your screen? The curve is only on the active tab, so I don't see how it's reducing the amount of tabs you can have.
  - ZoFreX 15y ago
    > Really? Looks like an improvement to me, because tabs have now consumed the titlebar area. I compared FF5 and these screenshots on my screen together, FF5 uses slightly less real estate. It's only a minor regression though, and hey, this is Firefox - I can customise it! It's just that prior to the current look, I had to modify Firefox quite a lot to optimise vertical real-estate, and it's quite nice that it's now good out of the box, so I selfishly want it to stay that way!
    - dpark 15y ago
      What OS are you on? Comparing my FF5 install on OSX to the mockups, the mockups use less space due to the tab / titlebar merging. I don't recall if FF5 is already doing that merging on Windows or not. Looking at screenshots online, it also looks like the mockup is smaller than stock FF5 on Windows, but I haven't confirmed myself.
d0m 15y ago
It looks fantastic! Only thing I fear about firefox is the speed. (Speed at Starting, loading setting windows, obviously loading pages, caching, etc.)
DrewG 15y ago
Love the ones with the short URL bar. That is one thing from IE9 that needs to be copied.
thirtysixred 15y ago
I hope they don't get rid of the ability to have extra toolbars since I use the web developer toolbar quite a bit, and adding an extra step to get to it would be very annoying.
BlazingFrog 15y ago
I'm hoping they will do away with the "you need to restart Firefox after installing an add-on". Chrome has been able to install/uninstall/disable/tinker with add-ons without the need to restart for years. That and a new logo (tired of that fox) and I may give it another try.
- potch 15y ago
  I promise you the fox isn't going anywhere, but add-ons made with the new APIs don't require restart.
- rpearl 15y ago
  I like the fox more than the pokeball.
- acemarke 15y ago
  The reason for the restart requirement is that Firefox extensions interact with the browser at a deeper level than Chrome extensions. Firefox does have a newer extension API called Jetpack that allows restartless extensions, but most extensions are written with the older (and more powerful) API.
aj700 15y ago
Is the background blue check thing a Lion desktop picture or just something blueprinty that moz are using for this? How do I get it (with nothing drawn on top of it)?
mrsebastian 15y ago
I did some digging around -- it should start appearing in Firefox 9, 10, and 11 (i.e. it will probably be complete in the Nightly channel before the end of the year, and in Beta/Stable builds next year some time): http://www.extremetech.com/computing/91652-mozilla-unveils-new-firefox-interface-for-firefox-9-and-beyond http://www.extremetech.com/computing/91652-mozilla-unveils-n...
dpark 15y ago
What's the green "tree" button to the right of the home button?
- mbrubeck 15y ago
  It's the favicon of a site that is pinned as an "app tab".
  - dpark 15y ago
    Makes sense. Thanks!
jerhewet 15y ago
[shakes his head in disgust] If I wanted to use Google Chrome, I'd install Google Chrome.
notatoad 15y ago
i hope they roll this out gradually. one of the biggest things that makes people stick with old browser versions is a reluctance to move to a new UI. if they introduce a big change, we're going to see a whole bunch of people sticking with an old browser version for much longer than they should. this is something that chrome is awesome for. they have changed the UI around a bit since v1, but each change has been so minimal that nobody has really noticed too much.
sprokolopolis 15y ago
I agree that these mocks seem to waste space. I much prefer a more compact design. In these mocks, only the active tab actually looks like a tab. The other tabs visually communicate that they are another interface element all together. I would suggest that all tabs have a full tab outline. Currently, the S-shaped curve on the tabs feels too wide and takes up too much horizontal space. The curve on the corner of the tabs should be sharper to match the rounded corner of the window. The difference in shape of the s-curve near the traffic lights and the s-curve of the tabs is bothersome. I am quite happy with the way Firefox 5 looks with a custom skin ("Default Mod") and some minor customizations. It would be nice to be able to move the tabs into the title bar to free up a little space.
joenathan 15y ago
If you want to try the new look out right now, SoapyHamHocks has put together a theme http://soapyhamhocks.deviantart.com/#/d425ffz http://soapyhamhocks.deviantart.com/#/d425ffz
BillPosters 15y ago
Status bar 4 eva. I don't want "improved" UX, I want to keep it as is, and anyone who wants a new UX should opt in for that. Don't force me to look at your latest designer's attempt to be noticed.
derleth 15y ago
I don't care as long as I can still use the Add-Ons (extensions, themes, etc.) to make it work like I want, which is pretty much like an improved Firefox 3.6 or so. That's the big thing Chrome doesn't have: The ability to customize the experience in very deep ways.
alexeiz 15y ago
this new UI is just awesome
UIZealot 15y ago
They sure love showing off screenshots on Mac OS X. But when are they going to follow the basic Mac OS X convention of putting the close button on the left, and centering the tab titles?
nodata 15y ago
This UI may be good for small screens - but for desktops? I'm not so certain.

264 points by paulrouget 15y ago

Strongly reminiscent of Chrome, and I don't think that's a bad thing. Chrome's UI was one of the primary reasons I switched from Firefox.

VanceRefrig 15y ago
To me, it looks almost exactly the same. I do enjoy the small bar on the top of the window in Chrome, and now soon to be Firefox
51Cards 15y ago
And for me the Chrome UI is the primary reason I can't stand Chrome and stay with FF. Whatever they do to the default layout in FF doesn't bother me, just keep giving me the option to put it back the way I like it. So far, so good... other than needing a plug-in now to get a bottom status bar.
- sp332 15y ago
  What do you use the bottom statusbar for?
  - mitchty 15y ago
    Personally I just hover to see where a link goes at times, but chrome's method of showing the link at the bottom after N milliseconds is more than sufficient. It doesn't need to permanently take up pixels otherwise.
    - sp332 15y ago
      Firefox does the same, now. It's almost like Chrome's but it doesn't expand to show the "middle" of a really long link after a second.
    - kstenerud 15y ago
      Except that chrome's version obscures the navigation links in a lot of websites, which means you have to be quick to point and click in order to be able to navigate before the popup info tooltip blocks your click.
      - sp332 15y ago
        That doesn't happen (anymore?), because the popup will move out of the way of your cursor if you get close.
        kstenerud 15y ago
        It happens to me all the time when I use Review Board on a big commit (which spans multiple pages). Just had it happen now on the latest Chrome. I have to move the mouse around and play dodge-the-tooltip and hope I get lucky.
  - 51Cards 15y ago
    I use it for the standard things like hovering over URL's and watching page load progress. And I also agree that the pop-up in Chrome works reasonably well for this too... however... FF went and added an 'Add-Ons Bar' to replace the bottom real-estate that plugins wanted to sit in lost by the status bar removal. So now, if I use the Add-on bar, AND allow the Chrome style status pop-up, I loose even more space since the URL is now outside the bottom bar, and I'm left with a ton of unused space on the Add-on bar. FF should have just made the Status label a movable element and allowed it to go back in the bottom bar if desired. Since the bar is going to be there anyhow for some people with plugins then their effort to save UI space just cost me 2x the UI space. It frustrates me that what could have been a simple and flexible change (optional, draggable status label) has turned into a hodge podge of work-arounds.
    - jamesbritt 15y ago
      And I also agree that the pop-up in Chrome works reasonably well for this too... however... However the Chrome pop-up has a tendency to obscure useful page content, especially on (oh, irony) Google docs. I much prefer a devoted status bar. OTOH, I have a WUXGA screen (1920x1200) so I have less need to obsess over vertical screen space. The rise of so-called "HD" screens is one of the tragedies of modern computing that ranks up there with Comic Sans.
    - phreakhead 15y ago
      We are going through a redesign for my company's web app and now we're going to have to insert a tiny bit of blank space at the bottom because Chrome's pop-up statusbar is covering a vital part of the UI! Doh!
- drgath 15y ago
  You don't need an add-on to get the status bar back. Just enable it: View > Toolbars > Add-on Bar.
  - 51Cards 15y ago
    True, Status bar, no. Status label on the bottom bar, yes.

nxn 15y ago

Very nice, if they actually manage to pull this look off it would probably make it the best looking browser. My only concern is that they wont and that it will still look like crap in linux.

streptomycin 15y ago
Personally, I think all these weird modern UIs look like crap, and the relatively standard Firefox UI on Linux is quite nice.
- nxn 15y ago
  I don't know, that floating button in the top left bugs me in linux. It makes sense in windows because it just blends in with the tabs next to it, but in linux it's on its own line with the tabs showing up below it. The wasted space annoys me to the point that this is one of the main reasons why I do not use Firefox anymore.
  - saulrh 15y ago
    I used to have the same problem, but it turns out that you can tell compiz to hide the title bar. Takes a tiny bit of getting used to (Alt is your friend), but it's pretty nice otherwise. http://jaket.is-a-geek.com/blog/linux/remove-titlebar-on-maximized-windows-with-compiz http://jaket.is-a-geek.com/blog/linux/remove-titlebar-on-max...
  - streptomycin 15y ago
    I'm not sure what you're referring to. On my computer, it looks either like [this](http://i.imgur.com/jZiFO.png http://i.imgur.com/jZiFO.png) or [this](http://i.imgur.com/yHMKH.png http://i.imgur.com/yHMKH.png). No "floating button in the top left" either way.
    - carussell 15y ago
      http://i.imgur.com/d4jjL.png http://i.imgur.com/d4jjL.png

lion0 15y ago

Seems much cleaner. They should do a comparison of how much screen space is used by the chrome vs. other browsers. Can't wait for this to high the nightly / dev builds.

starwed 15y ago
I've been running the nightly, and there was a brief period where the tabs were moved into the title bar. Not sure why they backed it out, but I didn't really like it anyway. (I kind of like knowing the title of the page I'm on -- for instance, with this particular link it conveyed semantic information that was missing from the page itself.)

joakin 15y ago

Very good mockup. Hopefully it will get into the main releases without many changes

rglover 15y ago

Wow. I really hope this isn't just speculation and something that's being put into production. Yeah, it looks like a Chrome clone, but it's been done well and with a slight twist. As a dedicated Chrome user, though, it's going to take more than just a coat of paint to get me to switch back. Can't wait to see where this ends up.

rbarooah 15y ago
What would you want to see in another browser that would make it worth switching away from chrome?
- yaix 15y ago
  Be faster than Chrom(ium) with regards to start up speed and JS execution. I abandoned FF after having used it since it was "Phoenix 0.1", because it had become slow and bloated, like NN had been before. Would love to switch back, but not if I can open 5 Chromium instances in the same time it takes to open one FF window.
  - gkanai 15y ago
    Have you tried a new profile? A long-time user will end up with a really crufty Firefox profile. Sync will move all your data to a new profile quickly and you can see what a new profile in Firefox is like.
    - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
      I don't use Firefox at all, but I just did some testing and the first time I started Firefox it took about 3 seconds to show its window. Subsequent starts got faster but always took at least a second and half. Chrome starts before I can say "one".
    - carussell 15y ago
      Sync will not move all your data. I switched to a new profile after installing an add-on that introduced problems and uninstalling didn't correct those problems. I fell back to Sync for the new profile so I could salvage my history and bookmarks from my 2-ish year old profile, but it left out something like 9 months of history, all but two of my tags, and a good chunk of my bookmarks and search keywords (including the ones I'd set up for MXR). I'm not sure if it was buggy, or if Sync was intentionally not tracking the stuff that didn't get copied over. (cf mconnor's blog post a month or so ago about implementing Sync quota caps).

mchusma 15y ago

The final design was awesome, just get rid of the home button and it will be even better. I can't remember the last time I used that button.

starwed 15y ago
That's easily removable even now -- right click the toolbar and choose Customize.
paulrouget 15y ago
It's not the home button but the home tab: http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/2011/06/10/home-tab-and-new-tab-conceptual-mockups/ http://blog.mozilla.com/faaborg/2011/06/10/home-tab-and-new-...
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  I love that design, makes me really excited about the future of Firefox. They're finally started to catch up with Chrome in regards to speed of innovation.

bostonpete 15y ago

I can't believe nobody's complaining about the missing dedicated search box. I thought that was everyone's big beef with Chrome. Then again, I haven't used Firefox in quite some time so maybe they've already dropped it.

jamesteow 15y ago
Dramatic decisions are often criticized until people accept it and adapt. I remember reading about how consumers wouldn't be able to adapt to a touch screen phone that didn't have a keyboard option.
- dkokelley 15y ago
  I'm sure you'll still find people who can't get used to the touch screen keyboards. Often it's the vocal minority that we hear loudest.
- viraptor 15y ago
  Sometimes what actually happens is that people get used to the change and get tired of fighting against. But they still don't like it at all. It's hard to see the difference from outside.
  - jonathansizz 15y ago
    Exactly. Someone might have their leg amputated and complain for a while, then eventually accept it and adapt. This does not mean that having a leg amputated is a good thing.
    - jamesteow 15y ago
      That's not a fair analogy. The alternative to not having your leg amputated in given example is likely eventual spreading of a disease and death. With consumer goods and services often no one forces you to have to accept their changes. No one forces you to use touch screen phones: there are plenty of alternatives which do include a keyboard. Even if you don't like one input box does all approach, you can use previous browsers or browsers which retain the standard model. If you don't like Netflix's price hikes, you can just use another service or don't subscribe at all. Your life won't decline because of it.

jamesteow 15y ago

I would most likely use the full screen view as I never need the menu options anyway (it's also how I use Photoshop). I would likely switch back to Firefox if they executed this.

ori_b 15y ago

So... chrome?

cultureulterior 15y ago

I don't understand why no browser manufacturer integrates tree tabs. It's such a great interface innovation, and everybody is just ignoring it.

rkudeshi 15y ago
Chrome on Windows has a flag that you can set to get vertical tabs, but it's a flat list (no tree style). Tree style tabs are the #1 reason I use Firefox (though many of Chrome's other advancements are mighty tempting).
ori_b 15y ago
Because to a user that barely understands tabs as it is, it's simply not going to fly. And yes, many nontechnical users do struggle with the idea of tabs.
carussell 15y ago
It's not going to happen because that would involve cutting a good chunk away from the side of the content area, standing in the way of pages' Manifest Destiny of extending from the left side of the screen to the right. Having pages like that is a shitty way to browse; people who do it are doing themselves a disservice by reading lines at that width, and screens are wider than ever, but people love full screen windows.
retro212 15y ago
Yeah, that's the only reason why I'm still using FF. I'd switch to Chrome months ago, but I can't stand horizontal tabs anymore.

pbreit 15y ago

Why has Firefox been so slow to slim down its UI? The back button is still way too big and the button colors not subtle enough. A browser should disappear into the background to some extent. It's just a window into the interwebs after all.

aberkowitz 15y ago
The back button is intentionally bigger as it is one of the most used buttons in a browser. In accordance with Fitt's law, the size allows a user to get to it quicker than a smaller button.
- dpark 15y ago
  I understand the logic of the bigger back button, but I think it is a poor choice. It's rather awkward-looking, but more importantly it causes the entire toolbar to be several pixels taller. It's an amazing waste of space.
  - starwed 15y ago
    For people who care about such things, you can customize the toolbar and enable "Small Icons".
    - dpark 15y ago
      Thanks. I don't use Firefox much anymore (I keep it setup to use the corporate proxy for the few things that need that), so I'd forgotten about that option.
    - pbreit 15y ago
      It's always the first thing I do but unfortunately defaults matter.
      - starwed 15y ago
        Sure, but many like the current default -- on a netbook, I used small icons, but everywhere else I willingly sacrifice a couple of pixels for an easier target.

jgranby 15y ago

I wonder whether this latest proposed redesign will finally have Firefox behaving like, y'know, a native OS X app, or whether it'll be just as shallow as all previous efforts.

starwed 15y ago
Curious, since I only recently started using a mac. How does firefox not act like a native app?
- jgranby 15y ago
  The whole app feels like an imitation of a Mac app. Most obviously on 10.7, the window chrome is wrong. Other small things like incorrect and wrongly sized fonts inside controls, or the whole menu bar disappearing when you use an extension in its own window. When you add everything together, it just feels wrong, like wearing clothes that don't fit. The way they've been updating the UI so far has seen some improvements, for sure, but it's as if they've been patching it bit by bit. I just wondered whether this signalled a change of approach.
  - carussell 15y ago
    > or the whole menu bar disappearing when you use an extension in its own window Could someone explain to me the correct way for a developer to handle this? I've been aware of this problem for a while, and I've newly come to own a Mac, so I've looked into it more and looked at what other apps are doing. There doesn't seem to be a correct solution. I looked at how Safari handles the Web Inspector, and it just adds a new, dedicated Debug menu to the menu bar. This is a no-go in my case. Suppose you're developer faced with a problem similar to the Firefox–extension problem. You have something like an app-within-an-app, or maybe A and B are actually even more closely tied together than that, but independent enough that on any other platform it would be a no-brainer: each one gets its own menu. What do you do for OS X? You can't re-use A's menu items in B, because A's items—in, say, the Edit menu—don't serve B. You can't just augment A's menu set to include B's menus and items, because B's menus and items are so numerous and specific to B and vice versa, that there's just so much clutter from the other's menus and items.

neatoincognito 15y ago

What does it look like with a bunch of tabs open?

yaix 15y ago

Glad they finally copied Chromium. Would be great if they copied it too with regards to startup speed and JS execution speed.

Aloisius 15y ago
Firefox 8 nightlies are as fast if not faster than the Dev Channel build of Chrome 14.

WayneDB 15y ago

Where's the mockup for Windows? There are way more people running Firefox on Windows than OS X.

voxmatt 15y ago
It's towards the bottom. Just scroll down.
- WayneDB 15y ago
  Oh, I see. They have 1 mockup for Windows and the rest are for OS X. Brilliant.
  - starwed 15y ago
    These aren't design blueprints. I don't really know why the OP linked to a set of images without any commentary, but it's obvious from the URL that these were part of a presentation. Showing exactly the same changes on every OS wouldn't have been very useful in that context.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

samuelhalle 15y ago

Chrome, is that you?

erickhill 15y ago

I could be an edge case, but I really dislike branded chrome skins that become a part of the window (like the Harry Potter example). Just feels tacky to me.

starwed 15y ago

Folk are focusing on the two changes that make this more like chrome (tabs in title bar, and apparent removal of search bar.) There's more going on here.[1] * Simplified, customizable graphical menus. No idea how well this will work, but it's only a mock-up at this point. * Removal of the forward button, merging the back button with the URL bar. * Refinement of per tab UI. In chrome you still get the browser chrome on pages like preferences or history. * A change in browser chrome when entering fullscreen mode. (Chrome just over-lays the standard UI when you mouse to the top.) [1] If anyone knows the context for these images, would be nice to link it!

kstenerud 15y ago
I hope there's an option to put the forward button back in. I use it a lot.
- gkoberger 15y ago
  If you think about it, the forward button is disabled about 80% of the time -- so it doesn't really need to always be there. The forward button isn't being removed completely; it'll just be hidden when it's not clickable. It will slide out when there's a "forward" URL available.
  - ori_b 15y ago
    Ugh. I hate shapeshifting UIs. Muscle memory depends on stuff being fixed in space relative to other elements.
    - MatthewPhillips 15y ago
      The only element that would shift is the awesome bar, and that's a pretty big target to miss.
    - idonthack 15y ago
      muscle memory is less relevant when mousing. the range of starting positions is large.

beaumartinez 15y ago

The dev tools' UI[1] looks amazing. http://people.mozilla.com/~shorlander/devTools/devTools.html http://people.mozilla.com/~shorlander/devTools/devTools.html

beck5 15y ago
Are they going to fully integrate firebug into firefox rather than having it as an extension?
- gkoberger 15y ago
  As I understand it (it's still somewhat in the planning stages, and things are evolving), Firefox will ship with a set of developer tools which will cover the major use cases (inspector, console, etc). Firebug will be an extension, and will add more advanced functionality. It's being rewritten in JavaScript, and could potentially work on any browser (Firebug and Firebug Lite are going to merge). This is how I understood it when I talked to the Firebug team a few months ago. Mozilla has since hired a ton of people for their Dev Tools team and John J Barton has left Firebug due to lack of funding from IBM -- so I have no clue if things have since changed.
  - sequoia 15y ago
    PLEASE integrate these things carefully and in a sensible way. If I have to use "dev tools" for x, b, and z and firebug for a, y and c that's going to be annoying as hell.
    - dangoor 15y ago
      You will not be annoyed. Promise :)
- dangoor 15y ago
  http://blog.mozilla.com/devtools/2011/05/25/the-relationship-between-firebug-and-mozilla-developer-tools/ http://blog.mozilla.com/devtools/2011/05/25/the-relationship... tldr; no. Firebug is an independent (but with Mozilla's support and blessing) project and we're also building some great tools that will ship with the browser.

broot 15y ago

I'm glad they finally got rid of that extra search bar, it was ugly and clunky and useless. Any word on when this changes happens for real? I would love a better looking firebug delivery device.

smhinsey 15y ago

I really hope this new tab layout doesn't mean Tree Style Tabs is out of the picture.

stephank 15y ago

I'm not sure what people like about Personas (or the equivalent in other browsers). It always stands out, distracts, and for me even messes up the great website I may be viewing at the time. I'd be much more interested in a CSS extension that lets websites 'bleed' their background into the browser chrome.

jeremyarussell 15y ago

I hope they allow people to keep the old current look if they'd like. I'm more tired of changing constantly then anything, and I love the UI in firefox now. Not that new ideas shouldn't be tried, just that what's not broken shouldn't be "fixed". And I personally don't like chrome because it seems to simple, so trying to turn into Chrome isn't going to win my vote. (but hey, it's about what the mass wants right?)

gkanai 15y ago
Firefox will always be the most customizable of any of the major browsers. If you don't like the default theme there are thousands of others to choose from, as there are today.

ahmetalpbalkan 15y ago

I see wasted pixels...

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

dedene 15y ago

That's looking awesome!! Where can we find your blue wallpaper from the back of those mockups / screenshots ?

bradgessler 15y ago

I like that wallpaper. Does anybody have a link to that?

icebraining 15y ago
I don't, but here is a content-aware filled version (using PS CS5): http://i.imgur.com/t72Z8.jpg http://i.imgur.com/t72Z8.jpg
tortilla 15y ago
He posted it on his blog, http://blog.stephenhorlander.com/2011/08/desktop-backgrounds/ http://blog.stephenhorlander.com/2011/08/desktop-backgrounds...

blauwbilgorgel 15y ago

What I don't like about these Chrome UI's is that they don't respect my OS settings. I am on Windows 7 with the classic NT skin. iTunes and Chrome are one of the few programs that don't respect this skin. While in this case it is simple user preference, in other cases it could mean an accessibility concern, or even give room to malicious attacks: With all these custom browser skins, pop-ups over the HTML body (link destination on hover) and no clear divide between window and application, users won't clearly know the difference between interaction with the browser, and interaction with a smart malicious website. With smart design one could make the bottom browser toolbar appear to be higher, and control the top half with your website. Fake plug-in install modal windows etc.

Silhouette 15y ago
> What I don't like about these Chrome UI's is that they don't respect my OS settings Hear, hear. On our new serious workstation, we mostly run a variety of developer tools and browsers, some basic office software, various graphics/DTP/modelling stuff from companies like Adobe and Autodesk, and a bunch of tools to automate things and join the dots. On a quick look, exactly none of the major products there uses the standard Windows 7 UI conventions. I, for one, am sick of: - not knowing which keyboard shortcuts perform frequent tasks like undo/redo, or more generally, not being able to navigate a UI using systematic and intuitive keystrokes; - every application's windows having different conventions for dealing with multiple documents, docking panels, and so on (and making the labels ever-smaller wherever they are, so your documents all look like "C:\users\Fred\..." and your web pages are all "Favourite Site | The S..."); - every application having different and increasingly obnoxious methods of giving you "important" notifications; - every application having different and increasingly obnoxious auto-update policies that break stuff; - every application having different ways to download and maintain plug-ins; - more and more applications trying to squeeze every last square inch of screen space by hiding commands behind a small number of tabs or, worse, meaningless menu-icon-things (we bought large, hi-res monitors for a reason, and having access to browser bookmarks within two clicks is worth far more to us than reading a web site at 2560x1400 instead of 2560x1370); - every application shoving its executables and config files in its own place (not helped by Windows 7's holier-than-thou "you can't put that in that directory" and "are you sure you want to do that" messages); - and many other things that just make day-to-day work horribly inefficient. I wish Microsoft would define a robust, standardised set of UI conventions again, based on usability rather than flashy stuff, and then at least stick to it themselves instead of inventing a whole new bunch of tricks for every new version of Office, IE, Visual Studio and so on. And then I wish other software, including everything I mentioned above and most definitely including Firefox and Chrome, would just follow the conventions or make some effort to collaborate and standardise in connection with Microsoft (or whoever else writes the platform(s) they run on).

sshah 15y ago

Does anyone know if they are planning on bringing back Ubiquity. Of the different lab projects, this one I miss a lot.

starwed 15y ago
You can actually download[1] an updated version of Ubiquity that works with even the nightly versions. The commands I personally wrote seem to be broken now, but I think the main pre-installed ones work. [1] Get tip.xpi at https://bitbucket.org/satyr/ubiquity/downloads https://bitbucket.org/satyr/ubiquity/downloads
- sprokolopolis 15y ago
  Thank you so much for posting this. I have missed Ubiquity.
- sshah 15y ago
  thanks a lot

mariusmg 15y ago

Yeah, let's make thing more round and diverge even more from the OS look. Morons.

fictorial 15y ago
How is name-calling useful to anything here?

ZoFreX 15y ago

While this does look very pretty I'm kinda concerned that they're throwing a lot of good stuff away. I'm running Firefox 5 and it really feels polished, there's so many things I'm still discovering and thinking "hey, that's cool". It's a feeling you most often get when a design has been iterated, and tweaked, and worked on for a long time... I get the same feeling frequently on the Mac I have to use at work. This is prettier, yes. It's also a lot curvier and wastes a lot of space compared to Firefox 5. In particular, vertical pixels are at a premium for me, and Firefox 5 has done a lot to improve this... this is a step backwards, as the main bar at the top is larger. And seriously, those curves take up a ridiculous amount of real-estate - compare those tabs to Chrome or FF5, how many can you get on your screen?

dpark 15y ago
> In particular, vertical pixels are at a premium for me, and Firefox 5 has done a lot to improve this... this is a step backwards, as the main bar at the top is larger. Really? Looks like an improvement to me, because tabs have now consumed the titlebar area. The tab area itself is larger, but the total change is a reduction in the amount of vertical space used. > And seriously, those curves take up a ridiculous amount of real-estate - compare those tabs to Chrome or FF5, how many can you get on your screen? The curve is only on the active tab, so I don't see how it's reducing the amount of tabs you can have.
- ZoFreX 15y ago
  > Really? Looks like an improvement to me, because tabs have now consumed the titlebar area. I compared FF5 and these screenshots on my screen together, FF5 uses slightly less real estate. It's only a minor regression though, and hey, this is Firefox - I can customise it! It's just that prior to the current look, I had to modify Firefox quite a lot to optimise vertical real-estate, and it's quite nice that it's now good out of the box, so I selfishly want it to stay that way!
  - dpark 15y ago
    What OS are you on? Comparing my FF5 install on OSX to the mockups, the mockups use less space due to the tab / titlebar merging. I don't recall if FF5 is already doing that merging on Windows or not. Looking at screenshots online, it also looks like the mockup is smaller than stock FF5 on Windows, but I haven't confirmed myself.

d0m 15y ago

It looks fantastic! Only thing I fear about firefox is the speed. (Speed at Starting, loading setting windows, obviously loading pages, caching, etc.)

DrewG 15y ago

Love the ones with the short URL bar. That is one thing from IE9 that needs to be copied.

thirtysixred 15y ago

I hope they don't get rid of the ability to have extra toolbars since I use the web developer toolbar quite a bit, and adding an extra step to get to it would be very annoying.

BlazingFrog 15y ago

I'm hoping they will do away with the "you need to restart Firefox after installing an add-on". Chrome has been able to install/uninstall/disable/tinker with add-ons without the need to restart for years. That and a new logo (tired of that fox) and I may give it another try.

potch 15y ago
I promise you the fox isn't going anywhere, but add-ons made with the new APIs don't require restart.
rpearl 15y ago
I like the fox more than the pokeball.
acemarke 15y ago
The reason for the restart requirement is that Firefox extensions interact with the browser at a deeper level than Chrome extensions. Firefox does have a newer extension API called Jetpack that allows restartless extensions, but most extensions are written with the older (and more powerful) API.

aj700 15y ago

Is the background blue check thing a Lion desktop picture or just something blueprinty that moz are using for this? How do I get it (with nothing drawn on top of it)?

mrsebastian 15y ago

I did some digging around -- it should start appearing in Firefox 9, 10, and 11 (i.e. it will probably be complete in the Nightly channel before the end of the year, and in Beta/Stable builds next year some time): http://www.extremetech.com/computing/91652-mozilla-unveils-new-firefox-interface-for-firefox-9-and-beyond http://www.extremetech.com/computing/91652-mozilla-unveils-n...

dpark 15y ago

What's the green "tree" button to the right of the home button?

mbrubeck 15y ago
It's the favicon of a site that is pinned as an "app tab".
- dpark 15y ago
  Makes sense. Thanks!

jerhewet 15y ago

[shakes his head in disgust] If I wanted to use Google Chrome, I'd install Google Chrome.

notatoad 15y ago

i hope they roll this out gradually. one of the biggest things that makes people stick with old browser versions is a reluctance to move to a new UI. if they introduce a big change, we're going to see a whole bunch of people sticking with an old browser version for much longer than they should. this is something that chrome is awesome for. they have changed the UI around a bit since v1, but each change has been so minimal that nobody has really noticed too much.

sprokolopolis 15y ago

I agree that these mocks seem to waste space. I much prefer a more compact design. In these mocks, only the active tab actually looks like a tab. The other tabs visually communicate that they are another interface element all together. I would suggest that all tabs have a full tab outline. Currently, the S-shaped curve on the tabs feels too wide and takes up too much horizontal space. The curve on the corner of the tabs should be sharper to match the rounded corner of the window. The difference in shape of the s-curve near the traffic lights and the s-curve of the tabs is bothersome. I am quite happy with the way Firefox 5 looks with a custom skin ("Default Mod") and some minor customizations. It would be nice to be able to move the tabs into the title bar to free up a little space.

joenathan 15y ago

If you want to try the new look out right now, SoapyHamHocks has put together a theme http://soapyhamhocks.deviantart.com/#/d425ffz http://soapyhamhocks.deviantart.com/#/d425ffz

BillPosters 15y ago

Status bar 4 eva. I don't want "improved" UX, I want to keep it as is, and anyone who wants a new UX should opt in for that. Don't force me to look at your latest designer's attempt to be noticed.

derleth 15y ago

I don't care as long as I can still use the Add-Ons (extensions, themes, etc.) to make it work like I want, which is pretty much like an improved Firefox 3.6 or so. That's the big thing Chrome doesn't have: The ability to customize the experience in very deep ways.

alexeiz 15y ago

this new UI is just awesome

UIZealot 15y ago

They sure love showing off screenshots on Mac OS X. But when are they going to follow the basic Mac OS X convention of putting the close button on the left, and centering the tab titles?

nodata 15y ago

This UI may be good for small screens - but for desktops? I'm not so certain.