7 ms·

The only UX/UI request I have for Firefox: Stop changing it. Don't add any more useless tweaks or adware or bundled services. Its UX "history" made it plummet

The only UX/UI request I have for Firefox: Stop changing it. Don't add any more useless tweaks or adware or bundled services. Its UX "history" made it plummet from the top browser at one point to a forgotten has-been. These tweaks were not successes or celebrations, they were the death by a thousand cuts.

paulryanrogers 5y ago
> Its UX "history" made it plummet from the top browser at one point to a forgotten has-been. My guess is the rise and marketing of Chrome and its offspring had more to do with Firefox's decline than anything Mozilla has done.
- grumbel 5y ago
  Firefox would still have declined, that's kind of unavoidable with Google owning Android, but Mozilla wasn't helping here. Turning Firfox into a lame Chrome-clone by removing everything that made it unique in the first place just ensured that there was no more need to bother with Firefox. Loading the browser up with all kind of telemetry, cloud nonsense and ads also removed any desire to ever bother with it again. I still think there is plenty of room for a privacy respecting browser in the market, but Mozilla hasn't even been trying to fill that niche in years and still claiming to do so just makes them look like untrustworthy liar.
  - yoavm 5y ago
    We hackers like to complain about stuff that bother us, but the truth is they don't bother anyone else but us. Firefox didn't lose marketshare to Chrome because it had telemetry. Users don't care about it, and if they did, they'd know Chrome is doing it much worse. Same for "cloud nonsense and ads" - you really think they disliked it so much, so they went to Chrome were they are forcefully logged-in, have every action linked to their Google account and have inferior adblockers? C'mon. It's kinda like saying "I'm moving to North Korea because freedom of speech in the US sucks!"
    - grumbel 5y ago
      People that don't care are already well served by Chrome, they are never going to switch, so there is little point in catering to them. People that do care however aren't well served by Firefox, that's an issue. Every thread about Firefox is filled with complains, be it removal of essential feature, shifting around the UI for no reason or addition of stuff nobody asks for. Not every user might care about every of those issues, but do you think that amount of negative feedback is good for attracting new users or keeping existing ones? I don't. Also the level Firefox has sunken too is mislabeling the Screenshot cloud upload button "Save". That's plain old malware dark pattern strategy to steal your data. They took almost a year to fix that and it's downright puzzling how that ever made it anywhere near a release in the first place. Chrome might be crap, but I am not going anywhere near Firefox anytime soon either. They have shown time and time again that they really aren't on my side, yet love to claim so. The sooner we get rid of Firefox, the sooner there is a chance a real alternative might arise.
      - yoavm 5y ago
        So what are you using now? Is Chrome on your side? IMHO, the _moment_ we get rid of Firefox, the _moment_ we lost the free web. Building a web browser is just too damn hard, and never again would free software stand a chance. All will be Chrome-based, and Google will decide what "standards" to adhere to while it sits in a committee with itself.
        technobabbler 5y ago
        The thing about Chrome is that it's a known evil. Google monitors me and sells me ads. OK, not exactly benevolent, but I can live with it. I'd prefer they just charge me $100/yr or whatever instead of ads, but at the end of the day it's a tradeoff I can accept. The thing about Firefox is that it's an UNKNOWN evil. Mozilla always feel like it's on the cusp of bankruptcy and constantly searching for new dark patterns to sneak in. When Wikipedia needs money they beg for it, but don't purposely sabotage the user experience to get funding. Mozilla does that with every new release. I always feel like they've added some shady new malware/adware with every new patch, and then use some stupid UI tweak to try to hide it. It's only a matter of time before they sneak Norton in there. I trust the Firefox team even less than Facebook at this point. Firefox just isn't trustworthy, whereas Chrome is a known compromise.
- antisthenes 5y ago
  While that's true, constant UI changing certainly didn't help retain what little market share it already had. It made the browser compete with itself, and pushed people into alternatives. After all, if you're going to learn a new UI, why not try another browser altogether?
eternityforest 5y ago
Mozzila turned itself into a privacy browser, not a browser with privacy. Google added things like WebUSB, Bluetooth, all kinds of web app APIs Mozilla rejected because of tracking risk, etc. Mozzila killed their coolest features like FlyWeb. They just haven't kept up with Chrome, and their vision is way too "privacy at all costs" rather than allowing users to decide. They don't seem to share in the modern idea of web apps having full native parity.
- svnpenn 5y ago
  > web apps having full native parity What an awful idea that is.
- leadingthenet 5y ago
  > They just haven't kept up with Chrome, and their vision is way too "privacy at all costs" rather than allowing users to decide. They don't seem to share in the modern idea of web apps having full native parity. Those are literally the last things keeping me with Firefox.
  - eternityforest 5y ago
    They're also things that make them less interesting to anyone who isn't privacy focused. They don't seem to have fully made up their mind on who the target audience is, it seems like their goal is to convince the mainstream to prioritize privacy over convenience. A better strategy would ve to either become just another Chrome-alike, or focus on an uncompromising privacy focused experience for the people who really want that. But that might require they not do some of the slightly shady stuff they always seem to want to do, and properly support uBO long term.

paulryanrogers 5y ago

> Its UX "history" made it plummet from the top browser at one point to a forgotten has-been. My guess is the rise and marketing of Chrome and its offspring had more to do with Firefox's decline than anything Mozilla has done.

grumbel 5y ago
Firefox would still have declined, that's kind of unavoidable with Google owning Android, but Mozilla wasn't helping here. Turning Firfox into a lame Chrome-clone by removing everything that made it unique in the first place just ensured that there was no more need to bother with Firefox. Loading the browser up with all kind of telemetry, cloud nonsense and ads also removed any desire to ever bother with it again. I still think there is plenty of room for a privacy respecting browser in the market, but Mozilla hasn't even been trying to fill that niche in years and still claiming to do so just makes them look like untrustworthy liar.
- yoavm 5y ago
  We hackers like to complain about stuff that bother us, but the truth is they don't bother anyone else but us. Firefox didn't lose marketshare to Chrome because it had telemetry. Users don't care about it, and if they did, they'd know Chrome is doing it much worse. Same for "cloud nonsense and ads" - you really think they disliked it so much, so they went to Chrome were they are forcefully logged-in, have every action linked to their Google account and have inferior adblockers? C'mon. It's kinda like saying "I'm moving to North Korea because freedom of speech in the US sucks!"
  - grumbel 5y ago
    People that don't care are already well served by Chrome, they are never going to switch, so there is little point in catering to them. People that do care however aren't well served by Firefox, that's an issue. Every thread about Firefox is filled with complains, be it removal of essential feature, shifting around the UI for no reason or addition of stuff nobody asks for. Not every user might care about every of those issues, but do you think that amount of negative feedback is good for attracting new users or keeping existing ones? I don't. Also the level Firefox has sunken too is mislabeling the Screenshot cloud upload button "Save". That's plain old malware dark pattern strategy to steal your data. They took almost a year to fix that and it's downright puzzling how that ever made it anywhere near a release in the first place. Chrome might be crap, but I am not going anywhere near Firefox anytime soon either. They have shown time and time again that they really aren't on my side, yet love to claim so. The sooner we get rid of Firefox, the sooner there is a chance a real alternative might arise.
    - yoavm 5y ago
      So what are you using now? Is Chrome on your side? IMHO, the _moment_ we get rid of Firefox, the _moment_ we lost the free web. Building a web browser is just too damn hard, and never again would free software stand a chance. All will be Chrome-based, and Google will decide what "standards" to adhere to while it sits in a committee with itself.
      - technobabbler 5y ago
        The thing about Chrome is that it's a known evil. Google monitors me and sells me ads. OK, not exactly benevolent, but I can live with it. I'd prefer they just charge me $100/yr or whatever instead of ads, but at the end of the day it's a tradeoff I can accept. The thing about Firefox is that it's an UNKNOWN evil. Mozilla always feel like it's on the cusp of bankruptcy and constantly searching for new dark patterns to sneak in. When Wikipedia needs money they beg for it, but don't purposely sabotage the user experience to get funding. Mozilla does that with every new release. I always feel like they've added some shady new malware/adware with every new patch, and then use some stupid UI tweak to try to hide it. It's only a matter of time before they sneak Norton in there. I trust the Firefox team even less than Facebook at this point. Firefox just isn't trustworthy, whereas Chrome is a known compromise.
antisthenes 5y ago
While that's true, constant UI changing certainly didn't help retain what little market share it already had. It made the browser compete with itself, and pushed people into alternatives. After all, if you're going to learn a new UI, why not try another browser altogether?

eternityforest 5y ago

Mozzila turned itself into a privacy browser, not a browser with privacy. Google added things like WebUSB, Bluetooth, all kinds of web app APIs Mozilla rejected because of tracking risk, etc. Mozzila killed their coolest features like FlyWeb. They just haven't kept up with Chrome, and their vision is way too "privacy at all costs" rather than allowing users to decide. They don't seem to share in the modern idea of web apps having full native parity.

svnpenn 5y ago
> web apps having full native parity What an awful idea that is.
leadingthenet 5y ago
> They just haven't kept up with Chrome, and their vision is way too "privacy at all costs" rather than allowing users to decide. They don't seem to share in the modern idea of web apps having full native parity. Those are literally the last things keeping me with Firefox.
- eternityforest 5y ago
  They're also things that make them less interesting to anyone who isn't privacy focused. They don't seem to have fully made up their mind on who the target audience is, it seems like their goal is to convince the mainstream to prioritize privacy over convenience. A better strategy would ve to either become just another Chrome-alike, or focus on an uncompromising privacy focused experience for the people who really want that. But that might require they not do some of the slightly shady stuff they always seem to want to do, and properly support uBO long term.