4 ms·

> Buttons are small... I don't understand this criticism. How often do you actually have to use those buttons? At best, once in a long while. So given that,

> Buttons are small... I don't understand this criticism. How often do you actually have to use those buttons? At best, once in a long while. So given that, why not make the buttons unobtrusive.

marginalia_nu 4y ago
If the buttons are small, they are harder to click. It's also harder to understand what they do, which is important when they have icons that are just cryptic monochrome squiggles. What's the merit in making the buttons unobtrusive? What are you going to do with all those saved pixels? There is no pixel shortage on desktop! That's a mobile design consideration. When the browser is covering a sixth of my screen it's already uncomfortably large. There is no reason to save hundreds of pixels when there are literally millions to spare.
- starik36 4y ago
  Given this line of thought, why doesn't Firefox put every single icon from the menu on the toolbar. Since there is so much space. My argument is that since those buttons are rarely used, they should be unobtrusive. Looking at my toolbar now, I really don't think they are that small. Just the right size. https://i.imgur.com/wyM9c2k.png https://i.imgur.com/wyM9c2k.png
  - marginalia_nu 4y ago
    Well if you make something hard to access, of course it won't be used very often. The buttons are pretty tiny within the context of the entire screen: https://imgur.com/BGKsaeD https://imgur.com/BGKsaeD
  - thesimp 4y ago
    Your toolbar is a nightmare for people that may have some eyesight problems or are not expert FPS shooters in the latest triple A game and miss some mouse dexterity. What I'm trying to say is that a large surface is good for muscle memory. And I have a lot of pixels to play with, 4k screens are cheap. Of-course programs have to scale between small and (very) big screens, but making everything very small by default is not the way to go.
  - rrishi 4y ago
    Curious to know the set of extensions you've got there
    - starik36 4y ago
      In order of buttons: Downloads (not an extension) Firefox Account (not an extension - I really should hide it) uBlockOrigin Honey (basically coupons) PushBullet (I use this occasionally to move links or images between the PC and iPhone. Should probably get rid of it since Firefox now supports functionality natively). Multi-Account containers Translate this page
  - stonemetal12 4y ago
    >My argument is that since those buttons are rarely used, they should be unobtrusive. Why the half measure? If they are rarely used remove them. If they are used enough to leave them on the UI make them big enough and labeled well enough that I don't need a decoder ring and magnifying glass. Making them small and unintelligible is probably the best way to make them rarely used.
- xigoi 4y ago
  > There is no pixel shortage on desktop! That's a mobile design consideration. I'm using Firefox on half of my laptop's screen, so I'm glad the menus don't take up that much space.

> Buttons are small... I don't understand this criticism. How often do you actually have to use those buttons? At best, once in a long while. So given that, why not make the buttons unobtrusive.

marginalia_nu 4y ago

If the buttons are small, they are harder to click. It's also harder to understand what they do, which is important when they have icons that are just cryptic monochrome squiggles. What's the merit in making the buttons unobtrusive? What are you going to do with all those saved pixels? There is no pixel shortage on desktop! That's a mobile design consideration. When the browser is covering a sixth of my screen it's already uncomfortably large. There is no reason to save hundreds of pixels when there are literally millions to spare.

starik36 4y ago
Given this line of thought, why doesn't Firefox put every single icon from the menu on the toolbar. Since there is so much space. My argument is that since those buttons are rarely used, they should be unobtrusive. Looking at my toolbar now, I really don't think they are that small. Just the right size. https://i.imgur.com/wyM9c2k.png https://i.imgur.com/wyM9c2k.png
- marginalia_nu 4y ago
  Well if you make something hard to access, of course it won't be used very often. The buttons are pretty tiny within the context of the entire screen: https://imgur.com/BGKsaeD https://imgur.com/BGKsaeD
- thesimp 4y ago
  Your toolbar is a nightmare for people that may have some eyesight problems or are not expert FPS shooters in the latest triple A game and miss some mouse dexterity. What I'm trying to say is that a large surface is good for muscle memory. And I have a lot of pixels to play with, 4k screens are cheap. Of-course programs have to scale between small and (very) big screens, but making everything very small by default is not the way to go.
- rrishi 4y ago
  Curious to know the set of extensions you've got there
  - starik36 4y ago
    In order of buttons: Downloads (not an extension) Firefox Account (not an extension - I really should hide it) uBlockOrigin Honey (basically coupons) PushBullet (I use this occasionally to move links or images between the PC and iPhone. Should probably get rid of it since Firefox now supports functionality natively). Multi-Account containers Translate this page
- stonemetal12 4y ago
  >My argument is that since those buttons are rarely used, they should be unobtrusive. Why the half measure? If they are rarely used remove them. If they are used enough to leave them on the UI make them big enough and labeled well enough that I don't need a decoder ring and magnifying glass. Making them small and unintelligible is probably the best way to make them rarely used.
xigoi 4y ago
> There is no pixel shortage on desktop! That's a mobile design consideration. I'm using Firefox on half of my laptop's screen, so I'm glad the menus don't take up that much space.