5 ms·

As Firefox turns 20, Mozilla ponders how to restore it to its former glory

40 points by Digit-Al 2y ago

mossTechnician 2y ago
Dupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42096225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42096225
guerrilla 2y ago
Become a non-profit. If GNOME can alienate all of its users yet still be the de facto default desktop Mozilla can figure out how to do whatever everyone else is doing abd just do it.
- ranger_danger 2y ago
  Usecase for a non-profit? /s
- jujube3 2y ago
  The Mozilla Foundation is already a non-profit.
  - qball 2y ago
    So's the Corporation that the Foundation controls, but that's more because it operates at a loss rather than being a charitable organization.
- shiroiushi 2y ago
  I don't think GNOME is a good model to follow. Just because it works for GNOME, in the Linux OS space, doesn't mean the same strategy will work for Mozilla or anyone else in a totally different space. Honestly, I'm not sure how GNOME manages to be, and remain, the de-facto default desktop for SO many distros. It's alienated so many users with its, well, opinionated approach to things, causing not one but multiple forks and competing projects (Cinnamon, MATE, etc.), in addition to other competitors (KDE, xfce, lxde, lxQt, etc.). Why SO many distros still feature GNOME as the default, instead of trying to differentiate themselves and push a different default like KDE, I really don't know, but I suspect it involves some kind of politics within the Linux distro realm. Perhaps there's still some crazy idea about it being more "newbie-friendly", but it's been decades now and Linux on the desktop has barely made any inroads, so I think it's really time to give up on that and focus on users who actually like Linux and are already experienced. Anyway, as I wrote before, I don't think this is something you can just replicate with Mozilla/Firefox; it's a completely different situation, and I don't think GNOME's apparent success holds any lessons elsewhere.
  - guerrilla 2y ago
    It doesn't matter. There are hundreds of huge projects that are surviving great. Just do whatever it is they're doing. Mozilla is being a drama queen. Just stop.
ranger_danger 2y ago
Just ask the people what they want. Companies and governments do NOT send out enough effective polls.
- from-nibly 2y ago
  "If I asked people what they wanted they would have said a faster horse" -some guy
  - jraph 2y ago
    Yep, that's a case of figuring out what people actually want from what they say they want, not a case of not listening to people :-)
- Vinnl 2y ago
  https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/results-from-the-browser-features-survey/td-p/70264 https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/results-from-the-...
blibble 2y ago
> What I love about Firefox is that it really provides users with an alternative choice of a browser that is just genuinely designed for them they can't seriously think this can they? who was asking for telemetry, mr robot, pocket, VPN ads, "use our email" (relay) ads, "check your accounts!!" (monitor) ads and built-in AI slop generators and soon, more built-in ads: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/ I don't think a single user wanted any of that at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface
- jraph 2y ago
  > at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface Of course, it doesn't need to. Google controls enough space in the web content itself. On Firefox there are options to disable that; at least it is a supported setting. For Google, you need third party extensions to take care of this. Not saying that I like that Firefox displays ads / is ad supported, but Chrome not displaying ads in its UI is hardly a positive against Firefox.
  - robocat 2y ago
    “predatory pricing” or “cross-subsidization”. A strategy where a monopolist reduces the price (sometimes to zero) of a complementary product to increase demand for its primary product.
  - 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
    The parent comment was focused on the claim that Firefox is designed for browser users and not for Mozilla's purposes or the purposes of other, commercial entities. The commenter provided examples demonstrating Mozilla's interests in generating revenue and serving commercial entities on the web. This reply however focuses on comparing Firefox and Chrome. Yes, Firefox is better.^1 But the parent's comment is still valid. There is so much in Firefox's design that is not for browser users but for the benefit of others. Mozilla cares deeply about web advertisers and an online advertising "ecosystem". This is reflected in the design. 1. On average, but not in every respect. For example, in Chrome I can set the default search engine to any valid URL. I use a localhost-bound netcat that serves a useful web form^2 that I created in lieu of a "search engine". In Firefox, this is not possible. 2. It sends text clips from Chromebook Chrome to the "developer mode" (frecon) console stdout.
goalieca 2y ago
Firefox needs to deliver a privacy focused browser with fantastic security and push open standards. This alone delivers more than enough value to _everyone_ for every cause. It seems though Mozilla fell into the “go woke go broke” trap and lost focus on their core mission.
- anotherhue 2y ago
  I think you misunderstand their core mission to be about users' benefit.
  - tiltowait 2y ago
    What is their core mission?
    - blibble 2y ago
      from evidence it seems to be to enrich the CEO and high level management and not to annoy the patron (Google)
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tetris11 2y ago
This is silly. Just pay the CEO more money, cut the dev team in half, and the problem will fix itself.
- anotherhue 2y ago
  CEOs are the true value creators in our economy. I don't know why they even pretend to need developers.
- hulitu 2y ago
  > This is silly. Just pay the CEO more money, cut the dev team in half, and the problem will fix itself. Huh ? Who needs a dev team ? Just fork Chromium, replace all instances of "Chromium" with "Firefox" and call it a day. And don't forget to add that it is more privacy focused than the last version, while still sending data to Google, even with SafeBrowsing disabled.
transfire 2y ago
Maybe it’s time that they stop trying to follow and lead. What about supporting a better hypertext meta language under a `moz:` protocol that’s only guaranteed to work with their browser?
- jitl 2y ago
  They spent like 10 years killing XUL already and going absolutely all-in on HTML, they are like the most HTML-tastic of the browser vendors in my opinion
hinkley 2y ago
Firefox got market share by having the best debugging experience, which I don't think it has anymore. When developers had an incentive to develop Firefox-first, then users had a better experience using it.
- jitl 2y ago
  Firefox got market share for not being IE6
  - hinkley 2y ago
    No. Software that doesn't work well for developers will eventually not work well for users either. In the age of early Firefox, we had employers telling people specifically not to support Firefox, but we just smiled and waved until they left. Because nobody wants to debug shit on IE6. You'd get it working on FF first and then fix the four things that broke only on IE6.
    - jitl 2y ago
      > nobody wants to debug shit on IE6 Yes that's what i'm saying! It wasn't IE6. It was better in so many ways, and I don't think it's primarily the devtools. It had tabs!!!! Firebug (a few years in). form data didn't go "poof". Basic security happening by default. Regular improvement. Faster. I think if anything the devtools situation made Firefox viable because so much of the web was ActiveX or refused to talk to or work with non-IE browsers in other ways. But I think if it was just a set of good devtools, and otherwise was slow or annoying for general usage, all it would have done is capture the market for good devtools. Back in the day when I started using Chrome, it was in spite of the devtools situation – I had been using Firefox devtools daily for years at that point, but checked out Chrome for its other improvements: speed, omnibar, tabs on top, even better stability. Those improvements were enough to win me over in spite of needing to learn new devtools. Now when I think about switching to Firefox, it seems like it has parity in devtools. Certainly the Firefox profile explorer is better, I do all my profile analysis on https://profiler.firefox.com/ https://profiler.firefox.com/ even for Chrome profiles because it has a real flamegraph, not just a stack timeline. But it means learning new habits, and besides the profile explorer, it is just at parity with Chrome, or perhaps a little bit ahead in places like performance, but not enough to really keep me there. Stability of both is so good its hard to see an improvement mattering to me. The biggest problem is that as a web developer, I know Chrome represents the average user agent pretty darn well - it's closer to Safari/Webkit than Firefox, and its a perfect match for all the Android users. So even if the Firefox tooling is 20% better overall, it's still gonna be hard to overcome the network effect for me as a developer unless its amazingly better somehow, or embeds Blink/Webkit or something.
tiltowait 2y ago
Firefox's problem seems to be that it's roughly as good as Chrome, with some weird advertising partnerships thrown in the mix. Yes, you can disable it, but—barring massive changes in public sentiment toward Chrome/Google—the browser needs to be more than "as good as" the market leader. What that looks like, I don't know. Maybe Arc (or Zen, which is like Arc for Gecko) has the right idea.
fooker 2y ago
The last few times I have tried Firefox, it has been a pretty bad experience. Some websites are inexplicably slow. Sometimes the whole UI freezes up for half a second. Some of it can be explained by Google and other giants not testing their stuff on Firefox. But it really does seem like they don't have enough development bandwidth to keep up with the modern web.
- diydsp 2y ago
  When was that? I have been running chromium and firefox side-by-side for about 4 years now. Chromium uses more memory and crashes more. I found perhaps 1 site per year which doesn't work on firefox. Speeds are basically identical, though I use nice computers. I don't understand why Chrome has a good reputation, but I also don't understand the recent American election.
  - k4rli 2y ago
    Biggest difference seems to be Google Maps, at least for me.
  - _dark_matter_ 2y ago
    Recently, and this is just off the top of my head: banks (us bank, key bank), food ordering, Microsoft teams, at&ts website - all don't work or work less well on Firefox. I usually find one to two sites a week (I run fx nightly).
rsoto 2y ago
With the manifest v3 debacle they have a golden opportunity in their hands. They can promoting the fact that they work for you rather than advertisers, they could explain what true privacy looks like, regardless of what device you're using. Firefox on Android used to be a really good product--it supported basically every popular extension there was for desktop, then in 2018-2019 they appeared to start a new revamped project for some reason. I downloaded the beta for it--it was rough around the corners, it had a quite short whitelist of extensions, most of the functionalities were absent, but there were a few improvements here and there. And out of nowhere, a few weeks later they made it the default. It's been way too long and the app still feels unfinished. It crashes way too much and I can't even move around the icons for the websites in the start page. They've enabled the list of extensions recently but it's a mess. I only use it since it's where I can have uBlock origin. It feels that every couple of years they have a golden opportunity, but somehow they never seem to know what to do.
- remram 2y ago
  Amen. The mobile app is honestly such a slap in the face. Synced tabs is a joke, the bookmark tags they push so hard on you on desktop don't appear on mobile so you have to move everything back to folders, extensions were removed for 6 years... features you don't need get pushed in your face with no way to hide them, e.g. password manager, "translate this page", collections, sync... rarely have I felt less in control of my own hardware. I use Firefox because Chrome is worse, not because I feel respected, "in control", or heard.
- kelnos 2y ago
  I'm pretty sure 95% of Chrome users don't know or care about Manifest v3 or what issues it brings. Consider also that most web users don't use an ad blocker; by definition most web users won't care about the Mv3 change, as that's what it seems to affect most. On top of that, it seems like ad blockers still work decently well under Mv3. That could change over time, certainly, but there's not really a compelling reason for most Chrome users to switch. > [Firefox for Android] crashes way too much Interesting; I've been using it for years and very rarely encounter a crash. Desktop Firefox (Linux) crashes more often than Firefox for Android, and there too it's incredibly rare.
nightowl_games 2y ago
The only site that runs better in chrome for me is YouTube. I use Firefox on my android almost completely because the URL bar is at the bottom, which is simply way better. And also reader mode is awesome. Plus I want to support Mozilla.
- sudahtigabulan 2y ago
  > I use Firefox on my android almost completely because the URL bar is at the bottom, which is simply way better. Same here (and for uBO), but bad news - it's been moved to the top by default (with an option to be at the bottom). And I have a hunch that the option will disappear at some point.
dehrmann 2y ago
It's kinda over. Firefox is a dying browser on desktop, desktop is a shrinking platform, and mobile is app-based, not browser-based. Mozilla almost exists because of the endowment effect. If it didn't exist today, would someone fork Chromium or port Konqueror to Windows? Mozilla's leadership might have even made the right move by dabbling in other platforms and with other value propositions, but it neglected the browser to the point that it doesn't matter. And I'm still a Firefox user.
clumsysmurf 2y ago
I still use Firefox, but on macOS it's a second class citizen. There was a HN post months ago about Safari being the new "IE6" (sorry, can't find that one). But when it comes to UI, on macOS, Firefox is the new IE6. And people see the UI, and web devs test against Safari even with its flaws, so they experience is still good. In general, my UI gripes: * Bookmarks dialog from the 90s, various usability issues * History dialog, same * Lack of Tab Groups, still, and no plugin has given me the experience as Safari * Profile switcher UI is also terrible * Still no vertical tabs * Still nothing like Safari "tab overview" * Miscellaneous UX fails like not being able to hover over a Tab preview and close it without switching to it (like the 'x' on List All Tabs) or close a tab by hovering over a persistent x without switching to it * Create bookmark dialog is limited so a small size and can't fit more than a few location folder entries * macOS : after all these years, still can't full-screen like a normal macOS app (all app bar toolbars / chrome shift when mouse) I can't remember an interesting UI feature in at least several years.

40 points by Digit-Al 2y ago

Dupe of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42096225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42096225

Become a non-profit. If GNOME can alienate all of its users yet still be the de facto default desktop Mozilla can figure out how to do whatever everyone else is doing abd just do it.

ranger_danger 2y ago
Usecase for a non-profit? /s
jujube3 2y ago
The Mozilla Foundation is already a non-profit.
- qball 2y ago
  So's the Corporation that the Foundation controls, but that's more because it operates at a loss rather than being a charitable organization.
shiroiushi 2y ago
I don't think GNOME is a good model to follow. Just because it works for GNOME, in the Linux OS space, doesn't mean the same strategy will work for Mozilla or anyone else in a totally different space. Honestly, I'm not sure how GNOME manages to be, and remain, the de-facto default desktop for SO many distros. It's alienated so many users with its, well, opinionated approach to things, causing not one but multiple forks and competing projects (Cinnamon, MATE, etc.), in addition to other competitors (KDE, xfce, lxde, lxQt, etc.). Why SO many distros still feature GNOME as the default, instead of trying to differentiate themselves and push a different default like KDE, I really don't know, but I suspect it involves some kind of politics within the Linux distro realm. Perhaps there's still some crazy idea about it being more "newbie-friendly", but it's been decades now and Linux on the desktop has barely made any inroads, so I think it's really time to give up on that and focus on users who actually like Linux and are already experienced. Anyway, as I wrote before, I don't think this is something you can just replicate with Mozilla/Firefox; it's a completely different situation, and I don't think GNOME's apparent success holds any lessons elsewhere.
- guerrilla 2y ago
  It doesn't matter. There are hundreds of huge projects that are surviving great. Just do whatever it is they're doing. Mozilla is being a drama queen. Just stop.

ranger_danger 2y ago

Just ask the people what they want. Companies and governments do NOT send out enough effective polls.

from-nibly 2y ago
"If I asked people what they wanted they would have said a faster horse" -some guy
- jraph 2y ago
  Yep, that's a case of figuring out what people actually want from what they say they want, not a case of not listening to people :-)
Vinnl 2y ago
https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/results-from-the-browser-features-survey/td-p/70264 https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/results-from-the-...

blibble 2y ago

> What I love about Firefox is that it really provides users with an alternative choice of a browser that is just genuinely designed for them they can't seriously think this can they? who was asking for telemetry, mr robot, pocket, VPN ads, "use our email" (relay) ads, "check your accounts!!" (monitor) ads and built-in AI slop generators and soon, more built-in ads: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/advertising/ I don't think a single user wanted any of that at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface

jraph 2y ago
> at least Chrome doesn't actually show you ads directly throughout the browser's interface Of course, it doesn't need to. Google controls enough space in the web content itself. On Firefox there are options to disable that; at least it is a supported setting. For Google, you need third party extensions to take care of this. Not saying that I like that Firefox displays ads / is ad supported, but Chrome not displaying ads in its UI is hardly a positive against Firefox.
- robocat 2y ago
  “predatory pricing” or “cross-subsidization”. A strategy where a monopolist reduces the price (sometimes to zero) of a complementary product to increase demand for its primary product.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
  The parent comment was focused on the claim that Firefox is designed for browser users and not for Mozilla's purposes or the purposes of other, commercial entities. The commenter provided examples demonstrating Mozilla's interests in generating revenue and serving commercial entities on the web. This reply however focuses on comparing Firefox and Chrome. Yes, Firefox is better.^1 But the parent's comment is still valid. There is so much in Firefox's design that is not for browser users but for the benefit of others. Mozilla cares deeply about web advertisers and an online advertising "ecosystem". This is reflected in the design. 1. On average, but not in every respect. For example, in Chrome I can set the default search engine to any valid URL. I use a localhost-bound netcat that serves a useful web form^2 that I created in lieu of a "search engine". In Firefox, this is not possible. 2. It sends text clips from Chromebook Chrome to the "developer mode" (frecon) console stdout.

goalieca 2y ago

Firefox needs to deliver a privacy focused browser with fantastic security and push open standards. This alone delivers more than enough value to _everyone_ for every cause. It seems though Mozilla fell into the “go woke go broke” trap and lost focus on their core mission.

anotherhue 2y ago
I think you misunderstand their core mission to be about users' benefit.
- tiltowait 2y ago
  What is their core mission?
  - blibble 2y ago
    from evidence it seems to be to enrich the CEO and high level management and not to annoy the patron (Google)

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

tetris11 2y ago

This is silly. Just pay the CEO more money, cut the dev team in half, and the problem will fix itself.

anotherhue 2y ago
CEOs are the true value creators in our economy. I don't know why they even pretend to need developers.
hulitu 2y ago
> This is silly. Just pay the CEO more money, cut the dev team in half, and the problem will fix itself. Huh ? Who needs a dev team ? Just fork Chromium, replace all instances of "Chromium" with "Firefox" and call it a day. And don't forget to add that it is more privacy focused than the last version, while still sending data to Google, even with SafeBrowsing disabled.

transfire 2y ago

Maybe it’s time that they stop trying to follow and lead. What about supporting a better hypertext meta language under a `moz:` protocol that’s only guaranteed to work with their browser?

jitl 2y ago
They spent like 10 years killing XUL already and going absolutely all-in on HTML, they are like the most HTML-tastic of the browser vendors in my opinion

hinkley 2y ago

Firefox got market share by having the best debugging experience, which I don't think it has anymore. When developers had an incentive to develop Firefox-first, then users had a better experience using it.

jitl 2y ago
Firefox got market share for not being IE6
- hinkley 2y ago
  No. Software that doesn't work well for developers will eventually not work well for users either. In the age of early Firefox, we had employers telling people specifically not to support Firefox, but we just smiled and waved until they left. Because nobody wants to debug shit on IE6. You'd get it working on FF first and then fix the four things that broke only on IE6.
  - jitl 2y ago
    > nobody wants to debug shit on IE6 Yes that's what i'm saying! It wasn't IE6. It was better in so many ways, and I don't think it's primarily the devtools. It had tabs!!!! Firebug (a few years in). form data didn't go "poof". Basic security happening by default. Regular improvement. Faster. I think if anything the devtools situation made Firefox viable because so much of the web was ActiveX or refused to talk to or work with non-IE browsers in other ways. But I think if it was just a set of good devtools, and otherwise was slow or annoying for general usage, all it would have done is capture the market for good devtools. Back in the day when I started using Chrome, it was in spite of the devtools situation – I had been using Firefox devtools daily for years at that point, but checked out Chrome for its other improvements: speed, omnibar, tabs on top, even better stability. Those improvements were enough to win me over in spite of needing to learn new devtools. Now when I think about switching to Firefox, it seems like it has parity in devtools. Certainly the Firefox profile explorer is better, I do all my profile analysis on https://profiler.firefox.com/ https://profiler.firefox.com/ even for Chrome profiles because it has a real flamegraph, not just a stack timeline. But it means learning new habits, and besides the profile explorer, it is just at parity with Chrome, or perhaps a little bit ahead in places like performance, but not enough to really keep me there. Stability of both is so good its hard to see an improvement mattering to me. The biggest problem is that as a web developer, I know Chrome represents the average user agent pretty darn well - it's closer to Safari/Webkit than Firefox, and its a perfect match for all the Android users. So even if the Firefox tooling is 20% better overall, it's still gonna be hard to overcome the network effect for me as a developer unless its amazingly better somehow, or embeds Blink/Webkit or something.

tiltowait 2y ago

Firefox's problem seems to be that it's roughly as good as Chrome, with some weird advertising partnerships thrown in the mix. Yes, you can disable it, but—barring massive changes in public sentiment toward Chrome/Google—the browser needs to be more than "as good as" the market leader. What that looks like, I don't know. Maybe Arc (or Zen, which is like Arc for Gecko) has the right idea.

fooker 2y ago

The last few times I have tried Firefox, it has been a pretty bad experience. Some websites are inexplicably slow. Sometimes the whole UI freezes up for half a second. Some of it can be explained by Google and other giants not testing their stuff on Firefox. But it really does seem like they don't have enough development bandwidth to keep up with the modern web.

diydsp 2y ago
When was that? I have been running chromium and firefox side-by-side for about 4 years now. Chromium uses more memory and crashes more. I found perhaps 1 site per year which doesn't work on firefox. Speeds are basically identical, though I use nice computers. I don't understand why Chrome has a good reputation, but I also don't understand the recent American election.
- k4rli 2y ago
  Biggest difference seems to be Google Maps, at least for me.
- _dark_matter_ 2y ago
  Recently, and this is just off the top of my head: banks (us bank, key bank), food ordering, Microsoft teams, at&ts website - all don't work or work less well on Firefox. I usually find one to two sites a week (I run fx nightly).

rsoto 2y ago

With the manifest v3 debacle they have a golden opportunity in their hands. They can promoting the fact that they work for you rather than advertisers, they could explain what true privacy looks like, regardless of what device you're using. Firefox on Android used to be a really good product--it supported basically every popular extension there was for desktop, then in 2018-2019 they appeared to start a new revamped project for some reason. I downloaded the beta for it--it was rough around the corners, it had a quite short whitelist of extensions, most of the functionalities were absent, but there were a few improvements here and there. And out of nowhere, a few weeks later they made it the default. It's been way too long and the app still feels unfinished. It crashes way too much and I can't even move around the icons for the websites in the start page. They've enabled the list of extensions recently but it's a mess. I only use it since it's where I can have uBlock origin. It feels that every couple of years they have a golden opportunity, but somehow they never seem to know what to do.

remram 2y ago
Amen. The mobile app is honestly such a slap in the face. Synced tabs is a joke, the bookmark tags they push so hard on you on desktop don't appear on mobile so you have to move everything back to folders, extensions were removed for 6 years... features you don't need get pushed in your face with no way to hide them, e.g. password manager, "translate this page", collections, sync... rarely have I felt less in control of my own hardware. I use Firefox because Chrome is worse, not because I feel respected, "in control", or heard.
kelnos 2y ago
I'm pretty sure 95% of Chrome users don't know or care about Manifest v3 or what issues it brings. Consider also that most web users don't use an ad blocker; by definition most web users won't care about the Mv3 change, as that's what it seems to affect most. On top of that, it seems like ad blockers still work decently well under Mv3. That could change over time, certainly, but there's not really a compelling reason for most Chrome users to switch. > [Firefox for Android] crashes way too much Interesting; I've been using it for years and very rarely encounter a crash. Desktop Firefox (Linux) crashes more often than Firefox for Android, and there too it's incredibly rare.

nightowl_games 2y ago

The only site that runs better in chrome for me is YouTube. I use Firefox on my android almost completely because the URL bar is at the bottom, which is simply way better. And also reader mode is awesome. Plus I want to support Mozilla.

sudahtigabulan 2y ago
> I use Firefox on my android almost completely because the URL bar is at the bottom, which is simply way better. Same here (and for uBO), but bad news - it's been moved to the top by default (with an option to be at the bottom). And I have a hunch that the option will disappear at some point.

dehrmann 2y ago

It's kinda over. Firefox is a dying browser on desktop, desktop is a shrinking platform, and mobile is app-based, not browser-based. Mozilla almost exists because of the endowment effect. If it didn't exist today, would someone fork Chromium or port Konqueror to Windows? Mozilla's leadership might have even made the right move by dabbling in other platforms and with other value propositions, but it neglected the browser to the point that it doesn't matter. And I'm still a Firefox user.

clumsysmurf 2y ago

I still use Firefox, but on macOS it's a second class citizen. There was a HN post months ago about Safari being the new "IE6" (sorry, can't find that one). But when it comes to UI, on macOS, Firefox is the new IE6. And people see the UI, and web devs test against Safari even with its flaws, so they experience is still good. In general, my UI gripes: * Bookmarks dialog from the 90s, various usability issues * History dialog, same * Lack of Tab Groups, still, and no plugin has given me the experience as Safari * Profile switcher UI is also terrible * Still no vertical tabs * Still nothing like Safari "tab overview" * Miscellaneous UX fails like not being able to hover over a Tab preview and close it without switching to it (like the 'x' on List All Tabs) or close a tab by hovering over a persistent x without switching to it * Create bookmark dialog is limited so a small size and can't fit more than a few location folder entries * macOS : after all these years, still can't full-screen like a normal macOS app (all app bar toolbars / chrome shift when mouse) I can't remember an interesting UI feature in at least several years.