I really don't want to be negative, but every browser update in the past year feels like a step back. This is true for Chrome and Firefox. Each update contains more "Sign in to your browser" stuff plastered everywhere. Eye candy is added. Useful configuration options are removed.[1] Many of these changes seem to be made with the goal of increasing revenue, not improving user experience.
Rule #0 of business is: Listen to your users. For browsers, one straightforward way to do this is to look at what extensions and addons users install. By far, the winner is adblock. Almost everyone who knows how to block ads does so. Therefore, if you are making a browser and you care about user experience above everything else, you will have ad blocking by default. That no major browser does tells us what their priorities really are.
Again, apologies for the negativity. This has frustrated me for some time.
Edit: I realize that if everyone suddenly started blocking ads, there would be darkness and chaos. But the current situation is only tenable because a small fraction of users have the know-how to get what they want. You can avoid ads if you are technically proficient or know someone who is. Everyone else has to put up with ads. Advertisers annoy millions if not billions of people, effectively subsidizing the usage of those with ad blockers. That doesn't seem fair to me.
Seeing how much backlash Mozilla got for even proposing to block third party ads by default, I can't imagine what would happen if they shipped adblock.
Just because adblock is popular doesn't mean everyone is using it, and as much as I don't like it, advertisers rely on that... it could seriously damage the web if they did that.
The French have an expression for this, they would say you can see no farther than the end of your own nose.
> one straightforward way to do this is to look at what extensions and addons users install
Oh God No! I do not use adblock. I use noscript and im happy with it. I also do not use "Video DownloadHelper" which is the second most used addon. And neither do I use Firebug which is #3. Please do not put all this stuff into my browser! And not everybody uses noscript which I use and which is #4. Im completely fine with installing it.
How about improving on the basic stuff? For example make FF use all cores of my machine and not just one?
> Each update contains more "Sign in to your browser" stuff plastered everywhere. Eye candy is added. Useful configuration options are removed.
- First of all, each update cannot possibly contain more "sign in to your browser". Are you talking about Firefox Sync, of which similar-yet-poorer functionality used to be in an incredibly popular extension (by your own rules, that should go in the browser!)?
- Eye candy is nice. Not everyone lives in the 90s and wants a clickable version of Lynx.
- Configuration options are as useful as the users make it. There was a massive outrage on here when Firefox removed the javascript switch, yet that is one of the best decision they made for their userbase.
Google sure did remove a lot of options over time, some of it has infuriated me as well (the removal of http: was a big one for me). But most of the time, users do not actually know what they want which is why they just want a bazillion options to be able to change their mind all the time, as if they're not using a browser but playing Wedding Tie Choice Simulator 2015. As Randall Munroe put it: https://xkcd.com/1172/
These people behind Australis are brave, competent and passionate. It shows in the remarkable experience they've built. I am a nightly user and I got to see these changes land one at a time. Hugs and cheers:)
I am not trying to be snarky, but to me a lot of the new UI is "oh, they made it look more like Chrome". I am kind of surprised to hear the word "brave" to describe that.
I believe that for (1), the tabs overlap so that they take the same amount of space as the old tabs. It's an illusion that they're larger (which I initially fell for also, until I was corrected).
(2) is the same as Chrome and older Firefox versions - to ensure that there is still some draggable area in the window when it is filled with tabs, and it disappears when the window is maximised.
the tabs that arent in the foreground (ie all other tabs except the front tab) are actually square.
im pretty sure the overall layout of tabs and buttons is actually more space efficient
Claims to be detail obsessed but the Mac version has the close/shrink/zoom buttons floating at the wrong height (like iTunes 10 briefly had until it recanted) and a title bar gradient with non-standard color and height (too short for integrated toolbar height and too tall for basic window title bar and too light in color for either) above a toolbar with the same weird gradient used again.
Windows and Ubuntu versions look much better; the Mac version should be fixed.
I think they lowered the close/shrink/zoom buttons so that they'd be roughly centered relative to the height of the tab container. If they didn't do this, it'd look weird and unpolished. As for the other things IDK. I still think it looks really good.
I've been surprised by the amount of hate for Australis. Are the people who criticise it actually using it?
I've moved back from Chrome to Firefox and I'm a big fan of the changes that they've made. A lot of clunky interface elements have been eliminated. I really like the customisable menu - it's a much better place to put semi-frequently-used add-ons than has been available in the past. The same paradigm works nicely on mobile, too.
The next things to tackle are probably the bookmarks and options dialogs, both of which are a bit of a pain. Chrome's searchable options were a game changer, and Firefox needs something equally easy-to-navigate.
Thanks - this let me reset the look to exactly how I wanted - I still prefer the square tabs personally in particular.
While I appreciate the effort spent making a new UI, it's always good to have a way back to a more familiar feel if required.
The killer feature in Chrome was and is the multiprocess implementation. I use Firefox for intranet browsing at work and Chrome for personal browsing: the former is a sloth compared to the latter, and hangs even for seconds when loading a big page whereas Chrome will happily use as many of my 12 cores as it likes and it just doesn't even slow down.
Firefox has had their comparable hack (Electrolysis?) in some prototype stage for a long time but the thing is Chrome actually delivered it... years ago. This turned the roles into a catch-up game where Firefox tries to match Chrome instead of other browsers trying to match Firefox, and the setting has remained as such since then.
The difference is still astronomical and I'm not at all convinced that a new user interface could have much effect there. The browser UI has pretty much standardized 15 years ago.
I've been using it for a couple months now. Maybe it's just me, but I really don't care too much about how Firefox looks. I actually quite dislike curved tabs, but I can live with it. What frustrates me the most is that I don't want to wait for the fancy animations to finish before doing something. If I want a menu to come up, I want it to come up.
Most of the menu reorganizations have very little affect on me since I usually use shortcuts. But waiting for some of these animations just hurts my productiveness and I've seen other people share my dismay. When changes like this hurt the people who know how to use their browser and want to simply get things done, it's saddening.
Is the lack of a unified search/address bar a deliberate choice or the result of some weird IP/patent thing? Every time I switch back to Firefox, it trips me up. AFAIR, it's the only major browser that still does this, right?
There might be other reasons, but a big one is that having search and address bar in one box means that normal URLs you type into the address bar will get sent to the search engine for autocomplete by default. Since that's a major privacy violation, they're kept separate.
I've removed the search box myself. If DNS doesn't return anything or if what you type looks like a search query, it does a search anyway, so the only thing I'm missing is search autocomplete (there's an addon if you really want that anyway: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/instantfox/).
Some users are skittish of Chrome's autocomplete since it could potentially send anything you type into the address bar to Google's servers. Mozilla also makes money from selling 'search box real estate' to different providers. So it's more discoverable when the search is in its own designated box.
Agreeing with bitsoda, so far as I'm aware the rationale is privacy protection -- either box can actually search, but having a box that automatically queries a search engine as soon as you start typing (rather than when you hit Enter) has privacy implications.
I really ask myself why they insist to put the tabs on top. With todays widescreen-displays, putting them left or right makes more sense for most use cases (at least with FF its possible to get this via add-on). OTOH they try to get rid of every pixel to get a bit more space while there are lots of at the left and at the right. Do all developers only work on 13" laptops today?
Regarding incremental UI changes, I recall reading that Google staged Chrome's tab style and color redesigns over multiple releases, presumably to avoid upset users. I'm not sure whether to admire their concern for user confusion or to feel like the dupe of some magician's sleight of hand. :)
Why have reverse tabs won? Has anyone done any usability test on them?
On OS X, with a space left for the hit area of only 10px tall, it's really hard to drag a window that uses them. For context, 10px is about half the cursor's height.
I can see a reason for them on Win/Linux, but I find them completely unfit for the Mac. I guess people just maximize the window and leave it at that.
On the other hand, I'm glad there's still a distinction between the search box and the address bar. The annoyance of omnibar mistaking a url for a search query and vice-versa, even admitting it's a rare event, is not worth the trouble to me. Besides, educating the user on such difference seems important to me.
I thought about it a bit and decided I prefer reverse tabs (tabs above the address bar, not below) because I see the address bar as part of the page I'm visiting - as I change tabs, the address and page display changes to, so having both of these together on the screen makes sense to me.
To me, as I read the brower window top-down, I have the firefox menu and minimise/maximise/close buttons -> the tabs -> the address bar and back/forward buttons. That follows the logic of application -> 'threads' within application -> status of that thread and forms the more logical tree from general to detailed in my mind.
That's not to say it's better or worse than the alternative, it's just different and makes more sense to me.
Because Chrome. There's no other reason. It's obviously less efficient due to Fitt's law and the comparative distances the mouse pointer must travel, but you'd hear the designers justify it how "conceptually" the address bar should be inside a tab. Not if it hampers productivity it shouldn't.
I like it, but I'm seeing some serious similarities to chrome. If I had not seen this announcement and I quickly glanced at those screenshots, I would not think it was Firefox.
yes but believe it or not, the new firefox UI/UX has been in the works for so long and chrome's development so quick that it seems like firefox was inspired by chrome when in fact that didn't happen
Its hilariously sad how new UI skin is touted as reimagining the whole browser.
Opera had fully customizable UI 12 years ago? And look at us now, somehow we moved back in functionality, even Opera nowadays is nothing more than a bad non-customizable Chrome skin :(
I dread the day most of the web stops working on Opera 12.16. I wont be even able to tune Chromium to my specific needs, after all it requires 16GB of ram to compile now (and that number will probably grow).
Opera's recent ui change atleast had a purpose.. they were trying to innovate and bring forth the browser features that their stars determined people use most.
Firefox here. As far as I can tell is just saying "ok we decided to shuffle the buttons around again"
Haven't been using firefox since they switched their patch number schema. But I still feel a little sad seeing them seal their own fate.
[+] [-] ggreer|12 years ago|reply
Rule #0 of business is: Listen to your users. For browsers, one straightforward way to do this is to look at what extensions and addons users install. By far, the winner is adblock. Almost everyone who knows how to block ads does so. Therefore, if you are making a browser and you care about user experience above everything else, you will have ad blocking by default. That no major browser does tells us what their priorities really are.
Again, apologies for the negativity. This has frustrated me for some time.
Edit: I realize that if everyone suddenly started blocking ads, there would be darkness and chaos. But the current situation is only tenable because a small fraction of users have the know-how to get what they want. You can avoid ads if you are technically proficient or know someone who is. Everyone else has to put up with ads. Advertisers annoy millions if not billions of people, effectively subsidizing the usage of those with ad blockers. That doesn't seem fair to me.
1. Such as the old new tab page in Chrome: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=326788
[+] [-] scrollaway|12 years ago|reply
Just because adblock is popular doesn't mean everyone is using it, and as much as I don't like it, advertisers rely on that... it could seriously damage the web if they did that.
The French have an expression for this, they would say you can see no farther than the end of your own nose.
[+] [-] itry|12 years ago|reply
Oh God No! I do not use adblock. I use noscript and im happy with it. I also do not use "Video DownloadHelper" which is the second most used addon. And neither do I use Firebug which is #3. Please do not put all this stuff into my browser! And not everybody uses noscript which I use and which is #4. Im completely fine with installing it.
How about improving on the basic stuff? For example make FF use all cores of my machine and not just one?
[+] [-] scrollaway|12 years ago|reply
> Each update contains more "Sign in to your browser" stuff plastered everywhere. Eye candy is added. Useful configuration options are removed.
- First of all, each update cannot possibly contain more "sign in to your browser". Are you talking about Firefox Sync, of which similar-yet-poorer functionality used to be in an incredibly popular extension (by your own rules, that should go in the browser!)?
- Eye candy is nice. Not everyone lives in the 90s and wants a clickable version of Lynx.
- Configuration options are as useful as the users make it. There was a massive outrage on here when Firefox removed the javascript switch, yet that is one of the best decision they made for their userbase. Google sure did remove a lot of options over time, some of it has infuriated me as well (the removal of http: was a big one for me). But most of the time, users do not actually know what they want which is why they just want a bazillion options to be able to change their mind all the time, as if they're not using a browser but playing Wedding Tie Choice Simulator 2015. As Randall Munroe put it: https://xkcd.com/1172/
[+] [-] yati|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] IvyMike|12 years ago|reply
I am not trying to be snarky, but to me a lot of the new UI is "oh, they made it look more like Chrome". I am kind of surprised to hear the word "brave" to describe that.
[+] [-] brazzy|12 years ago|reply
The design was just fine, so leave it the fuck alone!
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] dingaling|12 years ago|reply
http://www.donotlick.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/tab-shap...
1. The curves of the 'aerodynamic' tabs sacrifice pixels in the horizontal ramp-off / -on whereas old 'ugly' rectangular tabs can abutt.
2. A vertical void above the tabs, too shallow into which to put icons.
I'll have no choice but to become accustomed to it but I fear my little 12" screen will become even less efficient.
[+] [-] batiudrami|12 years ago|reply
(2) is the same as Chrome and older Firefox versions - to ensure that there is still some draggable area in the window when it is filled with tabs, and it disappears when the window is maximised.
[+] [-] cubancigar11|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zobzu|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gilgoomesh|12 years ago|reply
Windows and Ubuntu versions look much better; the Mac version should be fixed.
[+] [-] rectangletangle|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rossng|12 years ago|reply
I've moved back from Chrome to Firefox and I'm a big fan of the changes that they've made. A lot of clunky interface elements have been eliminated. I really like the customisable menu - it's a much better place to put semi-frequently-used add-ons than has been available in the past. The same paradigm works nicely on mobile, too.
The next things to tackle are probably the bookmarks and options dialogs, both of which are a bit of a pain. Chrome's searchable options were a game changer, and Firefox needs something equally easy-to-navigate.
[+] [-] wila|12 years ago|reply
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/classicthemer...
Actually more precisely it lets you completely customize the look.
Want to have square tabs? Can do, can even have the round tabs.
Want to have the url bar at the top? no problem
[+] [-] pidg|12 years ago|reply
The fun part now is wondering how long Classic Theme Restorer will be maintained. I give it 2 versions before it falls by the wayside.
[+] [-] snorrah|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] damian2000|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nwh|12 years ago|reply
Fully rendered cache with images.
[+] [-] Boriss|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yason|12 years ago|reply
Firefox has had their comparable hack (Electrolysis?) in some prototype stage for a long time but the thing is Chrome actually delivered it... years ago. This turned the roles into a catch-up game where Firefox tries to match Chrome instead of other browsers trying to match Firefox, and the setting has remained as such since then.
The difference is still astronomical and I'm not at all convinced that a new user interface could have much effect there. The browser UI has pretty much standardized 15 years ago.
[+] [-] gsam|12 years ago|reply
Most of the menu reorganizations have very little affect on me since I usually use shortcuts. But waiting for some of these animations just hurts my productiveness and I've seen other people share my dismay. When changes like this hurt the people who know how to use their browser and want to simply get things done, it's saddening.
[+] [-] Excavator|12 years ago|reply
You may find some relevant prefs at: about:config?filter=animate
[+] [-] grumblestumble|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Osmose|12 years ago|reply
I've removed the search box myself. If DNS doesn't return anything or if what you type looks like a search query, it does a search anyway, so the only thing I'm missing is search autocomplete (there's an addon if you really want that anyway: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/instantfox/).
[+] [-] bitsoda|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mweibel|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ubernostrum|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] GrinningFool|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zobzu|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kawa|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] m_mueller|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cpeterso|12 years ago|reply
Unfortunately, I can find that page now.
[+] [-] tambourine_man|12 years ago|reply
I can see a reason for them on Win/Linux, but I find them completely unfit for the Mac. I guess people just maximize the window and leave it at that.
On the other hand, I'm glad there's still a distinction between the search box and the address bar. The annoyance of omnibar mistaking a url for a search query and vice-versa, even admitting it's a rare event, is not worth the trouble to me. Besides, educating the user on such difference seems important to me.
[+] [-] NamTaf|12 years ago|reply
To me, as I read the brower window top-down, I have the firefox menu and minimise/maximise/close buttons -> the tabs -> the address bar and back/forward buttons. That follows the logic of application -> 'threads' within application -> status of that thread and forms the more logical tree from general to detailed in my mind.
That's not to say it's better or worse than the alternative, it's just different and makes more sense to me.
[+] [-] AliAdams|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Grue3|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ggchappell|12 years ago|reply
What are "reverse tabs"?
[+] [-] Ortsac|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lingben|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] arcameron|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rectangletangle|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rasz_pl|12 years ago|reply
Opera had fully customizable UI 12 years ago? And look at us now, somehow we moved back in functionality, even Opera nowadays is nothing more than a bad non-customizable Chrome skin :(
I dread the day most of the web stops working on Opera 12.16. I wont be even able to tune Chromium to my specific needs, after all it requires 16GB of ram to compile now (and that number will probably grow).
[+] [-] Garbage|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] childoftv|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Boriss|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ASneakyFox|12 years ago|reply
Firefox here. As far as I can tell is just saying "ok we decided to shuffle the buttons around again"
Haven't been using firefox since they switched their patch number schema. But I still feel a little sad seeing them seal their own fate.
[+] [-] beaker52|12 years ago|reply