A pre-emptive "Fuck You" to Mozilla



  •  As I'm sure you're all aware, Mozilla has decided to completely fuck up their user interface, the effects of which are slowly starting to creep into the release stream-- much like sepsis leaks through a patients body after their colon is accidentally ruptured, and their blood is slowly poisoned by their own shit and bile until the body rots from the inside out.

     This new UI is so bad, so mind-numblingly stupid, so Mozilla's head-up-their-own-ass, that extension developers are already [url="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/classicthemerestorer/"]pre-emptively saying "Fuck You" by making extensions that attempt to undo it[/url].

    And that is the real WTF right there. They release it into the pre-Alpha channel, and the very first thing people do with it is install it solely to figure out how to restore what used to be working.  Aurorisalisislnecropsis was, at the time this extension was made, roughly 1 year away from being released.  And they're developing this extension as a way to prepare for the damage that this update will do to the userspace.

    Mozilla has spent probably thousands of man-hours developing this piece of shit.  The extension developer surely spent hundreds of hours more.  All to just unbreak what Mozilla didn't have to break, just to restore the browser to "functional".

    Can you imagine what Firefox would be like if those thousands of hours were focused on improving the browser, rather than crippling it? Fuck.



  •  Looking at the screenshots it seems they are trying to emulate chrome. They shouldn't, I liked the old 3.6 UI and I am sad each time firefox moves further away from it



  • @Lorne Kates said:

    Mozilla has decided to completely fuck up their user interface
     

    Do you have any news? Like from this year, or the last one?

    Anyway, at the grand scheme of things, this last fuck up is at micro scale. If that page is showing all of it, it just puts some finish in earlier fuck ups.

    Also, extension developers always create extensions to undo interface changes in Firefox. Yep, that's because all previous changes were bad, but again, nothing new here.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    As soon as somebody ports Firebug to Chrome (no, not Firebug Lite), I'll drop FF like a bad habit.



  •  

     



  • If FF drops the ability to do text-only zoom, my internet will become either unreadable or oddly blown up with blurry images.

    D:



  • @joe.edwards said:

    As soon as somebody ports Firebug to Chrome (no, not Firebug Lite), I'll drop FF like a bad habit.

    I have switched to Chrome Developer tools years ago and never looked back. What exactly does firebug provide that chrome developer tools lack?



  • @russ0519 said:

    @joe.edwards said:
    As soon as somebody ports Firebug to Chrome (no, not Firebug Lite), I'll drop FF like a bad habit.

    I have switched to Chrome Developer tools years ago and never looked back. What exactly does firebug provide that chrome developer tools lack?

    Working grid views?



  • @russ0519 said:

    What exactly does firebug provide that chrome developer tools lack?
     

    This is a good question so I just compared both at a detailed level based on what I often use, and... I can hardly find anything.

    - The muted color scheme of the HTML tree is shit.
    - I can't see a way of setting break points immediately from the console where the error is shown?

    Uh. That's it.



  • I have to agree with this...I don't use Firefox for anything except development/debugging. I have tried using the Chrome developer tools, but I just couldn't get used to the interface compared to Firebug. I can't put my finger on one reason why...I guess I am just stubborn.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @bighusker said:

    I have to agree with this...I don't use Firefox for anything except development/debugging. I have tried using the Chrome developer tools, but I just couldn't get used to the interface compared to Firebug. I can't put my finger on one reason why...I guess I am just stubborn.

    Well the console (the thing I use most) in Chrome really sucks. One shared window for both input and output, there's no syntax highlighting, the command line is single-line unless you remember to hold shift, and then the command disappears as soon as you run it.

    As far as the rest, the functionality is there but the UI is suckier. The resources tab for example takes too much drilling down, the styles tab lets you disable some styles with a click but not others [I can't figure out which and why, but if you hover you'll see some have a checkbox and most don't], all the clickable areas are roughly half the size.

    My Firebug installation also has a bunch of auxiliary plugins that make it more useful, like Firesass that gives me the line numbers from my .scss file not the compiled .css file, and Acebug that makes the console more awesome.

    Overall, I just find Firebug to have a much more pleasant user experience.



  • I still like Dragonfly.

    Then again, I also still like an actual email client and rss reader that works as a sidebar and tab in my browser, rather than either a separate window or webmail.

    Yes, that means I'm one of the two dozen people still stubbornly using Opera 12. I suppose eventually I will probably switch, either back to firefox or (if they keep making its UI look more like Chrome) to Qupzilla or something.

    Where on earth did browser makers get the idea that tabs with slanted sides aren't ugly and annoying? Do they think they are designing manila folders, or does a significant portion of the world actually think that looks better? (I readily acknowledge it could be the latter. I do not have a conventional sense of aesthetics.)



  • @joe.edwards said:

    the styles tab lets you disable some styles with a click but not others [I can't figure out which and why, but if you hover you'll see some have a checkbox and most don't

    From my experience it's only the built-in styles you can't disable, because they are the last line before chaos!



  • I'm using it, and it's not really that bad if you add the "web developer tools" to the toolbar.



  • @Lorne Kates said:

    much like sepsis leaks through a patients body after their colon is accidentally ruptured, and their blood is slowly poisoned by their own shit and bile until the body rots from the inside out
    Don't hold back, Lorne. Tell us what you really think.



  • The really truly stupid thing about this decision is that everybody who wants a browser as restricted as Chrome has already switched to Chrome. Why TF Mozilla thinks it's a good idea to piss off its remaining user base is more than I can understand.



  • @joe.edwards said:

    As soon as somebody ports Firebug to Chrome (no, not Firebug Lite), I'll drop FF like a bad habit.

    Why? Chrome already has far superior developer tools than Firefox.



  • @flabdablet said:

    The really truly stupid thing about this decision is that everybody who wants a browser as restricted as Chrome has already switched to Chrome. Why TF Mozilla thinks it's a good idea to piss off its remaining user base is more than I can understand.
    I don't get it either.  Somehow they have forgotten what made Firefox popular in the first place. The conspiracy theory (for example here) is that Google controls Mozilla (because they provide 85% of Mozilla's revenue) and they are deliberately sabotaging Firefox.

    Although it does seem suspicious that they're making Firefox more Chrome-like, I don't really believe the conspiracy theory because this is a problem that had been infecting more and more applications. Everybody is making their UI "more modern", with apparently "modern" being a new euphamism for "shitty with fewer features".



  • @El_Heffe said:

    modern

    Less is more.



  • @Zemm said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    modern

    Less is more.

    Wrong.

    Less is less.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    @Zemm said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    modern

    Less is more.

    Wrong.

    Less is less.

    Wrong.

    Less is Less



  • The only real question is: are they making these changes as a result of a scientifically-conducted usability study, or do they just have some designer bullshitting-up this stuff?

    If the former, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug. If the later, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug.



  • @Ben L. said:

    @El_Heffe said:

    @Zemm said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    modern

    Less is more.

    Wrong.

    Less is less.

    Wrong.

    Less is Less

    Wrong.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    The only real question is: are they making these changes as a result of a scientifically-conducted usability study, or do they just have some designer bullshitting-up this stuff?
     

    Where is Grumpy Cat?



  • @gu3st said:

    @Ben L. said:
    @El_Heffe said:

    @Zemm said:

    @El_Heffe said:
    modern

    Less is more.

    Wrong.

    Less is less.

    Wrong.

    Less is Less

    Wrong.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    Everybody is making their UI "more modern", with apparently "modern" being a new euphamism for "shitty with fewer features".
    I blame the everything-is-a-phone brain worms, which are running rampant through the entire IT industry at present.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    The only real question is: are they making these changes as a result of a scientifically-conducted usability study, or do they just have some designer bullshitting-up this stuff?

    If the former, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug. If the later, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug.

    It's not only geeks who hate shit like this.

    I have a heap of customers that I encouraged to install Firefox well before Chrome was even a thing, mostly so they could install an ad blocker to sidestep the unbelievable torrent of shit that afflicts browsers not so configured. Some of those people have subsequently installed Chrome, usually by accident, and I have had many calls from people willing to pay me to uninstall it. I can't imagine that cohort of pretty much canonical non-geeks being thrilled about having a slow Chrome clone foisted on them when Firefox updates itself.

    This is the reaction that fashionistas who don't give a shit about usability deride as "fear of change". It's not fear of change; it's perfectly understandable and legitimate anger arising from arbitrary, capricious, unhelpful and above all forcible change. Very few people actually like having all their furniture rearranged while they're out.

    Radical and mandatory change to a product's UI on update is a massive breach of user trust, especially when the vast majority of users don't have even the minimal technical chops required to find and install the extension that reverts it. The considerate thing to do, if they're hell-bent on fucking up their default UI, would be to make their update package include the extension that undoes most of it. New users would get Firefox New Coke, existing users would get Firefox Classic with an easy option to switch, and nobody would have much reason to grumble. But they're not going to do that because they've been completely fucked in the head ever since the six week release cycle madness took hold.



  • @flabdablet said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    The only real question is: are they making these changes as a result of a scientifically-conducted usability study, or do they just have some designer bullshitting-up this stuff?

    If the former, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug. If the later, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug.

    It's not only geeks who hate shit like this.

    I have a heap of customers that I encouraged to install Firefox well before Chrome was even a thing, mostly so they could install an ad blocker to sidestep the unbelievable torrent of shit that afflicts browsers not so configured. Some of those people have subsequently installed Chrome, usually by accident, and I have had many calls from people willing to pay me to uninstall it. I can't imagine that cohort of pretty much canonical non-geeks being thrilled about having a slow Chrome clone foisted on them when Firefox updates itself.

    This is the reaction that fashionistas who don't give a shit about usability deride as "fear of change". It's not fear of change; it's perfectly understandable and legitimate anger arising from arbitrary, capricious, unhelpful and above all forcible change. Very few people actually like having all their furniture rearranged while they're out.

    Radical and mandatory change to a product's UI on update is a massive breach of user trust, especially when the vast majority of users don't have even the minimal technical chops required to find and install the extension that reverts it. The considerate thing to do, if they're hell-bent on fucking up their default UI, would be to make their update package include the extension that undoes most of it. New users would get Firefox New Coke, existing users would get Firefox Classic with an easy option to switch, and nobody would have much reason to grumble. But they're not going to do that because they've been completely fucked in the head ever since the six week release cycle madness took hold.

    Remember when Chrome changed the wrench icon to the ≡ icon? Remember how many people got confused and couldn't operate Chrome without someone pointing out that they just changed the "configuration" icon to a more relevant "menu" icon?

    Now imagine that instead of changing one icon, they produced Windows Vista. That's the kind of non-sequitur we're talking about here.



  • @gu3st said:

    Why? Chrome already has far superior developer tools than Firefox.
     

    They're pretty samey.



  • @Mcoder said:

    @Lorne Kates said:
    Mozilla has decided to completely fuck up their user interface
    Do you have any news? Like from this year, or the last one?
    Well it's not as if we've discussed it yet on here. Oh, wait...



  • @gu3st said:

    Chrome already has far superior developer tools than Firefox.
     

    I've found that you can't set a breakpoint right on the error in the console, and you can't jump to the code from the error in the console.

    So that's a big debugging efficiency hit.



  • @flabdablet said:

    <font size="4">This is the reaction that fashionistas who don't give a shit about usability deride as "fear of change".  It's not fear of change; it's perfectly understandable and legitimate anger arising from arbitrary, capricious, unhelpful and above all forcible change. Very few people actually like having all their furniture rearranged while they're out</font>.
     

    <font size="6">QFT</font>

     



  •  @blakeyrat said:

    The only real question is: are they making these changes as a result of a scientifically-conducted usability study, or do they just have some designer bullshitting-up this stuff?

    If the former, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug. If the later, the fact that geeks hate it is probably a feature, not a bug.

    Going by previous happenings, Asa Dotzler decided the Firefox UI wasn't "modern" enough so it's being changed.

     



  • And now that both Opera and Firefox have gone Chrome (and IE is still struggling with basic concepts like extensions), there is no product in the market for people who want a browser more advanced than Chrome. Who will be the first one to fill that void? Will someone fork Firefox? I'd start a free Opera clone myself if I had about 500x more free time.



  • Looks like SeaMonkey is trying to hold out against the brain worms.



  • @anonymous234 said:

    (and IE is still struggling with basic concepts like extensions)

    IE was the first browser with extensions. They were called toolbars. You might remember, they were around in IE4 and possibly even earlier.

    The only thing Mozilla innovated was a website dedicated to hosting extensions and one-click installs of them.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @anonymous234 said:
    (and IE is still struggling with basic concepts like extensions)

    IE was the first browser with extensions. They were called toolbars. You might remember, they were around in IE4 and possibly even earlier.

    The only thing Mozilla innovated was a website dedicated to hosting extensions and one-click installs of them.

    LOLWHAT



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @anonymous234 said:
    (and IE is still struggling with basic concepts like extensions)

    IE was the first browser with extensions. They were called toolbars. You might remember, they were around in IE4 and possibly even earlier.

    The only thing Mozilla innovated was a website dedicated to hosting extensions and one-click installs of them.

    Does IE have the ability to install extensions in a sandbox so they can't delete every file in your home directory like every other program can?



  • @Buttembly Coder said:

    LOLWHAT

    And yet that does not change the argument of, "IE had extensions before Firefox did". You know, these threads would go better if you people didn't post irrelevant bullshit.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @Buttembly Coder said:
    LOLWHAT

    And yet that does not change the argument of, "IE had extensions before Firefox did". You know, these threads would go better if you people didn't post irrelevant bullshit.

    @blakeyrat said:

    IE was the first browser with extensions.

    It doesn't change an argument you didn't make? No shit.
    You can't even pretend that you said that, Blakey.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @Buttembly Coder said:
    LOLWHAT

    And yet that does not change the argument of, "IE had extensions before Firefox did". You know, these threads would go better if you people didn't post irrelevant bullshit.

    What? What was IE 4's plugin API called? I can't find anything about it. IE5.5 used NPAPI, which is Netscape Plugin API. Firefox was a continuation of Netscape.



  • Socially inept nerds both hate and overreact to change. News at 10.

    The UI is having a slight overhaul. Oohhh nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.



  • @movzx said:

    movzx didn't read the thread. News at 10. This thread is not about nerds. Oohhh nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.



  • @movzx said:

    Socially inept nerds both hate and overreact to change. News at 10.

    The UI is having a slight overhaul. Oohhh nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

     

    You detestable refuse of a person!



  • @Ben L. said:

    What? What was IE 4's plugin API called? I can't find anything about it.
    ActiveX
    Although it also shared the Windows Explorer "shell extension" API too, because Microsoft was taking the position that a Web browser should be a computer browser as well.



  • @movzx said:

    Socially inept nerds both hate and overreact to change. News at 10.

    The UI is having a slight overhaul. Oohhh nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

    Remember when they removed the "http://" from the address bar in Chrome, and the planet exploded? We wouldn't want that to happen again!



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @movzx said:
    Socially inept nerds both hate and overreact to change. News at 10.

    The UI is having a slight overhaul. Oohhh nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

    Remember when they removed the "http://" from the address bar in Chrome, and the planet exploded? We wouldn't want that to happen again!

    Remember the rage and frustration you felt when given no realistic option but to try to use a tool (git) that you personally found unfamiliar enough to be unusable, and the hurricane of derision you copped when you raised what you saw as an entirely justifiable critique? Why give tacit approval to putting millions of existing Firefox users through exactly the same kind of pain?



  • @flabdablet said:

    (git) that you personally found unfamiliar enough to be unusable,

    Git is unusable.



  • @Ben L. said:

    Firefox was a continuation of Netscape.
    Firefox still contains code than dates back to Netscape 4.x.  Firefox is simply a renamed version of Netscape Navigator.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    @flabdablet said:
    (git) that you personally found unfamiliar enough to be unusable,

    Git is unusable.

    Australis is unusable.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.