Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed
-
https://www.pcmag.com/news/firefox-redesign-will-see-compact-density-option-disappear
A major blow?
How could it be a "major blow" when they admit that they are getting rid of it because nobody uses it.I tried it and the difference is just barely noticeable. Maybe they meant 'majorly blows'.
-
But wait. It gets better. From the same article:
When Proton arrives, the Normal and Touch density options are expected to remain, with Touch increasing the size of the user interface to make it more finger-friendly.
Meanwhile, the development team is optimizing the Normal density for displays that use 768 pixels for height, while most displays now use a higher resolution than that. Hopefully this doesn't mean the UI will be larger than it is now by default.
-
Oh for f
This is the setting I'm using now, because I don't need the address bar to be 900 pixels tall, and I'm not operating my desktop browser on a 5 inch phone.
-
Hopefully by "optimizing for 768 pixel displays" they mean "keep compact density and rename it to normal"
-
Had no idea it existed and it makes like 24 pixels difference so it's barely noticeable anyway.
-
@El_Heffe said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
https://www.pcmag.com/news/firefox-redesign-will-see-compact-density-option-disappear
A major blow?
How could it be a "major blow" when they admit that they are getting rid of it because nobody uses it.
It says: “For Firefox users who like to minimize the space their browser UI takes up, this is a major blow.” This says nothing about how many of those there are, but for the few that like this option, it could well be a major blow.
-
@loopback0 said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
it makes like 24 pixels difference so it's barely noticeable anyway
-
@El_Heffe said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Meanwhile, the development team is optimizing the Normal density for displays that use 768 pixels for height, while most displays now use a higher resolution than that. Hopefully this doesn't mean the UI will be larger than it is now by default.
768 sounds like a positive to me. Sure, my displays are larger, but I generally don't maximise my browser windows.
-
Ugh, of course I'm using the compact setting, because I also have the title bar enabled. (How am I supposed to drag the window otherwise? Oh, there's a "drag area" option for that? Great, that's like 3 pixels.
)Bet the next option to remove that nobody uses is light mode, because why would anybody ever not want to use dark mode, right? Everybody browses at night in a dimly lit room, because offices aren't a thing anymore.
(I might actually be fine with dark mode if they integrated it with the "Night Shift" schedule and switch automatically, but that'd be reasonable)Interestingly, I don't see a difference anymore between the default and light theme. When they introduced it the default theme was some dumb mix between light and dark so I had to switch to light, but now they look basically the same?
-
@Gurth said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
This says nothing about how many of those there are, but for the few that like this option, it could well be a major blow.
-
@topspin said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Ugh, of course I'm using the compact setting, because I also have the title bar enabled. (How am I supposed to drag the window otherwise? Oh, there's a "drag area" option for that? Great, that's like 3 pixels.
)Use KDE so you can just hold down Alt and click anywhere to drag?
-
@topspin said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
(I might actually be fine with dark mode if they integrated it with the "Night Shift" schedule and switch automatically, but that'd be reasonable)
Glorious
PCmacOS Master Race reporting in!
-
@topspin said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Bet the next option to remove that nobody uses is
Conspiracy: The browsers trying to get everyone to switch back to Edge so they can gang up on Microsoft again.
-
@dkf said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Glorious
PCmacOS Master Race reporting in!
-
@boomzilla said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@topspin said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Ugh, of course I'm using the compact setting, because I also have the title bar enabled. (How am I supposed to drag the window otherwise? Oh, there's a "drag area" option for that? Great, that's like 3 pixels.
)Use KDE so you can just hold down Alt and click anywhere to drag?
Not necessary on my linux box, because my KDE is configured to always show title bars, even for retarded Gnome programs (but I repeat myself) that remove the window decorations and paint their own garbage.
-
@topspin #MeToo
-
@El_Heffe said in [Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed]
A major blow?
How could it be a "major blow" when they admit that they are getting rid of it because nobody uses it.They're assuming nobody uses it. From their issue database:
The "Compact" density is a feature of the "Customize toolbar" view which is currently fairly hard to discover, and we assume gets low engagement.
So who knows? I use it, so I assume everyone else does too. :)
Later on in the issue thread they talk about what metrics are available to determine how much space is available. While they gather display resolution, they don't have the scaling being applied so they don't know the effective size of the screen. (I don't know if they're gathering the size of the window; that isn't mentioned in the thread.)
I tried it and the difference is just barely noticeable. Maybe they meant 'majorly blows'.
This article has examples of the various old and new options, but they don't show the difference under consideration:
It's about 35 pixels at 100% scaling, almost as much as the Windows Taskbar.
FWIW, I don't think it's a "major blow", but it's disappointing.
-
@Parody said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
It's about 35 pixels at 100% scaling, almost as much as the Windows Taskbar.
FWIW, I don't think it's a "major blow", but it's disappointing.
The version on the left looks significantly shitter though, irregardless of height.
-
@loopback0 Quite true, but it would also be less shittier if it were smaller
-
@Parody said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
So who knows? I use it, so I assume everyone else does too. :)
I use it too. I have for a very long time.
If it's removed, I might change over to another browser.
-
Pale Moon exists...
-
@Gribnit said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Pale Moon exists...
I'll probably try ghostery.
-
@Gribnit said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Pale Moon exists...
alt detected.
-
@Carnage said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@Parody said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
So who knows? I use it, so I assume everyone else does too. :)
I use it too. I have for a very long time.
If it's removed, I might change over to another browser.Talk about throwing out the baby with
of bath water.
-
@topspin said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@Gribnit said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Pale Moon exists...
alt detected.That seems unfair to even
-
@loopback0 said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@topspin said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@Gribnit said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
Pale Moon exists...
alt detected.That seems unfair to even
I always thought he was odd.
-
@Parody said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
(I don't know if they're gathering the size of the window; that isn't mentioned in the thread.)
The dumb thing is that's the piece of information that they absolutely have access to!
-
@dkf said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@Parody said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
(I don't know if they're gathering the size of the window; that isn't mentioned in the thread.)
The dumb thing is that's the piece of information that they absolutely have access to!
You misunderstand. Software is about the tail wagging the dog. They wanted to remove this feature, so why would they look at anything that would contradict that desire? And we all know how bad Mozilla wants to be Google.
-
@Zenith said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
They wanted to remove this feature, so why would they look at anything that would contradict that desire?
Actually they are now adding some telemetry to measure its usage, after the inevitable outrage. Still better than nothing, even though they obviously shouldn't have started out with ass-pulled assumptions in the first place.
-
@Zenith said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
They wanted to remove this feature, so why would they look at anything that would contradict that desire?
Reminds me of that one time they randomly decided to remove "print" from page context menu for no reason other than that they've had a ticket open dating back to pre-1.0 and nobody thought to check if it's still true that nobody uses it 10 years and hundreds of millions of users later.
-
@Gąska On a side note, it's amazing how many pages completely shit the bed if you try to print them.
-
@Zenith How could it possibly fail, it's combining the two most consistent and reliable technologies in computing: CSS and printers
-
-
@loopback0 said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@Parody said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
It's about 35 pixels at 100% scaling, almost as much as the Windows Taskbar.
FWIW, I don't think it's a "major blow", but it's disappointing.
The version on the left looks significantly shitter though, irregardless of height.
I believe you mean
disregardless
-
@Gribnit I believe you are incorrect
-
@loopback0 said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@Gribnit I believe you are incorrect
don't we all
-
@Luhmann No. Wrong.
-
@Zecc said in Firefox eliminates another "feature" that nobody even knew existed:
@Luhmann No. Wrong.
No, you're wrong that we don't all believe that loopback0 is incorrect that Gribnit believes that loopback0 means disregardless.
-
Ok, on second though I was wrong. But what you wrote isn't quite correct.
ITYM: No, you're wrong that we don't all believe that loopback0 believes that Gribnit is incorrect when believing that loopback0 means disregardless.
