Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Make Firefox support moz://a

bugzilla.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 176 posts

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#101

Post by Jordrok »

toxican wrote: post #42

While I don't like the branding move at all, I think the concern that people will start calling them moz-colon-forward-slash-forwadslash-a is a little ridiculous. Is Sony's line of laptops Analog Wave One Zero? Is Verizon Verizoncheckmark? Is Johnson & Johnson Johnson ampersand Johnson? Is Comcast CComcast? No, because people aren't complete idiots. Those that are going to know/care about Mozilla will be able to tell…

Sure, people will almost definitely not call them "moz-colon-forward-slash-forwadslash-a", but I could easily see a lot of people shortening the whole thing to just Moz. The :// in a url acts as a separator, so the important bits are whatever come before and after it. All there is after it is an "a" which isn't very informative, so my eyes are drawn to "moz" instead. Which isn't ideal because a company named Moz already exists and has no connection to Mozilla whatsoever.

Maybe less technical people who aren't used to seeing full urls won't have the same reaction, but in that case you've still got a problem because they probably won't already know who Mozilla is and it's kind of a leap to go from Moz://a to Mozilla without already knowing the name.

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#102

Post by whyileft »

toxican wrote: post #42

While I don't like the branding move at all, I think the concern that people will start calling them moz-colon-forward-slash-forwadslash-a is a little ridiculous. Is Sony's line of laptops Analog Wave One Zero? Is Verizon Verizoncheckmark? Is Johnson & Johnson Johnson ampersand Johnson? Is Comcast CComcast? No, because people aren't complete idiots. Those that are going to know/care about Mozilla will be able to tell…

Who cares... Mozilla gets more and more irrelevant by the day. Since its clear the leadership is completely ineffective but someone manages to not be replaced, its pretty obvious Mozilla will continue its downward path.

In a real corporation this entire group would be replaced based on current and recent past performance. https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/leadership/

Such a shame.

EDIT: Not surprised to see people trying to censor my comment as opposed to addressing the dismal leadership that somehow avoids all accountability.

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#103

Post by [deleted] »

dustinmr wrote: post #96
wott wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, because people aren't complete idiots. Sweet summer child. http://www.gentside.com/le-bon-coin/le-bon-coin-un-ordinateu... http://i.imgur.com/4nMqG8C.png http://www.jofogas.hu/veszprem/Sony_mio_laptop_elado_6040346... http://archiwum.allegro.pl/oferta/sony-mio-pcg-6e1m-laptop-o... https://www.olx.in/item/sony-wio-laptop-ID19koWZ.html

Change languages and you're in a whole other world. Have an Argentine (for example) pronounce Yosemite National Park for you. Or for that matter, ask an English speaker to pronounce Habanero (there's no ñ) or someone from the East Coast to say Oregon or Puyallup. While those are words and names, examples abound in marketing. But to continue my example, Argentines already pronounce Mozilla differently than an English…

[deleted]

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#104

Post by jcranmer »

mypalmike wrote: post #27
ricardobeat wrote: post #2

Such a terrible idea... this will generate endless confusion for no gain at all.

Indeed. And on the code side, implementing this gimmick involves 115 lines of new code across 9 files. https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/105654/diff/1#index_header

Half of those changes are actually just tests that it works correctly The first three files are the only ones that are doing any useful work, and then the last one makes sure that it works in anything other than a local build.

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#105

Post by thresh »

reitanqild wrote: post #68
thresh wrote: post #58

Yeah, that will totally solve Mozilla's now so slow fading into irrelevance. VideoLAN.org website stats tell me that Firefox hits percentage dropped from 26.3% through Jan 2016 to 21.2% through Jan 2017. Of course this is not a 100% reliable measure, but stats usually don't lie about that.

> Yeah, that will totally solve Mozilla's now so slow fading into irrelevance. Neither will constant picking on anything they do or don't do. > VideoLAN.org website stats tell me that Firefox hits percentage dropped from 26.3% through Jan 2016 to 21.2% through Jan 2017. I guess the reason might just be that the market is moving towards a new equilibrium. Unless we start making websites and web apps that only work in…

I'm not picking, I'm just looking at the stats I have. I've actually have it graphed on http://thre.sh/stuff/browsers-stats-videolan.org.png now.

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#107

Post by jccalhoun »

cschmidt wrote: post #40

If you're not a logo geek, this is the major website that reviews logo redesigns, on the new Mozilla logo: http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_logo...

really interesting to see how the comments there are largely positive while the ones here are largely negative.

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#108

Post by StevePerkins »

reitanqild wrote: post #99
StevePerkins wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep talking about Mozilla like it's the engineering wing of the EFF, that it's tirelessly working on a mission of Internet freedom, etc. I'm sorry, but I just don't see it. I see: (1) a team of developers, incrementally maintaining a codebase that that was donated by a 1990's commercial entity, and (2) some second-tier marketing types, burning through Google/Yahoo money and padding their resumes with random "…

Keeping that thingy running all those years and making sure it is still competitive against Chrome (that has 1000 times the resources + free access to put ads for their browser on two of the highest value ad spots that exists) is an engineering masterpiece as well as a marketing masterpiece if you ask me. Also you write like Firefox extensions haven't been years ahead of competition (proven by the fact that no other…

Hey, I love Firefox and I'm glad that Mozilla keeps it running. But the parent comment complains that people never talk about anything other than Firefox. Well...

Also, tabs (like most browser UI innovation over the past 15 years) came from Opera.

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#109

Post by daveFNbuck »

amooiman wrote: post #76
matt4077 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quote, to maybe nib the ritual hatred in the bud before mozilla becomes the new Apple: "A logo that not only DOESN’T suck but one that has a strong idea, a fresh execution, a promising flexibility, and, that all of it together, sometimes subtly and sometimes overtly, manages to communicate what Mozilla is about." Now if only someone would write an article explaining why considerations such as branding are useful even…

The general idea is that 90% of people I tell "I work for Mozilla" respond with "Oh, you work on Firefox?" but we're about so much more than that. My understanding of the motives behind this change is that having better branding that explains we're focused on the internet in general will hopefully expand our reach and recognition outside the tech bubble.

That's a bit weird. Where other than in a browser or something that will open your browser do most people see ://?

Re: Make Firefox support moz://a

#110

Post by adam12 »

Jordrok wrote: post #101
toxican wrote: post #42

While I don't like the branding move at all, I think the concern that people will start calling them moz-colon-forward-slash-forwadslash-a is a little ridiculous. Is Sony's line of laptops Analog Wave One Zero? Is Verizon Verizoncheckmark? Is Johnson & Johnson Johnson ampersand Johnson? Is Comcast CComcast? No, because people aren't complete idiots. Those that are going to know/care about Mozilla will be able to tell…

Sure, people will almost definitely not call them "moz-colon-forward-slash-forwadslash-a", but I could easily see a lot of people shortening the whole thing to just Moz. The :// in a url acts as a separator, so the important bits are whatever come before and after it. All there is after it is an "a" which isn't very informative, so my eyes are drawn to "moz" instead. Which isn't ideal because a company named Moz alre…

It took me until your post to see that : = i and // = ll.

I've known the Mozilla name for years. I guess I'm just too accustomed to seeing http://.

edit: Maybe other people see haiti's pill.

Post reply on HN