Does anyone feel that this new UI brings notable improvement? I don't think it is much worse, other than taking some extra vertical space but for the most part my reaction is "meh". I feel like these resources could have been spent much better in other parts of the browser. Am I missing some reason why this is worth the investment?
My initial reaction to the beta version was that the UI was much worse, but I decided to give it a chance and spend a few weeks trying to get used to it. Now that I've had time to play with it, I'm even more convinced my initial reaction was correct. But I've also had time to reflect on why, and in my view there are two problems with this new design. Removing visual separators from the tabs makes them much harder to…
Firefox Release 89.0
331–340 of 487 posts
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#332The menus and omnibar look the same to me though, for better or worse.
It seems like FF is getting worse with every release. Who thinks the changes (read: regressions) over the past few versions are a good idea? Who is the target audience of FF?
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#333I don't like the removal of tab separators. Now all the background tabs kind of merge into one large mega tab :( for example - https://i.ibb.co/p4LWvtb/2021-06-01-19-12-43-3841x169.png
The favicons separate tabs clearly enough for me.
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#334I liked the UI changes, except that they removed Compact Mode due to "Low Engagement" Why is that even a metric for a browser UI? Are they putting ads in the settings? It's now hidden by this bool in about:config, `preference browser.compactmode.show `
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be perfectly blunt it doesn't matter what a team is doing. They paid $X million to "design resources" and directed those resources at the redesign featured in this release. Instead they could have paid that to backend, other UX initiatives, the extension team, the privacy team... I understand that you can't swing resources around freely in the short term but you don't have a bunch of designers sitting around by ac…
You're right the money could be spent elsewhere. But calling people resources is rude to put it mildly.
I don't think it's considered rude, since "Human Resources" is a widely accepted term.
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#336Wow. This is a significant UX improvement for MacOS users! I might try FF as my daily personal browser in lieu of Safari. Overscroll and (to a lesser extent) native context menus are huge to me.
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
The favicons separate tabs clearly enough for me.
Do they? https://i.imgur.com/Oemlwfo.png
Personally, the previous design was fine and this one is too. Neither has made any meaningful difference to my user experience.
Edit:
Scratch that. I've just noticed that tabs can now have a sort of status line, telling me, for example, that's it's playing something. There was functionality sort of like this before, but this is a nice improvement. Great.
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you turn it on? I don't see it.
Looks like they made it harder to find the option to customize the toolbar. Right click on toolbar, select 'Customize Toolbar', click 'Density' option at the bottom (I'm macos).
What a mess.
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#339Does anyone feel that this new UI brings notable improvement? I don't think it is much worse, other than taking some extra vertical space but for the most part my reaction is "meh". I feel like these resources could have been spent much better in other parts of the browser. Am I missing some reason why this is worth the investment?
I don't like it. The tabs look like buttons and not tabs. It's such an unnecessary deviation from a standard tabbed interface look and feel that everyone is accustomed to. I'm not sure what their reasons are for experimenting with something new but I would be curious to know.
This is pure speculation on my part, but I assume the "Firefox team" wanted the selected tab to stand out visually. The selected "tab" turns white in the default theme. But if the tab is attached to the URL toolbar, then the URL toolbar also needs to be the same colour as the selected tab. It would look odd if they were attached but each was a different colour.
I assume the "Firefox team" wanted the active tab to stand out visually, but not the whole URL toolbar. So the tab becomes a button and is detached from the URL toolbar. Now the active "tab" and the URL toolbar can have different colours: A "louder" colour for the selected tab to make it stand out, and a "quieter" colour for the URL toolbar that lets it recede a little from the foreground.
That's what I think may be the reason for the tab change - but as I say, it's pure speculation (and could be completely wrong).
Re: Firefox Release 89.0
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Even the back button is wrong in the new version. Previously it spanned up to the left edge of the window. When you actually try it instead of comparing screenshots, you'll see that its clickable area still goes all the way to the edge of the window. The button hasn't moved to the right; there's just more negative space because they removed the circle around it. Deleting that space would actually move the button to…
After I move the mouse over the back "button" at first nothing happens, it's surely nothing happening "as soon as the pointer" enters the area. Then after some delay, the "area" of the button is shown, but not inclunding the newly "empty" space, which you claim is clickable. But what is highlighted starts to the right. If my mouse is already close to the edge, it visually signals that it's not over the button, that i…
In the case when the button does light up the instant it becomes clickable, I don't get the perception of ‘I've moved the mouse too far’ — instead, it's easier to see why the highlight isn't bigger: I don't just get a “hint of the area I can target”, I see exactly a standard-sized button, which I'm aiming for — but when I miss a bit, there's also a bonus area where the click still works.
Without the immediate feedback, the highlight seems ‘off’ (in the sense of displaced) in some arbitrary way. But really it's way more sophisticated (an overly pedantically detailed elaboration follows; I promise this is not apologetics on behalf of the Firefox UI designers, but illustrating a point I will attempt to make in the end and that I couldn't be bothered to put in fewer paragraphs out of sheer laziness):
1) There's a bonus area to the left. It's nice to have when you happened to click a bit too far to the left. But how far off you can be in that direction depends on the exact circumstances: E.g. in my case, in windowed mode I can approach the edge to within 1 or 2 px before the mouse cursor switches to ‘resize window’, whereas in fullscreen mode, I can go to 0 px, but pushing beyond that triggers the dock which otherwise lingers beyond that edge of the screen. So that's why it's a bonus area: It'll try to do the right thing, but it's not a promise that clicking there will work. And by directing your focus to the standard-sized button that would ordinarily be all you can click, it's more likely that you'll hit the intended target.
2) There's no bonus area to the right. Because the forward button is to the right. Instead of extending the standard-sized click target, hoping that this is what you meant to do, the GUI refuses to interpret your click as something that could be the exact opposite of what you meant to do.
3) There's a bonus area upwards. On MacOS, moving up even farther gets you to the buttons for closing and minimising the window, but they're a good few px away from the bottom of the title/tab bar, so we can approach that border all the way without risking a wrong click.
4) There's no bonus area downwards. Because that's where the web page you're viewing is, and making the top left corner of the page a link (e.g. to the home page of the site) is really common, so ignoring ambiguous clicks wins out over risking doing something you didn't want.
Thank you for your attention — you made it to the end where I attempt to make a point: AFAICT, the click target is the exact same it has always been. I understand that it can be annoying that they removed the circle when you're used to the circle being there; but I assure you, the circle never was the actual clickable area — it was just the visual target you were aiming for. You want ”the limits of the button drawn”? The circle doesn't do that. The button is a rectangle, and the clickable area is another rectangle that is almost the same, but a bit more generous in exactly those cases where the extra leeway can't do any harm.
> Wait, It's All Ohio? Always Has Been refers to an exploitable template in which two astronauts are in space. One looks at Earth and realizes the entire Earth is made up of something other than what is expected, and asks "Wait, it's all X?" The other astronaut, preparing a gun, says "Always has been."
— https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/wait-its-all-ohio-always-has-...