Most active commenters
  • pier25(10)
  • takeda(4)
  • reaperducer(3)
  • gmanley(3)
  • multiplegeorges(3)

←back to thread

Mozilla lays off 70

(techcrunch.com)
929 points ameshkov | 48 comments | 15 Jan 20 19:48 UTC | HN request time: 0.847s | source | bottom
Show context
dman ◴[15 Jan 20 21:11 UTC] No.22058629[source]▶
Brendan Eich has a helpful chart of Compensation of Highest paid executive at Mozilla vs Firefox market share over time.

https://twitter.com/BrendanEich/status/1217512049716035584/p...

replies(8): >>22058725 #>>22059044 #>>22059122 #>>22059260 #>>22059384 #>>22059453 #>>22059705 #>>22060015 #
throwaway123x2 ◴[15 Jan 20 22:02 UTC] No.22059260[source]▶
It's crazy how much FF's marketshare has dropped. It's such a great browser.
replies(7): >>22059466 #>>22059499 #>>22059567 #>>22059596 #>>22059736 #>>22059800 #>>22060719 #
1. pier25 ◴[15 Jan 20 22:35 UTC] No.22059567[source]▶
Hmm I don't know. I switched to FF 4 months ago and while the engine and dev tools are great, it's simply not as polished as the competition.

For example just look at the alert popups[0], or the non native contextual menus, or the video pop icon. The UI is full of little quirks like that. The tab bar is by far the ugliest one of all current browsers, at least on macOS.

It also misses important features such as multilingual spell checking. For people writing in multiple languages it's a real PITA. I know this functionality can be added with an extension but it slows down FF too much IMO.

[0] https://imgur.com/lODjWSm

replies(11): >>22059585 #>>22059635 #>>22059668 #>>22059780 #>>22059919 #>>22059953 #>>22059956 #>>22060062 #>>22060128 #>>22060191 #>>22060207 #
2. madeofpalk ◴[15 Jan 20 22:37 UTC] No.22059585[source]▶
I think that alert's design is actually a _feature_. Safari made a similar change a while back not make the alerts look like system UI, to prevent phishing and similar attacks.
replies(3): >>22059672 #>>22059695 #>>22060275 #
3. takeda ◴[15 Jan 20 22:42 UTC] No.22059635[source]▶
> It also misses important features such as multilingual spell checking. For people writing in multiple languages it's a real PITA. I know this functionality can be added with an extension but it slows down FF too much IMO.

Really? Do you learn a new language every day? I installed languages that I am interested years ago and forgot about it until you mentioned it.

replies(5): >>22059661 #>>22059708 #>>22059749 #>>22059836 #>>22059975 #
4. GranPC ◴[15 Jan 20 22:46 UTC] No.22059661[source]▶
No, but some people write text in more than one language inside Firefox.
replies(1): >>22060198 #
5. reaperducer ◴[15 Jan 20 22:47 UTC] No.22059668[source]▶
I switched to FF 4 months ago and while the engine and dev tools are great it's simply not as polished as the competition.

The polish of developer tools has exactly zero to do with a browser's popular marketshare.

replies(3): >>22059689 #>>22059700 #>>22059992 #
6. reaperducer ◴[15 Jan 20 22:47 UTC] No.22059672[source]▶
Ah, I wondered why that was done. Thanks for the light bulb.
7. afturner ◴[15 Jan 20 22:49 UTC] No.22059689[source]▶
I do believe there's a comma missing there. engine and dev tools are great (full stop) But! it's simply not as polished.
8. pier25 ◴[15 Jan 20 22:50 UTC] No.22059695[source]▶
My point is not that it doesn't look native... It's a neglected part of the UI.
replies(1): >>22059905 #
9. pier25 ◴[15 Jan 20 22:51 UTC] No.22059700[source]▶
My bad, I missed a coma...
replies(1): >>22059843 #
10. flexd ◴[15 Jan 20 22:53 UTC] No.22059708[source]▶
A lot of us are bi-lingual. English is not my first language, so being able to use spell checking for my native language and English without things breaking is important to me.
replies(1): >>22060190 #
11. pier25 ◴[15 Jan 20 22:56 UTC] No.22059749[source]▶
Yeah but you don't have spell checking on all these languages unless you manually switch between those.

I write in 4 languages so it's quite annoying to do that every time. In Chrome there is multilingual spell checking even when you mix languages in the same sentence.

replies(1): >>22060215 #
12. squarefoot ◴[15 Jan 20 23:01 UTC] No.22059780[source]▶
It is a great browser, once we agree on priorities on what they should be great at. All modern browsers suck badly wrt UI. User interfaces dumbed down to unusability is the new fashion and both Chrome and Mozilla suffer equally from that (which is why I use Waterfox Classic). But while FF focuses on privacy, and definitely delivers in this context, Chrome and others don't, by design. I would happily trade 50% of everything else for 10% more privacy, because an ugly tab, panel, window, menu etc. does no harm compared to the potential disgrace caused by the loss of control on personal data.
replies(2): >>22059848 #>>22061088 #
13. reaperducer ◴[15 Jan 20 23:09 UTC] No.22059843{3}[source]▶
Ah. I thought you were saying the dev tools weren't polished.
14. pier25 ◴[15 Jan 20 23:10 UTC] No.22059848[source]▶
It's not one or the other. FF could have the best UI and the best privacy features.
replies(2): >>22060250 #>>22063878 #
15. gmanley ◴[15 Jan 20 23:15 UTC] No.22059905{3}[source]▶
The person you responded to specifically explained that. It's made to look non-native on purpose so that users don't think a pop-up, phishing, asking for their password, is a native system prompt. Safari did the same thing. It's not that it's neglected, quite the opposite, actually.
replies(1): >>22060002 #
16. lucis ◴[15 Jan 20 23:18 UTC] No.22059919[source]▶
Do you find Firefox Dev Tools better than Chrome?

It's probably the only reason that I stick with Chrome, its dev tools are fantastic and often gets new incredible features.

replies(2): >>22059969 #>>22060147 #
17. johne20 ◴[15 Jan 20 23:22 UTC] No.22059953[source]▶
> The tab bar is by far the ugliest one of all current browsers, at least on macOS.

I switched to FF about 2 months ago. I made a FF Color theme [0] that matches Chrome's colors to help ease my transition. Only color I wasn't able to adjust with FF color is the tab onhover color.

[0] https://color.firefox.com/?theme=XQAAAAIWAQAAAAAAAABBKYhm849...

replies(1): >>22060084 #
18. huntie ◴[15 Jan 20 23:22 UTC] No.22059956[source]▶
Firefox's spellchecking is just generally awful, even for English. It fails to recognize even basic words such as 'surveil' with the closest suggestion being 'survive'. I've found several other words I wanted to use that weren't found too. I have spellcheck off by default but when I write something long I do a quick check at the end so I don't normally notice this.

Firefox is by far my least favorite piece of software that I regularly use and I've considered throwing my computer out the window because of it.

replies(1): >>22060103 #
19. throwaway123x2 ◴[15 Jan 20 23:23 UTC] No.22059969[source]▶
I use Chrome for web development because of devtools. Personal use is all Firefox.
20. RaptorJ ◴[15 Jan 20 23:26 UTC] No.22059992[source]▶
Well maybe not exactly zero, more devs using FF tools --> more websites designed to be optimized for FF first.
replies(1): >>22060230 #
21. pier25 ◴[15 Jan 20 23:28 UTC] No.22060002{4}[source]▶
The Safari alert doesn't look native and yet it looks polished.

https://imgur.com/rvsjJtO

replies(1): >>22060129 #
22. ◴[15 Jan 20 23:32 UTC] No.22060032{3}[source]▶
23. somishere ◴[15 Jan 20 23:35 UTC] No.22060062[source]▶
@pier25 Would honestly disagree on your 'polish' concerns. I consciously 'returned' to Firefox macOS a little over a year ago from a contented experience with Chrome, for entirely non-practical reasons (it just felt like a good idea). And it's been nothing but pleasant. I'm a massive fan of the UI, it's simplicity, flexibility, but also its bold sense of self. I despise the too-polished feel of safari. It is impractical. And chrome I return to semi-regularly for debugging or QA, but it honestly feels like a downgrade. It's so plain. So lifeless. So google. Sure there may be edge-case usability issues on FF, such as your multi-lingual spell check, but this seems like an entirely workable extension challenge. Safari on the other hand is drowning in edge cases ... and chrome - privacy.
replies(1): >>22060891 #
24. jacobwg ◴[15 Jan 20 23:38 UTC] No.22060084[source]▶
Thanks for this link, I was unaware of Firefox Color - for anyone looking for a Chrome-dark-mode-like equivalent, here's a quick attempt:

https://color.firefox.com/?theme=XQAAAAITAQAAAAAAAABBKYhm849...

25. orf ◴[15 Jan 20 23:41 UTC] No.22060103[source]▶
I think you need to install a new or different dictionary. It’s dumb, but that’s how it works - spellcheck dictionaries are provided on the Mozilla extension store. You could try a new one.
replies(1): >>22060214 #
26. multiplegeorges ◴[15 Jan 20 23:44 UTC] No.22060128[source]▶
I found a UX quirk that bothered me.

I documented it, proposed a solution with my own justifications for why it would be better, and submitted a bug report.

Feedback from Moz, the work done on it, the patches created, and the release plan for it were all done in the open and I could track it.

The change I suggested was implemented and is now out.

Be the change you want to see... only Firefox/Mozilla would do this in such an open way.

replies(1): >>22060835 #
27. gmanley ◴[15 Jan 20 23:44 UTC] No.22060129{5}[source]▶
Personally, I don't think the Firefox version looks any worse than the Safari version, they're just different. It comes down to preference. Just like you saying it's the ugliest tab bar which I very much disagree with.
replies(1): >>22060278 #
28. multiplegeorges ◴[15 Jan 20 23:45 UTC] No.22060147[source]▶
The change can be jarring at first, but I honestly prefer the FF dev tools now.
29. takeda ◴[15 Jan 20 23:51 UTC] No.22060190{3}[source]▶
well, I'm bi-lingual as well, I only needed to install languages once. I don't want to have installed dictionary for every language under the sun. They do take space.
30. tzs ◴[15 Jan 20 23:51 UTC] No.22060191[source]▶
> also misses important features such as multilingual spell checking

The English spell checking is pretty bad, too, giving me at least an order of magnitude more false positives [1] than Safari or Chrome on my Mac, and Edge or Chrome on Windows. Same when compared to things other than browsers, such as Word, LibreOffice, BBEdit, Pages.

What's baffling is that Firefox, LibreOffice, and Chrome all use Hunspell [2], so presumably the reason Firefox spell check sucks compared to LibreOffice is they have a terrible dictionary.

So why doesn't Mozilla just take the LibreOffice dictionary?

[1] In case I've got the terminology wrong for spell checkers, by false positive I mean where the spell checker says that a word is spelled wrong when it is in fact spelled correctly.

[2] https://hunspell.github.io/

31. takeda ◴[15 Jan 20 23:52 UTC] No.22060198{3}[source]▶
you can add as many as you want (at least I didn't hit the limit) it's just 2 clicks for each and they are retained between upgrades, the parent issue is that Firefox doesn't come with every language installed by default.
32. flukus ◴[15 Jan 20 23:53 UTC] No.22060207[source]▶
> The tab bar is by far the ugliest one of all current browsers, at least on macOS.

It's horrible on all platforms ;) . The way tabs are handled is by far my biggest complaint, you can't fit as many tabs in as with chrome and since they "upgraded" the extension system the vertical tab extensions don't work well (can't remove top tab panel).

I wish they'd just make a native UI for each platform, their cross platform one has always been a train wreck but it's especially bad since they dropped XUL.

replies(1): >>22063897 #
33. huntie ◴[15 Jan 20 23:54 UTC] No.22060214{3}[source]▶
There is something seriously wrong with Firefox if the default spellcheck dictionary is so bad that I might need to install a different one, especially for the English language. Hell they should just be able to merge theirs with Chromium's. Regardless, as I said I don't normally use spellcheck and I trust my own judgement over the computer's so it isn't a big deal for me.
34. takeda ◴[15 Jan 20 23:54 UTC] No.22060215{3}[source]▶
oh my bad, I misunderstood what he meant.
35. robotron ◴[15 Jan 20 23:56 UTC] No.22060230{3}[source]▶
If you optimize for your devs use and not your users there's a problem.
replies(1): >>22060638 #
36. squarefoot ◴[15 Jan 20 23:58 UTC] No.22060250{3}[source]▶
Very true, but it costs money and neither Google's browser with their nearly infinite resources has them. FF might just need more time to implement them properly; I only wish they didn't fall into the dumbed down UI fashion like they did when they copied from others the "let's fill the main page with junk and remove a perfectly working configuration panel completely".
37. saagarjha ◴[16 Jan 20 00:02 UTC] No.22060275[source]▶
That and I believe the new modal prevents locking up the entire browser.
38. pier25 ◴[16 Jan 20 00:03 UTC] No.22060278{6}[source]▶
Sure, aesthetics is ultimately a subjective thing, but that's not what I'm saying.
replies(1): >>22060359 #
39. gmanley ◴[16 Jan 20 00:14 UTC] No.22060359{7}[source]▶
It's not? That's exactly how I've been interpreting it. Objectively, how is the Safari version better? Other than subjective design.
replies(1): >>22060959 #
40. hutzlibu ◴[16 Jan 20 00:57 UTC] No.22060638{4}[source]▶
But the user will switch to a browser that works for them. Which is happening.

All the people I know, who left FF, myself partly included, did so for this reason. Quite some sites did not work anymore on firefox. And the normal user does not care that this is because of vendorprefixes which are not standard. They care about that their website does not work anymore.

Keep the webdevs ... keep your users.

41. pier25 ◴[16 Jan 20 01:32 UTC] No.22060835[source]▶
> Opened 19 years ago

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69687

replies(1): >>22064061 #
42. pier25 ◴[16 Jan 20 01:41 UTC] No.22060891[source]▶
> Sure there may be edge-case usability issues on FF, such as your multi-lingual spell check, but this seems like an entirely workable extension challenge

It's an issue that affects anyone that writes in multiple languages. This accounts for the majority of internet users in the world since they write at least in their own language and English. This is not an edge case that affects 10% of users.

Like I already explained, it can't be solved properly with an extension. The ones that try to solve it slow down FF. This has to be solved at the native level, not in JS.

43. pier25 ◴[16 Jan 20 01:54 UTC] No.22060959{8}[source]▶
When I say polished I don't mean a polished visual style in an aesthetic sense. What I mean is that a designer has put some work on a UI element and after some iterations there has been a conscious decision over why an element looks the way it looks.

For example, one of the major considerations when doing UI design is creating elements that have a cohesive style (regardless of which aesthetic style that is).

None of that happened on that god forgotten alert. It's probably the first thing that someone came up with in a rush, in a style that no other UI element of FF shares, and it has stayed like this probably because nobody cares.

44. samantohermes ◴[16 Jan 20 02:15 UTC] No.22061088[source]▶
Waterfox doesn't really have a future. However, Pale Moon has redundancy in terms of developers and a maintained XUL platform.
45. modo_mario ◴[16 Jan 20 12:32 UTC] No.22063878{3}[source]▶
Do you know how customisable firefox's UI is in ways that chrome isn't? They limited it a bit in recent years so you can no longer can easily turn the url bar and tab bar into one bar which i'm sad about but all in all most of the buttons i don't use i can remove, those i do i can add, i can change the colours, shapes and location. Chrome is ugly by default and doesn't allow me to fix it.
46. modo_mario ◴[16 Jan 20 12:35 UTC] No.22063897[source]▶
Wait you can't scroll trough tabs on macOS? I have hundreds open and can read em perfectly fine
replies(1): >>22071036 #
47. multiplegeorges ◴[16 Jan 20 13:01 UTC] No.22064061{3}[source]▶
Sure, no process is perfect. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

The multilingual thing sounds like a big problem for people that rely on that.

My comment was directed to your other complaints about UX quirks.

48. yoasif_ ◴[17 Jan 20 01:34 UTC] No.22071036{3}[source]▶
You can.