Firefox 89 and Proton

So, the latest Firefox is out with an all-new Proton design and apparently, may cause even the most diehard of Google Chrome fans to switch to it. I've seen the screenshots and I'm not a fan on how the tabs now look but at least there's Dark Mode to actually see them. I wonder if anybody else has their own opinion of it.

For myself, I still use 78 ESR and I will be welcomed with Proton when 91 ESR is out in October. However, I still have Pale Moon as a handy back-up...

Discuss.

Comments

  • It looks fine, I guess. The tab bar design is a bit weird but I could probably get used to it. It certainly isn't enough to make me switch from Chrome though.
    It's funny how all these other browsers are trying to copy chrome to get people to switch... Why would I use the imitation when I have the real thing?
  • @BlueSun
    It certainly isn't enough to make me switch from Chrome though.
    Well, Firefox now boasts more privacy protection which I forgot to add to my initial post.

    Also, I hope it can let me keep the Menu Bar even if the browser is deliberately copying Chrome.
  • I like it, but I don't know why compact mode was suddenly dropped.
  • > > It's funny how all these other browsers are trying to copy chrome to get people to switch... Why would I use the imitation when I have the real thing?

    indeed. firefox is missing big features that chrome users regularly use such as PWAs. Mozilla for a time was developing their own version of that but then stopped development on it.

    >I like it, but I don't know why compact mode was suddenly dropped.

    I mean it's mozilla, they love removing features for no good reason. It's only a matter of time till userchrome.css is totally disabled.

  • Firefox 89... the one that broke font rendering in Vista! For now, anyway. I'm not sure if I can fix GDI in time for October.
  • Don't know why browsers are copying Chrome in the first place... you'd think Google wouldn't allow that. Much like every major brand can allow the likes of Aldi to copy their products just for a "cheap" discount.
  • It is so, so, so, so, incredibly tiresome how everyone wants to keep changing around user interfaces for no good reason.



    This is roughly how a real web browser should look. Proper standard system window management controls, on Microsoft Windows this includes the title bar, maximize, minimize, and system box. Proper standard File menu, which is something I use all the freaking time. Back, forwards, reload, URL bar (not a "search" bar, although it happens this one can do that), download manager, and activity indicator (AKA throbber). Then a user bookmark toolbar, web page in the middle, and status bar at the bottom.

    Tabs? Sorry, the OSes I usually use have good window management, so I don't need or want that bad workaround.

    Too much vertical space? I feel so sorry for consumertards who think shortscreen monitors are somehow desirable. (Heck, I had to use one of those the other day, and reading on it was a pain, not to mention they had the resolution set wrong so text and its artifacting looked like it was rendered on an Apple II).

    I could go on and on and on.


  • I mean, apart from the tabs, it's fundamentally the same as your example. The status bar isn't there all the time, but it does show status messages when needed.

    As far as tabs go, it's kind of been one of Firefox's main features since it was released. I never saw the point of them back in the day, but everyone wanted them. These days, I do like having tabs. Keeping all the web stuff in one window is nice.
  • Geez, this update is worse than I thought.

  • If DNS over HTTPS bothers you, turn it off. It's a setting. It wasn't even enabled in my firefox after doing the update, so they clearly aren't actually forcing it on you. As long as they let you choose the provider which includes a custom option, then I don't really care if it's a feature or not.

    Now, if they do DNS over HTTPS with no way to turn it off or change the provider... then that's a problem.


  • I've never really cared what my browser looks like, to me they are mostly the same, and I'm fine with that.

    And I'm sure browsers will be fundamentally the same for the foreseeable future, and honestly, I don't think all that many people really care. Web browsers are like cars: sure, they may be different from each other, but they all do the same thing.
  • Usually whenever they change the UI, I'm annoyed by it for a bit, but then I get used to it. It only really pisses me off when it messes with my muscle memory.
  • The DoH tech by itself does not seem like the worst idea, but the problem is how Firefox is using this to redirect everyone's DNS traffic away from their ISP and hand it over to cloudflare. Ideally DoH should be provided by one's ISP - they already know and control where your traffic is going so if you can't trust them, then there is already a serious problem. I am aware of some ISPs who are not really trustworthy in this regard.

    I do understand why some people wanted tabs when they were put in to Firefox, the window management on some OSes didn't handle large numbers of windows very well. Mac wants people to do one thing at a time, and Linux can be all over the place. When Windows started grouping windows from the same application, that meant extra clicks. The problem gets to be that it forces me to waste space for tabs when I don't use them.

    Another big problem with changing UIs around is that it breaks documentation. A lot of users can only follow click-by-click instructions and when the instructions don't match, they can't do whatever they are doing. It used to be that UIs usually only changed with major revisions, and those could be prepared for well enough in advance. These days a developer in the marketing department presses a button and suddenly it is all different for everyone.
  • edited June 6
    I don't really understand the distrust in cloudflare. What are you people doing that it matters even slightly that cloudflare knows you resolved a domain? Assuming they can even determine it's you.
    My bigger problem with DNS over HTTP is that name resolution really should be a OS task, so implementation of this should be at the OS level.

    As for using the ISPs name servers, forget that. It's not a trust issue for me, but rather the fact that ISP name servers tend to be the slowest and they love to take over NX domains to show you ads. No thanks.
Sign In or Register to comment.