Firefox 29 released

What I do is instead of setting a shortcut to the application on the homepage is to put a bookmark link with the browser icon on the home screen. Works similarly and I use the "Recent App" functionality most of the time.

You have a strange definition of 'usable'.

There's no homepage because the app lifecycle is completely different on mobile. Android guidelines (and since the first version) advise to always show the app in the same state as when the user left it. Then there can be no concept of "start page" since the app is only started once (after install), and then always continued.

Thanks. So I take it there is a new sync protocol in the latest Firefox, with no server released yet, but that it can still use the old protocol? It would be wonderful if they actually put these things in the release notes.

Adding more details:

The data is still encrypted on client-side but the key is not randomly generated but instead, derived from the password. (This is how Chrome Sync works as well).

Also, the new Firefox version cannot be used to add a new device to the old sync server. So for any new devices, stick to the previous version of Firefox.

The point important for me is that people who liked FF28 and before are no longer in the game - thus I did not list the changes which bother me.
As said before, any add-on may not work in future - like oribit scheme and many add-ons which I used to install.
So I would not trust add-ons to be there in a few years - and thus got really minimalistic.
To say no has a reason - many things are similar to Chrome - I played with Chorme and it is faster, has much better Flash support (really built-in without a crappy plug-in and updated to current versions), but I really dislike the UI.
Now the clear menus of FF are gone (which are not enough but have to enhanced by "about:config" - but this is another story) and similar to Chrome there is the `garbage can' on the right where several menu items are burried.
If I am forced to get accustomed to a Chrome-like UI, the 1st thing would be to give Chrome a try - which is faster and more compatible with content.
So if Mozilla wanted to release their users to the other big browser, this was the best they could to reach that goal.
I liked the menus - the efficient tabs - I knew which scheme and which 2 add-ons I need and had just 5 preferences to change ... a routined job.
Now it starts with FlashVideoDownloader icon to the extreme left (i.e. 1st place for an add-on! - before it was sanely put next to the URL bar), I could not find things I used several times a day in several minutes (that was were GNOME3 and Unity came to my mind) and experienced the striking similarity with Chrome - which I only put to 2nd place because of its UI (on old computers it's impressive how FF is wasting performance compared to Chrome - but I have quite fast machines anyway ...).
If I had no choice I may have played longer - tried the classic UI addon ... but why. To rely on an add-on which may be abandoned in one of the next few FF release as many before?
That's the reason I hate the scheme and add-ons - it is not clear they are around next time and I was bitten several times in the past.
If a user who is happy with an UI is forced to a new one he/she is well adviced to consider alternatives.
So it's not a matter of wish list to fullfill to be a happy user again - it's a matter of classic UI as option in standard browser or clear focus on alternatives.
And the new UI is not superior in any way - it's inefficient (similar to ribbons in M$ office - but fans do exist even for this change - I hope Libre Office will not use Ribbons as only UI if they are allowed to do it. ;-).
But I really would like to see a list of efficiency improvements by the new UI (from non-Chrome users/co-users of cause ;-).
Not just "it's fresh - as it is new" - and IMHO using an UI similar to a `rival' (or {former} main sponsor - you name it) is neither fresh nor new.
After users are forced to use the UI I would like to see Mozilla asking their users what UI they prefer - and if more than 30% would vote for classic Mozilla should do more than allowing an incomplete classic add-on.
The question from my point of view - why did Mozilla not try out new UI design changes via add-ons and look how many times they are used? Maybe they knew it would not be that numerously taken?
The 1st part of the name UI is user - so they should decide what is efficient for _their_ workflow.
KDE4/GNOME3/Unity lost huge parts of their user base - when will companies / developers / ... learn?

Not the original poster, but I just installed FF 29 on my Windows work PC to check it out. Fortunately, I don't use that computer for actual browsing. Some initial impressions:

* The menu bar is now in the title bar. If I turn off the menu bar, the title bar disappears. This means that I also lose all window controls, such as minimize, maximize, closing, and even window movement (no alt+button1 to drag on Windows)! This is on Windows 7 using the classic theme, btw.

* Losing the traditional title bar means I don't see the page's title on the window. Minor, but a little annoying.

* I use the tree style tab extension. The new rounded tabs look exceptionally silly there, as there are huge misplaced images on either side of the tab. Also, the tab height is about twice as big as it use to be, meaning that I could only open half as many tabs before it requires scrolling. Arguably, this is an incompatibility between base FF and an extension, but it is a completely unnecessary one.

* The "icon" menu is interesting, but not at all as useful as the traditional text based menus because it can only hold a small subset of functions.

* The new customize mode is more confusing. It took me a while to figure out how to exit the customization mode. Who would have thought that one of the buttons on the icon menu that I was editing was actually a real button?? The dialog based version was easier to understand. Maybe the "done" button should not look like it was part of the UI being customized.

* Using the classic theme restorer addon, I was able to restore most functionality. It even made the tabs in tree style tab not as tall. But it is frustrating that someone had to make an extension to fix all these things. How long will this extension work?

Of course all this is on the Windows version. I haven't dared upgrade on Linux where I do most browsing. Does anyone know if these changes affected that version, too?

Really ? You guys must have a lot more in your setup than I do.

I read the slashdot comments while I was downloading 29, made a note about how to fix it if it was as bad as people said, and then compiled it. Colour me unimpressed by curved corners on the tabs, and something is different about all the icons moving to top left - but I could not honestly tell you _how_ it has changed, so my impression is that yes, it has changed, but the difference is not important.

I don't like the position of the menu button. I suggest a couple of changes:
- Put the menu button in the left top corner (in the same place than the old firefox button). The same way the pinned tabs look but with the menu icon.
- Change the lines color on the menu icon to orange! (It is really important to leave some orange on the browser for identity purposes).

I don't understand. The new tabs don't waste any space (at least no more than the old tabs). The sloped edges overlap the tabs next to them. Each individual tab is wider without making the overall tab bar any wider because tabs next to each other share the same space.