LWN: Comments on "DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates"

We really used to hate NN updates back then

philomath — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 18:06:50 +0000

It never really was.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

dlang — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:48:51 +0000

actually, I suspect that people can say the same, depending on what extensions they are using.

If they are using extensions that stick the the extensions SDK, I expect that they will have had no problems.

However, the Firefox extension mechanism includes the ability to go beyond what the SDK provides (and what Chrome provides) and get into the internals of Firefox. Extensions that do that will be far more likely to have problems, but it also means that they can do things that would be impossible in Chrome.

The state of noscript/adblock type extensions in Chrome compared to Firefox is a good example of where Firefox is better. I've been running bleeding-edge dev Firefox (aurora) for about a year now, with noscript and have not had any problems with it. the noscript developers do things beyond the SDK, but they are careful about it and so do not get broken with upgrades.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

nix — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 18:42:19 +0000

Precisely. I've been running bleeding-edge dev Chrome for a year now, with a dozen extensions, and in all that time not a single one of them has broken. One cannot say the same for Firefox.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

arafel — Tue, 17 Jul 2012 11:28:12 +0000

If they move because they object to the principle of rapid updates, sure, I'd agree.

If they move because they have no problem with the principle of rapid updates, but they do dislike being asked to restart Firefox every 6 weeks, at which time your extensions may or may not work, then no, I'd say they know exactly what they're doing.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

BenHutchings — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 18:26:57 +0000

Tabs? There were no tabs back then. I do not think we even had extensions.

I remember that, and I remember installing the tabs extension shortly after it came out!

The versions were also a single number, only it had a "M" in front, and were also released with a rapid schedule.

That was earlier, when there was just 'Mozilla' with a GUI even busier than Netscape Communicator. That turned into Seamonkey, not Firefox.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

dlang — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:57:58 +0000

Given that Chrome is the browser that started the rapid release process for browsers, anyone moving from Firefox to Chrome because they don't like rapid releases just doesn't know what they are doing.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

arafel — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 14:16:14 +0000

>I find it hard to believe that people moves to chrome due to the fact that
>the rapid release process breaks their extensions, since they will probably
>not find those same extensions in chrome.

That's one of (if not the main reason) why I moved. By the time I moved, a lot of the extensions I used to use no longer worked. Of the ones that remained, some weren't necessary in Chrome (tab handling is nicer out of the box), most had equivalents (ad-block), and the one or two that didn't I could live without.

In the case of my wife, it seemed (to her) that every time she turned on the laptop Firefox wanted to update itself. So she's now on Chrome too - now, no more problems.

Same for my parents.

Regarding the long-support release, I didn't know it even existed, let alone where to find it. If I didn't, there's no reason less technical people should. You're also assuming that people have an attachment to Firefox. By this time, they don't - they've got fed up with the restarts, and they're already looking for something that's not Firefox. As the blog entry says - developers have an attachment to the software, users don't.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

dashesy — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:58:28 +0000

I almost always use maximized windows (more and more applications support tabbed environment BTW), but maximized window does not span to my second monitor. This makes Gnome 2 more effective IMO.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

bojan — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 00:53:48 +0000

> In the 90s I used to retreat to text console only from time to time and I felt incredibly productive. It made it very easy to focus on the task for me.

Nobody is doubting the usefulness of being left along with the task at hand. It's just that Gnome 2 could do that just fine, if with minor tweaks (autohide panel, turn off notifications, maximise window). Forcing everyone to endure constant expose animations and change of views just to achieve the supposed peace was the mistake I was talking about.

And, of course, you now have to write Javascript code (or convince someone to do it), to (re)move an icon, for instance. Totally ridiculous.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

cortana — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:27:29 +0000

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=768813 for any Mozilla bug angels who happen to be passing by. :)

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

bersl2 — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:22:16 +0000

Indeed, I have been thoroughly enjoying the rapid releases. I can finally use the stable versions.

As for GUI changes, I use the vimperator extension, so I have no idea what any of you are talking about. :)

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

kripkenstein — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:37:12 +0000

> Their new updater simply doesn't work.

It sounds like you encountered a serious problem. Have you filed a bug? Or can you tell us more details here at least? This is something that should be fixed.

The drones are coming

hummassa — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:29:57 +0000

> Reading between lines in your mail, it appears that Chrome is actually sending every keystroke to the mothership.

Being really clear: Chrome sends every keystroke IN THE OMNIBOX to the mothership if Google is the default search engine (which is normally the default, yes) and you enable smartmatching (which is also the default). So, yes.

The drones are coming

man_ls — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 22:52:50 +0000

Reading between lines in your mail, it appears that Chrome is actually sending every keystroke to the mothership. By default, except for web history which I never accepted but found enabled one day. You can (or will be able to) avoid some or all of it with extra settings, but right now (unless you take precautionary measures) everything is sent and stored. Given that the US government has the right to access all that information without a search warrant, I would think it is likely they are filtering all that data and sipping it for, don't know, terrorist-related patterns. Given that all that data correlates nicely with your gmail inbox (also available) and now with your real name and stats (thanks to Google+), it only takes a few keystrokes to point the drones your way...

Quick, do they make 10-feet-thick titanium-foil hats?

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

hummassa — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 22:10:15 +0000

Oh oh, here we go, let me put my tinfoil hat...

> Why is it asking me to log in to the browser then? It says on every open tab "Not signed in to Chrome (You're missing out -- sign in)". What am I missing out?

Setting synchronization. Some of us have to use two, three, or even a hundred different computers. If you log into the browser, the browser extensions and settings are replicated throughout all of its instances.

> Why is it sending every keystroke on the google search bar?

So that you can see the search results two to twenty times faster.

> Why are they implementing "do not track" as it says on the link you sent?

Because the users demand it. I do.

> Why is web history enabled by default?

It's not. You have to explicitly enable it, and you have to re-enter your password in order to do so. It's really hard to enable it by accident.

> Why keep all the information by default?

It's not. It just retains the information you want it to retain, it's possible to encrypt your settings and bookmarks with a second pass phrase so that not even google can see it.

> You know, I'm not comfortable with all this.

You can still use it, just do not log in.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

Baylink — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 18:34:18 +0000

Now that I've caught up on all the comments, I *am* sure that lots of extensions fell over dead. My favorite tab wrangler was one of them; on a 12" laptop, that's pretty critical...

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

Baylink — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:56:53 +0000

In fact, it isn't really *not* the version numbers: my problem with it (aside from "doing a major release every six weeks is semantically stupid, for a large number of reasons") is in fact that they are doing a major release every six weeks.

Or, more properly, they're doing *something they're calling* a major release, even though by long defined version numbering standards, most of them are not.

This is most prominent at the plugin interface, where plugin authors, justifiably, do not make their plugins automatically compatible with newer major versions than the one that existed when they shipped...

which means that *all your plugins fall over every 6 weeks*, and that those authors are *forced* to deal with that. I do not *know* that we've lost a lot of useful plugins, but I strongly suspect it.

In case anyone missed it, here's Mitchell Baker's rationalization for this process:

http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2011/08/25/rapid-release-p...

My comment is buried somewhere about halfway down, and it's a little less polite than I usually like; that is in large part because I had just done that a month earlier, when Asterisk made the same stupid mistake:

http://blogs.digium.com/2011/07/21/the-evolution-of-aster...

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

dashesy — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:30:01 +0000

One that I remember; my wife was mad because the home button apparently had changed its position after an update, being as flexible as Firefox is she had managed to restore its desired location. I am not sure if Home button location is major, but sure irritates people.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

pkolloch — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 15:02:01 +0000

I guess your intention was to ridicule Gnome 3 but it touches something true for me.

In the 90s I used to retreat to text console only from time to time and I felt incredibly productive. It made it very easy to focus on the task for me.

Now, it might not be a surprise to you that I love Gnome 3 except of some details (chatting feels awful to me).

With all the complaining about Gnome 3 I wonder if it is possible to create a good shell for everyone.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

nye — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:15:58 +0000

> I love vim and gimp, without having donated a speck of code to either one.

Vim is one of less than half a dozen examples of software that I think is actually quite good, rather than just barely tolerable because everything else is worse.

Gimp is another matter entirely.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

man_ls — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:09:29 +0000

No doubt it's all conspiracy theories. Why is it asking me to log in to the browser then? It says on every open tab "Not signed in to Chrome (You're missing out -- sign in)". What am I missing out? Why is it sending every keystroke on the google search bar? Why are they implementing "do not track" as it says on the link you sent? Why is web history enabled by default? Why keep all the information by default? You know, I'm not comfortable with all this.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

nye — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 13:02:47 +0000

> I find myself using Chrome more and more, despite its irritating "send every keystroke back to the mothership" policy

I wish people would stop repeating this fallacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_chrome#Privacy

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

sorpigal — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:47:41 +0000

If you think that's what BarTab does then you are of a mind with the Mozilla developers, but just as incorrect.

BarTab had a host of useful features of which *one* was lazy loading of tabs upon restart. Firefox does not have (and the developers do not want to add) the other features.

Where is the option to unload tabs after they have been idle for $TIMEFRAME?

Where's the option to lazy-load background tabs?

Where's the option to skip unloaded tabs when choosing the next tab after a tab is closed?

I repeat: still no replacement for BarTab. I'll stick with older Firefox.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

bojan — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 08:11:43 +0000

You probably didn't read the design documents that explain the rationale of the UI changes then. Paraphrase: users must be uninterrupted and focused on their task. Sounds a lot like a text terminal to me...

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

petegn — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 07:17:43 +0000

I do not mind the updates but what does get right up my goat is when an so called update screws with the way i have FF laid out then the sparks fly .

When it comes to the layout NO ONE knows what is best for me better than i my self do . Do NOT touch my layout end of .

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

jzbiciak — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 03:10:17 +0000

If Vim were to go to Firefox's update model, I think that may test your "love."

"My .vimrc broke again? Wait, what happened to my color scheme? GAHHHH."

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

drag — Mon, 09 Jul 2012 01:23:18 +0000

> The problem with Gnome 3 (G)UI change is that it addressed a problem nobody had: how to do single tasking efficiently.

That's a completely bogus statement. There isn't much to discuss further, unfortunately.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

k8to — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:58:19 +0000

Sure, but all your extensions are already working in Firefox. Leaping into the unknown is scary. Will I be able to get readability? Will there be something equivalent to ItsAllText (which should have been built into Mozilla from day 1 and was the most popular bug entry ever for around 6 years). And so on..

Maybe there will be, but you'll have to figure it all out and.. who wants to do that?

Until they all start breaking on Firefox repeatedly, in which case figuring that all starts to seem a lot LESS painful than staying with Firefox.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

cwillu — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:40:10 +0000

He was referring to the API presented to user-space, which is in fact sacred.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

jzbiciak — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 23:34:15 +0000

I believe the comment you're replying to meant external interfaces. For the kernel, that would be the kernel/userspace interface, which *is* stable. Thou Shalt Not Break User Space.

Likewise for a user interface. Rewrite the whole app if you must, but don't change the UI any more than is necessary.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

ibukanov — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 21:03:19 +0000

I fully agree with Jono that updates that causes even a slight interruption trigger bad feeling and should be avoided almost at any cost.

I used to work for Mozilla as a contractor when the decision about rapid release was made. I accepted it as arguments looked reasonable and my reservations against was based mostly on gut feelings.

But now, after being on the receiving end of a similar forced updates system, I truly understand the hatred people have against those updates. On a new project I was given a laptop with a typical setup at the customer site. When updates are available, they are forced on all computers. A message box pops up telling that in 5 minutes the system will be rebooted and I should save all my work. This happened for me the first time when I was deeply into a debugging session and another time when I was writing email that should be finished quickly.

I was not pleased with that to put it mildly. It turned out that I was not along with those negative feelings. People in the office I have asked consider that one of the most hatred feature of the local setup.

Then I realized that as a developer I used to restarting the browser sometimes each few minutes. I was blind to the fact that other my use it as a tool that should just work. With a rapid release process the chance that the update happens at the bad moment for the user is high and that would leave the user with rather negative emotions. Add to that that the update may change the familiar GUI for no reasons and one starts to consider alternatives.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

SilverWave — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 13:46:53 +0000

BarTab

FF > prefs > General > Don't load Tabs until selected.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

akumria — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 12:09:17 +0000

You are right.

Well, you were.

4 releases ago (i.e. Firefox 10), which is 4 * 6 weeks, 24 weeks (i.e. half a year ago) that was changed.

If you haven't, you should retry Firefox. As I believe that particular issue of add-ons being incompatible by default has been addressed.

I don't use Firefox on Windows but, from what I understand, Firefox 13/14 fixes the problem with prompting (UAC). But that is all third hand knowledge to me.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

Pawlerson — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 10:36:16 +0000

No, it's not true for the kernel, because most of the drivers are shipped with it. Stable API is a nightmare.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

gmaxwell — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 05:44:23 +0000

I love a lot of the software I use.

... although, I'm not sure how much of it I'd still love if it changed non-trivially!

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

TheEnormousOne — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 04:30:44 +0000

Personally I love Firefox and hate Chrome. Coming from years of using Netscape browsers, I find FF much easier to use than Chrome. The interface of FF just seems more user friendly to me and the PIs are great. Have never seen a PI that if it didn't work after update it wasn't fixed shortly thereafter.

We really used to hate NN updates back then

zlynx — Sun, 08 Jul 2012 01:15:03 +0000

The days when Internet Explorer really was the best browser available for free.

DiCarlo: Everybody hates Firefox updates

man_ls — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 21:51:41 +0000

I find it hard to believe that people moves to chrome due to the fact that the rapid release process breaks their extensions, since they will probably not find those same extensions in chrome.

Interesting. I think that the argument goes like this: when people evaluate Firefox vs Chrome, they weigh all their extensions and customizations vs the faster, shinier Chrome. But once extensions start to break, there is no reason to stay and people flock to Chrome.

Truth is, with AdBlock installed, Chrome is a pleasant browser with lots of nice touches. Tabs feel snazzy, and when the browser crashes only the current tab is affected. As an anecdote, Firefox just ate a previous version of this comment because I was playing with bookmarks...

We really used to hate NN updates back then

man_ls — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 21:36:28 +0000

Luxury. I remember NN (as we called it back then, Netscape Navigator) 3.x on Mac, starting with 3.0 which displayed all pages blank, through with 3.02 which crashed twice per page visited; and up to the horrible Communicator suite which came with a half-baked email/news client, an atrocious chat thing and an even worse page editor (which I am sure made many people reconsider their future lives as web designers and go back to daddy's butcher shop. With gratitude.) There were other, less pleasant products also integrated in the suite.

That was right before Netscape entered a long, long tunnel of a rewrite which took them right below the AOL/Time Warner merger and through to being spun off as a non-profit for the first Firefox releases. (I hear there were some releases down there, but probably nobody saw them.) The best result of that long winter was probably Spolsky's article about major rewrites, so imagine that.

Use Debian stable and you're fine

debacle — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 20:28:50 +0000

In fact, I tried the backport once, but much-loved extensions are not backported, e.g. I believe xul-ext-scrapbook was not available at that time. So I moved back to the version in stable.

(Btw. on my private desktop, I'm running testing, which has the ESR version.)