What We're Working on in Firefox

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Firefox’s roadmap of features like vertical tabs, tab grouping, improved profiles, and performance gains is welcomed by many who see the browser as fast, capable, and still vital as a non-Chromium engine. At the same time, long‑time users worry that “streamlined” menus, reduced customization, and past extension breakages show Mozilla chasing Chrome’s mainstream audience at the expense of power users, while still failing to reverse Firefox’s declining market share. Underlying the reactions are broader concerns about Mozilla’s dependence on Google search money, the risk of a Chromium monoculture, missing capabilities such as full PWA support, and whether Firefox can remain both privacy‑protective and competitive.

Overall sentiment & history

  • Many are glad Firefox is still around, recalling Phoenix/early Firefox releases and how they displaced IE.
  • Current browser (v126 era) is generally viewed as fast and capable, but people are worried about its shrinking market share and Mozilla’s strategic direction.
  • Several say they use Firefox primarily because it’s not Chromium and see it as vital to prevent a Chrome monoculture.

UI, menus, and “simplification”

  • Strong split on “streamlined menus” and simplified UI:
    • Critics fear further “Gnome‑ification,” loss of options, and harder discoverability; they want expert modes and deep customization.
    • Others welcome decluttering and argue that minimal, focused interfaces are more usable and aesthetically better.
  • Long‑time users lament erosion of customization (status bar, compact mode, XUL, classic menus), and reliance on userChrome.css or third‑party themes to restore old behavior.

Tabs, containers, profiles

  • Native tab grouping, vertical tabs, and better sidebar/profile management are widely welcomed; many have relied on Sidebery/Tree Style Tabs and want first‑class, synced implementations.
  • Container tabs are praised as more useful than traditional profiles, especially for multiple accounts and AWS sessions; some want native URL‑to‑container rules and smoother behavior.

Extensions, about:config, PWA

  • Anger persists over past extension breakages (XUL → WebExtensions) and the limited extension set/about:config removal on mobile; some accept sandboxing as a security win, others see it as needless crippling.
  • Many want proper PWA support back; lack of installable web apps is a deal‑breaker for some.
  • Desire for finer‑grained extension permissions similar to Chrome is mentioned.

Performance, power, and compatibility

  • Mixed reports: Firefox is snappy and efficient for some (esp. on Linux); Mac users report worse battery life and heat than Chrome/Safari during video or calls.
  • Calls for better hardware‑accelerated video, WebRTC offload, and completion of WebCodecs.
  • Debate over Firefox not implementing some draft APIs (WebUSB, WebBluetooth): some see it as privacy‑protective, others as a competitiveness gap.

Privacy, business model, and strategy

  • Firefox’s privacy stance and on‑device features (translation, PDF AI alt text) are appreciated, but ads/promos on the start page and Google’s dominant funding raise trust concerns.
  • Several argue Mozilla abandoned power users to chase mainstream Chrome‑like UX, alienating its evangelists without winning mass users.