Yes. It's also shrinking to be almost the only reason I run Firefox. I absolutely loathe the constant tinkering with UI and settings, they just can't seem to leave stuff alone. The ghacks user.js does get rid of a lot of nuisances, but I also know some people also want to get rid of the user.js config option.

I wonder if any of them read HN or feedback from the feedback page or anything?

I can't help but think the designers do not care. I'm guessing the UI/UX folks at Mozilla think only a loud minority of users are protesting the incessant redesigns. They probably look towards what Apple and Google do and believe they have to follow trends or be left behind. They also probably want to be seen as bold and innovative - so damn the metaphorical torpedoes, full speed ahead!

Edit: The kind of feedback they're willing to accept is probably only barely impactful. Suggest going back to the old tab bar? Sorry, but you'll learn to love it and we aren't changing it. Suggest a slightly different shade of gray for the edge of the rounded tab bar? They might just take the suggestion. That kind of thing.

The "Submit feedback" menu entry now links to their ideas@mozilla platform, launched several months ago:

https://mozilla.crowdicity.com

They seem to be reading and considering some of the suggestions, though none have been implemented yet.

- Most popular idea (819 votes): Compact Interface Option - https://mozilla.crowdicity.com/post/719764

- Most critical idea (in my opinion): Expand support for extensions for the stable android version - https://mozilla.crowdicity.com/post/723675

No, they only pay attention to feedback from their telemetry. HN users mostly disable telemetry, right?

> No, they only pay attention to feedback from their telemetry

If that's true, it probably explains why they're bleeding users. Why stick with a company that ignores your complaints?

I don't.

What UI changes? I run firefox nightly for ages and minor sizing changes are barely noticeable. The biggest change was moving of address bar lower and tabs higher.

Some that come to mind:

* completely changing the settings UI;

* the very annoying "present" icon that appears after updates;

* constantly messing the address bar in how it works and what it searches;

* constantly re-enabling stuff like searching in Amazon and Google;

* changing the menu to the hamburger menu.

There's probably more that I forgot. But it seems every two or three months or so I need to make effort to turn off some feature I don't want. Stuff like the stupid pocket functionality no one ever asked for.

Proton is not even six months old, surely you must remember.

So independent all their funding is provided by Google.

Not all, some funding is.

>Last year, more than 400,000 individuals gave to Mozilla to protect and improve the health of the Internet. The Mozilla Foundation also receives support in the form of grants from other like-minded major foundations, including the Knight, MacArthur, Bill & Melinda Gates, and Ford foundations.

But the foundation is not responsible for Firefox development, isn't it? It's the corporation which can't be supported through donations iirc.

I don't know the exact figures of how it operates. According to Wikipedia Firefox is "developed by the Mozilla Foundation and its subsidiary, the Mozilla Corporation".

As luck would have it: it's inferior in most aspects. Security, Usability (UI, responsiveness), Performance, Defaults (Privacy)...

Security: Is it the case? (legitimate question) Usability: It works really well for me, even on old computers. Could be better, but in comparison with the other browsers, it does well. Performance: This I don't get, it's snappy, and light for me, feels more solid and less resource hungry than chrome based browsers

Defaults settings are far from being great, but there's no competition in term of privacy, firefox + ublock origin is still the best option.

And don't forget support for the latest Web APIs. Fewer and fewer new, heavy web-apps work on it. I love everything else about Firefox but if they can't keep up on the API side it's going to increasingly impede my workflow.

This is not 100% fair.

A lot of web APIs are rolled out by Google without sufficient standardization or agreement from the other organizations that ship engines. So Google is being a poor citizen here, but because of their dominance, everybody else is blamed.

I really would like you to explain all of those, especially the first and the last. In what way is it less secure or private than the alternatives?