Mozilla plans far-reaching changes to Protective features in Firefox

Martin Brinkmann
Jun 21, 2019

Mozilla plans to improve the protective features of the Firefox web browser further by making user interface changes, introducing social blocking as a new tracking protection feature and protection reports, and launching a new service called Firefox Proxy.

Mozilla improved the Tracking Protection feature of the Firefox web browser with the release of Firefox 67.0 in May 2019. The organization added fingerprinting and cryptomining protections to Firefox, and enabled third-party tracking cookies blocking in Firefox 67.0.1 by default.

A series of new mockups suggest that Mozilla plans to make far-reaching changes to the protective features in Firefox. It needs to be noted that the plans could change, and that the final product could look different.

Away with the i-icon, new tracking protection panel

firefox tracking protection panel

Firefox users may access site information with a click on the i-icon in the browser currently. A click on the icon displays information about the connection, tracking protection, and site permissions.

Mozilla plans to remove the icon from Firefox and separate information into a Tracking Protection panel and the lock icon for the connection.

The organization identified several issues with the current design including information overload, no separation of blocked and unblocked items, vague terminology, and visibility issues.

The shield icon of the Tracking Protection feature will be visible all the time. A click on the icon displays only Tracking Protection options and information:

  • Tracking Protection on/off toggle.
  • Site not working repair suggestions and report option.
  • Elements that are blocked and elements that are not blocked but can be blocked are displayed.
  • Not blocking information.
  • Link to Protection settings.
  • Link to the new Protection report.

The lock icon that indicates the security of the connection gets new functionality as well. Mozilla moves the connection information and site permissions to the icon.mozilla-messages tracking protection panel

The new layout paves the way for a new type of interaction that Mozilla would like to implement. Mozilla could use the panel to push information and other content to the panel using a new Messaging system.

New Social Blocking feature

firefox social media tracking

Social Blocking is a new Tracking Protection feature that blocks social media sites from tracking users across the Internet. The feature blocks trackers such as like-buttons or embeds on third-party sites to eliminate or reduce tracking.

Firefox may display prompts to temporarily disable social trackers if they are required for user interaction, e.g. when a sign in requires that certain trackers are allowed as it would not work otherwise.  Firefox users may allow tracking temporarily to complete the process.

Firefox may display a notification at the top of the web page if it detected that social media tracker blocking blocked content elements such as login forms on the page. The browser displays an option to load the page with tracking protections turned off to access the missing functionality.

Protection Reports

private protections report

Another new feature that Mozilla plans to introduce is a reporting feature called Protection Report. The browser displays the number of blocked trackers per day of the week and sorted into categories such as cross-site trackers or social trackers.

The report provides Firefox Monitor and Firefox Lockwise information as well. Firefox Monitor is a breach-checking and notification service, and the report highlights the number of monitored email addresses, known breaches, and exposed passwords.

Firefox Lockwise is a password manager. The report displays the number of stored and duplicate passwords.

Firefox Proxy

firefox proxy

Mozilla has not announced Firefox Proxy officially. A mockup describes the service in the following way:

Stay safe on public Wi-Fi

Firefox Proxy makes wireless hotspots more secure to protect you from hackers

Firefox Proxy will be made available as a browser extension, at least initially. Whether it is the name of the upcoming VPN service that Mozilla could introduce later this year or something else is not clear at this point in time.

It could detect connections to public wireless networks and inform the user that connections to these networks are insecure and that the use of a VPN or proxy server could improve security; this would be an ideal placement to advertise the free/paid Mozilla VPN.

Closing Words

Mozilla plans to improve the protection features of the Firefox web browser and make usability improvements at the same time. The removal of the i-icon will be irritating to users in the beginning but it seems likely that Mozilla will inform users about the change on first run.

Now You: What is your take on these changes? (via Sören)

Mozilla plans far-reaching changes to Protective features in Firefox
Article Name
Mozilla plans far-reaching changes to Protective features in Firefox
Mozilla plans to improve the protective features of the Firefox web browser further by making user interface changes, introducing social blocking as a new tracking protection feature and protection reports, and launching a new service called Firefox Proxy.
Ghacks Technology News

Tutorials & Tips

Previous Post: «
Next Post: «


  1. Stan said on June 22, 2019 at 7:15 pm

    The UI/X is becoming so complicated it’s almost like clickbait to get to the required option.
    (See the new beta/nightly add-ons disaster)
    Few new users will navigate that mess, which of course is the intention.
    Time to call confuse a cat ?

  2. censor bob said on June 22, 2019 at 6:03 pm

    firefox has been embroiled in many privacy scams over the last few years. mozilla mixes up the feature set to confuse users, take away more control and snatch your data in one obscure fashion after another, its been a downward spiral for years. they polish that turd as bright as they can to fool the masses. I can hear them in the board room, “hey lets make a shiny new icon”, pathetic. Even the new features they add aren’t worth my time. I’m not interested in proving it, do a search you’ll find out what most people know, defenders make me lmfao. really it comes down to two types, those who don’t care about privacy and those who are pissed. I made the decision years ago to switch to Palemoon. I use the toggle javscript extension along with their add blocker, a private list and a custom host file. I have very few problems, when I do I launch FF esr portable with the ghacks privacy config and only allow those configs I need to get the job done. Its frustrating having to goto these lengths. I wish we could go back to the interwebs of the early aughts but that’s a pipe dream. There’s big money to be had in data snatching. Once those $’s get offered most people sell out instantly.

  3. Stan said on June 22, 2019 at 5:01 pm

    The Washington Post !? LOL :)
    I’m asked to pay $4 to read fake news from that propaganda sheet !
    No doubt THE RUSSIANS!!! have a mole hiding in Chrome…

    1. ULBoom said on June 23, 2019 at 4:25 am

      Don’t pay them.
      Pay me instead.
      Advice isn’t free around here you know!

    2. Anonymous said on June 22, 2019 at 9:39 pm

      There is no evidence of the Russians in Chrome–of Google products they use Google search and YouTube (among many others–Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.) to sabotage elections.

      The Washington Post is one of the two greatest newspapers in America and it has been for decades. Followers of a treasonous orange pathological liar may not want like the Post’s light being shined on his crimes, but just because you don’t like something does not make it propaganda. To give a more concrete example of what propaganda really is look once at Faux “News” [sic].

  4. smaragdus said on June 22, 2019 at 12:58 pm

    @Iron Heart @Lambo-san
    Don’t waste your time entering into discussions with brain-washed people like Tom Hawack, it is total waste of time

  5. Hy said on June 22, 2019 at 5:18 am

    The Washington Post’s tech columnist says goodbye to Chrome today, declares it to be spy/surveillance software (!), and ditches it for Firefox:

    1. Iron Heart said on June 22, 2019 at 9:13 am

      Firefox is spyware by default, too. You need to tweak it in about:config in order to make it not so. That‘s what is never mentioned when people talk about Firefox.

      1. Anonymous said on June 22, 2019 at 8:58 pm

        Uh, no, not in the same ways at all. That is a false equivalency; to say that is misleading.

        Firefox is not made by an advertising company, let alone the world’s biggest advertising company, and the web’s “biggest snoop of all” (Google).

        Firefox also does not collect all of the websites you visit like Google Chrome does, and add it to the dossier they already have on you from all of your web searches, if you’ve ever used Google search, and your emails, if you’re unfortunate and foolish enough to use Google Gmail for your email. There is really virtually no equivalent to this degree of massively invasive data-siphoning. Imagine if someone (and there are millions who do) uses Google search and Google Gmail and Google Chrome browser. That is a staggering amount of personal data being harvested and collected by one company–Google. Firefox does not even come CLOSE to this. As the article notes, “Firefox isn’t perfect…but it doesn’t share browsing data with Mozilla, which isn’t in the data-collection business” to begin with. “It’s a tale of two browsers — and the diverging interests of the companies that make them.” People should read the article and make up their own minds rather than solely listening to competing comments here.

        Some commenters on ghacks bash Firefox every chance they get, but if Firefox dies, what happens then? Near-total Google Chromium dominance. The web is a better place with Firefox.

      2. Anonymous said on June 24, 2019 at 3:07 pm

        Anonymous said on June 22, 2019 at 8:58 pm : Firefox isn’t perfect…but it doesn’t share browsing data with Mozilla

        True, Firefox is sharing the browsing data, but not of 100% of the users for now. So it’s spyware but less than Google which is all that matters.

        Anonymous said on June 22, 2019 at 8:58 pm : Mozilla, which isn’t in the data-collection business

        True again, the browsing data that Mozilla monetizes for advertising is not collected, it is used locally. Data collection happened for Cliqz, but it was only some Germans.

      3. Anonymous said on June 27, 2019 at 9:58 am

        “Anonymous,” you sound familiar…

        Those are incredible claims you make, without providing any evidence.

        “Firefox is sharing the browsing data…” Please provide references with links to substantiate this claim. Thank you.

        “browsing data that Mozilla monetizes for advertising…” Again, please provide references with links to substantiate this claim. Thank you so much.

  6. Anonymous said on June 22, 2019 at 12:08 am

    I think that they need to implement a whitelist, because some sites are broken (ex.twitter frames on every site) and the only workaround is to disable it and use extensions that offer more granularity like uBlock Orign and uMatrix.

  7. My Patreon: said on June 21, 2019 at 7:23 pm

    I just left Mozilla products alone, no more a Mozilla Corp. customer.

    I am Free — D. Icke

  8. MOYcano said on June 21, 2019 at 6:17 pm

    I think I found something strange in the latest 3-4 versions: Ctrl + L doesn’t work for the left-side key. Everything else seems to work just fine with both Ctrl keys (Ctrl + C, V, T, Tab, K…).

  9. Clairvaux said on June 21, 2019 at 3:21 pm

    I’m glad I’m using a browser for grown-ups now. There are plenty of enthusiastic Vivaldi users, but I’ve yet to meet one berating a fellow computer user because he doesn’t like Vivaldi.

    1. ULBoom said on June 21, 2019 at 6:59 pm

      Vivaldi’s forums are more polite than most and noticeably less inane. Maybe Vivaldian’s go outside, live to do something beside complain, and have fun in life, IDK.

      Could be there’s a subliminal stream of The Four Seasons that calms posters. :)

  10. Mo said on June 21, 2019 at 2:48 pm

    I love that blocking social tracker is going to be built into FF.

  11. Plot thickener said on June 21, 2019 at 11:41 am

    Sounds good, definitely keep going on improving privacy for default users.

    I hope I’ll still be able to quickly access permissions, site security and site information in general, though. Until now they’ve been staying accessible all along even though this part of the browser UI changed a lot, so there’s hope.

  12. Pedro said on June 21, 2019 at 11:00 am

    As opposed to what some others like to say around here, no Firefox is not a joke, and we get it you miss those tens of heavy extensions that slowed Firefox to a crawl.
    Unfortunately, they need to evolve with time.

    Right now Firefox is great and is constantly improving. Are there other great browsers based on Chromium? Yes. Go use them if you prefer them.

    With Firefox I can have all the privacy add-ons that I want, Dark Reader, VPNs, the sync with the Android version works perfect (always had issues in Chrome with that) and I can also install AMOLED black themes, uBlock Origin and the Dark Reader extension in the Android version.

  13. MozillaFail100thtime said on June 21, 2019 at 9:47 am

    All this while selling data to 3rd parties and implementing Google as default search engine. Epic.

    1. ULBoom said on June 21, 2019 at 6:48 pm

      Well, that’s certainly a step up from Yahoo although it’s not hard to top Yahoo.

    2. subscribe to my youtube channel said on June 21, 2019 at 2:00 pm

      Do you have any other method by which Mozilla can make revenue? I’m sure they would be pretty interested by it.

      1. Ayy said on June 21, 2019 at 6:50 pm

        why does Mozilla need to make revenue? Just to push more Soros funded initiatives like their “anti fake news” filters, or their “diversity and inclusion” programs, because they surely don’t pay developers to code the browser.

      2. Anonymous said on June 23, 2019 at 6:56 am

        “Just to push more Soros funded initiatives”
        It seems we have a extreme right winger her

    3. Tom said on June 21, 2019 at 1:43 pm

      Mozilla is not selling data to 3rd parties. Please don’t spread such lies. But of course your pseudonym already tells us that you’re a troll.

      1. Iron Heart said on June 21, 2019 at 3:20 pm


        The Cliqz experiment Mozilla ran some time ago happened to send your entire browsing history to a third party. Just saying.

      2. owl said on June 22, 2019 at 4:00 am

        @MozillaFail100thtime, For example Google is default search engine.
        > Is the chicken ahead? , Or the egg?
        Previously, DuckDuckGo was the search engine of default. However, the overwhelming majority wanted “Google search”.
        Search engine can be easily changed.
        Is such a level thing a serious defect of Firefox? It is too ridiculous.

        @Iron Heart, The Cliqz experiment Mozilla ran some time ago happened to send your entire browsing history to a third party.
        > “Cliqz” was an experimental project in Germany, and its purpose and privacy policy were specified. By no means the user was forced to use.

        Both should stop fake news!

      3. Iron Heart said on June 22, 2019 at 9:11 am


        You fail to mention that Cliqz came by default with 2% of all Firefox downloads in Germany, without the user being notified about the spyware being included.

        Please reduce your lying a bit, thank you.

      4. MozillaFail100thtime said on June 21, 2019 at 2:10 pm

        Maybe not directly selling data but they have “affiliations”. For example Google is default search engine. How deep the rabbit hole goes find for yourself at

  14. Lambo-san said on June 21, 2019 at 9:15 am

    Firefox has been a joke since they released version 4 back around 2011. I tried very hard to like it, but I can’t. It’s just a joke. It isn’t even properly supported by some websites. For example, if I want to download something from, I have to use a Chromium-based browser instead.

    1. Yuliya said on June 22, 2019 at 12:16 am

      I think Firefox can’t download more than 2GiB from Mega:
      Trying to do so, I get the message: “Unfortunately, Firefox has an insufficient buffer to decrypt data in the browser, please install the MEGA desktop app to download large files (or use Chrome)”
      It’s mainly due to the fact that mozilla decided to have the browser done by telemetry developers and data analysts, instead of actually skilled developers who know what they are doing.

      On Fx v4, I actually liked that version. It was way, way better than v3, which was horrible and every browsing session would be ended in a crash (mainly due to plugins, such as Flash, but no excuse as other browsers did not have this problem). I liked the UI, it was a copycat of Opera’s UI – eh, I guess if you can’t come up with anything original, and good, at the same time, copying good designs isn’t that terrible. Sadly they threw it away with the Australis abomination, and again in v57 – now Firefox is nothing more than a glorified spyware – a data aggregator about its users, reporting everything to mozilla, so they can further sell you to 3rd parties – add some delusional mozillians constantly defending this and you get the full picture of the reality about Firefox in its current state.

      But no matter how much they try, people will never forget about this:
      And if you do, well, I’m here to remind you all ;)

      1. ULBoom said on June 23, 2019 at 4:20 am


        Uh, No, I at least can download more than 2 gigs from and there’s nothing special about my FF installation beyond knowing how to use it.

        The bizarre logic of those jilted, moving to a far worse choice on the rebound then singing the sour grapes anthem to no one but themselves is really special.

      2. Yuliya said on June 23, 2019 at 1:00 pm

        Wow, ok. Here is a mega link to a 7GiB file:!TR4jTCYT!gAlzkkUJ7pLMLxfXWt5GK0BEX014chKjz6UCHONd24w

        … and here is a screenshot of Firefox being a piece of trash, and Chromium working just fine:

        Do feel free to prove us all wrong, You master of browsers. .

    2. Tom Hawack said on June 22, 2019 at 12:10 am

      @Lambo-san, have you checked your Firefox protections? And even if downloading from is impossible (though I doubt it), an exception or even a few doesn’t make a browser a joke.

      By the way when I read complaints about Firefox issues, site rendering problems it’s always by naggers who share little or nothing about the details of their experience. So What other sites, name them, be explicit. I’ve never encountered such issues and i do visit quite a lot of places, even in Latin America, Russia, Far-East.

      Firefox has a lot of settings available. Make sure you set things correctly and don’t unset them incorrectly. Of course less a browser provides user settings less it is vulnerable to issues.

    3. asd said on June 21, 2019 at 9:18 pm

      If Firefox is so terrible, why have you not got over it since 2011?!?!

    4. bwat47 said on June 21, 2019 at 8:39 pm

      I’ve never had any issues with with firefox

    5. ULBoom said on June 21, 2019 at 6:45 pm

      My router firmware updates come from No problem downloading with FF or Chromium and my FF has many config changes, ad/tracking blocker, etc. I’ve never, at least not in many years, had a site access issue with FF that was fixed by switching to Chromium.

    6. Iron Heart said on June 21, 2019 at 3:13 pm


      Of course some sites are better optimized for Chromium browsers these days, because websites admins can’t afford to waste their time supporting a fringe browser like Firefox, with 5% combined desktop + mobile market share.

      As you can see, you will be burned at the stake around here for saying anything like this. Look at that smart guy @Kubrick, for example, who just comes up with the ridiculous assumption that you would visit some fishy website, just to taint your argument. I would gladly say what I think about super-smart comments like this, but gHacks would censor my comment in response.

      1. owl said on June 22, 2019 at 3:20 am

        @Iron Heart,
        You do not respond to my reply,
        But you are yelling “the same, fake news (Hardly anybody uses Firefox)” again. You hate Firefox, so it seems that you can not judge the truth.

        Up-to-date analysis of quoted sources and the “statcounter” you used:–2019-06-21

        On the other hand, such analysis is also:
        Firefox 40.9%

      2. Anonymous said on June 24, 2019 at 2:23 pm

        owl said : Firefox 40.9%

        Thanks owl ! I am glad I can still find non fake news comments that comfort me in my beliefs ! I am certain that anyone who would assert that there might be a bias in browser stats shouldn’t be trusted. I hope that some day the Firefox proxy can filter those hateful and conspiracy comments against Mozilla and its business partners !

      3. Pants said on June 25, 2019 at 11:04 pm

        > I am certain that anyone who would assert that there might be a bias in browser stats shouldn’t be trusted

        disclosure: i have not looked at any results in these tests for at least a month, because, reasons (I don’t need to), so any figures I say are examples, from memory, or using figures someone else said above.

        amiunique is not a usage metric, it is a fingerprinting metric. It returns information that can be collected via your browser: either about the browser and it’s settings (browser fingerprinting) or your device (device fingerprinting)

        While the fingerprints returned are useful, the entropy and numbers are not. It is not real world. It is an experiment that attracts a small subset of users: namely those interested in privacy and anti-fingerprinting: which leads to biased numbers. Said users keep tweaking their profiles and re-testing. This leads to data poisoning.

        A simple illustration of this is canvas: since it is the one with the highest entropy (because everyone is unique), it is the first one users want to reduce. Now results in Panopticlick will show that a 10×10 white canvas (such as privacy.resistfingerprinting returns) is something like 1 in 7 browsers. Considering no other browser does this, and most canvas protection extensions default to randomizing, this figure is an absolute load of BS. No way did 1 in 7 people in the world specifically go out of their way to opt-in to a hidden pref, or download and change a canvas blocking extension’s default settings. And you can also see that Firefox users are heavily over-represented, which is natural, given that Firefox is one of the browsers that advocates and provides more privacy options than most. Firefox market share is nothing like 40% by any reliable scientific method. It is more like 10% desktop and 5% all devices. This is your bias, data poisoning, tainted results in all it’s glory. These are just a couple of examples, and a recent real-world live study of over a million users in a short time frame on a very popular website confirms all of this, as does science and math!

        Results are also often derived from long-lived data-sets which skews figures, e.g user agents, which change frequently. Panopticlick only recently changed to a rolling last 45 days (or something like that). In other words, they can also be not in real-time.

        This is not the fault of the sites, they are what they are by their very nature and purpose. Panopticlick was partly constructed to highlight the problem. amiunique was an experiment by Pierre Laperdrix et al to gather information for a research paper. Another factor here, is that these fingerprinting tests are also out of date and lack new techniques (and have largely been abandoned in this aspect), which can give a false sense of where you stand in the overall scheme of things. And lastly, the data sets are small. Very small.

        When dealing with fingerprinting entropy, it is also pointless to try and compare everyone. It is trivial to detect some things such as browser, or Tor Browser users, or if you are on a mobile device, etc. Instead, when dealing with countermeasures, it is important to know that all you need to do is enforce the fingerprint and calculate the entropy within your set of users. For example, if all TB users report their timezone is UTC 0, then entropy in that set does not exist on that metric. Panopticlick on the other hand will say you are e.g. 1 in 30 users with that timezone and entropy is x. In reality, for TB users it is zero. It is better to look at your entropy as a Firefox user, or a mobile Firefox user, or a TB user – see GeKo’s comment here: .

        So… since I’m intrigued…. am I to be trusted?

        tl;dr: amiunique and other fingerprinting all-in-one test sites: not up to date with techniques and often “abandoned” now they have served their purpose, very small data sets, not real-world, not-real-time and usually pointless time frames (which affect some but not all results), tainted data sets: tainted by the user-set and by repeat visits from said user-set, and compares everyone to everyone which is impossible to defeat: i.e you should be looking at smaller sub-sets, and use science and math properly! :)

      4. Iron Heart said on June 24, 2019 at 4:59 pm


        > comfort me in my beliefs !

        That’s what it is: Belief. Not fact, not knowledge. Nobody aside from Amiunique themselves claim that Firefox has 40% market share. Not Statcounter, not Netmarketshare, the sources which are usually being cited.

        > hateful and conspiracy comments

        You exaggerate massively. If anything, I doubt dubious market share figures and the opinions drawn from them. If you meant me at all, that is.

      5. Iron Heart said on June 22, 2019 at 7:51 am


        1) I don‘t have to reply to you, if I don‘t see a reason to.

        2) I do now regardless, because you are annoying me. I have never heard of that dubious Amiunique site which claims that Firefox has supposedly 40.9% market share. That directly contradicts the widely respected Statcounter figures, which see Firefox at around 5.07% as of May 2019:

        Netmarketshare, another respected institute, sees Firefox at around 9.59% (desktop only, mobile excluded):

        Those are the market share figures which are usually being discussed, and which gHacks also cited:

        So no, Firefox most certainly doesn‘t have 40.9% market share. That‘s a fantasy figure not even Mozilla would claim.

      6. Tom Hawack said on June 22, 2019 at 12:28 am

        @Iron Heart “I would gladly say what I think about super-smart comments like this [that of Kubrick’s], but gHacks would censor my comment in response.”

        So it’s only the fear of censorship which prevents you from being rude?

        IronHeart is on an eternal anti-Firefox crusade, whenever he has the opportunity there he goes popping in his fatwa. Unfortunately without providing evidence and always referring to general ideas, old references he must have archived with the hope of serving them, cold.

        We don’t encounter IronHeart’s whims no more than those of his alter egos, all in what looks very much as propaganda and its lot of fakes.

      7. Iron Heart said on June 22, 2019 at 7:44 am

        @Tom Hawack

        Watch your blood pressure, it seems like you are a bit angry these days. And no, I am not on an anti-Firefox crusade. I just say that it could very well be that some sites don’t work well in it because hardly anyone cares about it. Not more, not less. For whatever reason, that enrages you.

        You are a talker. You throw texts at me, accusing me of having no substance in them, while you don’t provide any yourself. Here is the reason behind my argument:

        Firefox at 5.07% market share, as I said. It‘s no surprise that websites are better optimized for Chrome these days. And my source isn‘t outdated either, it‘s from May 2019. My sources being outdated is just an untrue assumption you freely made up.

        Fake news, propaganda, bla bla bla… I don‘t think I am the one being rude here. I mean, read your own comment again. It‘s full of rudeness.

      8. rickmv said on June 21, 2019 at 10:29 pm

        Yes, because a web client should dictate and enforce all the web browsing and other browser engines should have crippled access to data and services through web pages. More like evil cold G00Gle deep in the heart and iron clad head. It is a ridiculous assumption to call Gchrome a web browser, when it is only a user data mining agent.

    7. krillareinsance said on June 21, 2019 at 12:19 pm

      Do you get a fat enough cheque from Google to say something completely ridiculous to criticize Mozilla on something completely unrelated to the post or are you just another one of those “whatever Mozilla does it wrong” fanatics?

      Get real, dude. Don’t like it, use another browser and stop commenting on a browser that you claim to have disliked since version 4 and “is a joke”.

      1. Stan said on June 22, 2019 at 4:53 pm

        I thought until recently the only one getting the ‘fat checks’ from Google was Mozilla ?

        @Looking at the decline in Firefox usage; rather silly recommending using other browsers isn’t it, you might want to think about that ;)

      2. Lambo-san said on June 22, 2019 at 1:09 am


        I forgot to mention one thing:

        So according to you I’m not allowed to have an opinion if it contradicts with yours, well, that’s very bigoted of you.

        You can go ahead and shit on every browser I mentioned – Chrome, Chromium Edge, Opera, Brave… whatever, I don’t care, I’m not a fanboy, I just use what works for me and I don’t act based on emotions, I switch browsers like every few months to try different ones.

      3. Lambo-san said on June 22, 2019 at 1:06 am


        I loved Firefox between versions 2.x and 3.x. It was my favorite, but when Chrome released in 2008, I realized how bloated, slow and sluggish Firefox was. At the time Chrome was the king for the next 3 years.

        Now Chrome is nothing special and many other Chromium-based browsers like Opera, Brave or Edge greatly outclass Chrome. If you assumed I was siding with Google, you just made me chuckle.

        I use whatever works best for me, not what I like. I like Firefox 3.6, I like the UI, the freedom of customization. I like Opera 12, etc, etc. But can I use them today? No I can’t because their rendering engines are so outdated I can’t do anything with them.

        Firefox has been bloated for a long time, even after version 4 when they switched the UI with an ugly one that copied Chrome’s tabs on top. Since Quantum, Firefox is turning more and more into a Chrome clone and stripping down XUL support was the final nail in the coffin.

        Firefox is not what it used to be and it never again will be, face the facts.

    8. Kubrick said on June 21, 2019 at 11:38 am

      That is more likely to be the fault of the website rather than the browser.I have never had an issue with firefox in this regard but mind you i don’t visit iffy download sites either.

      1. Tom Hawack said on June 22, 2019 at 12:14 am

        @Kubrick, I entirely agree with you, never an issue with Firefox either, be it for sites’ rendering, be it for downloads. A lot of excited people nowadays, nagging, likely unhappy, yelling after Firefox because it’s the trend and they feel comfortable with that.

    9. Martin Brinkmann said on June 21, 2019 at 9:28 am
      1. Lambo-san said on June 22, 2019 at 1:15 am

        @Martin Brinkmann

        I looked through this and it looks like placebo effect. They are doing the same things the Vivaldi team is doing – talking about privacy and free web when their browsers don’t even work properly.

        As for the placebo effect, it’s kinda like all those useless antivirus bloatware out there are doing – Kaspersky, Avast, Avira, etc… you install them, the program turns red, says “You are infected!”, you run a thorough scan that takes an hour or whatever, then the program turns green, says “You are protected!” and you sigh with a relief gazing with awe at the green status of the program, completely ignoring the fact that an antivirus barely does anything other than false alerts to give you an impression that “it’s doing something” where you can just use common sense to protect yourself from viruses, malware and whatever.

        I haven’t used an antivirus bloatware since 2009 and since then I’ve never had issues, sometimes I would get suspicious, install the 30-day trial of a couple of Premium antivirus programs, run a few thorough scans, waste a few hours only to see that I had no issues, only a few gigabytes of junk files that were slowing down my computer that I forgot to clean for a few weeks.

        What Firefox are doing is exactly the same – they show you some icons that tell you random things “you’re protected” or “you’re in danger”, etc. Completely useless waste of their development resources, the worst part is this is their marketing strategy to try and trick people into using their browser.

  15. Anonymous said on June 21, 2019 at 8:57 am

    could you share the links where the mock-ups were presented in the first place?

Leave a Reply

Check the box to consent to your data being stored in line with the guidelines set out in our privacy policy

We love comments and welcome thoughtful and civilized discussion. Rudeness and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please stay on-topic.
Please note that your comment may not appear immediately after you post it.