Mozilla Is Rebranding Firefox and Wants Your Feedback (venturebeat.com) 269
An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla is rebranding Firefox. The company is asking for feedback on the new look, which will try to cover the various Firefox offerings. For most people, Firefox refers to a browser, but the company wants the brand to encompass all the various apps and services that the Firefox family of internet products cover, "from easy screenshotting and file sharing to innovative ways to access the internet using voice and virtual reality." The fox with a flaming tail "doesn't offer enough design tools to represent this entire product family," Mozilla believes.
Tldr (Score:5, Insightful)
"We ruined our product and want people to give us a second look without realizing who we really are"
Re:Tldr (Score:5, Funny)
"We ruined our product and want people to give us a second look without realizing who we really are"
Um, no, that would be Xfinity.
Re: Tldr (Score:5, Insightful)
Rebranding is really a waste of money and energy.
Re: Tldr (Score:2, Informative)
Wasting money, time and other resources is something that I think that moz://a excels at. Just look at spectacular failures like Firefox OS, Pocket, Rust, and Persona.
Re: Tldr (Score:5, Funny)
Not really. If there were no rebranding then we'd have hundreds of marketing people wandering the streets and begging pedestrians for user experiences.
Valley of the Vixens (Score:2)
Valley of the Vixens would retain the fox theme while suggesting a wider array of "services". If they want to retain the flaming tail aspect of it the Valley of the Hot Vixens. I'm sure there would be no confusing branding when a google search is done as long as it isn't from work
Re: (Score:3)
How about "Tetanus" for a product name?
Feedback? (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, believe me, I would LOVE to give Mozilla some feedback about how they're doing with Firefox! Somebody might get injured though.
Re:Feedback? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or maybe people have become tired listing out all the shit the incompetent Mozilla "coders" have broken, needlessly deleted, or never fixed, over and over and over again, which is why Firefox is down the shitter in terms of userbase like never before, as there was at least a stable niche population in the past with a purpose for Firefox which sees no purpose anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Feedback? (Score:4, Informative)
I'm not pissed they threw out XUL. I'm disappointed that the replacement doesn't have as many features. With XUL you could change the UI to a very large degree (remove the toolbars completely and organize the UI however you want), how tabs are organized (like on the sides), (a long time later fixed) preempt loading for ad/scriptblocking, and load local CSS from the disk under an HTTPS page (this is marked as WONTFIX https://github.com/tysonmatani... [github.com] and breaks Stylus usage when people with disabilities would need it (I don't fall into this category however)). The replacement wasn't up to par as the original; I do know that security wise some of these decisions make sense, but what made Firefox special was removed and not replaced.
Here's feedback (Score:5, Funny)
1) Change the name to something more recognizeable. Some modification of the "Chrome" seems to be popular right now, so try things like "Chromantum", "Chromicisity", or "Chromabat". The closer to "Chrome", the better.
2) The color scheme using steel grey and ice-cold blue still has a tiny bit warmth to it. This should be removed, using a browser should feel like entering a walk-in freezer.
3) The preferences pages still have a few lines and borders that give the options an organized feeling. Mozilla should transition to a completely non-delimited look, so that everything looks like it's just placed on a white page.
4) Also on the preferences, get rid of the group headers. Since all the options are labeled, the headers are useless anyway.
5) There is still too much contrast between screen elements. For example, the slider on the right hand side of the screen can still be distinguished from its rail - the slider should be made lighter and/or the rail should be darker, to reduce annoying contrast.
6) More animations, such as the "cylon stare" when loading a tab, or the "burst of shadow" that happens when you open a new tab. These don't take any time to implement, don't need debugging or maintenance, and add greatly to the browsing experience.
7) Be sure to change the programming interface with each new update. Users only use any one extension about 30% of all sessions (on average), so this matches well with what users want.
8) Never, ever incorporate popular extensions into the core product for efficiency. Blocking ads and better security should be the end users task to learn about, decide, and implement. If you *must* implement something like the "do not track" button, be sure to be extremely careful not to piss off advertizers: implement it by default "off", so that users can choose.
9) Don't bother implementing an easy way to use encryption in the E-mail reader - no one wants that.
10) When all else fails, copy the competition (Chrome). There's no such thing as "product distinction" in the browser marketplace, one browser is the same as another. Don't bother trying anything that could make you better than Google.
11) And finally, always cater to the average user. Never implement anything that would appeal to advanced users, never try anything new and innovative, and never "play to the choir". Keep it simple, and keep your average users happy.
Re: (Score:2)
Also don't forget to change the user interface radically so that everybody else has to change theirs to match because you give away the software free to schools and the kids don't know how to use anything else. Howabout removing all those pesky menues full of informative words and replacing them with apparently random icons that race round and round the outside of the page around the ribbon track. Maybe colour code them by function e.g. Post to Facebook group in blood red, Post to twitter group in orange et
Re: (Score:2)
One word: Pocket. It might have been popular, but its addition to the core browser was not well received here...
Re: (Score:2)
8) Never, ever incorporate popular extensions into the core product for efficiency. Blocking ads and better security should be the end users task to learn about, decide, and implement. If you *must* implement something like the "do not track" button, be sure to be extremely careful not to piss off advertizers: implement it by default "off", so that users can choose.
Unset was actually the required default state in the DNT spec [w3.org], when Microsoft decided to violate it there was a lot of discussion about how it would be valid for advertisers to ignore DNT for IE users. (Microsoft later changed IE to require the user to change the setting).
Re: (Score:2)
Starting with anonymous comments.
Re: (Score:2)
What kind of idiot comment is this? Instead of snark, how about you actually communicate what it is you have a problem with?
Every week, the comment section here is getting worse and worse.
Careful, you're entering snark-infested waters here...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The very idea of doing this rebrand is what we have a problem with. Let's start: "the various apps and services that the Firefox family of internet products cover"
Except.... the list of things the "Firefox family of internet products covers" in the mind of almost everyone that's heard of it:
* The web browser.
If they focussed on being a damn web browser instead of whatever ecosystem of apps or services they wanted to push; we wouldn't have this conversation. Mozilla Foundation wants to put out something t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Feedback? (Score:5, Insightful)
... Instead of snark, how about you actually communicate what it is you have a problem with?...
That approach was tried. Mozilla's Firefox devs went and did what they wanted anyway, ignoring what the users had asked for. Any snark heading towards Firefox devs has been earned, many times over, due to the condescending user-arrogant attitude the devs have displayed.
No one has ever went wrong naming their product (Score:5, Funny)
Bob.
Re:No one has ever went wrong naming their product (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, and have it stand for Bob's Our Browser
Re: (Score:2)
Too late, there's already a planet [wikia.com] with that name.
Re: (Score:2)
If its your browser, you can. No one said you had to use bob.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah that is what I originally was going for but things took a left turn at titan.
Re: (Score:2)
Clippy says hello...
Busy work for designers + managers (Score:5, Insightful)
None of FF's users care. This is just designers + managers making busy work to justify their jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? You've personally asked all 4 of them?
Re:Busy work for designers + managers (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you seen TFA? It's just a choice between one set of incomprehensible icons and another.
Probably Not Good News (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are these the same idiots who keep making all my applications BRIGHT WHITE with no lines / shading / colour and they take away the text labelling from my icons?
I got an idea (Score:5, Funny)
They should call it Netscape Navigator.
Re:I got an idea (Score:5, Funny)
They should call it Netscape Navigator.
You spelled MOSAIC wrong
Re: (Score:2)
No, that was Spyglass Mosaic. Different code actually.
Just give it up (Score:4, Insightful)
If you want to rebrand Firefox and get all trendy-like, and make a whole line of experiences or whatever, just give up. Give Firefox over to Apache or somebody, focus on these apps and widgets that are going to lapse into total profitability -any day now-.
You clearly don't want to make a decent browser any more. You definitely don't want to make a decent mail client.
So why are you even expending effort on this browser you dislike?
here's some feedback: (Score:5, Interesting)
oh fuck me.
Look guys, I remember when Mozilla was a bloated monolith - irc, mail, usenet, i don't even remember what else. Oh, and a browser nobody used. Then firefox came out from your summer intern (Blake Ross), by getting rid of all that crud and being a browser. And only a browser.
And, poof, Mozilla (well, FireFox) became relevant again. And then you squandered it. Why will it be different this time? Honestly, close up hop and give the money to somebody else.
Re:here's some feedback: (Score:4, Insightful)
All I want is for them to take all the features everyone doesn't use out of the browser, and move them into extensions. That was supposed to be the whole point of Firefox from the beginning, but they have lost their way.
Re: (Score:3)
What they have lost is their mind... and that happened a while ago. Sadly this just proves it's still lost and roaming a desert somewhere
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully, another summer intern will make a new stand alone web browser. :P
Chromefox (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about the name, it's about the icons.
Do you want icons styled like the current version of Android or do you want icons styled even more like the current version of Android.
Neon-gradient vectors all the way!
Firebird! (Score:2)
How about Chrome II? (Score:3)
Re:How about Chrome II? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps "Not Quite Chrome!" But were working on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Or just Chlone.
Just call it Internet Expresso (Score:4, Insightful)
And then claim MSFT infringed on your trademark.
Profit!
(seriously, though, when you spend time rebranding, it's usually a sign of bad things)
Red Panda! (Score:3)
They can call the Email Client "Panda Express"
Avoid Dilution (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Microsoft very nearly did it with ".Net". It was a technical term, and the marketdroids discovered that a large amount of techies were enthusiastic about that term.
The marketdroids were slapping ".net" on the end of everything (Windows Server.Net, SQL Server .Net, Exchange Server .Net etc). Seriously. Even Exchange.
Amazingly, someone with some technical clue at Microsoft was able to head this off at the last minute and those products were named back to their normal names and .net was restricted to, well,
Re: Avoid Dilution (Score:3)
Oh that shit was confusing as hell at first. The first I had read about dot net was some sort of SOAP enterprise bus thing and then about a java runtime and then something about sql server and boy did that confuse the shit out of me
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I hate the games tech businesses play with names. All it does is annoy people.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Or how about "Mozilla, Sweeeeeeeet"
Why do marketers love to make things difficult? (Score:5, Informative)
Mozilla is the brand for the family of products, and Firefox is the brand for the browser product. Nice and simple. Why overload it and confuse people? This makes no sense at all. Other products should have other brands so you can tell them apart.
Re:Why do marketers love to make things difficult? (Score:5, Insightful)
marketing wanks look for ways to justify their existence, so they rename things, create confusion and piss the hell out of customers.
The solution is to keep the names and eliminate the marketing wanks, they're as replaceable as cheap toilet paper.
Re: (Score:2)
they're as replaceable as cheap toilet paper
For precisely the same reason.
Re: (Score:2)
cheap toilet paper doesn't come pre-loaded full of shit though
Re: (Score:2)
No need to read the article... (Score:4, Informative)
Just go to their blog post [mozilla.org] and read it. As it says, there is no voting they just want feeback in the comments about it.
To me.. marketing types are funny (peculiar, not haha) in that they feel the world and their product revolves around marketing and perception. I think it is somewhat important for a product, but you need a good product first and foremost. It seems that Firefox has been making strides to get get back to where they need to be, although I am not sure they're there yet. I am personally willing to switch back from Pale Moon [palemoon.org], but they're going to have to really convince me of it...and new icons aren't going to do it.
Feeback you say? (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see, how about a browser. You know what a browser is, don't you? It's a piece of software which allows one to view web pages and maybe play some content.
A browser does not harass you with add-ons, intrude upon your privacy, hide basic functionality such that one has to tweak settings in some obscure area, or a multitude of other issues which do nothing but slow the browser's ability to render web pages because it's become a bloated sack of yak manure.
KISS. You know what it means, right? Learn it. Live it. Do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Feeback? We will be charged? :(
They fail at the starting line (Score:5, Informative)
You can want until the end of time, if Firefox is a browser to most people now, it will stay a browser to most people in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully.
"design tools?" there's your problem right there (Score:4, Insightful)
A person who says a logo contains things called "design tools" is one of those fucking goddamn marketing choads.
They have some use when cut up for chum, but otherwise they just rename things to justify their otherwise purposeless existence, and create confusion.
Eliminate them, keep the names people know.
Try making your product usable again (Score:4, Interesting)
I was trying to do something with Firefox on somebody else's computer and I just didn't have a clue how to do it.
The first thing I do on my own machines is install classic theme restorer, which isn't perfect but it gets you 90% of the way to sanity.
Totally clear (Score:2)
Use the colourful chrome icon (second row, first icon)
Browsy McBrowseface (Score:3, Funny)
Have you considered... (Score:3)
I mean, all these tools help with interacting with the full landscape of Internet sites so maybe... Netscape?
Call it FoxFire (Score:2)
CEO's an idiot. (Score:5, Insightful)
WTF are you doing? You've spent the last few years destroying Firefox to "make it better" by removing popular and time tested features (because they're too hard to maintain) then adding features no one wants or asked for (but now you want to ask them about branding) while baking ads into the browser all the while claiming you're "saving the internet"
You're a ship without a rudder and obviously have no tech vision of your own. THERE'S YOUR PROBLEM.
Yeesh, can you imagine Steve Jobs asking "What is a good vision for my company"?
Oh shit... (Score:2)
mazoola (Score:2)
that's what my wife used to call it when i used it
Re: (Score:2)
Brandon Eich (Score:2, Funny)
Hire Brandon Eich to head the renaming project.
Oh my ... (Score:2)
The headline reads feedback and I read again facebook
OMG! Please, NO! Just effing DON'T!!! (Score:2)
Jeebus HB Crickey! Do NOT do what you are about to do! ... twice, ... before you bring this up again. You won't do that, but no matter, do read the book first!
I insist *EVERYONE* on the Mozilla "marketing" and branding team read "The 22 immutable laws of marketing" front to back
The Firefox brand, after the "Firebird" desaster done by the same team (yeah, remember that one?) has become a globally recognised brand that is - and this is the most important aspect - associated with giving big iNet corps the fing
Here's a tip (Score:2)
Trade the army of marketingoids for some coders and accountants that can keep the project running.
Feel free scrawl the marketing-speak on the toilet stalls because that's the only time I'm in the mood to hear it.
They could call it Phoenix again (Score:2)
FIREFOX? FIREFOX BADDD!!!! (Score:2)
My feedback: Rebrand Rust (Score:2)
Ah yes, high time for a new icon (Score:2)
After all, nobody can think of anything good to add to the browser, and yuo have to do _something_ to keep busy...
What, again? (Score:2)
Anyone remember the early phoenix/firebird/firefox plugin that would change the name of the browser every time you brought it up? I really miss that.
It was about the same time as the Abe Vigoda Is Not Dead plugin. Good times.
encompass all the apps... (Score:2)
> For most people, Firefox refers to a browser, but the company wants the brand to encompass all the various apps and services that the Firefox family of internet products cover [...]
Feed back ? (Score:2)
Stop worrying about branding and labeling and deal with functionality. Establish a menu style and STICK WITH IT. Make an API and leave it in place long enough for people to get used to it and they will support and use the product. Quit trying to emulate the car industry and producing a 'new' model every season.
Design by committee (Score:3)
M-scape (Score:2)
A Triumph (Score:2)
A triumph of style over substance, that manages to obscure the meaning every single icon.
Help us (Score:2)
"Help us rename this bloated pile of shit that used to be a great browser."
Sure, here are a few of my suggestions:
FireSlug
Pile-O-Worthless-Trinkets
MemoryHog
Frozen Dogshit (but with new themes!)
I still call it Netscape. (Score:2)
I still have the box too.
lolzilla (Score:2)
Mozilla should have started leaving decisions to the users a long time ago. I for one would have opted against breaking all the extensions to make the browser faster on paper.
Memory Leak (Score:2)
one tool, one job (Score:2)
Can you just give me a browser that is really good?
The Unix philosophy is to have tools do one job, do it well, and integrate with other tools for more complicated jobs. That is how the commandline became a powerhouse that is bested by graphical tools only in a few select areas, and that can pack a solution to a problem that some companies want to sell you dedicated tools for into a short stackoverflow posting.
Stop focussing on the bells and whistles. Give me a good browser. Then, if I want a design tool, I
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, then they could even roll an e-mail client into it, too. Make it one big huge program, and call it "Netscape Navigator", or something like that. Maybe??
Re: (Score:2)
Better yet, it should have a little icon of a man waving his willy around at the top of the scroll bar weeing on the slider way down below, to, you know, remind you of what a great experience you are having.