Re: Removing Firefox Version Number

Isaac Stitz wrote:
> On Aug 20, 12:30 am, Asa Dotzler<[email protected]>  wrote:
>> You have data for that? I'd love to read it.
>
> Asa, this is what practically everyone in this discussion has been
> asking you.  We still want to know what horrible things are happening
> due to the version number being in the about box.  Less relevant to
> the average consumer != useless to everyone.

Nowhere have I claimed that having the version number in the About 
dialog is "useless to everyone". I don't think anyone who thought about 
it for a minute would assert that any one feature could have the exact 
same value to every single user.

We have a current user base of about 450 million people all over the 
world. In the coming years, we intend to grow that to 1 billion people. 
  We cannot design Firefox to work perfectly "out of the box" for every 
possible users. We must design for the larges audience possible and then 
offer customization, including add-ons, to help those who are not happy 
with the defaults to configure a Firefox that works just right for them.

> It sounds to me like you think a little too much of your own intellect
> and a little too little of your users'.

I think this discussion would probably result in better outcomes if we 
avoided personal attacks or insults.

Let me try to address that statement, though. I think about 450 million 
users and how they interact with the Web through a web browser. That's 
my job. It's also the job of Mozilla's UX team -- a collection of 
experts in usability and design.  We do not think of users as dumb or 
incompetent or anything like that. We look at the challenges they face 
interacting with the Web and we design features and workflows that try 
to make their use of the Web as empowering and enjoyable as possible.

> What if I know that FF version X is going to have per-process tabs
> and I want to see if I'm running that version yet?

When we complete our remaining work on the update system, and we solve 
the remaining issues that block the ending of the old Firefox 3.6.x 
release, a regular user will always be on the latest release of Firefox.

I realize that if you haven't been following Mozilla closely for the 
last 8 months or so, this might not have been obvious to you. With our 
new rapid release program, the vast majority of Firefox users will 
either be on the latest release, or are moments away from being on the 
latest release.

That means that the moment that process per tab is available, you will 
either have it or be about to have it. If you open the About window, and 
it was available but you didn't have it yet, it will download and be 
installed and you'll have it.

Do you have any questions about that? I'd be happy to try to answer.

> What if I want to check and see what version number I'm using so I can
> determine what add-ons will (or won't work) for me?

Another good question presuming you aren't up to speed on our rapid 
release system.

As I said above, you will always be on the latest version.

Add-ons that are compatible with the latest version of Firefox will be 
available from various add-on hosts on the Web including 
addons.mozilla.org, and will be available to you through the Add-ons 
Manager in Firefox. Add-ons that are not compatible with your latest 
version of Firefox may be available to experiment with.

Add-ons that you already had installed which are compatible will be 
enabled in your latest version of Firefox and will just work. Add-ons 
which are not compatible with your latest version of Firefox will be 
disabled.

We are working very hard to improve add-on compatibility. For non-binary 
add-ons, I'm working with the design and development teams to see if we 
can build in a feature that let's you test incompatible add-ons to see 
if they're functional enough for your particular use even though they 
may have some broken functionality.

> All of these are questions that will be a bigger hassle to answer with
> the version number hidden.

Your two use cases do not require any user knowledge of the Firefox 
version. Do you have other use cases you'd like to discuss?


> So there's a small sample of how removing the version number *hurts* FF.

I don't think those to use cases hurt Firefox. Neither one requires the 
user to know anything about the Firefox version number.


> (And I'm not even touching on the fact that it violates a standard
> established by about 99% of GUI software.)

Well, since you have actually touched on it, I'll take a minute to try 
to help you understand how we think about this.

There are many great OS platform standards. There are even a few 
cross-platform standards. Where Mozilla usability folks think a standard 
OS feature is the best way to help a user accomplish a task or move 
through a workflow, we adopt those standards. Where we think the OS 
feature is a good tool but could be improved upon, we extend or modify 
that feature. When we don't believe that abiding by OS conventions are 
the best way to help our users, we try to come up with better ways.

Let me give you an example that I think will help make this clear. Back 
in 2001 or so, most of us were on MS Windows. Windows provides an OS 
standard tool for moving between documents and application, called the 
Taskbar. It works quite well for a lot of things, but we noticed that 
more and more that our browser windows were sort of overwhelming the 
Windows Taskbar.  A volunteer in the Mozilla community created an 
extension that offered a very interesting non-standard mechanism for 
organizing browser windows called Tabbed Browsing. This wasn't at all 
like the native Taskbar and it wasn't even like the MDI interface that 
Windows offers in applications like Office. But tabbed browsing seemed 
really compelling to some of us and so we built it into Mozilla and then 
Firefox. This was a total violation of the OS standard on Windows, Mac, 
and Linux but we didn't let that stop us. There were plenty of people 
telling us we were crazy (really!) but we stuck to our guns and today 
it's one of the most popular features of every single browser.

> Would you please explain why leaving the version number in place would
> hurt FF more than this?

I've tried to explain why the use cases you offered up do not require 
the user to know the Firefox version number. So, why not just leave it 
in place. Well, as I've said previously, I think that there is still a 
lot of value in the About dialog because people do open it to see if 
they're up to date. So, we can optimize for that by making sure that the 
up to date message is clear, simple, and credible. One effective way to 
make sure a message is likely to be understood is to remove things which 
are not core to the message -- to simplify. If our primary goal is to 
give the user confidence that she is on the latest version or in the 
process of being updated to the latest version, then the message in the 
About window should focus on that.

> Initially, I wasn't too opposed to this change (though I saw no point
> to it), but after seeing your handling of the situation I'm disgusted
> at your arrogant attitude and I'm disgusted at Mozilla for tolerating it.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

> (I'm a software developer too, but never have I felt the need to elevate
> myself above my users or ignore their concerns.)  If this change is made
> without offering so much as a token explanation for why it's so necessary,
> I'll be in the market for a different browser.  So will my relatives and
> clients.  Not because of the stupid version number, but because Mozilla
> is just turning into another Microsoft or Google -- too absorbed with their
> own greatness to listen to what us peasants have to say.

I've offered the best answers I can. I think I've given far more than "a 
token explanation" here and elsewhere in this forum. Also, I don't think 
anyone at Mozilla thinks of our Firefox users as peasants. I think we 
all try very hard to put our process and our work into the public and to 
listen and respond to as much feedback and criticism as we can. I think 
Mozilla does this better than most other software projects and it's one 
of the reasons I've been contributing to Mozilla for the last 13 years.

> Sadly, they seem to have forgotten that their greatest strength was that
> they *weren't* just another Google or Microsoft.

I certainly don't think that Mozilla is another Google or Microsoft? 
Those are giant multi-billion dollar corporations trying to sell 
software and ads to enrich their shareholders. Mozilla is a tiny 
non-profit, mission-based organization dedicated to shaping the future 
of the Web for the public good.

> They *were* a community-oriented organization, or at least they
 > made a good show of it until now.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I hope I've at least answered some of your 
questions. 9

- A