Clarifying the Future of Firefox Screenshots | Hacker News Reader

Clarifying the Future of Firefox Screenshots

blog.mozilla.org

62 pointsBrendinooo35 comments

I support this - IMHO Screenshots made it frighteningly easy to dump sensitive information to a mystery server, and did not make clear enough when data was leaving your control.

How do you click a button with an arrow going into a cloud, and then be surprised that you've uploaded the screenshot online?

Super useful feature. Will miss it.

> "How do you click a button with an arrow going into a cloud, and then be surprised that you've uploaded the screenshot online?"

God forbid somebody clicks the button called "Save" thinking that it would save the file, rather than deciphering the icon to determine that the button labeled "Save" is actually "Share". Why not rename this (https://0x0.st/zKfv.png) menu entry to "save" too while they're at it? And why is that the only button with text in it? The others have tool tips, but otherwise they're just bare icons. The only one with text is the share button that says "Save".

It's indefensible. It should have never made it past code review, let alone stuck around for several revisions. If the button had said "Share" instead of "Save", there never would have been any complaints about it.

To save the file, instead of clicking the big, colored "Save" button you must click the smaller, gray "Download" button. Where does it download from? From my computer to my computer? How did that ever make sense to anyone?

Didn't test it.

Your explanation sounds reasonable.

Has been bitten before by an open source (I think) program that was for taking screenshots but that forget to mention it would also, by default, upload them.

Be very cautious when working with new software in sensitive settings.

Shameless plug:

With https://cliperado.com we go a step further. It will keep your screenshots up to date for you, and notify you of any changes. We created it to keep our step by step screenshot guides updated with every deploy.

So instead of fixing the UI, let's remove the entire feature altogether. Yeah, no.

There was nothing wrong with the UI, it was literally an arrow going into a cloud.

... with the word "Save", and another button for "Downloading" which was closer to a "Save" operation.

But that's pretty irrelevant, since the reason it's going away isn't because of the text, but because it wasn't used enough to justify keeping it around.

Anyone who's running 67 (in beta now) will lose the ability to upload screenshots for sharing.

Weird move from Firefox, especially as they start promoting Firefox Send. Screenshots as a whole is an essential feature to me that really helped set it apart from Chrome. The hosted screenshots aren't integral, but I'm disappointed that they're taking away functionality for stated reasons that aren't particularly interesting.

I don't get why they don't integrate Screenshots with FF Send.

We have discussed it.

I hope that you do end up doing it. This seems like the perfect kind of thing to use Send for, removes the need for mozilla to maintain extra infrastructure (maybe just a STUN server? I haven't looked at the Send architecture) and would let people keep the files up for as long as they'd like at the same time.

Back when this change to Screenshots was announced, it wasn't known whether Send would be a successful experiment.

The "making it simpler" for users is definitely only an excuse for Mozilla to not pay for the servers anymore. Kinda disappointed as uploading was a dry useful way to share in, high quality screenshots. I can't fathom that it would've cost then much to keep the platform running

not running a server that stores images uploaded by anyone on the internet also saves them from having to deal with any legal issues associated with running a server that stores images uploaded by anyone on the internet

I wouldn't say "definitely".

Just devil's advocate... Besides costs of running servers, also conceivable is potential competition with another service that they're trying to push (though they should have a smooth path to turn those users into uptake of the other service). Also conceivable is that there were costs for dealing with abuse of the service (e.g., excessively heavy users, human resources to respond to reports of criminal/harassing content). Or maybe privacy&security experts are finally shaking things up, and saying that Mozilla is still thinking too much like a dotcom.

> I can't fathom that it would've cost then much to keep the platform running

Depending on how many users used the service, I'd say it could definitely cost a lot. It depends a lot on whether they're using something like aws/gcp where you pay for all bandwidth too.

I did not know that screenshot was a feature in Firefox, and I suspect that almost no one does.

Seriously, where is it? It's not an ANY of the menus, at not on Mac OS.

Isn't it right in the address bar on a default Firefox install? If it isn't, then it's definitely in the 3 dot menu in the address bar.

It defaults under the 3-dot menu. (Which is the perfect place to stash features you don't want your users to know about.)

It's in the right-click menu, and also in the the "..." menu on the right side of the address bar.

It's really easy to use. Just right click somewhere on a page.

Go to the web console (Ctrl+shift+t) and write :screenshot, ":screenshot --help" can give you a list of options to use.

It's Ctrl+Shift+K for me on Windows (and I haven't changed any of the default shortcuts).

It's in my right click menu.

A lot moves at Firefox lately seems to focus on making the life of their devs easier but not necessarily their users.

i respect that though. happy devs is a precondition for happy users.

If I want to make a screenshot I press either alt-print or shift-alt-4, which I've configured to run "xfce4-screenshooter -r"

I select the area of the screen I want, and it pops up a window which allows me to save, copy, upload to a couple of sites, or open in a program.

http://imgur.com/s8IeaMNl.png

What could be simpler.

Apple has a more limited version of this with shift-apple-4 I think.

The only thing I can think of that would need it in my browser rather than my OS is to capture non-visible parts of a webpage, but that isn't the functionality that's pushed.

Have you tried it ?

One neat feature is the ability to select a DOM element of the page, like with the inspect tool, and take a clear picture of it.

You can also screenshot the whole page, including what's below the float line.

Note however that floating bars, such as the one used on this article, mess it up: https://0x0.st/zK9t.png

Zapping that element with ublock origin fixes it, but needless to say the UX needs work.

The Firefox tool is simpler in a couple of ways:

1. It's aware of the DOM, and allows you to select an element easily. If you're making a series of screenshots (say, for a QA report or something), all the images will be exactly the same size. No having to be fussy with your mouse selections.

2. You don't have to take your clipboard contents and go visit another image sharing site. You can just click the little cloud button and that's it. A new tab opens with your clip and all your editing/markup options.

> http://imgur.com/s8IeaMNl.png What could be simpler.

Your link doesn't work. That's a good demonstration why this FF feature was cool. :)

(January 24, 2019)

Thank the gods. This is the sort of thing that keeps me using Firefox. Just when it starts to seem like Mozilla never listens to the community, they prove me wrong.

> "User feedback about the button copy had nothing to do with the removal of the server. "

O-Oh. Well nevermind then, it's just a happy coincidence according to them. Whatever, I'll still use their browser even if they're too prideful to ever admit fault without filtering it through PR (see also their response to community outrage over them injecting "Mr Robot" advertisements.) Between Google and Mozilla's management, users are stuck between a rock and a hard place

Reply on news.ycombinator.com