Comment by _odey | Hacker News Reader

Comment by _odey | Hacker News Reader

Yes, obviously they did! they keep denying the importance of implementing things like this:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542189

https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/shortcut-for-different-...

Even if it's a highly requested feature, minimal effort, high impact, and something users expect to Just Work™, just like it does in Chrome; it's still getting ignored.

And all they have to do is copy what Chrome does 100% exactly the same, no effort to design something new. They have all the functionality already in place, under about:profiles, it just needs a nice UI on top, and to open new links in the "last active profile".

When a user sees this does not work like it does in Chrome, and they have to struggle to achieve the same functionality with a worse workflow and a hideous UI, they will simply claim the functionality does not exist and carry on with their life using Chrome. They will not bother to search and install the extension that does this for them, that's simply not a realistic expectation to have.

I can work around this because I appreciate the other things Firefox has more than the effort I put into profile management. But I'm tech, and highly tolerant of things like this. Normal users aren't, the simplest inconvenience will throw them off for good.

If something Just Work™ in Chrome then it has to Just Work™ in Firefox as well.

This was just one example, probably the most obvious example of them all.

This is where the corruption coming from Google money shows through.

I'd add that to store the Firefox search engines, they developed a custom file format. This is to make it more difficult to configure search engines (and make you more likely to keep the default ones).

https://www.jeffersonscher.com/ffu/searchjson.html

" This is where the corruption coming from Google money shows through."

Never thought of that, perhaps showering Mozilla with money had two goals, getting search users and corrupting Firefox for Chrome to take over.

Indeed, they might say they're not influenced by Google, or even believe it themselves, but when your job security relies on not addressing user needs, you won't.

We just switched from LastPass to Bitwarden at work and as I use Bitwarden for my personal stuff, I need to use browser profiles for separate Bitwarden extensions. Before I had been using Firefox containers to separate my work browsing from my personal browsing. It's really minor but the way Chrome handles profiles made me switch back after 3-4 years on Firefox.

I never ever had to switch profiles in Firefox in my 20 years of usage.

Neither did I for 10 years until I discovered the concept. Then I started making use of it and liked it. Same for everybody else around me, they either already knew of profiles and used them, or started using them once they learned about them.

Thing is, they used them in Chrome, because that's where it was easy and obvious to do. And since Firefox does not have an equivalently easy and obvious workflow, they keep using Chrome, and teach others as well to use Chrome. Reason why the drop in numbers happen.

Dont you think it's more because Chrome is backed by a trillion dollar company and it's kinda the go-to browser nowadays because everybody believes Chrome is faster than Firefox? I have a bunch of friends using Chrome, but they all say it's for speed, not for switching profiles?

And I have a bunch of friends that say it's because it lacks the profile functionality and they can tolerate the speed.

It's not the only issue Firefox has, but it's the highest impact, lowest effort one they have. Performance improvements are hard, PWA is hard to implement. Putting a better UI on existing functionality is simple by comparison. They could score an easy win here, but they choose not to.

I've hated that misfeature from the day chrome rolled it out and it was a major factor in pushing me back to Firefox.

Logging in to the browser and not a website? And then your account is indelibly imprinted on the browser? In what universe is that a good idea?

And then Google saw that people weren't using this so they made it that if I just go to Gmail and sign in, the browser casually slurps up the login anyway and anyone else who uses the computer later can see that my email address exists.

I think we're discussing different things here.

Profiles are entire separate namespaces at the browser level. The login functionality Chrome has is an extra piece on top, that ties your profile to your Google Login.

I too obviously hate that functionality, but it's unrelated.

What do you want to use profiles for?

Having separate accounts, bookmarks, history, state, and extensions for:

* My personal usage.

* My professional usage.

* Each individual client I contract for.

* Testing out extensions.

* Local development playground.

It's extremely convenient to have all of this be just 2 clicks away the way Chrome has it, simple and intuitive to use.

I have all of this in Firefox as well, but it's not as easy to set up and use, difficult to navigate and hard to look at. Plus links always open in the default profile instead of the last active one so I always have to copy things around and shuffle windows. I can deal with this, other people don't and won't. It has to Just Work™ like it does in Chrome. They use Chrome because that's where it's easy. And because of that Firefox looses potential users.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com