Firefox could get vertical tabs in the future

[Redaktion]

An idea that surfaced on Mozilla Connect > Ideas more than two years ago has finally became an actual feature in Firefox Nightly. Still in the "very rough proof-of-concept" stage, vertical tabs are now one step closer to becoming available for all Mozilla Firefox users. However, it is also possible that this won't happen anytime soon.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Firefox-could-get-vertical-tabs-in-the-future.821956.0.html

[vertigo]

I've all but given up on Firefox at this point, since they've gone to such great lengths to Chromify their browser that it makes more sense to just use something like Brave at this point. That said, it would be ridiculous if they do this, when there are already multiple addons (as mentioned in the article) that can already achieve it (and probably better and with more options and customization than a built-in solution), yet it's been *years* since the features of TMP, especially multiple rows, have been difficult to impossible to get back. Users have been asking for these features back with no response from Mozilla, and so for them to instead add a feature that's already available would just be further snubbing their users. Mozilla has ruined Firefox and ignored the users that *made it* as popular as it was/is all to appeal to the masses and try to emulate Chrome to draw those users, but most of those users don't know or care about other browsers and won't switch anyway, certainly not just to go to something so similar, and in the process they've removed most of what makes Firefox worth using for those that do care.

[A]

I've all but given up on Firefox at this point, since they've gone to such great lengths to Chromify their browser that it makes more sense to just use something like Brave at this point. That said, it would be ridiculous if they do this, when there are already multiple addons (as mentioned in the article) that can already achieve it (and probably better and with more options and customization than a built-in solution), yet it's been *years* since the features of TMP, especially multiple rows, have been difficult to impossible to get back. Users have been asking for these features back with no response from Mozilla, and so for them to instead add a feature that's already available would just be further snubbing their users. Mozilla has ruined Firefox and ignored the users that *made it* as popular as it was/is all to appeal to the masses and try to emulate Chrome to draw those users, but most of those users don't know or care about other browsers and won't switch anyway, certainly not just to go to something so similar, and in the process they've removed most of what makes Firefox worth using for those that do care.

I don't agree, many people want vertical tabs and don't want to or can't load 3rd party addons(like enterprise policy)

That said, considering the demand I am not sure why Chrome and FireFox take so long to implement these features despite them being fairly easy to do

Also, I thought multiple row tabs have been possible via css customization? Though firefox does break it once in a while and requires enabling an extra flag. Though personally with tab groups would be a more useful feature than making multiple lines option permanent.

[hugh mungus]

I've all but given up on Firefox at this point, since they've gone to such great lengths to Chromify their browser that it makes more sense to just use something like Brave at this point.

Brave is literally Chrome, you mongoloid, and it's a security blanket for morons who don't know anything about actually protecting their privacy.

[vertigo]

I've all but given up on Firefox at this point, since they've gone to such great lengths to Chromify their browser that it makes more sense to just use something like Brave at this point. That said, it would be ridiculous if they do this, when there are already multiple addons (as mentioned in the article) that can already achieve it (and probably better and with more options and customization than a built-in solution), yet it's been *years* since the features of TMP, especially multiple rows, have been difficult to impossible to get back. Users have been asking for these features back with no response from Mozilla, and so for them to instead add a feature that's already available would just be further snubbing their users. Mozilla has ruined Firefox and ignored the users that *made it* as popular as it was/is all to appeal to the masses and try to emulate Chrome to draw those users, but most of those users don't know or care about other browsers and won't switch anyway, certainly not just to go to something so similar, and in the process they've removed most of what makes Firefox worth using for those that do care.

I don't agree, many people want vertical tabs and don't want to or can't load 3rd party addons(like enterprise policy)

That said, considering the demand I am not sure why Chrome and FireFox take so long to implement these features despite them being fairly easy to do

Also, I thought multiple row tabs have been possible via css customization? Though firefox does break it once in a while and requires enabling an extra flag. Though personally with tab groups would be a more useful feature than making multiple lines option permanent.

Fair point about Enterprise settings. I've played with multiple tabs a couple times in Firefox and, while I got it working, it wasn't solid enough I'd feel comfortable depending on it, not to mention the fact it breaks periodically, causing you to have to go from multi-row to single row until it's fixed again, assuming they don't break something that prevents that entirely at some point.

Not even going to respond to the other user/troll...

[hugh mungus]

Not even going to respond to the other user/troll...

Sorry that facts > feelings

[A]

Brave is literally Chrome, you mongoloid, and it's a security blanket for morons who don't know anything about actually protecting their privacy.

While I personally don't use Brave, Brave is not literally Chrome. It is based on Chromium which Chrome is also based on. Chrome is Google proprietary stuff added on top of Chromium

While I personally trust Mozilla more as well, there is no reason to go as far as insulting people...

Fair point about Enterprise settings. I've played with multiple tabs a couple times in Firefox and, while I got it working, it wasn't solid enough I'd feel comfortable depending on it, not to mention the fact it breaks periodically, causing you to have to go from multi-row to single row until it's fixed again, assuming they don't break something that prevents that entirely at some point.

The point of Mozilla Connect is that people can bring up and vote on issues. So you can add that issue if it isn't there or vote on it. Things with most votes is what gets considered more likely

Though I do wonder as I pointed out above about tab groups, have you tried tab groups on Brave? I think it is a better alternative than multi-row as it not only lets you fit more tabs in less space, it also helps keep things organized

[NikoB]

What kind of idiot do you have to be to use all browsers on the chromium engine with non-disabled muddy fonts under Windows?

Only Firefox (although the developers there also stupidly adopted a rendering scheme that also leads to cloudy fonts from version 69) allows you to disable cloudy anti-aliasing.

For this simple reason alone, Firefox is the only most famous browser on the planet to choose from. Because only there, after disabling the cloudy incorrect font smoothing, can you not spoil your vision on screens with ppi below 220.

And these are almost all the screens on the planet.

[NikoB]

I use FireFox exclusively for reading text with anti-aliasing disabled. And perfectly clear text, although without anti-aliasing.

The only place where I have to use Chrome is youtube. For a simple reason, because. Google uses openly criminal methods to block the normal operation of other browsers with their service. And a proven fact. And very rarely you have to use it on crookedly written sites, where idiot developers did not care about real compatibility with WWW standards.
And also, again, sometimes due to the fact that the built-in Google translator (which Firefox still does not have in its normal form) forces some sites to be translated via Chrome.

I don't need browsers on the Chromium engine for anything else.

The problem with Mozilla is not that they make a bad browser - it is the best on the planet today for the eyes and in general, but that they have completely lost to Google because of the developed ecosystem of support for their browser - they do not have YouTube and there is no analogue of Google -translator. They don't have mail or other services.

This is a meaningless fight against a monster that should have long ago been divided into a dozen companies through antitrust laws.

But as I have explained for many years, the US government benefits from the monster Google as a geopolitical tool. Therefore, US antitrust officials are expressly ordered not to pay attention to the anti-market actions of Alphabet or, in the past, Google.

Competition works where rules are followed. In the USA the rules are NOT followed. Their power is two-faced.

[vertigo]

Brave is literally Chrome, you mongoloid, and it's a security blanket for morons who don't know anything about actually protecting their privacy.

While I personally don't use Brave, Brave is not literally Chrome. It is based on Chromium which Chrome is also based on. Chrome is Google proprietary stuff added on top of Chromium

While I personally trust Mozilla more as well, there is no reason to go as far as insulting people...

Fair point about Enterprise settings. I've played with multiple tabs a couple times in Firefox and, while I got it working, it wasn't solid enough I'd feel comfortable depending on it, not to mention the fact it breaks periodically, causing you to have to go from multi-row to single row until it's fixed again, assuming they don't break something that prevents that entirely at some point.

The point of Mozilla Connect is that people can bring up and vote on issues. So you can add that issue if it isn't there or vote on it. Things with most votes is what gets considered more likely

Though I do wonder as I pointed out above about tab groups, have you tried tab groups on Brave? I think it is a better alternative than multi-row as it not only lets you fit more tabs in less space, it also helps keep things organized

Good luck trying to have a conversation with that person. I do agree, Mozilla is more trustworthy than Google my a wide margin (despite some of the controversial things they've done), but I feel Brave is close in that regard. And considering Vivaldi had far too many issues, Edge is MS, and Chrome is Google, Brave is really the only viable alternative to Firefox, both of which also have plenty of issues as well. If it weren't an option, I'd continue to use Firefox primarily, as I refuse to use Chrome and only use Edge at work where I have to. But since they have lost their way and seem dead set determined to imitate Chrome, and have fairly significant issues that Chrome doesn't have, I figure there's not much reason to use an inferior imitation at this point (that said I do still use Firefox primarily at work, since Brave isn't an option, and I still use it secondarily at home).

As for tab groups, I've used them, and they are helpful, but I just personally prefer multi-row, and while tab groups help organize, it's a bit too easy to out-of-sight, out-of-mind them, not to say I don't end up doing that anyways. Perhaps I should try using them more consistently and see if I can change my mind about them.

[NikoB]

I figure there's not much reason to use an inferior imitation at this point (that said I do still use Firefox primarily at work, since Brave isn't an option, and I still use it secondarily at home).

Post a screenshot from Chrome of this page (your last message) and you will immediately see how your text is rendered. Only after this can we discuss further whether it is possible to use Chrome or Edge in principle without damage to vision.

[vertigo]

I figure there's not much reason to use an inferior imitation at this point (that said I do still use Firefox primarily at work, since Brave isn't an option, and I still use it secondarily at home).

Post a screenshot from Chrome of this page (your last message) and you will immediately see how your text is rendered. Only after this can we discuss further whether it is possible to use Chrome or Edge in principle without damage to vision.

I use or have used in the recent past Firefox, Waterfox, Brave, Vivaldi, Edge, and even Chrome very rarely. I use and have used them on different ~24" 1080p monitors and on a 32" 1440p monitor. I have never noticed a difference. That's not to say there isn't one, but it's not enough for me to notice, much less be bothered by it. And it certainly isn't going to do "damage to vision." At worst, if you really find it bothersome, it might cause some eyestrain. Regardless, usability, stability, features, and the company behind the browser are far more important to me than a very minor (IMO) difference in font rendering that I don't even notice and certainly couldn't care less about. Obviously, if it bothers you that much, you should stick with Firefox, but not everyone is bothered by the same things, just like not everyone notices or is as sensitive to things like DLP rainbow effect, soap opera effect, judder/jitter, PWM, etc.

[NikoB]

I asked for a your screenshot of the page from this thread from your favorite browsers. You deliberately avoided answering, which only proves that you do not understand what we are talking about. And ruin your eyesight. But it's your vision, right? Not mine... =)