User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:48.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/48.0 Build ID: 20160726073904 Steps to reproduce: Updated to FF48 Actual results: The url bar behavior changed inserting unwanted text eg. -Visit - Search and changed the way the results are presented eg. bigger text on page title, focus on page title instead of URL etc Expected results: I would have expected to have the same url bar as in previous FF versions

Per this https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1181078#c89 I added the relevant "depends on" and "blocks" fields.

The report is too generic to do anything about it, what you see is by design, so I hope you accept a "no thanks" as a valid answer for now. If you have ideas for enhancements to improve the current design, please file them separately and we'll evaluate them singularly, but please first search for already filed issues (like bug 1280700, for example).

(In reply to Marco Bonardo [::mak] (Away 6-20 Aug) from comment #2) > The report is too generic to do anything about it, what you see is by > design, so I hope you accept a "no thanks" as a valid answer for now. > If you have ideas for enhancements to improve the current design, please > file them separately and we'll evaluate them singularly, but please first > search for already filed issues (like bug 1280700, for example). I don't believe that revert is too generic, is precisely what I believe is an enhancement by reverting to the previous design that worked very well. The fact that you don't like - as it seem from your writing - that someone doesn't approve your new design doesn't make this bug generic and nor will I accept your condescending "no thanks" answer. bug 1280700 just refers to one of the changes that need to be reverted, in this bug I refer to all the changes that need to be reverted. Is the problem that I haven't listed the changes one by one? Sorry I can't and also you can do this much better since you know all of the insides.

(In reply to George Billios from comment #3) > The fact that you don't like - as it seem from your writing - that someone > doesn't approve your new design doesn't make this bug generic and nor will I > accept your condescending "no thanks" answer. I accept your opinion, but it's an opinion. We spent time working on improving the awesomebar and we think we did. You don't like what we did, that's fine, we accept your opinion, but we are not going to throw away all the work just because of that. Especially if there is no suggestions on how to improve things apart from "revert everything". If there will be constructive criticism or issues will arise for many users, we'll take corrective actions. > bug 1280700 just refers to one of the changes that need to be reverted, in > this bug I refer to all the changes that need to be reverted. Ok, that's not going to happen. Thus I'm asking you to evaluate the single points of failure in your opinion, take the main ones, and build constructive reports around them. That bug is one of those. > Is the problem that I haven't listed the changes one by one? No, the problem is that "revert all the work you did" is an unacceptable bug report, sorry.

Sorry I don't have the time to list every single one change here because you would preferred that. I assumed you know better and *you* (firefox devs) know what you changed. Let me suggest something different then, use this - or another bug I don't care - as a placeholder to summarize all the individual "revert" ones. Then at the end of the day work on those that are upvoted the most. Personally I voted for 1280700 PS. I assume I don't have to express my gratitude for Firefox but might need to added as a disclaimer in order to not get that kind of reaction on my bugs.

Just wanted to clear that I didn't mean to be "negative" towards you, at all. Since this is a technical bug tracker, it's more likely you get quick direct answers from developers, rather than PR-like kind of answers. This is not a feedback panel, it's a ticketing system we use for everyday work. That, along with the fact many of us are not English mother tongue and we get hundreds of bugmails a day (very short time to reply to everyone) often makes answers look more negative than they are supposed to be.

"We spent time on improving X and I think we did" is not a valid criteria for forcing a UI change that users didn't ask for (while ignoring actual user requests like Syncing user-added search engines) *and* taking away an option (browser.urlbar.unifiedcomplete) to revert this UI change. Firefox is a browser for advanced users that is loved by its target audience for customization ability. *Forcing* UI changes on users is not the Firefox way, and developers should understand it better than everyone. They must not use FF themselves, or they'd immediately understand the impact of being hindered by this nonsensical "Visit..." option (thankfully already fixed, but I won't even tell you how so that you don't break that workaround too) that now interferes with the habitual workflow or the needlessly wide "awesomebar" (whoever came up with this name as well as the concept, please go back to Google) that forces you to look to the right to see the URL. Yes, we all have widescreens. No, we don't like information presented horizontally rather than vertically just for the sake of filling the space. Almost half of my addons at this point are there to un-mess-up what Mozilla devs thought would be trendy UI improvements. Another half is to implement the functionality people actually have asked to be added just to be ignored, or you'll have to ask Microsoft for advice on getting people off obsolete software versions despite security risks, because FF47 will be the last thing productive FF users will put up with.

(In reply to Phantom from comment #8) > "We spent time on improving X and I think we did" is not a valid criteria > for forcing a UI change that users didn't ask for (while ignoring actual > user requests like Syncing user-added search engines) *and* taking away an > option (browser.urlbar.unifiedcomplete) to revert this UI change. > > Firefox is a browser for advanced users that is loved by its target audience > for customization ability. *Forcing* UI changes on users is not the Firefox > way, and developers should understand it better than everyone. They must not > use FF themselves, or they'd immediately understand the impact of being > hindered by this nonsensical "Visit..." option (thankfully already fixed, > but I won't even tell you how so that you don't break that workaround too) > that now interferes with the habitual workflow or the needlessly wide > "awesomebar" (whoever came up with this name as well as the concept, please > go back to Google) that forces you to look to the right to see the URL. Yes, > we all have widescreens. No, we don't like information presented > horizontally rather than vertically just for the sake of filling the space. > > Almost half of my addons at this point are there to un-mess-up what Mozilla > devs thought would be trendy UI improvements. Another half is to implement > the functionality people actually have asked to be added just to be ignored, > or you'll have to ask Microsoft for advice on getting people off obsolete > software versions despite security risks, because FF47 will be the last > thing productive FF users will put up with. Hear hear! Agree on all levels with this.

Having been through this run-around before, I would point out that there is in fact no place for users to "get quick direct answers from developers" (the closest anybody could come up with last time around was a very general and almost purely developer-on-developer mailing list). As imperfect as this forum is for the topic, this is the best there is. The last run-around was virtually identically. Firefox introduce a new feature. Many users hate it (and let me be clear, I detest the 'awful' bar). Webposts proliferate on an about:config switch that disables it. A few releases later, Firefox disables the the switch and acts massively surprised when people pile onto Bugzilla to complain. Firefox has learned NOTHING from its previous clusterf*cks, and continues to commit them. Does anybody at Firefox have the first clue whether users like UI changes or find them useful? Does anybody EVEN CARE? That to me is the the real 'bug' in the system -- a systematic failure to cultivate meaningful feedback.

On "The report is too generic to do anything about it", is this specific enough for you: Restore "browser.urlbar.unifiedcomplete" to functionality. I would point out that features of this new interface were sufficiently widely disliked that the Classic Theme Restorer add-on had a "Remove 'Search with' and 'Visit' items" feature (which is now greyed out and non-functional, presumably due to underlying functionality supporting it being removed).

I made an account on this site solely to tell you to please let us make changes to your awesomebar. I like Firefox and I've been very happy with how the bar works before. The "visit" link popping up at the top now is horrible, it serves absolutely no purpose for me, I don't want to go to the top level domain. Please consider letting your users decide whether they want to see the "visit" result at the top of the results or not, thank you.

I don't think extrapolating a single phrase from its context is the right way to read what I said. We consider any kind of feedback, but please notice personal attacks and advocacy are not welcome on Bugzilla.

Marco: 1) "Extrapolating" has no meaning in this context. (Look it up in a dictionary.) 2) If the the accusation is "taking out of context", then it is beholden on you to demonstrate how the context modifies the meaning of the quoted passage. 3) "Firefox" is not a person (nor are its components, UI, etc), so attacking it is not a "personal attack". I am seeing a lot of effort being put into avoiding this issue, rather than addressing it.

Incidentally, I see the word "advocacy" repeated over, and over, and over, here, as though it is a dirty word. If Bugzilla regulars do not wish to "welcome" it, then it would seem to be beholden on them to suggest a forum where disgruntled users can ***EFFECTIVELY*** "advocate" against changes that they dislike. Lacking such an effective forum, I think it is highly likely that such users will continue to find their way here. As I stated previously -- "a systematic failure to cultivate meaningful feedback."

Addressing this issue would just mean reverting all the changes, since that's what the bug is asking for and that's why it's marked as incomplete. There's no constructive feedback, nor actionable bug report here, apart from "I dislike it" (invalid or wontfix could be a better resolution, but does that matter?). I'm answering to all the bug requests I see, trying to coordinate the feedback, and also replying on articles on the Web and on Reddit. Is this "avoiding the issue"? (In reply to hrafn42nz from comment #15) > If Bugzilla regulars do not wish to "welcome" it, then it would seem to be > beholden on them to suggest a forum where disgruntled users can > ***EFFECTIVELY*** "advocate" against changes that they dislike. Note that "Bugzilla regulars" is people who use this ticketing system for their everyday job, and then you can easily see why I say it's not the right place to have discussions. The Firefox reddit, firefox-dev mailing list, input.mozilla.org pages are just few examples. You can send us mails, ping us on IRC, contact on twitter... it's not like we are hiding ;) Which other browsers allow you to have this kind of interaction and influence on development? Now, clearly we can't satisfy everyone, but we listen. Short, there are so many places to discuss and provide feedback, that using a ticketing system is just plain wrong.

Marco: 1) Dozens of hits on "browser.urlbar.unifiedcomplete" of people posting on how to disable the feature, and an add-on seems to indicate that it's not just me disliking it. 2) firefox-dev mailing list was the "very general and almost purely developer-on-developer mailing list" I mentioned earlier. It is ***NOT*** an effective forum for specific user complaints. 3) I would challenge anybody to distinguish any clear message from the output of input.mozilla.org -- it is simply a random firehose. Again, not an effective forum for user complaints. 4) Reddit, quite apart from having no formal relationship with Mozilla, is likewise a fairly random (and very transient) firehose. 5) None of the rest of your suggestions appear to do anything more than relegate each of us to being another lone voice on the wilderness (even if we happened to stumble upon a dev and recognise them as such) -- easily dismissable as "I [singular] dislike it". If we cannot join our voices together, then we have no chance of changing anything. Here's a suggestion -- before suggesting further random forums, check to see if any of them have actually functioned as a forum for effective feedback (at all, let alone consistently). Short, any of these other places YOU JUST WON'T HEAR US. I'd rather be "wrong" than be muzzled. "A systematic failure to cultivate MEANINGFUL feedback." (By meaningful, I mean a forum where we have a chance of actually being heard, not just of letting off steam.)

(In reply to hrafn42nz from comment #17) > 1) Dozens of hits on "browser.urlbar.unifiedcomplete" of people posting on > how to disable the feature, and an add-on seems to indicate that it's not > just me disliking it. You are assuming those "dozens" are a good representation of hundreds thousands. It's feedback to take into account and we are already doing that. As an interesting anectode, when we removed the first pre-selected row for autoFill, years ago, we got about the same amount of negative feedback we are getting now that we are re-introducing it. What does that mean? > Here's a suggestion -- before suggesting further random forums, check to see > if any of them have actually functioned as a forum for effective feedback > (at all, let alone consistently). Why do you think I didn't? I'm here from 8 years and I can tell you that all of them worked for effective feedback. In a lot of cases fixes started from feedback collected at those sources. > Short, any of these other places YOU JUST WON'T HEAR US. I'd rather be > "wrong" than be muzzled. Sorry, but at this point we went a little bit too far away. Since none of the previous comments contain anything that is "actionable", doesn't look like bringing on this conversation is going to be useful to move on. So I'm now restricting comments on this bug. For people looking for solutions, I point out some of the bugs that will likely help in the future: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1235397 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1256074 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1280700 For anything not covered here, please file a specific bug with the issue and proposed solution.