Michelle, this is the bug that describes the message / string we need. Here is Chrome's in product message for comparison: http://media.askvg.com/articles/images6/Windows_XP_Vista_No_Support_Popup_Google_Chrome.png The difference is that Chrome's was a complete end of life, stopping all updates including security updates. We will continue to provide security updates for some time. We'll have another bug for messaging users when security updates will end. Philipp, how do we normally message this sort of thing in the product?

cc-ing :flod for the l10n piece

Well, so far we have never messaged anything like this ;) It might be one of those rare cases where a notification bar actually makes sense. The new tab page might be an alternative if we want to keep the message around for longer. Do we have a position on how hard we want Firefox to nudge people towards upgrading their OS?

(In reply to Philipp Sackl [:phlsa] (Firefox UX) please use needinfo from comment #3) > Do we have a position on how hard we want Firefox > to nudge people towards upgrading their OS? From what I heard in recent discussions (I think based on Chrome's XP share leveling off only slowly?) most people probably won't know how to update their OS (i.e. our advice won't be actionable for them and might just confuse them) or won't be willing to do so just because we tell them. IMHO we should tell them that and why they won't receive further major updates, maybe with a Learn More link like Chrome, but we shouldn't go out of our way to try to push them somewhere. In fact in the case of Chrome there's been a simpler solution besides updating the OS: Installing Firefox. Apparently most people didn't even want to do that. To be fair though, as far as I know Chrome didn't make an effort to recommend Firefox, so we can only speculate as to whether people stayed because they're lazy or because they didn't know better.

(In reply to Dão Gottwald [:dao] from comment #4) > (In reply to Philipp Sackl [:phlsa] (Firefox UX) please use needinfo from > comment #3) > > Do we have a position on how hard we want Firefox > > to nudge people towards upgrading their OS? > IMHO we should tell them that and why they won't receive further major updates, > maybe with a Learn More link like Chrome, but we shouldn't go out of our way > to try to push them somewhere. I agree with this. There is not much the average user can do other than buy a new computer. I was thinking about sending users to the Microsoft page which explains the options: https://www.microsoft.com/windows/xp/upgrade-options.aspx > To be fair though, as far as I know Chrome didn't make an effort > to recommend Firefox, so we can only speculate as to whether people stayed > because they're lazy or because they didn't know better. From the external surveys we've done it is both.

Makes sense - then we might indeed be looking at a notification bar in this case. We could put one on the bottom of the window that only goes away once it is interacted with (but then doesn't show up again)

Recommended copy - Learn more links to blog post address tbd: Firefox 52 is the last complete update for Windows XP and Windows Vista. We will release security updates, but no new features. Learn more

(In reply to mheubusch from comment #7) > Recommended copy - Learn more links to blog post address tbd: > > Firefox 52 is the last complete update for Windows XP and Windows Vista. We > will release security updates, but no new features. Learn more At least the message must land ASAP for l10n.

(In reply to Masatoshi Kimura [:emk] from comment #8) > At least the message must land ASAP for l10n. Based on the email discussion, I don't think it does. Also, today is merge day, so it's pretty much already late. Given that the plan is to update these strings over time, mozilla-central is not a suitable place for strings, and we should use the gofaster/system add-ons way: external repository for strings, dump in mozilla-* code as necessary outside of tracked l10n paths.

I beleive our update system has the ability to detect an orphaned system and open a web page in a tab with information for the user. Why don't we use this method of notification instead? We can tweak this message as needed, we can prompt users on xp/vista on every major update, and there no l10n issues.

ni to rstrong for confirmation we can do something like with the update system.

App update has the ability to inform the user with an unsupported message along with a link when there is a newer Firefox version available and the client's system is no longer supported ( this is what I was referring to in bug 1305453 comment #7 ). The text provided by UX is Title: System Unsupported Message: Your Firefox is out of date, but the latest version is not supported on your system. Please upgrade your system, then try again. You will not see this notice again, but you can learn more. Note: The "learn more" text is the link.

Philipp, the original proposal here was to alert users in 52 that 53 will not support their operating system. Do we still want to try to do this? (If so we have some l10n issues to deal with.) Alternatively we can notify these users when they attempt the update to 53, per comment 12.

(In reply to Robert Strong [:rstrong] (use needinfo to contact me) from comment #12) > App update has the ability to inform the user with an unsupported message > along with a link when there is a newer Firefox version available and the > client's system is no longer supported If the user is on ESR 52, at what point could this be shown? When v53 is available, or when ESR 59 is available?

(In reply to Jim Mathies [:jimm] from comment #13) > Philipp, the original proposal here was to alert users in 52 that 53 will > not support their operating system. Do we still want to try to do this? (If > so we have some l10n issues to deal with.) Alternatively we can notify these > users when they attempt the update to 53, per comment 12. I think it makes sense to see 3 messages, if possible: 1) Soon after the user gets ESR52 2) A few months before final EOL 3) At EOL

The text in comment #12 is shown when there is an update advertised to the client that has the unsupported attribute in the update xml. When it is shown is typically determined by release drivers and the work to add this to the update xml is done by release engineering. The ui with the text in comment #12 is typically shown to users when they are running a version of Firefox that has an update available to it that the user cannot update to because their system is no longer supported.

A little background: we've had cases in the past where we've decided to no longer support specific systems. In order to let these users know their system is no longer supported we needed UI to let them know. This would either require creating a point release of the current release to add the UI or to go with what we have now for app update. As for warning users with multiple messages about a "planned" removal of support I suggest going with something along the lines of the infobar.

I agree with Peter that the info could be pretty important for ESR users. It would definitely be better to show it *before* Firefox actually fails to update. On the message on update that Rob mentioned: This sounds pretty generic (as opposed to the infobar text that Michelle has provided in comment #7. How about making the body copy something like »Your Firefox is out of date, but the latest version is not supported on Windows XP and Windows Vista. Please upgrade your operating system, then try again.«

Why not use a what's new page?

(In reply to Peter Dolanjski [:pdol] from comment #15) > (In reply to Jim Mathies [:jimm] from comment #13) > > Philipp, the original proposal here was to alert users in 52 that 53 will > > not support their operating system. Do we still want to try to do this? (If > > so we have some l10n issues to deal with.) Alternatively we can notify these > > users when they attempt the update to 53, per comment 12. > > I think it makes sense to see 3 messages, if possible: > 1) Soon after the user gets ESR52 > 2) A few months before final EOL > 3) At EOL You're describing prompting that takes place in a release build. #1 sounds like it can be handled by the what's new page rstrong mentioned. I think we want to avoid trying to cram #2 and #3 into 52 aurora. But we could plan both of those as a point release we localize and distribute to 52ESR once it's out (need to confirm we can do this).

(In reply to Philipp Sackl [:phlsa] (Firefox UX) please use needinfo from comment #18) > I agree with Peter that the info could be pretty important for ESR users. It > would definitely be better to show it *before* Firefox actually fails to > update. What difference does the six weeks really make? I don't think we should expect users to rush out and update their os in response to this. They keep using XP and hope whatever version of fx they have now keeps working. Remember these users are on XP/Vista, they *know* their chosen operating system is totally obsolete.

(In reply to Jim Mathies [:jimm] from comment #20) > You're describing prompting that takes place in a release build. #1 sounds > like it can be handled by the what's new page rstrong mentioned. I think we > want to avoid trying to cram #2 and #3 into 52 aurora. But we could plan > both of those as a point release we localize and distribute to 52ESR once > it's out (need to confirm we can do this). in-product localization targeting ESR is not possible. As said, the only way we can manage out of cycle communication, evolving over time, is through a system add-on localized outside of m-c

(In reply to Francesco Lodolo [:flod] from comment #22) > (In reply to Jim Mathies [:jimm] from comment #20) > > You're describing prompting that takes place in a release build. #1 sounds > > like it can be handled by the what's new page rstrong mentioned. I think we > > want to avoid trying to cram #2 and #3 into 52 aurora. But we could plan > > both of those as a point release we localize and distribute to 52ESR once > > it's out (need to confirm we can do this). > > in-product localization targeting ESR is not possible. As said, the only way > we can manage out of cycle communication, evolving over time, is through a > system add-on localized outside of m-c Ok, so it sounds like the system add-on is our only option for #2 and #3 if we decide to do those. It could also fix #1 I think, if we pushed the update out shortly after esr 52 merges. It looks like we might not have anything to land in aurora 52 for this.

If the proposal is to change the text in the update ui from comment #12 I am very against doing that. This is used in cases when we have no other option but this to inform the user either due to a last minute change or due to a change not being planned out properly which is why the text is generic. For example, there could very well be a change that requires no longer supporting a Linux, Mac, or an additional Windows configuration and we would need to not only inform users on release but also on release esr. To be able to support both the original purpose of this ui as well as the specific purpose of notifying xp users that xp is no longer supported would require code and ui changes. With that being the case it would make just as much sense to add it to Firefox itself whether that is via new ui or use a what's new page. Regarding system add-ons, bug 1307568 was filed to try to figure out why we have seen only around 55% of systems receive system add-ons. Even if immediate progress were made in that bug I doubt it would help esr this late in the cycle.

(In reply to Jim Mathies [:jimm] from comment #23) > (In reply to Francesco Lodolo [:flod] from comment #22) > > (In reply to Jim Mathies [:jimm] from comment #20) > > > You're describing prompting that takes place in a release build. #1 sounds > > > like it can be handled by the what's new page rstrong mentioned. I think we > > > want to avoid trying to cram #2 and #3 into 52 aurora. But we could plan > > > both of those as a point release we localize and distribute to 52ESR once > > > it's out (need to confirm we can do this). > > > > in-product localization targeting ESR is not possible. As said, the only way > > we can manage out of cycle communication, evolving over time, is through a > > system add-on localized outside of m-c > > Ok, so it sounds like the system add-on is our only option for #2 and #3 if > we decide to do those. It could also fix #1 I think, if we pushed the update > out shortly after esr 52 merges. > > It looks like we might not have anything to land in aurora 52 for this. We spoke offline and this is exactly the approach that we'll go with, for messages #1, 2, and 3. I will file bugs for #2 and 3. The update UI mechanism that rstrong described will be used for Nightly/Aurora XP/Vista users. (as is, with the link going to a blog post that will be published) I will file a bug for this.

We discussed this offline and the new plan is to simply load a URL in a new tab to a SUMO page. We'll provide the URL for that shortly. The SUMO page will describe the information to be conveyed to the user instead of using an InfoBar.

Added SUMO article link to user story

Moving tracking flags to esr52 since AIUI that's where the WNP should be shown.

The URL of the XP EOL page on the new Lithium SUMO site is: https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Install-and-Update/Important-Firefox-is-ending-support-for-Windows-XP-and-Vista/ta-p/31270 Redirects from the old SUMO site to the new Lithium SUMO site are not working yet, so I propose we push the above URL directly as the whatsnew page. I update the URL in the user story above. For future reference, the old SUMO URL was: https://support.mozilla.org/1/firefox/%VERSION%/%OS%/%LOCALE%/xp-eol

How does that new page work for non-english locales?

(In reply to Julien Cristau [:jcristau] from comment #30) > How does that new page work for non-english locales? IIUC, it won't. Our old SUMO permalink [1] was broken when the SUMO site (Kitsune) moved to the Lithium CRM. In addition, Lithium does not support multilingual redirects the way we used to do. I will CC you on an email thread about this. [1] https://support.mozilla.org/1/firefox/52.0/win/en-US/xp-eol

I believe we can close this bug now, this is all done?

(In reply to Julien Cristau [:jcristau] from comment #32) > I believe we can close this bug now, this is all done? Yep! :)

Firefox Beta and Release channel users running Windows XP or Vista have been migrated to the ESR 52 channel and are shown the XP EOL SUMO page for their locale: https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Install-and-Update/Important-Firefox-is-ending-support-for-Windows-XP-and-Vista/ta-p/31270