Today the stable channel of Firefox got a new UI, and man, it looks familiar:
I wonder why?
Naw, no way Firefox (top) looks similar to Chrome (bottom) at all. Totally original design, Mozilla! Innovative! Ushering in a new era on the Internet! Leading the industry!
It's sad Mozilla has fallen so far in recent years, starting with the Firefox 4 clone of Opera's UI. Why can't they hire real interface designers who know what the hell they're doing, instead of blatantly copying Chrome, like Mozilla started doing first with the development cycle and version numbers and now with the UI. Oh, and the whole Brendan Eich thing.
Firefox fanboys will argue that no no, Firefox has rounded tabs, not anglular tabs! Very different! And the design predated Chrome!
No, I'm sorry Firefox fanboys. Here's what the Australis design looked like back in 2011, when they used a gear icon for the menu and the design looked far better, though still a Chrome lookalike:
Firefox fanboys also argue that the hamburger icon came to Firefox before Chrome got it, but no. Chrome got the hamburger icon in late 2012, Australis didn't even have that in the design mockup in 2012 or in Nightly.
Besides that, when did Australis get released? Oh that's right, today. When did Chrome get released with the hamburger icon? Oh wait, two years ago.
Firefox fanboys argue that, "All browsers borrow designs from other browsers. There's only so many ways you can design something before they all start looking the same." lol no. Take a look at Opera, Internet Explorer, Maxthon, and Midori:
[caption id="attachment_218" align="aligncenter" width="1920"] Opera[/caption]
[caption id="attachment_215" align="aligncenter" width="1920"] Internet Explorer[/caption]
[caption id="attachment_216" align="aligncenter" width="1920"] Maxthon[/caption]
[caption id="attachment_217" align="aligncenter" width="1920"] Midori[/caption]
They've all got square tabs, but at least the rest of the UIs in all of them are different. Mozilla could have come up with their own unique UI, instead of copying Chrome. But no. Innovation is dead at Mozilla. No, Firefox OS is not innovative. They built an OS on top of a web browser with an aging engine with poor performance, which consistently has problems on Android, so how will it perform well on its own, especially on the garbage phones Mozilla plans to put it on? Yeah, tell me how that's innovative.
You may call me a Chrome fanboy, which I most certainly, proudly am. But you can't deny the major similarities here. And you can't deny that for all intents and purposes it appears that Firefox copied Chrome's UI.
There's the bad things about Firefox 29. Here's the good things:
- Firefox Sync finally got an update and doesn't force you to carry a long code with you anymore, you just need an account name and password. Simple, I like.
- Firefox's new UI means that a lot of people will be pissed off, and I can enlighten and ascend more Firefox peasants to the glorious Chrome master race, because if they look the same, why use a crappy lookalike when you can use the real thing?
There you have it. A Chrome fanboy's rant on Firefox's rampant copying of Chrome, and Mozilla's stagnant innovation, that hopefully outlines some key points very well.
Articles from the web that agree that Mozilla copied Chrome:
...The new design looks pretty darn Chrome-like, what with the (annoyingly large) curved tabs and the right-hand "hamburger" menu.
[Firefox 29]... includes both the new — and very Chrome-like — Australis design, ...
...the latest Firefox feels a lot different—though to people who have used Google’s Chrome, it may look strangely familiar.
Have some thoughts on this post?Reply with an email