Take NoScript for instance : a plain user doesn’t have the faintest idea of how to tweak the settings, he must for the main rely on default settings. Recently this extension has had problems with a new feature concerning cookies, feature set to ON by default and which appeared to be a big bug. Well, only geeks made their way out, others lost hours.

As for myself, I’ve updated to Firefox 3 for security, speed and a few enhancements, but not all : who uses truly the awesome bar, who really tags ? Excess of gadgets pushes away “plain” users who like “plain” semantic paths. Of course it is often possible, and especially with Firefox, to disable this or that, but you still have to make your way to it.

As for Ubiquity, I’ve checked it out, it is made to make things easier, but does it really? For maps, I right-click on an address and click on context menu : two clicks and I have a full browser page map : not really more complicated. Email the same.

Generally speaking, and this is my truth for all domains, a concept is worth what it appears to be when experienced in time. I remember many years ago when it appeared that many programs written in “spaghetti” code ran faster than those written in “structured” code (back in the eighties). Remains true elsewhere, that is that often the natural chaos as opposed to full logic, of human behavior reaches its aim more quickly than when the path has been structured in such a way that only those who have followed the logic of the sructure really find it useful.

http://labs.mozilla.com/2008/08/introducing-ubiquity/

An average user wants a settle and run system, security and extensions. Successful browsers of tommorrow will be those that remain simple. Already at this time there are 2 Firefox 2.x users for 1 Firefox 3.x user, because Firefox 3 has innovated functions only wished by geeks!

Make it simpler, developers !