[patio11]

Someone remind me why are we tampering with how the urls are displayed. Is there some major benefit I'm missing out on and why is this type of thing "news"?

1) Normal users do not understand URLs, at all.

2) It is in Google's direct financial interest to extend overwhelming control of navigation on the Internet into complete domination, by discouraging navigation by end users and teaching them that the right way to navigate is to use AOL Keywords 2.0 at their friendly local multinational advertising company.

Why would Firefox do this? I don't know. Maybe they have Chrome envy.

Want a conspiracy theory? Firefox receives essentially 100% of their funding -- to the tune of over a hundred million bucks -- from Google kicking back advertising revenue in return for being the default search engine in FF. If a for-profit corporation made a decision in the interests of their sole client whose happiness was worth 9 figures a year, what would you conclude about the motivation for that decision?

[chc]

I think it's pretty much just the first reason you list. Firefox has been trying to move in this direction since the introduction of the horribly named AwesomeBar, which was intended to be a DWIM button for Web navigation.

The conspiracy theory doesn't really hold up, since as far as I can tell, pleasing Google doesn't affect Mozilla's bottom line either way. The value of Google's happiness to Mozilla is substantially less than $9 million per year. The important metric isn't happiness — it's the binary "Have we avoided pissing Google off so badly that they're willing call off the deal and give up all those Firefox ad clicks to Bing?"

To go beyond the call of duty and actually try to make Google happy by making Firefox worse would be a stupid move — it would only weaken Mozilla's bargaining position with Google.

[pasbesoin]

I believe point 2) has not been emphasized enough.