[dao-]

> Don't forget colorways, the non-feature that still needed to be force-fed to us. I assumed people who wanted to change the color theme already could

Most average users don't ever change settings or otherwise customize stuff, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't enjoy a different theme. Colorways saw good adoption according to our internal Telemetry. In fact, three years later colorway themes combined remain more popular than either Dark, Light, or Alpenglow, despite not being offered or advertised directly in Firefox anymore.

[dale_glass]

Not surprising, since I believe Firefox gave everyone the Colorways screen when that feature showed up, but nothing equivalent happened whenever it went away.

My current desktop has been Fedora since Fedora 16, and I just upgraded from one release to the next continuously. So yes, whatever choice I made back in 2013 is just going to stick around on my current machine unless it goes away entirely or I manually change it. Colors are just not that important, if I like it well enough, it's going to stick around forever.

The only one that caused intense feelings in me was the "Dreamer – Bold" theme that caused a fair amount of confusion about why the heck couldn't I tell which tab was active, and what could be possibly broken. Because it never occurred to me that the theme could be designed that way intentionally.

[dao-]

> Not surprising, since I believe Firefox gave everyone the Colorways screen when that feature showed up,

Right, I assume that's what the parent comment meant by "force-fed to us." That screen was indeed the whole point: It made the theming feature visible and accessible to the average users.

[albedoa]

Okay? The thing that you force-fed users saw good adoption. Imagine that.

[dao-]

Drop the hyperbole for a second. It was a choice screen, a far cry from force-feeding. I'll grant you, somewhat wide adoption is almost a given when putting this kind of UI in front of all users, but that still doesn't mean that it was a mistake or a net loss to give folks who wouldn't normally customize Firefox a chance to do so. So, what's your point?

[Y_Y]

It was something I didn't want, put between me and my browser, because someone at Mozilla decided they wanted wveryone to stop what they were doing and pay attention to this new method of self expression. If it wasn't a big deal them why do I still care about it? Maybe I should just change my desktop theme until I feel better.

[albedoa]

> So, what's your point?

What? It's the one you conceded:

> I'll grant you, somewhat wide adoption is almost a given when putting this kind of UI in front of all users

I see now that "force-fed" is hyperbole. It was merely "put in front of all users". And then the thing that happens when you put this kind of UI in front of all users happened.

Thanks!

[Y_Y]

Does your internal telemetry tell you that "average" users don't know what Firefox is, and that proficient users who might recommend it to them are sick of the mismanagement of the browser?

[margalabargala]

> In fact, three years later colorway themes combined remain more popular than either Dark, Light, or Alpenglow, despite not being offered or advertised directly in Firefox anymore.

People using colorways after the feature was removed? Well, that sounds like a failure of the feature then.

The whole crux upon which the colorways marketing rested, was they were temporary! You get to change your theme for a few months, and then later on at some random point, it changes again as it's taken away from you.

If users have managed to continue using those themes, well, that's in spite of what Mozilla did with them, not because of them.

The criticism of colorways wasn't because people hate browser themes, it's because making features that self-destruct after indeterminate amounts of time is user-hostile. "Limited time features" is alone enough to make someone want to swap to a fork.

[dao-]

> People using colorways after the feature was removed? Well, that sounds like a failure of the feature then.

> The whole crux upon which the colorways marketing rested, was they were temporary! You get to change your theme for a few months, and then later on at some random point, it changes again as it's taken away from you.

It was sort of a marketing gimmick, one I wasn't particularly fond of. (I was the lead engineer for colorways.) What it really meant is that we'd offer the onboarding screen and colorways built into about:addons for a limited time. The intent was never to remove them once users installed them. We have since migrated them to AMO where they can still be installed: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collections/4757633...

[margalabargala]

Yes, and when people complain about colorways, the marketing gimmick is what they are complaining about. No one objects to colored themes, and adding a UI "hey this is a feature" isn't a thing people really dislike either beyond a few.

People know when they are being sold to and emotionally manipulated, and they don't like it, even if it's effective.

That's why colorways was a failure, complained about years later, even if "the metrics look good". People don't remember what you did, they remember how you made them feel.

[dao-]

There's for sure a lesson to be learned in here. The product owner who had decided and pushed for making it seem like colorways were ephemeral has long left Mozilla, so you're preaching to the choir at this point.

I still don't consider colorways a failure, all things considered. To me, the fact that colorways are still some of the most used themes outweighs you remembering that you were angry three or so years ago, but thanks for the feedback.

[margalabargala]

I think perhaps we are using the same words to talk about different things.

It may well be that colorways are used and loved by many users and that's a success. You made something people like; well done!

That we are having this conversation at all I think could be considered evidence, though, that it was a strategic failure for Mozilla. How much public opinion is worth burning for how much increased usage of a new theme feature? In my opinion, very little.

That colorways work well, that the people who use them continue to do so, that they were technically well designed and well engineered, is one yardstick by which to measure success/failure. By that measure they are certainly a success. But another yardstick is "did they have a net-positive or net-negative effect on the organization", which is where I think it came up short.

Based on the things you've said it sounds like you and I are more or less on the same page.

[dao-]

> How much public opinion is worth burning for how much increased usage of a new theme feature? In my opinion, very little.

I think we're squarely in the "very little" range here in terms of how much public backlash we saw. You might be overestimating how widely folks got angry the same way you got angry, or perhaps we weren't monitoring the right forums and channels when releasing the feature, who knows.

[jlokier]

Oh... I'd completely forgotten that I picked a theme when those were offered.

So it hadn't occurred to me since then that I could change it.

I guess I count among the users who are still using a colorways theme. But after getting used to it, I ended up thinking of it as being what current Firefox looks like by default.

[RunSet]

> Colorways saw good adoption according to our internal Telemetry.

The users who regard colorways as frivolous likely also disabled the telemetry.

Rather like how the "psychological profile of a serial killer" is merely the psychological profile of a serial killer the police are capable of catching.

[Izkata]

And on the other end of the spectrum, Colorways was extremely bland compared to user themes.

[bufio]

Telemetry Brain and "Most average users don't..." may explain why Firefox has been getting consistently worse for a long time.