[Gormo]

"Non-technical users" is a contradiction in terms. If you're using technology, you're a "technical user".

If you don't know how certain options work, you should leave them alone; but if you don't leave them alone and something breaks, it takes only common sense and not specialized knowledge to suspect that the thing you changed has some relationship to the thing that broke.

De-featuring software for the presumptive convenience of a presumptive lowest-common-denominator user is not a good practice.

[nsmartt]

It's true that users should not break things without some mind as to how to fix them, but it's also irrelevant. If a user breaks your product, it makes no difference to him or her who broke it. It's still broken. Users will have a bad experience.

This doesn't mean advanced options shouldn't exist, but it does mean that they should be out of the way for non-advanced users. In this case, the setting is moved to about:config or to add-ons, so I don't see how we've lost anything.

Are you opining that some users may not be able to find the setting in about:config? Would they not just enter "How to disable JavaScript in new Firefox" into a search engine?

>"Non-technical users" is a contradiction in terms. If you're using technology, you're a "technical user".

This is a debate about semantics. "Non-technical" is a colloquialism. I see no benefit to this train of thought.

[Gormo]

Users will have a "bad experience" as a consequence of an action that they took, and can undo just as easily.

A good user experience can be achieved by providing users with an efficient way to understand and fix problems that they encounter.

De-featuring a product to prevent users from ever encountering a problem reduces the utility of the product, which produces a worse experience for everyone, not just the ones who would have had a problem they couldn't solve.

Those who would have had a problem they couldn't solve will still ultimately have a bad experience, because it's their own pattern of usage, and not any defect in the software, that's ultimately getting them stuck.

Moving an "advanced" setting to a different interface is fine, but the release notes don't say that the JavaScript toggle was moved to about:config; the notes say that it was removed (and that user-set values will be reset to default, which, IMO, is an unacceptable thing for an update patch to ever do.)

[nsmartt]

>A good user experience can be achieved by providing users with an efficient way to understand and fix problems that they encounter.

Agreed.

>De-featuring a product

If I were building a browser today, I wouldn't want the option to be where Mozilla had placed it. I think of this more as a correction than as removing a feature. I don't think we're going to agree on this one, which is fine.

>produces a worse experience for everyone

Not at all. The majority of users do not need this feature, and those that do are likely to be sufficiently experienced to find it anyway.

>Those who _would_ have had a problem they couldn't solve will _still_ ultimately have a bad experience, because it's their own pattern of usage, and not any defect in the software, that's ultimately getting them stuck.

This is debatable. Good UX means preventing these kinds of pitfalls.

>the notes say that it was removed

This is a failure on their part to communicate the move, which sucks. It's also possibly a direct attempt to prevent people from using this feature for whatever reason, which is kind of sleazy.

>and that user-set values will be reset to default, which, IMO, is an unacceptable thing for an update patch to _ever_ do.

I'm pretty sure we're in agreement here. I take no issue with moving the option to about:config. I also wouldn't take issue with it being removed entirely, because add-ons such as NoScript are superior to that feature anyway.

[smackfu]

Your vision of users is so adorable.

Real people just don't act that way.

[Gormo]

So the people who do act that way are fake people?

I've worked a helpdesk, and I know where the stereotypes are coming from. I also know that selection bias is selection bias, and that there's never an excuse to remove functionality from software.

[bashinator]

Good thing no functionality has been removed, then.

[Gormo]

The release notes did say "removed"; apparently, this is inaccurate.