Categories: General


Seven months since setting out to refresh the Mozilla brand experience, we’ve reached the summit. Thousands of emails, hundreds of meetings, dozens of concepts, and three rounds of research later, we have something to share. If you’re just joining this process, you can get oriented here and here.

At the core of this project is the need for Mozilla’s purpose and brand to be better understood by more people. We want to be known as the champions for a healthy Internet. An Internet where we are all free to explore and discover and create and innovate without barriers or limitations. Where power is in the hands of many, not held by few. An Internet where our safety, security and identity are respected.

Today, we believe these principles matter more than ever. And as a not-for-profit organization, we’re uniquely able to build products, technologies, and programs that keep the Internet growing and healthy, with individuals informed and in control of their online lives.

Our brand identity – our logo, our voice, our design – is an important signal of what we believe in and what we do. And because we are so committed to ensuring the Internet is a healthy global public resource, open and accessible to everyone, we’ve designed the language of the Internet into our brand identity.

Today, we’re sharing our new logo and a proposed color palette, language architecture, and imagery approach. Remaining true to our intent to engage with the design and tech community throughout this open design process, we welcome your feedback on these elements as we build out our design guidelines.

Let’s go into a bit more detail on the components of our brand identity system, developed in collaboration with our exceptional London-based design partner johnson banks.

Our logo

Our logo with its nod to URL language reinforces that the Internet is at the heart of Mozilla. We are committed to the original intent of the link as the beginning of an unfiltered, unmediated experience into the rich content of the Internet.













The font for the wordmark and accompanying copy lines is Zilla. Created for us by Typotheque in the Netherlands, Zilla is free and open to all.

Typotheque was an historic partner to Mozilla. They were the first type-foundry to release Web-based fonts, and Mozilla’s Firefox web browser was an early adopter of Web fonts. We chose to partner with Peter Bilak from Typotheque because of their deep knowledge of localization of fonts, and our commitment to having a font that includes languages beyond English. Prior to partnering with Typotheque, we received concepts and guidance from Anton Koovit and FontSmith.


Selected to evoke the Courier font used as the original default in coding, Zilla has a journalistic feel. It bucks the current convention of sans serif fonts. Anyone can create the Mozilla logo by typing and highlighting with the Zilla font, making the logo open and democratic. The black box surrounding the logo is a key building block of the design, and echoes the way we all select type in toolbars and programs.

Mozilla comes first in any application of the system, just as the protocol begins any internet journey. Copy lines, colors, and images all flow from that starting point, much like a web journey.

Our color palette

Our color palette, derived from the highlight colors used by Firefox and other web browsers, distinguishes our brand from its contemporaries. Color flows into our logo and changes according to the context in which the logo is used. As we develop our style guide, we’ll define color pairings, intensities, and guidelines.


Our language and language architecture

Copy lines to the right or below the logo hold core Mozilla messages.  They also hold program, event, and team names — simplifying and unifying a multitude of different Mozilla activities. It will now be easier to know that something is “from” Mozilla and understand how our global initiatives connect and reinforce one another.

The system enables Mozilla volunteer communities across the globe to create their own identity by selecting color and choosing imagery unique to them. Meanwhile the core blocks of our system, bounding boxes and typography, will provide the consistency, making it clear that these communities are part of one Mozilla.


Our Imagery

As we looked at the elements of our brand identity, the concept of one image or icon standing for the whole of Mozilla, and the entirety of the Internet, seemed anachronistic. Since imagery is an important reflection of the diversity and richness of the Internet, however, we’ve made it an important component of our system.


In digital applications, ever-changing imagery represents the unlimited bounty of the online ecosystem. Dynamic imagery allows the identity of Mozilla to evolve with the Internet itself, always fresh and new. Static applications of our identity system include multiple, layered images as if taken as a still frame within a moving digital experience.


How might it work? We intend to invite artists, designers, and technologists to contribute to an imagery collective, and we’ll code curated GIFs, animations, and still images to flow into and and other digital experiences. Through this open design approach, we will engage new design contributors and communities, and make more imagery available to all under Creative Commons. We’re looking for input from creative communities to help shape and expand this idea.





We will roll out the new brand identity in phases, much as we have with concepts in this open design process, so please be patient with our progress. As we develop our design system, we look forward to hearing your feedback and suggestions using the comments below. You’ve been with us from the start and we’re glad you’re here. We’ll continue to share updates and comments in this space.




Photo credits
Brandenburg Gate
Iron Filings

240 comments on “Arrival”

  1. Aleksey wrote on

    Very cool idea for new logo. You will sell stickers with him? Wanna it.

    1. incko wrote on

      I’d totally interested in buying stickers of the Logo! (And please make them available for worldwide shipping)

      Oh, and where can I download the Zilla font?


      1. Tim Murray wrote on

        Thanks, Aleksey! We’ll have the font available within a month or so as we build out our brand guide. And we’ll figure out a way to make stickers available as well. Stay tuned!

        1. Vivienne wrote on

          Awe, really gonna miss the little fox! Is he going away for good? He’s soft and friendly looking, cute too! (Remember it’s “Fire “Fox”) Sometimes brands are intrinsically comforting.

          1. Tim Murray wrote on

            Hi Vivienne, This is not a replacement for the Firefox logo. It’s for Mozilla. Learn more at Thanks for commenting!

          2. M Munn wrote on

            Firefox original logo is ultimately supreme… please do not abandon completely… Please Please Please Please !!!

        2. Vivienne wrote on

          One more thing…the new logos remind me of “Sportswear” Sorry, it’s just we’ve had our logos for so long, it’s become Cozy! Fight for the Fox! =D

          1. Tim Murray wrote on

            Thanks for contributing, Vivienne. This brand identity is for Mozilla, not Firefox. Mozilla is the nonprofit champion of a healthy Internet and the maker of Firefox, the open-source browser. We will always fight for the fox.

        3. Peter wrote on

          i’m so proud to donate for Mozilla.. Thanks Team

        4. cici wrote on

          I have to admit when I just saw the “M” on my google search page, it reminded me of the “modern farmer” font. They have a similar feeling about them.

      2. noithathaiphong wrote on

        Thank you for this sharing

    2. Poppy wrote on

      i really dig the new concept and type driven identity. personally would have moved away from the slab serif and something more of a minimal digital feel like akkurat mono. great project, love the glyphs :)

    3. Sergei wrote on

      I think it’s not a pretty good idea – only for those people for which the Latin alphabet is native – 1.5 billion (20%) against 5,5 billion of other people in the world.

      And only for IT geeks. If you want to spread more widely you need to be more understandably for ordinary users.

      1. Clairvaux wrote on

        What’s your point ? Are you telling us that Mozilla should adopt Russian as its primary language ? Arabic ? Chinese ? Kaspersky is a Russian company, but its logo is not in cyrillic characters. Chinese worldwide businesses don’t trade internationally using the Chinese language and Chinese ideograms.

        1. Wilfredo Cespedes wrote on

          I don’t agree with @Sergie because English is now the international language of politics and commerce. As was French in the 20th Century. The Chinese actually comprise more English speaking people than the US and other English speaking countries because of their population size. Your direction is the right one because it gives way for evolving in a common platform. I think, and agree with your efforts. Thank you for doing this now more than ever. The changes are global and I’m glad you are working to make it inclusive and open.

      2. Alex wrote on

        ordinary users say and do stupid things, they need a champion of free internet as the internet is just very ununderstandably for them

    4. RAHUL DEV wrote on

      awesome look but its better if u add nuclear fission graphics in mozilla logo..

  2. nicolas wrote on

    This blogpost finally :)

    Quick, unthinkingly reaction: solid wordmark, fitting palette, and really good surprise to see a custom typeface in the delivery! All three feel quite Mozilla to me, so I guess it’s a success, I can see it working and having the right voice.
    A clearer art direction for the imagery would be welcome, but maybe we can see where it goes from here and refine it along the way. Or it can be the seasonal thing that changes from time to time, the part of the identity that updates when a refresh is needed, the type and wordmark staying rooted along the years.

    Questions now: when will font files, vector logo, and public brand guidelines be available? When will we be able to play with it? When can we update all the Wikipedia articles about Mozilla, local communities’ websites headers, etc? How will deploying it take place on Mozilla side?

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Thanks, Nicolas. You’re right in assuming that imagery will be constantly updating to reflect the diversity and beauty of the Internet in real time. Our design system gives us the flexibility to adapt the imagery to reflect season, current events, or even the work of a particular technologist or artist. We are at work on a brand guide that will include all of the elements we need, so please stay tuned.

      1. nicolas wrote on

        Thank you for the reply Tim. I’m looking forward to seeing all of this!
        Otherwise, I noticed the version of the logo currently up on has shorter inner margins on the sides. Is there a mistake in either that one or the one introduced here (which looks better with increased margins)?

  3. bob wrote on

    Very cool. Where can I find the zilla font?

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Thanks, Bob! We’re at work on our brand guide and will make Zilla available within the next month or so. Assuming all goes as planned, Typotheque will create Cyrillic and Indic character sets as well.

      1. bob wrote on

        Awesome, it’s great looking font, looking forward to playing around with it. The new logo is very slick! Keep up the great work

        1. Anivar Aravind wrote on

          If you need any help with Indic character set and reviewing, we , Indicproject can help. Please let me know . I am a Mozillian.

          I also suggest to open up the font design phase accepting patches in true spirit of open design .

      2. Camilo wrote on

        That’s great! Waiting for it… Will it be monospaced, or have a monospaced version? It looks like it would be really nice to have in an IDE or terminal.

      3. Lisa wrote on

        Having been a typesetter years ago with the original typesetting computers, I was a little disappointed that the new font wasn’t used as the type style for the articles! First thing I checked. But, good job and good luck!

  4. Boring Sydney wrote on

    so much MEH!

  5. Lyonel Marcente wrote on

    Brilliant. Nice fusing of both concepts.
    The concept of building living collages with CC images would normally feel cheap, but in keeping the theme of the internet of the people it’s an extraordinary approach.
    Also, it reminds me of the millenium’s beggining, bursting with elements but before the shines-and-shadows. It looks great and different to the half-retro half-plain trend now.

  6. Hamed Yahyaei wrote on

    I like the philosophy behind the design of new logo :-) Good job and good luck with the design of brand identity!

  7. JC wrote on

    I love this new cool branding of Mozilla. <3

  8. Danish Raza wrote on

    I’m impressed, very impressed! great work, clear & retched colors with message

  9. Floris van Leerdam wrote on

    Well that looks a bit familiair.


    1. Sally G wrote on

      It seems to me that the :// is common to both, and possibly for the same reason—it represents the Internet, the start of a URL, which is central to Mozilla (which I guess I will now be writing as Moz://a—no, I guess not—it works as a logo, but not in text!) and presumably to Floro, with which I am not familiar.
      That said, the application, new typeface (which I like a lot, especially the “old style” numerals—and yea! for serifs, so I can tell the difference between cap Is and lower-case Ls even when standing alone).

  10. Ross James wrote on

    This is the logo equivalent of Martin Shkreli’s face.

  11. alex_mayorga wrote on


    Loving it from moz:// =)


  12. Jimmy Rustles wrote on

    You should look up what that hand sign means in other countries.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Thanks, Jimmy. Noted.

      1. michael wrote on

        ya it can be similar to the middle finger in Brazil which is funny since Nixon signed at a crowd in Brazil back in the 1950s when disembarking his plane

    2. Gus wrote on

      Seconding this. It is rude in some countries.

  13. Yofie Setiawan wrote on

    Looks brave enough to me…

  14. Greg K Nicholson wrote on

    Some thoughts:
    * I don’t immediately love it.
    * …but I’m willing to be impressed.
    * It looks very mid-late-2000s, which may be deliberate. (In particular, BBC Radio 6 Music used to use a slab serif in pastel blue text-boxes.)
    * I thought web browsers didn’t really expose the protocol to users any more.
    * I thought the motivation for the rebrand was that our old wordmark wasn’t a strong enough identity, and we can’t resume using the old dino for some unspecified reason. The example of MDN in the new identity still uses the dino, which suggests that the new identity still doesn’t have a good replacement icon.
    * The example on the office wall reminds me of IE6’s About box.
    * The Fira font still looks good with the new identity on It seems to pair well with Zilla. We should keep using Fira – perhaps for more product-focused application; whereas Zilla could be for more activism/organisation-focused uses.
    * If you make an example in red that says “This technology could fall into the right hands”, you’ll probably win me over.
    * It isn’t *not*-Mozilla.
    * The coloured versions of the logo remind me of
    * I want to like it.
    * I hope I eventually like it.

  15. Sergey wrote on

    Ugly, bad geometry, bad readability. Design for design? Why did you do that?

    1. Benjamin Kerensa wrote on


    2. Vic wrote on


  16. Steven Hoober wrote on

    Would love to see a monospaced version if Zilla. They come up, but I don’t love most current versions and this seems an obvious tie in to the old.

  17. OGenius wrote on

    Amazing work! This new logo is powerful, elegant and definitely well thought! The colors are also vibrant and engaging. But I have to be honest: I will miss the little Firefox…

  18. Dan Jones wrote on

    That new logo is going to be confusing. People already disagree on how to pronounce Mozilla, without throwing moz://a into the mix.

    1. Benjamin Kerensa wrote on


  19. Tom S. wrote on

    This is horrible. I don’t mind a re-brand, but wow, this is just ugly stuff.

  20. jp wrote on

    sooooooo cool!

  21. silver wrote on

    My last comment was deleted so I’ll be more clear. It’s bad for user experience to supply a string that is not valid where it is expected to be used, requiring the user to manipulate it before it can become useful. If a user types moz://a into a browser address bar, they will either be given a protocol violation, or a google results page in which an unrelated party is #1 for organic results. This is unfriendly to your users.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Silver, We are addressing this issue and will have an appropriate redirect when someone types moz://a into a Firefox browser. Thanks!

      1. John wrote on

        A redirect is OK I guess, but what if they are a IE or Chrome user trying to switch to Firefox? I know a few Chrome users that mistakenly refer to Firefox as just “Mozilla”. If they were to type moz://a into Chrome or IE, they are not going to be able to reach a relevant Firefox download page.

        1. Tim Murray wrote on

          That’s a great point, John. We know we still have a lot of work to do to distinguish Mozilla from Firefox, and it’s going to take time for people to understand that Mozilla is the nonprofit champion of a healthy Internet, while Firefox is an open-source browser. The logo is the only place that this unique expression of our name (with ://) will appear, and our hypothesis is that most people will still write and say “Mozilla” when referring to us. We’ll continue to monitor this and seek ways to improve our standing in search results so that Firefox is easy to find through Mozilla for those who still consider the two as one.

  22. xx xxx wrote on

    Never understood why companies feel that they constantly have to change their logos.

    This new logo will not help you.

    The dinosaur head was best.

  23. Artyom Gavrichenkov wrote on


    First, it’d be hard to google this “moz://a” if you haven’t heard about Mozilla Foundation before. Hopefully Google Search would adapt, but the likes of Bing, Yahoo, Baidu, Yandex, you name it — would not.

    Second, I personally just can’t force myself into reading this as “mozilla”, not “moz’a”. Maybe I, as a programmer, is not a good pick for a typical sample of a human being, yet so.

    1. Leif wrote on

      Ok it’s not just me. If confusion is what the branding is after, then success! It makes me want to say “Moz” and then stutter. As someone who grew up with the web I’ve apparently grown to omit the “://” sequence of characters when I see it.

      It’s clever, but perhaps too clever?

    2. Paul Brinkley wrote on

      If they hold company dances, will they call them moz://a balls?

  24. SNL wrote on

    Such eighties. New logo = sick. Looking forward to style guide & adaptation.

  25. Christine Prefontaine wrote on

    Gotta say, I was a bit worried along the way. But looks fantastic. Has really come together nicely. Kudos to the open design team!

  26. Rick James wrote on

    This reeks of attempted tech-trendiness. The colors are great, but the letter replacement reminds me of when Mountain Dew and Taco Bell were using “Xtreme” to describe their entire product line. It’s like you’re pandering to a tech culture that really doesn’t like companies who pander. Add in the imagery of stale meme subjects, and the cycle is complete.

    Mozilla used to stand out because they WERE different, not because they were trying to look different. You need to find a way to tie the functional roots to brand messaging. This is a better example of where Mozilla has gone wrong than it is an encouraging sign they are determined to right the ship.

  27. Rob B wrote on

    I like it overall, but won’t it confuse people when spelling mozilla? Do they type mozilla or moz://a? Seems a bit gimmicky. All the other stuff I really like though, good work.

  28. Alexander wrote on

    : / oldgood dino or this variant(dino eye) much better, i love animals :)


  29. Benjamin Kerensa wrote on

    As a long time Mozillian (Longer than the creative director Tim) I think the identity is unsettling and as bad as the Hotbot or Lycos logo (you remember them right? No, almost nobody remember them)

    The identity doesn’t work with hashtags and can’t be used in urls or usernames which means a fractured identity because for urls, usernames r hashtags you will have to continue to use Mozilla not Moz://a which means brand inconsistency.

    Anyways I figure this decision will be backpedaled in the future. I don’t think this will stick.

    1. Jean-Philippe Baril wrote on


    2. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Benjamin, Thanks for weighing in on this effort. Our name is still Mozilla, and is still written and spoken as Mozilla. The logo is a stylized way to express our name, not a new name. #mozilla will be how it’s expressed.

      1. Ardi wrote on

        Yes, I am sure your name is still Mozilla, but how do you avoid the misreading for new user?

        1. Tim Murray wrote on

          Good question, Ardi. We have tested the logo with different groups of users globally and found that it is readable by the great majority as “mozilla”. It will be a rare case when the logo is used without any surrounding reference to the name of the company. In that case, the mental puzzle of figuring out how to say it in one’s mind creates a more memorable experience – not a bad outcome for a brand.

          1. Gerald wrote on

            So you’re saying you don’t mind confusing people and making them spend their time to read your company’s name? That may well be memorable, but it won’t be good memories. It also contrasts with the journalistic, no-nonsense, straight-to-the-point ethos exemplified by the new font and simple, bold and open colour scheme. Which I like, by the way.
            (I agree with other commenter by the way, keep using other font for body text as it’s easier on the eyes – reserve Zilla for headlines, logos, impact statements.)

            I fear most users soon won’t know what :// stands for, while those who do will stutter and be slightly annoyed every time they read it. For a company that cares about the open internet and open standards, moz:// embodies the opposite: a proprietary URL hack using a non-standard pretend-protocol that can really only provide access to one https website in a subset of browsers.

          2. Sally G wrote on

            If there is confusion in reading—and I don’t think there will be much—then that IS a bad outcome; if someone is seeing that flaw as an advantage because ze is married to the outcome, then Houston, we have a problem! I actually would expect it to be used without the company name a lot, so would not expect to rely on that cue.
            All that said, confusion should disappear quickly with familiarity, so if it is truly very minor at this point, I would say we’re good to go.

          3. Beryl wrote on


    3. Alberto Urra wrote on

      I think you are absolutely right.

  30. Claudio wrote on

    I too am looking forward to a monospaced Zilla font.

  31. TuggyNE wrote on

    Well, I finally understand why Mozilla dropped Thunderbird. Nobody at Mozilla knows the difference between the web and the Internet anymore: if it doesn’t have a visible address bar displaying a protocol, it’s not the Internet, apparently.

    Aesthetically, the logo is very clever. Extremely clever, in fact.

  32. Brock McLellan wrote on

    An open-source organization with style! Congratulations.


  33. Max Ellinger wrote on

    I love it so much. Amazing work.

  34. Jonathan Chan wrote on

    Will you be making t-shirts available with the new logo? That would be really cool!

  35. Kade Morton wrote on

    This logo will work, but at the end of the day what this boils down to is replacing the i with a : and ll’s with //’s. Given the fact this has taken seven months, thousands of emails, hundreds of meetings, all of this costs in terms of salary and work that wasn’t done because the font was being worked on, dozens of concepts, three rounds of research, partnering with two different design companies for the font, I’m not sure the outcome of all that being a :// is value for money/time invested.

  36. BZ wrote on

    I like its clarity and flexibility. I wasn’t a fan of the protocol pun route. But the new additions balance out features of the protocol wordmark that were too “hardcore techy”, boring, or static. It’s like before we only had salty, dry popcorn. Now we have both salty, dry popcorn and sweet, wet soda. A great complementary combination. It also has the advantage of being flexible in tone for multiple contexts by either changing the content/style of the non-text elements or by changing the amount/size of non-text elements relative to the protocol wordmark.

    Once the non-text elements have more constraints on how they are composed (e.g. always 3 to 5 elements, must overlap in certain ways, should follow one of 4-5 color strategies, etc.) the visual branding will be top-notch.

  37. David Juicer wrote on

    At least they didn’t fall into the trap of using that same crappy sans-serif font word-mark-only logo everyone is using now. This one actually looks like someone designed it.

    I like the look, but it’s a damn shame a connection to the old dinosaur theme couldn’t be found.

    The :// protocol delimiter in the logo is cool, but Firefox hides this by default nowadays — will this aspect of the design be lost on the average user?

    Finally, unrelated, but this logo will have been an exercise in futility if Mozilla doesn’t abandon the reckless and suicidal plan to remove support for extensions from Firefox. Please, please please please please reconsider. :-(

  38. david wrote on

    guys this logo is not really readable, hire a real designer next time

  39. Texturefox wrote on

    When just about anyone on the planet sees The Golden Arches their association with McDonald’s is instant. Nothing else is necessary to know who that company is and what it does.

    What Mozilla is doing is more calculated and brazen than some seem to give them credit for. Could McDonald’s Arches be more effective if they also conveyed more than company identity?

    Imagine Mozilla’s example with McDonald’s Arches. In the immediate vicinity of the arches, for every product or core company value, appropriate design and imagery follows. When a commercial advertises French Fries we may see a container spilling out in beautiful slow motion – but in a corner rests a static logo, “Gold Arches” + “Tiny container of French Fries”. Would this better inform the public that McDonald’s sells French Fries?

    Or say, McDonald’s changes the color of arches for further product or idea identification. A pink arch is for breast cancer awareness, or is it to let us know McDonald’s sells strawberry milkshakes? Is the green arch with half a leaf telling me that salads are on sale or are they going green and reducing their carbon footprint?

    The most successful logos are simple and only convey company identity. Expanding on that and avoiding convolution is a challenge; before too long things can be confusing and redundant with little standardization. That seems to be what is bothering some dissenters.

  40. Wasi wrote on

    Such utter waste of time. What’s wrong with you?
    The logo was fine as is.

    The new one doesn’t make sense. If a new person saw it they wouldn’t be able to pronounce it. Moz-col-slash-a? Moz-co-ss-a?
    I can’t even figure it out. The logo is just immature. Like this nonsense “MoZilLa” kids use.

    Search engines will also have problems with :// colon and slashes.

    Some have asked if Mozilla is a sinking ship. It sure is. Mozilla what happened to you?

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Wasi,
      Thanks for your comment. We’ve tested the new logo’s legibility as the word “mozilla” globally and found that the great majority of people can pronounce it. Those who find it difficult at first persevere and feel a sense of accomplishment, and feel that this makes the logo and name more memorable. Our name is still Mozilla, still written and spoken as Mozilla. The logo is a stylized representation of the name, not a new name. Thanks for contributing to this effort.

      1. Aaron wrote on

        “Our name is still Mozilla, still written and spoken as Mozilla.”
        You keep saying this. Is it because (with the new logo) it is not clear?
        “Written” as you say, and logo-ed as the new logo is, they’re very similar looking. The wide audience you want to make things clearer for, SHOULD NOT be confused, but may be. While it looks cool, computery, (webby?) and geeky, I don’t know a single person that has encountered double slashes (//) in years. I remember when the latest Firefox update (was it 3?) allowed the user to type just / etc. (thank you Mozilla). And then there is bookmark searching from the address bar (so easy, thanks again Mozilla!) Who types “http://…” anymore? That was a while ago wasn’t? A piece of the past that nobody misses isn’t really a signpost for the future, is it? On the other hand, people love dinosaurs.

  41. Rob wrote on

    Why force someone to use a specific color? Having color palette as a guideline forces people to think and follow what you guys created.

    Is that the behavior you want people to remember Mozilla?

    I see internet as an open canvas for creativity, we should allow people to show that. Having a black slab of logo as a brand is cool; it can be interpreted as a “window” to the openness and show flexibility while maintaining the logo.

    Digital media moves very fast, one year we are using soft-color, then strong, then vibrant. Forcing specific color usage would only hinder the whole process of accepting the logo in my opinion. Then the perception to the brand would not aged very well.

    We are living in an age where internet should empower people to try something.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Rob, thanks for your comment. This is our starting point with a color palette, which we consider an open design tool that others will be able to contribute to, not a rigid rule that will be policed. Mozilla communities can select from it or choose another legible color that reflects their local identity better, and the palette will evolve over time to remain current. Does that address your concern?

      1. Rob wrote on

        That sounds great! Thanks for the clarification.

        Looking forward to see the next step.

    2. Sally G wrote on

      Iwas going to make a similar reply to an earlier comment, so thanks. I appreciate Tim’s reply—just what I would have expected.

  42. Eloy wrote on


  43. Leo wrote on

    Well done Mozilla. Your previous logo was completely unremarkable. I applaud the fresh and distinct look and love the subtle touch of reminding yourselves and the world at large that the internet is the soul of mozilla.

  44. Seveti wrote on

    I prefer the old design. New one feels like they are forcing modern design a bit to much.

  45. GiacomoL wrote on

    Thanks for making me feel young like in the ’90s, when anyone could call himself a “designer” just by playing with fonts in Photoshop. I honestly can’t understand why people bother with design schools, when institutions like Mozilla will just pick the cheapest typography hacks that 16-year-olds can come up with. “Let’s make our name harder to google, yeah!”… have you seen the first search result for “moz://a”? Is your designer paid by Are you deliberately trying to hide?

    You gave the world a lesson in branding with the original Firefox logo, and now this. How the mighty have fallen.

  46. Leonardo wrote on

    Finally ’90s Are BACK!

    so colorful
    so messy

    i’m delighted and puzzled at the same time. Will this rebrand convince the internet community?

    Hope for the best.

  47. Robert Carriere wrote on

    Look, I don’t envy any person(s) tasked with accomplishing something like this. You need to ensure it still evokes thoughts of a brand that is (in more ways than one) a dinosaur that has survived the early days of the modern internet, while projecting relevancy for the future.

    I have functional issues with “Moz://a” that others have expressed (the “://” makes it difficult the search/hashtag, etc). But I cannot deny the simple brilliance of it.

    You did, however, lose me at the “our imagery” section. I hope that the collection of images displayed is placeholder, because it looks like the visual equivalent of buzzwords. You do know what buzzwords are right? Linguistic hokum that marketing uses to trick CEOs with more money than brains, because the CEOs don’t understand the nuts and bolts of their company, but by God they’ve heard of “the cloud”. They don’t know what it is, or when it’s appropriate, but it sounds impressive! Everyone outside of marketing and management **hates** buzzwords. Hell, marketing might not even like them, but they don’t have to pitch ideas to Joe Nobody.

    The collections of images and memes look like noise without meaning that pollutes the simple elegance of “Moz://a”. And they can be problematic. Who owns the original pictures? Suddenly grumpy cat’s lawyer is knocking on your door. Maybe the meaning of the meme is hidden or changes, use a stereotypical cartoon frog wearing a beret for Moz://a France, and you’re unintentionally supporting the alt-right or nazi-isms. Trying to force new memes almost never works, and the meaning ends up inverted…

    Stick with basic iconography, like the rocket for emerging technologies. For National branches, use a simplified map coloured in with it’s flag (and *maybe* one additional national icon). If you use too many visual cues you’ve overcomplicated the message and risk shooting yourself in the foot.

    1. Yackums wrote on


  48. Ian M. Andrews wrote on

    This logo here, is an absolute joke. Whilst the moz://a idea was indeed worked off from, this logo is decidedly…nineties-era than 2010 era. Because of how dated the logo looks, the company is certainly not going to appeal to the general public, and people will probably deride Mozilla as some sort of nerdy c**p. In addition, the imagery in the rebranding is too reminiscent of the images used during AOL’s rebranding to Aol in the early 2010s, and when AOL rebranded, perception of the new logo was also quite negative, and worsened perception of the brand. So, in summary, the new Mozilla logo is already dated as a result of its surrounding imagery, and the company should seriously consider retooling the rebrand to remove the dated elements and incorporate a more timeless design, or scrap the logo altogether and start the design process from scratch, with a timeless design given priority over “artsy” designs. The design can still be simple, it just needs to be a more timeless design.

    1. Vladimir Krstic wrote on


  49. Hamish wrote on

    Dreadful, gaudy and inconsistent graphic language, with a hot mess of ‘flexibility’ over focus. A typeface that is not classic, edgy or on trend. Confusing messaging that ensures the public at large will still have no idea who you are or what you do.

    If that’s who you are as a company, then you’ve captured it perfectly!

  50. Jeff Goldbloom wrote on

    Look at That looks nice and clean. Come to mozilla’s site and it’s trying to be hip and trendy and in my honest opinion, looks very tacky and unprofessional. This logo does not look good and will not allow for new users to understand it’s meaning.

    Redesigns are good, this one is not.

    1. Aleksei wrote on

      I would say the logo is OK, though I find the rest of the brand elements busy and unfocused.

  51. Question wrote on

    Where can we download the font?

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      We’ll be making the font available within the next few weeks.

  52. Rahul Ghosh wrote on

    Awesome. Can’t wait for the new mozilla font to be up.

  53. Alexander wrote on

    I am don’t like new logo. I like old dino, or this new variant(dino eye)


  54. Arnaud B. (Mist. GraphX) wrote on

    Hi, great job ! I i’m a long time user of the mozilla products (even if i use Chrome to debug and work with sass ^^) and i was a little bit afraid with the guide lines of Google : flat and uniformed designed. I’m really happy to see a new health in web design, new types, new colors : break and crash this web !! we like you ! Go on !


  55. Mist. wrote on


    i’m not a fan of the ‘:’ replacing the ‘i’ , i’ think for a proper implementation and readability in this logotype you must choose between the ‘ll’ or the ‘:’ > ‘i’ ;-)
    in my opinion.

  56. Seburo wrote on


    I really like the new word mark and how flexibly it can be used. With Mozilla having used “earth” type colours for so long, the introduction of a much bolder and brighter palette could take some getting used to, but overall I think that this is a good thing.

    As with quite a few people here, I look forward to downloading the typeface and making sure I adhere to the new brand guidelines. With such opennesses of expression in the examples above, I can appreciate that formulating guidelines will be done with care and should not be rushed.

    A great brand I am looking forwards to seeing more of.

    1. Sally G wrote on

      Actually, I am not thrilled with the palette so far. I like the logo itself, and its flexibility, waiting for refinements before I comment on associated graphics and colors.

  57. Andrew wrote on

    I rather like the Zilla font, but I think it generally looks much nicer at lighter weights than it does in bold.

  58. Martin wrote on

    Really like the new logo on black with colored letters and colored marked subtitles! Great job. Can’t wait for the font.

  59. Vladimir Krstic wrote on

    If Mozilla was art museum, design or fashion magazine, tourism or culture organization this would be great! But, it’s not. Mozilla is a software company at its core and software is keeping it sustainable. For a software company this design direction is a big miss. I literally can’t name one thing in whole direction that is done right.

    From the very start of process I had low expectations, but didn’t thought that we will get this catastrophe. Why I got low expectations? Simply, you choose johnson banks for a partner. They have done some really great work, and exactly this great work can’t recommend them to work for company like Mozilla. Their visions are suitable for completely different fields. Your process was completely philosophical and at no point practical.

    How you plan to incorporate slab serif font into Firefox or MDN or any other product where usability is primary? You don’t of course. Big hole you got there in consistency.

    Protocol :// is indeed clever but is it usable? Mozilla is already having problems with recognition. And as much you have tested its readability and factor of coolness on Mozillians and I guess designers you got it wrong. Biggest share of average folks won’t get it and more importantly will not be able to read it correctly.

    Imagery? I can share you my scrapbooks if you need some of these. Of course if you are opening art museum… Chaos without end, consistency not even on sight. Applicable? Yes, in mass production of random t-shirts.

    Vibrant colors? Yes if you want user to close the tab(with eyes in pain) before he clicks download button. Animate them? This is where ophthalmologists start making real money.

    Sean Martell’s work from few years ago was on good track. This… this misses big time.

  60. Budiman Oktavianus wrote on

    Very Nice <3 , just waiting for the release font..

  61. Josh Anthony wrote on

    Every time I look at the new logo, I think of a concerned face. Ironically, this reflects my feelings about the new logo.

  62. Martin M. wrote on

    Hey! You used my idea I suggested in one of my commentaries during this process(sort of…i think). Cool. (the idea- make the text transparent so the color shows through the logo – or as you put it “the color flows into the logo”).

    Initial gut reaction is hm.
    It doesn’t grab me, but I’m not totally put off by it either. It feels…oddly comfortable?
    Kind of like it’s always been there, but not really…It looks like it could have a broad application – which in the end is the ultimate goal. And it looks like this will be flexible enough that if certain visual approaches don’t work they can be tweaked and modified as time goes on.

    Coolio – the proof is in the pudding. Application will tell.

    Congrats on a brave journey – opening up to the world to have their (blunt, raw) input requires a thick skin and a caring hand…and I think you have navigated it well.

    Here’s to seeing it in the real world.

  63. T-Khan wrote on


  64. Awais wrote on

    can we download the font?

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Soon! We’re working on extending Zilla to multiple weights and languages. Continue to watch this blog for details. Thanks.

  65. Adam wrote on

    Great work – fresh moder logo – good brand for good good purpose.

  66. gabi vallu wrote on

    As a graphic designer I can say: the amazing result of all this long open source rebranding process made me want to work with Mozilla company. :)

    Well done! Keep the good work! (clap clap clap)

  67. KveMot wrote on

    Same logo as jetty?


  68. Dennis Miano wrote on

    Amazing. Totally love it!

  69. Jurnalweb wrote on

    Aww we love it

  70. Michael “notriddle” Howell wrote on

    Funny that they did a user study, the user study said users preferred Burst, and the final design is almost entirely a variant of Protocol. I get it; the starburst thing was either going to suck, or end up looking too much like the Git logo, but still.

    “A man uses statistics like a drunk uses street lights. For support, not enlightenment.”

  71. César Luis Alvargonzález wrote on

    IMHO the other options were more fresh and original, this one looks really similar to the new cURL logo. Many people will wrongly associate cURL to the Mozilla org.


    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Cesar, Thanks for your comment, and you’re right there are some similarities between the two identities in their use of protocol language. cURL was identified during the design process, and we believe our expression of the idea is sufficiently different to avoid confusion. The founder of cURL, Daniel Stenberg, a former Mozilla employee and current Mozillian, is really happy with our brand identity. Thanks for being a part of this open design process.

      1. Dr. Denan wrote on

        Tim, I less a fan of Mozilla than I used to be for reasons of memory hoggery and your mainstreaming of your politics (sick to death of politics and looking for political-correctness-free zones), but I’ve been with you folks for ages and am not going to walk away.

        That said, I’ll go forward believing the new Mozilla brand will grow on me. But the memes? Nope. Too trendy and superficially self-important.

        But that’s just my opinion and I wish you success.

  72. Roberto wrote on

    It’s amazing how good ideas travel fast and far, Tim. We designed a logo based on the same concept about a year ago for Molecle a “human-centered coding” agency :D Here’s the story:


    1. David Jackson wrote on

      Not really the same concept because mozilla uses the characters as replacements for letters unless the first logo is spelling illmolecle?

  73. Luis wrote on

    This reminds me of MySpace.
    And having company branding identity based on a logo contest…
    Don’t you ever thought about using a good agency or something? And define a proper strategy instead of doing a logo contest like the ones you did in college? This is real life mates.
    What are you targeting? Do you really had to make a huge change? Did you even tested this? You know that having a couple of articles online, hyped for a week, is not going to give you the holy grail in the long run.
    Sorry if i am being harsh, I know the numbers are going down, but sounds like you’re my desperate ex-girlfriend crying for attention.
    If you don’t know how valuable good design is, and don’t know how to implement it in your business culture, I just have to wish you guys the best luck for the future.

  74. Benjamin N. Summerton wrote on

    I really like this design and think it actually looks very engaging, but I wish you’d drop the meme references. I don’t think it adds anything.

  75. Vladimir Krstic wrote on

    If Mozilla was art museum, design or fashion magazine, tourism or culture organization this would be great! But, it’s not. Mozilla is a software company at its core and software is keeping it sustainable. For a software company this design direction is a big miss. I literally can’t name one thing in whole direction that is done right.

    From the very start of process I had low expectations, but didn’t thought that we will get this catastrophe. Why I got low expectations? Simply, you choose johnson banks for a partner. They have done some really great work, and exactly this great work can’t recommend them to work for company like Mozilla. Their visions are suitable for completely different fields. Your process was completely philosophical and at no point practical.

    How you plan to incorporate slab serif font into Firefox or MDN or any other product where usability is primary? You don’t of course. Big hole you got there in consistency.

    Protocol :// is indeed clever but is it usable? Mozilla is already having problems with recognition. And as much you have tested its readability and factor of coolness on Mozillians and I guess designers you got it wrong. Biggest share of average folks won’t get it and more importantly will not be able to read it correctly.

    Imagery? I can share you my scrapbooks if you need some of these. Of course if you are opening art museum… Chaos without end, consistency not even on sight. Applicable? Yes, in mass production of random t-shirts.

    Vibrant colors? Yes if you want user to close the tab(with eyes in pain) before he clicks download button. Animate them? This is where ophthalmologists start making real money.

    Sean Martell’s work from few years ago was on good track. This… this misses big time.

    P.S Try to post my negative critics this time, “open design”.

  76. gorn wrote on

    * I admit that I do not like the logo, although I wish Mozilla success with it.
    * It did not catch my eye by itself and I feel that the combination with different pictures and colors only makes it confusing. It almost feels like, someone is trying to do the best from bad situation, which I do not think is a good result of rebranding process.
    * I would much more liked anything more beautiful.

  77. Martin M. wrote on

    Y’know…it’s growing on me. (It does remind of Wired circa 1999).

    Just remember “New Coke”. :-P (Move quickly if you must).

    But yep…growing on me.

  78. Bruno wrote on

    It was time! But I think it could be improved. Good job!

  79. Rameez Soomro wrote on

    these great innovation and ideas inspired me

  80. Paul wrote on

    Nothing like a new logo to bring the critics out in force! For what it’s worth, I think the logo you chose is the one that best fit your brief. I think you’re quite brave to have exposed what is always a difficult process to the public. And I think it’ll be interesting to see if these colors work, or if they end up being accents and you need to identify a safer and more mainstream primary color.
    Be careful mixing the photos, transparencies, icons and everything else though. There’s a fine line between dynamic imagery and a hot mess.

  81. Martin Scurry wrote on

    Hello Tim

    I’m really happy to see a new health in web design, new types, new colors, break and crash this web !! we like you Mozilla ! Go on ! Have a nice day.

    Regarding Martin

  82. David wrote on

    Loving it. You are doing some great work! Everyone is using mozilla and another browser which I’ ll not name here. Well done. Never had any issue with mozilla.

  83. just a user wrote on

    I really don’t like the new logo. It is confusing. I have been in Internet for 20 years, and that is still confusing. I was thinking: is it an URL or what?

    Down vote for the logo.

  84. just a user wrote on

    Well, just a user again.

    There is some coolness in the logo though. So, not totally bad!

  85. Daniel wrote on

    MMM tasty looks, I dig em. Want them in my moz://a explorer now! haha
    Pretty cool stuff ur doing here, Hope it all goes well. U have my support!

  86. Chris Sky wrote on

    Always been a big fan of the Mozilla foundation since back when I decided to use Firefox 2 over Explorer. I also now use thunderbird for email.
    Keep it us guys, you are doing a great job.

  87. Someone wrote on

    Awesome. The Mozilla logo is still being improved. Love this organization. And what it does. Firefox, Internet Privacy, the list goes on. Keep up the great work!

  88. Dale wrote on

    I really like the new logo idea and also the font. Is the font and logo gonna be on the browser?

  89. Ron T wrote on

    If you have to explain or rationalize the design, is sucks. My last company took a perfectly good logo and made a childish pig with lipstick out of the re-branding. The “C-Suite” got sold a load of carp for a stupid amount of money and they too had to make a video to justify the design. I’m educated as an Industrial Designer, spent lots of time with graphic designers. No mater what you design not everyone will like it, but telling me how cool it is isn’t going to change my mind. It won’t have me singing its praises.

    I liked the comment about the McDonald’s arches best. Everyone knows what that means. The Chevy bow tie. Fonts come and go, color palates are for Interior designers experimenting with color shock value. The logo Icon is what matters.

  90. Waffielz wrote on

    kinda want that shirt, not gonna lie


  91. Rochelle H. wrote on

    I have an idea for your new logo in case you start over….I’m not an artist so I can’t draw it unfortunately, but try this on for size. Change the Z to a lightning bolt, make the bolt look like it’s striking the words, “We Light the Way” under Mozilla. That’s it….lol. Whatever you guys do, I’m sure it will be great.

  92. Nap wrote on

    Hesitant to chime in but heck I heart Mozilla and have always trusted Firefox back in the days so I do not want to be silent. I would prefer a logo and a name brand. A very strong logo like the “fox.” Change is good but not this kind where the fusion of brand and logo is amiss.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Nap,

      This is the brand identity for Mozilla, the nonprofit champion for a healthy Internet. It’s not a replacement for the Firefox logo.

      Thanks for commenting!

      1. Sally G wrote on

        Tim, I read the comment very differently from the way you did—it seems to me that Nap was asking for a graphic logo that would have the same impact that the fox does for Firefox.

  93. Evangeline T. wrote on

    Comments off the top of my head:

    Never been crazy about the courier font. Looks too much like an old-style typewriter, which I used too many years to find in the least bit attractive, but sometimes old becomes new again and the font will work over time, a favorite.

    I love that the protocol :// really fit the name mozilla to a T. It is just genius; even while I’m not sure if, of itself, it can fill all the gaps you are wanting in a brand. Time will tell.

    Also, not sure if it was intentional, or not, but I read the hand as making the sign of “Ok” as also making the symbol for “zero $$, or FREE” which definitely captures the spirit and intent of Mozilla to begin with. Another stroke of genius! If not, a stroke of my genius to see both things ;)

    What I do not care for AT ALL is the color pallete: To begin with purplish-pink, orange and yellow are hideous colors to combine. I have no doubt that you will achieve what Denny’s Restaurant chain wanted when they chose this color scheme: To get serviced-customers moving out of their restaurants quickly to make room for new customers. These clashing colors, along with hard plastic seats, made people uncomfortable and made them all but run out of their restaurant after having eaten. I don’t think this is Mozilla’s long term goal. I fancy a palette which is more soothing over hours of viewing, and definitely something more pleasing to the eye. Something, perhaps, a bit more neutral without losing vibrancy in the processes.

    Of course, I am but one voice among many. I put in my two cents and look forward to what comes in hopes that it will be a process that continues to evolve and move forward until creators and contributors eventually arrive at the perfect combination of colors and symbols.

  94. Evangeline T. wrote on

    P.S. I do tend to agree that moz://a does kinda look too much like protocol…
    maybe a small change to the : making it look a bit more like an i… and the // looking a little more like itallicized ells would make it easier to see, while still being clever enough to capture the protocol. Perhaps Typotheque could come up with characters that would be “different enough” from the new font, to make it seem less like character code and a bit more differentiated. Anyway, my last 2 cents for today.

    1. Sally G wrote on

      I think the replacement of the letters with symbols work in the logo and in the new font; it does not work in general typography, which is good; we can and should keep typing Mozilla in everyday use.

  95. Evangeline T. wrote on

    My suggestion, not for publication.
    The kernelling of the font totally went askew.
    This is an idea of how this could be made a bit clearer
    with the right font and colors… and obviously done by a graphic designer,
    who is not me. I’m merely a hack.
    But if you offset the :// in such a way, using an altogether different font
    and setting it apart, maybe in a gradient color, the Logo would look
    more pulled together and more cohesive.
    I do believe the use of a separate font would, and in a smaller size than the rest of the name, would make the :ll less prominent. In the same font, it kind of washes away and looks like a protocol within the name and that loses it’s impact!


  96. UViX wrote on

    its pretty coool!!!!

  97. Andreja Andjic wrote on

    The logo fits perfectly!
    Nice job, and I hate changes, so congrats!

  98. Kim wrote on

    Love it, I would be keen to buy stickers and that tee!

  99. albert sluys wrote on

    ok great

  100. Karen wrote on

    Hey, I have an idea…why not use Comic Sans? It’s one step above slab serif.

  101. Joyce wrote on

    I like the fox..sorry..

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Joyce,

      This brand identity is for Mozilla, not Firefox. The Firefox character lives on.

  102. Luffy wrote on

    Isn’t the ‘m’ in the logo very similar to the m&m chocolate font? could be a copyright issue when mozilla logo is shortened to that m

    1. Sally G wrote on

      As a newly designed typeface, and not being a candy company, I doubt that there would be a problem. And maybe m&m learned from the E.T. fiasco (when they were afraid of the product placement and Reese’s Pieces got all the publicity). However, no making Mozilla candy for premiums!

  103. sridharan wrote on

    well good job keep it ups superb

  104. CHANDRA DUTT SHARMA wrote on

    very nice.

  105. mike wrote on

    I’d rather keep the old Firefox logo(orange fox, blue earth). Billions of people already familiar with the old logo. Force people to recognize/memorize the logo is just adding cognitive cost for user without obvious benefit. I’d suggest do a 1% experiment for current users and see how many people want to adapt to new logo and how many people want to keep the old logo.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Mike,

      Thanks for commenting. This brand identity is for Mozilla, the nonprofit champion for a healthy Internet and the maker of Firefox, the open-source browser. It’s not a replacement for the Firefox logo. Cheers ~

  106. Santhosh Kumar wrote on

    I don’t like the new logo. IMO it’ll look odd in any contemporary site.

  107. Shitopifa wrote on

    I think the original Mozilla Firefox logo is still good, and I really enjoying the services more than other website services.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      This is not a replacement for the Firefox logo. It’s for Mozilla.

  108. Md Marghoob Inam Naghmi wrote on


    I think it’s a cool stuff. It will take some time but people will love it.
    New approach is always bumpy. Some will like and some will not.
    Motive should be correct.
    Mozilla motive is “Open”.
    I think this new Logo is a representation of this motive.

    I do agree that using it in online environment is difficult but I hope it will improve in future.

    Color pattern is also good.
    Just make sure colors should be easy on eyes.

    Fonts should be more usable.

  109. karabo lisa wrote on

    wow this is the best i love it very much

  110. Joseph PIMETE wrote on


  111. NILESH CHAVDA wrote on

    worls no 1…Nice & best for internet browser

  112. iqbal wrote on

    Hi tim really niece presentation so you are good looking

  113. afshin wrote on

    very nice

  114. babayo shanga wrote on

    Good outlook!

  115. Castleton N. wrote on

    The new logo is too complex for today’s society, not to mention it’s being used for many other companies as shown. Change it back.

  116. Ade wrote on

    Will the firefox logo be getting a makeover/do-over as well?

  117. Andreas wrote on

    If the new logo is for the Mozilla org its ok and nice .
    Also you should have 1-2 variations depending if the backdrop is lighter or darker.
    An inverted whit or black etc.
    Please don’t chance the Firefox logo! Never remove the lovely fox!!
    Its one the best logos of the IT industry!

    Cheers and keep up all the good work!

  118. Fahad M. Siddique wrote on

    This is beautiful, i can not imagine Internet exploration without Moz://a ;) the FirFox Guru!

  119. jcho wrote on

    I liked the new moz://a logo from the moment I first spotted it some time ago, and that was before I was even aware you had a rebranding exercise, or this blog that I’m only now reading. More importantly, I instantly ‘got’ it; incorporating the colon and double slash into the logo made perfect sense to me for the company that you are. So what if that idea’s been used in other logos before; what strikes me as being particularly serendipitous is how the :// happens to nicely fit in, to transform part of the Mozilla brand name yet keep it legible, rather than simply being appended to it.

    Having looked at the other contenders: — I believe this is the right choice; it’s simple and understated, yet is the clearest of them all in conveying Mozilla’s identity.

    So, great job with the rebranding!

  120. Ghanshyam Singh wrote on


  121. Sree wrote on

    LOGO is awesome…just loving it……. ://

  122. Forest Mars wrote on

    I remember my m&m chocolatiers. Its cool tyhough.

  123. Chase J wrote on

    Man, you talk about innovating with a slab serif font, and then you write the article in a sans serif. That’s the most disappointing thing.

  124. Barbara wrote on

    Very nice! I enjoyed reading through the process (although “previous” and “next” were a tad confusing!) and was disappointed to have not realized the process had been going on and I missed out! I would have suggested incorporating the new type into a sort of dyno head shape. Anyway, it’s cool; you are all great; I am especially glad the “fox” is with us!

  125. DeeTee wrote on

    I LIKE it! Can I get a t-shirt? :-0

  126. kimsland wrote on

    In an era where :// have been removed from user’s view on most browsers, I find this idea to be outdated and confusing. I also find that others will not be able to even write the logo without accidentally looking like Internet text protocol when its actually a company name! Plus it seems to look as though your company name is more “moz” now, which is an unrelated to your company!

    And to change from Mozilla to Moz, will be bad move in my opinion, I pronounced Mozilla as mO-zilla, so now its moz? Like in Mozzie which is slang for a mosquito?

  127. Mika wrote on

    Loved it all! And the “One in a Mozillian” tshirt… I’d love to spread it all over Israel <3

  128. Brian Carl Miller wrote on

    While I admit that sometimes change can be a good thing, but to be clear, not always. Case in point, take for example our flag. Its easily recognized immediately all over the world and it says “USA” without even 1 letter on it, but now if we were to change even one item or color, suddenly people would be wondering who is that? We can change anything we want about our country, its policies and loyalties and attitudes and governing bodies, but the flag that represents us does not change, imagine if it did…I guess what I’m trying to say here is simply ” If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” I like the original logo just fine and can spot it anywhere so why not just leave it alone? Would you recognize “Uncle Sam” in a new outfit of designer clothes and colors? I think not. Best of luck in your endeavors to get yourselves rediscovered and known again.

  129. Vivek wrote on

    Cool but as a fan of Firefox browser I strongly feel Mozilla need to step up their A game in comparison to Google’s Chrome and the new kid on the block Microsoft’s Edge even Opera seems to be catching up.

    Best regards,

  130. David wrote on

    You should leave well enough alone.

  131. Nigel wrote on

    Mozilla,please beat microsoft we need freedom not entrapment.

  132. Lorand wrote on

    Most of the people like’s a lot this new design.I’m not going with the herd and I cannot find nothing good or valuable in this .I really hate it.My advice :keep the old fox ,and don’t lose your identity mozilla….

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      This is not a replacement for the Firefox brand identity. It’s a refreshed brand identity for Mozilla, the nonprofit champion of a healthy Internet and the maker of Firefox, the last independent browser. Have no fear that the Firefox character is not going away.

  133. Krystina wrote on

    I think it looks great!

  134. William Logan wrote on

    Looks kinda similar to GiffGaff’s corporate identity! I like it, though it’d benefit from less-outdated memes. Where can I get one of those round cuddly foxes on the reception desk?

  135. Kim Sihota wrote on

    I love what Mozilla has been doing but based on some of the comments I have read here it appears to me that there are a lot of people who do not understand the Mozilla role. I have been using the products from the Mosaic/Netscape days. I have assumed the name came from the combination of Mosaic and Godzilla and that the Godzilla influence had to do with the little original gecko mascot thingy (maybe making him seem tougher?) Anyways I believe you need to provide some historical context so the world will actually have a better understanding of your role. I find it difficult and I have had some background using several of the products you have developed over the years. Differentiating things like Mosaic, Netscape Navigator, Gecko, Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey are difficult for the common user. Your quest to rebrand may be a good one but it really doesn’t matter if the public does not understand what you do in the first place. To me Mozilla is the strong underlying foundation that has developed and supports other products. As such the image needs to be strong, functional and stable. To me associating multiple images to the name does not meet that goal. In fact, it weakens an identity that is already not well understood.
    I rely on Firefox as my browser and Thunderbird as my email client. As far as Mozilla is concerned I want to know that the foundation will continue to support and improve these flagship products. The name and image need to inspire confidence in the strength of this supporting foundation. Visually I liked the impression of the Moz://a idea but I agree that this representation of the name comes with some major drawbacks. I don’t know how you will be able to overcome these problems outside your own products. Maybe the Moz://a portion should only be provided as a graphic with an overlay (below?) with the real text. Again, this will become a problem as the history of the name is forgotten. Without knowing Mozilla who will recognize where Moz://a actually came from?

  136. Disappointed Commenter wrote on

    I comment something on the Web very seldom, especially in English: I know it not so well. But now it’s personal. :) Mozilla team, you gave us the execellent browser, I’m using it for… forever. You sponsored Let’s encrypt, if I’m not wrong. I’m sure, you’ve done so many good things beside. But, please, just make sure that this clumsy awful old school logo will never be shown in a start page and in a new tab page again.

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      This is not a new logo for Firefox. It’s a new brand identity for Mozilla, the nonprofit champion of a healthy Internet (and maker of the Firefox open-source web browser). Thanks!

  137. Welshboatman wrote on

    The ‘M’ logo on your browser site looks exactly like the UK Morrisons supermarket logo. Not a good idea.

  138. Lou wrote on

    Sometimes companies over think and over engineer a non existent problem.
    Im open minded, spontaneous, adventurous and love new things, but this time Mozilla, you’ve got it wrong!
    If i came across a web browser with the existing fire fox logo vs the new new moz://a logo for the first time, I would be instantly drawn to the current logo. I bet a huge number of people will feel the same way.
    The current fire fox logo works! It is distinct and immediately recognisable. It is bold, it is confident, it is reassuring!
    It does what it says on the tin – ‘fire fox’.
    Why fix it if it aint broken?

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      Hi Lou, This is not a replacement for the Firefox logo. It’s a refreshed brand identity for Mozilla, the nonprofit champion of a healthy Internet and the maker of Firefox. The Firefox character lives on. Thanks for being a part of this open design process.

  139. Lou wrote on

    Ok, so just read a post that Moz://a is not a replacement for the Firefox logo.
    Well thank goodness for that!
    It would have been good to make this point very clear from the start though…..not everyone reads through numerous post or long explanations beforehand..
    just lost 10 mins of my life ranting about a logo…needlessly!

  140. Victor wrote on

    Absolutely fantastic! Incorporating the link into the logo was just a stroke of genius. I look forward to this new design campaign!

  141. Daniel wrote on

    It is Great.
    I like it personally.

  142. David wrote on

    I love this! I am definitely interested in getting a t shirt with the new design if an when those come around

  143. Jumei Setyo wrote on

    i Think this is so fresh by the way this is for world wide or only in american?
    if world wide you can insert local content for a guideline new brand identity so it can be world wide style :)

  144. Chris Healy wrote on

    Looks very like the M&M’s logo, almost exactly like the M on each M&M.

  145. Flath wrote on


  146. Saiful Umar wrote on

    Best of luck.

  147. sandeep wrote on

    New fonts are looking nice. I am still a big fan of Mozilla and I would love to use these new looks.


  148. kj2008 wrote on

    The logo LOOKS all right, and I like the type face, but I think the cutesy ://a business messes it up. It will result in two spellings of the name, which with computers is problematic. The secretary in me wants to ask you to please start over, or at least try what Evangeline T. was suggesting.

  149. dennis wrote on

    it will be awesome

  150. Sanjeet Shrivastava wrote on

    AWESOME……. Specially I liked the concept for LOGO moz”://”a

  151. LawyersChandigarh wrote on

    Hope, whatever will be outcome, it will be the best for web-moz user, keep doing good work.

  152. Oliwier Brzezinski wrote on

    I love the new design although the old logo will always be remembered.
    I guess it’s time for change.

  153. Syed Sajid Ahmed wrote on

    New logo, elegant thought, vibrant colors. Amazing work!

  154. Chidi Chris Uriel wrote on

    It is cool and amazingly awesome


  155. San Jai wrote on

    Eagerly waiting …. my team have been huge Mozilla users and contributors as well.

  156. HANK wrote on

    Well the reason i picked Fire Fox in the first place was that the little fox wrapped around the world and it caught my eye because it told me i could find the answer to anything in the World and that’s why Mozilla Fire fox is followed by so many people. you know there’s something our country has very little of anymore and if there was more of it we would be living in a more peaceful world but we live in a greedy society and we forget where we came from and what got us there and your little fire fox got you where your at and now your putting an end to him and showing the people how loyal of a person you really are what you should be doing is surrounding that little fox with some new design and celebrating the success that the logo brought to Mozilla Fire Fox

    1. Tim Murray wrote on

      This process is about updating the brand identity of Mozilla, the nonprofit champion of a healthy Internet. It’s not about Firefox, our open-source web browser. Thanks for your comment!

  157. trlkly wrote on

    My complaint is a really insignficant one. It has to do with the official SVGs.

    They have a bunch of junk leftover from using Adobe Illustrator. It’s fine that you used that software, but it leaves behind some pointless bits, and essentially advertises their software.

    All you need is the XML declration, then the SVG tag with the xmlns and viewbox properties as given, and then the rest of the file. The rest is just junk that Illustrator adds to every SVG they make. Heck, the enable-background attribute is was never implemented correctly and is deprecated–partly because Illustrator used it by default.

    (Personally, I also think using an embedded stylesheet is pointless since you apply it to only one color. but I could see some reason you might do that. Still, you could consider just using a fill attribute. And the group is kinda pointless, too. )

  158. Mr Rithy wrote on

    very good

  159. Helga techer wrote on

    its nice

  160. mynah lortzing wrote on

    The block around the logo looks fine to me, and the “protocol” id really cool. But is there an alternative to “highlighting” other text? I would prefer a rectangular text box.

  161. vera wrote on

    wowwwwwww!!! this is cooooolllllll
    I really enjoying the services more than other website services.
    so congrats!


  162. Parvez Shaikh wrote on

    Mozilla and Firefox are same things for many, so the confusion about the ‘fox’ going away is understandable.
    I don’t agree that moz:lla looks misleading. A brand is identified by its logo and a logo doesn’t necessarily include its whole name. It could simply use a stylized ‘M’ and still be recognized as Mozilla. Mozilla is getting a brand makeover, not a name change, after all. It’s still written and called Mozilla.
    Anyways, this is an impressive concept overall. And thanks for being there for us, the people of the internet.

  163. JEFF TILTON wrote on

    Are you kidding did you just putt these up so the real ones will look that much better because I’m sorry but these are all pitiful I would be embarrassed to have one as my logo YUCKOLA

  164. odunga fredrick wrote on

    good time Mozilla i appreciate

  165. George wrote on


  166. ThiruN wrote on

    Great! just great!
    The logo perfectly fits Mozilla and i don’t want them to change it.
    I don’t know why people are going nuts over the ‘://’ part. When Mozilla had the dino logo, did the people searched the ‘dino’ on the internet? then why is everyone is going mad over this?
    ‘Moz://a’ is the ‘logo’ while ‘Mozilla’ is the ‘name’. Please!!! Nobody asked you to enter ‘Moz://a’ in the address bar! it’s not a name damn it! it’s the logo!
    And for god’s sake! this is not replacement for firefox logo! this is the logo for Mozilla.

  167. Ali wrote on

    Very interesting move! Keep going!!!!

  168. Nektarios F. wrote on

    :// looks like a sad or confused face.
    Moz://a looks ugly as a typed word and as I already mentioned above when I make the connection with modern internet language and smileys I think it projects a somewhat negative vibe. Not sure if everyone will bother to have your special font to show it better.


  169. Glenn Pryor wrote on

    Love it! … for the most part. That includes the excellent mottos/ catch phrases re what you stand for, and your campaign to popularize it. It is interesting that you have had to explain that none of this affects the Fox logo, that it won’t go away, and that Firefox is only pasrt of Mozilla. That shows the need to make the difference clear. I really like the new font and logo. Some critics/ comments have good points, though some of it is over my head. I don’t know code, or the history of internet design as used in the 90’s… I think that will not be a big issue for most people, especially the general public. I assume you are mainly reaching out to the general public, and are seeking to inform and gain support from them. Though I have no formal training in it, I think I have a decent eye for design. I like your design changes, though I am concerned some of it is too “busy”. I’m sure you’ll make some adjustments as needed. Best of luck!


  170. Peter M’menge wrote on

    Superb! Very creative and so wow !

  171. Santosh S Malagi wrote on

    Hey please dont change the FireFox!

  172. LERRY wrote on

    this is a new experince in new MOZILLA