Evolving the Firefox Brand

Say “Firefox” and most people think of a web browser on their laptop or phone, period. TL;DR, there’s more to the story now, and our branding needs to evolve.

With the rapid evolution of the internet, people need new tools to make the most of it. So Firefox is creating new types of browsers and a range of new apps and services with the internet as the platform. From easy screen-shotting and file sharing to innovative ways to access the internet using voice and virtual reality, these tools will help people be more efficient, safer, and in control of their time online. Firefox is where purpose meets performance.

Firefox Quantum Browser Icon

As an icon, that fast fox with a flaming tail doesn’t offer enough design tools to represent this entire product family. Recoloring that logo or dissecting the fox could only take us so far. We needed to start from a new place.

A team made up of product and brand designers at Mozilla has begun imagining a new system to embrace all of the Firefox products in the pipeline and those still in the minds of our Emerging Technologies group. Working across traditional silos, we’re designing a system that can guide people smoothly from our marketing to our in-product experiences.

Today, we’re sharing our two design system approaches to ask for your feedback.

 

How this works.

For those who recall the Open Design process we used to craft our Mozilla brand identity, our approach here will feel familiar:

  • We are not crowdsourcing the answer.
  • There’ll be no voting.
  • No one is being asked to design anything for free.

Living by our open-source values of transparency and participation, we’re reaching out to our community to learn what people think. You can make your views known by commenting on this blog post below.

Extreme caveat: Although the products and projects are real, these design systems are still a work of fiction. Icons are not final. Each individual icon will undergo several rounds of refinement, or may change entirely, between now and their respective product launches. Our focus at this point is on the system.

We’ll be using these criteria to evaluate the work:

  • Do these two systems still feel like Firefox?
  • How visually cohesive is each of them? Does each hold together?
  • Can the design logic of these systems stretch to embrace new products in the future?
  • Do these systems reinforce the speed, safety, reliability, wit, and innovation that Firefox stands for?
  • Do these systems suggest our position as a tech company that puts people over profit?

All the details.

The brand architecture for both systems is made up of four levels.

Each system leads with a new Firefox masterbrand icon — an umbrella under which our product lines will live.

The masterbrand icon will show up in our marketing, at events, in co-branding with partners, and in places like the Google Play store where our products can be found. Who knows? Someday this icon may be what people think of when they hear the word “Firefox.”

At the general-purpose browser level, we’re proposing to update our Firefox Quantum desktop icon. We continue to simplify and modernize this icon, and people who use Firefox tell us they love it. Firefox Developer Edition and Firefox Nightly are rendered as color variants of the Quantum icon.


Browsers with a singular focus, such as our Firefox Reality browser for VR applications and our privacy-driven Firefox Focus mobile browser, share a common design approach for their icons. These are meant to relate most directly to the master brand as peers to the Firefox Quantum browser icon.

Finally, the icons for new applications and services signal the unique function of each product. Color and graphic treatment unite them and connect them to the master brand. Each icon shape is one of a kind, allowing people to distinguish among choices seen side by side on a screen.

Still in the works are explorations of typography, graphic patterns, motion, naming, events, partnerships, and other elements of the system that, used together with consistency in the product, will form the total brand experience.

Read along as we refine our final system over the next few months. What we roll out will be based on the feedback we receive here, insights we’re gathering from formal user testing, and our product knowledge and design sensibilities.

With your input, we’ll have a final system that will make a Firefox product recognizable out in the world even if a fox is nowhere in sight. And we’ll deliver a consistent experience from an advertisement to a button on a web page. Thanks for joining us on this new journey.

Madhava Enros, Sr. Director, Firefox User Experience

Tim Murray, Creative Director, Mozilla

2,212 comments on “Evolving the Firefox Brand”

  1. Jacob wrote on

    For general purpose browser icons, I prefer system 1.

    For other apps and services, I prefer system 2 because the icons for system 1 are a little too abstract and make it hard to remember which one is for which app.

    For the masterbrand icon, I prefer system 1, but at the same time, it looks similar to the GitLab logo.

  2. Hans Bauer wrote on

    System 2 is so much better

  3. Irina wrote on

    System #1 all the way!!

  4. Laura Kaplan wrote on

    Another vote for system 1 with system 2 browser icons!

    From: Long time user, big time fan. Also coincidentally a design professional.

  5. Mark wrote on

    System 1 all the way. I totally get it.

    System 2 is ok, but I feel the whole system 1 approach is more cohesive.

  6. Ariane wrote on

    System 2 masterbrand, with system 1 icons.

    But, if I have to choose just one, I will choose System 1.

    Awesome job, Firefox!

  7. TIGER VIRK wrote on

    SET 1 IS OK.
    BUT FOR SOME REASON.
    IT ALL LOOKS LIKE A ROOKIE CONCEPT.
    BROWSER ICON SHOULD BE SIMPLYFIED FURTHER.
    BRING THE TOP FOX FACE TRIANGLE ON TOP SO THAT THE NECK FUR REPRESENTING THE HAIR ON NECK LOOKS SECONDRY. USE FLAT COLORS INSTEAD OF SHADED. WISH WE COULD SUBMIT A VISUAL TO MAKE IT MORE CLEAR.
    WILL TRY TO SUBMIT ONE TOMORROW.

  8. Martin M wrote on

    I’m from the design school that says a good logo always works when reduced down to black and white. Of the two, I think System 2’s primary logo/mark will retain the most detail and will be most recognizable in black and white. However, I think the majority of the secondary and tertiary elements are stronger in System 1.

    Overall, very strong! To all involved, well done!

  9. Candy C. wrote on

    I like System 1’s Masterbrand Icon because the geometric shapes serve to be very versatile components when it comes to translating it into other products/services. System 2’s Masterbrand Icon is nice as well but in the world of browsers (Chrome, Opera, Safari, etc.), the swirl is iconic but seems to blend in a map of popular internet browsers.

    When it comes to the browser icons, I feel as though it needs a mix of both. The shapes in System 1 are almost too abstract and but the colour scheme is nice. The shapes in System 2 are a lot easier to discern but the line/ribbon approach feels a bit too far of a departure from the Masterbrand Icon. The colours as well are a bit all over the place. The best approach it seems would be to make use of the geometric forms in System 1 but retain the easier-to-discern icons in System 2.

    Overall I find the Masterbrand Icon of System 1 to be the strongest in representing this change of Firefox as a company that is so much more than just an internet browser. As sad as it is to depart from the iconic fox swirl and globe, the bright and orange face of the fox serves to be the ‘new face’ of Firefox. People are likely to freak out over change, much like they do whenever a company changes the logo they have known to recognize to something completely different. The change in the logo will cause lots of press and coverage, most of which will hopefully be praise but even if it is poorly received, eventually people will simply grow to accept it after the period of change. The publicity that will come from this drastic logo change also works in favour for Firefox to have news outlets help educate people on all the other cool things the company does.

  10. Alberto wrote on

    System1 master brand resembles GitLab icon, I don’t like it.

  11. Onyx wrote on

    I prefer system 1, those icons are nice to watch and recognizable in my opinion.. Furthermore, they present a color palette that could represent the brand

  12. Bertram wrote on

    Totally system 1. It looks more adult and serious

  13. Jan-H. Schrooten wrote on

    Only one color group (warm colors of yellow towards red) shows resemblances to the old icon.
    This is certainly why many of the comments here aim to favour the combination of the first system icons with the masterbrand icon of the second system.

    Best regards
    Jan-H. Schrooten

  14. Pieter Kip wrote on

    System 1 with the browser icons from system 2 is your best choice. They seem to match more with system 1, because the center is white instead of coloured. Most of system 2 does not look like Mozilla/Firefox at all. I even think i’ve seen something like it allready at some other firm.

  15. Gianrkl wrote on

    System 1.

  16. Miles wrote on

    Why is the first one the back of a foxes head? Once you see it you can’t under it.

  17. noIdea wrote on

    System 2

  18. nj wrote on

    systeme 1

  19. nj wrote on

    i choose system 1 is beter

  20. Namisk wrote on

    System 1 masterbrand icon is too resemble to GitLab, other than that, I like System 1 approach as a whole. General purpose icons in System 1 are nice, I found bonfires in their silhouettes.
    System 2 icons other than general purpose ones feel like childish for me.

  21. Antonio wrote on

    They are both beautiful sets of icons but I personally prefer the former because I think it is more in line with the past.

  22. Victoria wrote on

    2 !

  23. Mohan Pai wrote on

    System 2 – Firefox Masterbrand Icon
    System 2 – General-purpose browser icon (first one)

  24. Joe Bubba wrote on

    As a long time IT BA and UI designer, I really don’t like the System 1 icons. For those with red/brown color blindness (me for example), the icons do not present enough shape differentiation to be easily understood. (turn the color off on the icons to see what I mean) The same holds true for people that are dyslexic. The System 2 icons, other than the browser icons are a mess. I would have little intuitive idea what most of them represent. I think much work is yet to be done to come up with intuitive icons that represent the Firefox family. Over reliance on complexly colored icons to drive meaning is a significant mistake. The original Firefox icon is unmistakable with or without color.

  25. Yolaine wrote on

    I liked all the icon from System 1 except for the masterbrand. Masterbrand System 2 Icon is better (for me)

  26. Hassan Changizi wrote on

    System 2 is so much better

  27. Jim wrote on

    I like the focus icon in system 2, since it looks a little bit like a shield. If you’re making something privacy-focused, using the (almost) universal symbol of the defender is a good way to go.

    I like the colours of system 1, but they all look a bit flat and plain. Simplicity is good for being recognisable, but too much makes it look boring.

    I like the browser icons of system 2, specifically the tail. A good browser is fast, and the angle of the tail make it look like the fox is moving. For contrast, the angle of the system 1 tail looks like the fox is stationary or moving in a slow and sluggish manner. Also, the back of the system 1 fox is rough, which adds to this slow look.

    I like the fact the system 1 fox is still curved around the globe. A browser connects nodes around the globe to transfer data and if this idea could be carried to other icons in the family it may afford a clearer link that these are all part of the World Wide Web.

    I don’t like that system 2’s icons are outlines or framework, it makes them feel hollow and empty, like they don’t do much. While this metaphor could be good for the single focus icons that do one thing and one thing well, I don’t think it would be good to carry across to all icons.

    That’s my breakdown of what I think when I see this.

  28. jarek wrote on

    System 2 mnie przekonuje najbardziej zbliżony do liska.

  29. Krzystoff wrote on

    The System 1 Icons look superior in terms of branding recognition, and they are much more clearly part of a software family in terms of styling.
    I like the Fox Head icon in portrait (first row of System 1), which is fresh and yet famliiar.
    However the second row of Browser icons from System 2 are better than System 1 — the coloured centre on System 1 makes the Browser icon too similar to several other browsers such as Chrome or Comodo Dragon.

  30. Ines wrote on

    System 2

  31. RM1981 wrote on

    System 2 with new apps & sevices from system 1

  32. Azotiga wrote on

    Group 1 with Group 2 browser icons

  33. lorando wrote on

    yes sys 2
    we dnt want to c a new formes

  34. Fnugrahendi wrote on

    since it wasn’t a vote, so i prefer system 1 for its master brand and system 2 for the rest.

  35. Laurie wrote on

    I agree so much with the answers before, exactly what I was feeling !

  36. Lucas Burgos wrote on

    system 1

  37. najlae wrote on

    Système 1 avec icons for new apps & services du 2nd système.

  38. Federico wrote on

    I like the original icon of Firefox, so I prefer the second system because it remember me the old icons of Mozilla Firefox.

  39. Iva Kravitz wrote on

    Really prefer System 1. It holds together better, ie the icons work more cohesively with each other; it relates to the old logo better; and the icons have more heft and substance though they’re still quite elegant.

    It’s very cool that the company is looking at customer/public comments. I happen to be both.

  40. John wrote on

    As many people have said before my preference would be the browser icons from system 2 with the other icons coming from system 1 (with colour adjustments for system 2 icons to fit). Or possibly the the master icon from system 2 with the coloured browser icons (2nd row) from system 1 with the middle dark section removed.

    Whilst the fox head is well executed, it could be for any high quality app. The Firefox logo is well recognised and an evolution of the existing logo seems sensible, I’m not oppose to changing the Firefox icon dramatically but the fox head feels like it lacks both association to the brand and individuality.

    The logo shapes and colour palette for system 1 are really great and fit together as a set, the system 2 icons feel more like an icon set for system functions in Linux rather than a set of programs from Mozilla. They also feel more (for want of a better phrase) feel more ‘grown up’ and professional.

  41. Laura wrote on

    System 1 with the General-purpose browser icons from System 2

  42. Arie wrote on

    The Masterbrand of system 2 looks more dynamic, more open and thus fits the Mozilla philosophy better. A second advantage of System 2 is that it is easily recognizable as Mozilla.
    Apart from the browser icons the other ones may need some rework to become closer to the Masterbrand to make them recognizable as Mozilla products

  43. Ivy Markwell wrote on

    Group 2 with Group 1 icons for apps and services

  44. Mariya wrote on

    Love the Design 2 browser icons (best icons of the whole thing). The main icons are bad for both (design 1 is indistinguishable from github and design 2 has no fox). The remaining icons all feed dated & derivative, but if I had to choose, I’d choose design 2.

  45. Will wrote on

    Hi,

    I don’t know why my feedback wasn’t posted, but it’s pretty frustrating that I took time to write it, answer all of your questions, give general feedback all in a polite and constructive manner and then you “moderated it.

    Anyway, TL/DR – don’t throw the baby out with the bath water, find a way to keep the flaming tail wrapped around whichever system you choose.

    Cheers :)

  46. Caroline wrote on

    While I do like them both, System 2 feels more inately like Firefox.

    The consistent colors, makes System 1 feel more cohesive, but that principal could be adapted to system 2. The negative space in the graphics in System 2 will scale easier, be more memorable and communicate at a variety of sizes.

  47. zed wrote on

    System 1, very modern and distinctive.

  48. Zachary Catlin wrote on

    To me, both Systems 1 and 2 feel somewhat over-abstract and lacking in both a sense of physical presence and (except for the general-purpose browser icons) mnemonic resemblance to application name or function. They certainly do *not* feel like they are “still Firefox” – too radical a break.

    That said, if the choice is between the options given, I’m in the “System 1, except for the general-purpose browser icons from System 2” camp.

  49. Bahaa Talib wrote on

    System 1… Is Good

  50. Kevin Matthews wrote on

    The angular shapes in design 1 are striking – I quite like them!

More comments: 1 33 34 35 36 37 41