Please: is the green jigsaw puzzle icon at e.g. https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/firefox-pioneer/ a generic icon that appears when the developer has not specified an icon?
Or is that an extension for which Mozilla specified the old green icon before the new blue became the norm? First on AMO: 2017-07-21
it’s now less than one hundred percent.
The new look does not yet offer any hint of incompatibility:
A key frame from that recording, where I switch to a Firefox 57 view of things:
Tabs - Extensions - Add-ons for Firefox is:
Classic and new looks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8j-P4UUFSw
Cross reference: my comment under Keeping Tabs on the Tab API | Mozilla Add-ons Blog (2017-11-03). From the main post:
… The good news is that there are already hundreds of extensions written with the WebExtensions API to help you configure, organize and otherwise manage your browser tabs. …
– probably intended to link through to the hundreds (of 1,919) that are compatible with Firefox 57+, instead there’s an empty space and promotion of some legacy extensions, and things that are entirely unrelated to tabs.
Web Development :: Add-ons for Firefox is:
Use case: I aimed to preview the short description of The easiest Xdebug when listed in the midst of other short descriptions.
This looks very nice and congrats on migrating the front-end to React! I do wonder about all the rounded borders. Both Quantum and the new Mozilla branding make me think of sharper and bolder edges. The roundness of the current design takes me back to Kubrick, a 2005 default Wordpress theme 
Will one be able to search by Newest and Recently updated like we can now?
Basics, for a moment.
https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/search/?type=persona&sort=updated is similar to the address that’s given when you use the Sort by menu to choose Recently updated – at the tail of the address in this case,
&sort=updated
Basically: wherever you see sort=updated you can change it to sort=created so, for themes (personas):
– and then ignore the word Relevance, to the left.
Compared to the classic look, the new does not show the dates. It’s probably to be done, but not yet on a milestone.
There is no way to search for “New” addons. To be “up and coming” you first have to be “New”!
For now, please bookmark:
– and ignore the word Relevance, which may appear to the left whenever you sort without using the menu of preset sort options.
With the redesign of mozilla.org (including blog.mozilla.org), Firefox Quantum (including the great new logos) and the new AMO logo, I hoped the AMO.org would also go a bit more in that direction - something bolder, more modern. This simple layout might work well on mobile, but on desktop the current blocky layouts look to me little more like wireframes than an end-product.
It might be partly due to the 9px border radius (radii?), which I still saw to much off 2012 - 2015. Removing makes it look a little more serious already - obviously all my personal taste.
Other little changes that helped for example on extension detail pages include increasing the font-sizes to 14px or even 16px (are the 12px for mobile?) and increasing spacing i.e. .AddonMoreInfo-contents dd { margin: 0 0 11px; /* up from 3px */ } or .Card-footer-link { padding: 15px 26px; /* from 5px 26px */ }, etc.
The loading times are incredible. Kudos to the team.
On a side note:
dev tools > inspector > css rules does not seem to work on that page (due to React I guess?).Looking good 
Personal star ratings are not yet apparent – the absence of gold from two areas of the new look:
(The overlay is a SeaMonkey view of the same URL. There’s the gold.)
Found:
Hint: the word, not below the word. Click the centre of the letter o in Explore …
This bug is either transient, or was quickly fixed.
… can’t tell anymore …
… no indication of whether either is supported in Firefox 57 …
How can I see if an addon is FF 57+ ready now?
… A Firefox 56.0.2 view of pages such as … offers no hint that Firefox 57 will not work with such things.
A number of workarounds are possible.
…
- read two windows alongside each other for a single extension.
Clearly this is far from ideal. … I’m very surprised by the current situation. I do know that at least one feature of the new site was recently temporarily, properly removed in response to user testing.
Maybe some other feature of the site was very recently removed without realising the consequences. …
Also:
… less than two weeks before Firefox 57 lands into the Release Channel, it will be a frustrating experience when we tell users to start looking for 57+compatible extensions when the addons.mozilla.org page they see doesn’t tell them and they have to install an extension to find out. After 57 lands, one won’t …
Two frames from a screen recording:
The URL changed – to the page for Tab Tally – but navigation did not occur; Firefox 56.0.2 continued to present the page for Containers On The Go.
At the time of those two frames:
An edge case, I reckon (I’ll not raise an issue in GitHub) because there was a prior change of agent to gain the classic look – in response to a SeaMonkey string (as specified in User Agent Overrider):
FreeBSD / SeaMonkey 2.49.1: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.1
Related:
You can switch to the desktop version for now, if you miss the older look
I’m not sure if I’m a little blind here, but I don’t see a way to check on a WebExtension’s permissions in the new design…
To be honest, I don’t like very much the new look of Mozilla Addons. Maybe it’s not to my taste, but everything on the site has become too big (and you need to scroll a lot to see items downwards), with rather ugly motley colors and the same sketchy icons that repel me in Windows 10. Maybe this is the new culture trend, I don’t know, but it doesn’t just appeal to me. Otherwise the functionality is ok, I just don’t approve so much the looks. The old version was somewhat cleaner and easier to navigate, with more beautiful icons and colors… I hope the link to it would stay for the future…
– @Hamsterkill I tried three or four times to add a comment, with reference to the comments under your https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/7adng2/did_the_addon_page_change/dpa34zl/, but I’m having difficulties in multiple browsers (https://status.github.com/messages shows “All systems reporting at 100%” but comment texts seem to be disappearing into the ether). Reported to GitHub.
I don’t like the new view at all. It’s extremely cold and sterile and VERY lacking of important information such as what versions the add-on is compatible with, etc. This makes it even worse when you are trying to find replacement add-ons that meet the new web-extension standard. And having to click “Read more” to see the description is ridiculous. It needs to be full page front and foremost.
The previous version, which I immediately reverted back to, had finally progressed to near perfection. Why change something that works great? Don’t ‘fix’ what isn’t broken. The only thing I can think of that may have been a slight improvement for the previous version would be to move the Version Information, Development Channel and Developer’s Comments sections from the bottom of the page, up to the top, below the Add to Firefox button. I was so pleased with the fact that in the Add-on search results, you had added a green “Compatible with Firefox 57+” indicator, which was a wonderful idea. Then you turned around and removed it in the new version. No steps forward, 10 steps back.
The changes made to the Add-ons page is comparable to taking a nice car, taking out the leather power seats and putting in wooden kitchen chairs and removing all of the numbers from all of the dials in the dash.
Also, when viewing a Theme, there is no more Add to Favorites feature, which I liked and actually used when I got bored with my current theme.
Happy with new look but its just not usable at all now! As stated by other replies, there is no Firefox 57 compatibility sort feature.
Luckily I had just finished initial review of my extensions for the coming Firefox 57 the day before the new site layout. But now it is way too hard to determine from a search if I am looking at FF57 compatible ones.
HELP!!!
The new site does NOT render properly on FF16 nor FF48 and very little is functional! Cannot search, clicking on most links does nothing…etc…
I can click on My Collection to take me there but if I select ANY collection, rendering is so bad that the text is almost all single characters in ONE COLUMN VERTICALLY, so I cannot use the page at all!!!
This means that I am cut off from ALL add-ons for ALL my versions of FF. I am dead in the water regarding addons, accessing or managing them etc.
This effectively means that if others are experiencing the same thing, they are all cut off!
I have to resort to Chrome 49 just to look up anything.
Note: I am still on Mac OS X 10.6.8 so I cannot upgrade FF beyond 48.0.2 at this point in time.
I hope something can be done about this…and hopefully soon…
HELP!!!
P.S. Not sure what it is suppose to look like in FF but the site has far too much white space, at least in Chrome…a lot of wasted space, where there used to be more useful info…
Totally love the new design. Personally, I don’t have any major problem using it. I only need to get used to it.
And here we go;
The way to sort or only show extensions with minimum compatibility Firefox 57 (WebExtension/WE) already mentioned at least by 3 people above.
Because Firefox will focus on new extensions I suggest to only show those extensions by default (Firefox 57 will go stable on few days?). Just give the option (maybe tickbox) to the user if they want AMO also show non WE extensions. Any Firefox (or derivative) up to version Firefox 56 could show all by default if you want.
If permitted & if possible, could the page of extension which already installed show that fact? Like GChrome extension or Android app page. I’m sorry to even dare to mention/compare to GChrome.
Make Developer homepage & Support Link bigger & easy to find. Go Las Vegas light if necessary. From my experience using the old AMO, other users somehow successfully miss those links. I pity the extension devs who actually take time to check the review side & replying.
Thank you.
