Most of the modern browsers, including Firefox, won't prompt an additional window before closing tabs in private mode. That's what private mode is for - if you don't have anything to hide and you don't need to close it ASAP in case, you'll probably use standard mode ;)

I guess I don't agree and won't, and I wonder if you know the saying about assuming. :-D ASS U ME I know it's a stupid joke. It's one of those things a parent does and I claimed I never would, and yet here we are.

Anyway, using private mode isn't about hiding anything from anyone nearby for all people. Your suggestion about closing things quickly did briefly cross my mind (for about 1/4 second) but I thought nah, surely that's not that common...

Not that I have to explain myself, but for clarity mostly, I primarily appreciate the less advertiser/major corporation tracking (google in particular... why I use firefox) provided by private mode from those OUTSIDE my home. Because they apparently think every detail about even my boring life (and that of my family) is (and should be) monetized profit for them, and I highly disagree and don't go along with it if I can help it.

I definitely have to sign in to accounts more often (you probably know the pages don't save the info or as many cookies automatically (or something related to similar things) and sometimes I have to verify sign-ins more often than others. That's okay with me.

That being the case, then I think a few words under the checkbox to say it doesn't apply in private mode is warranted. People don't read minds, even when they're (ahem) older, and have been using these things for decades.

Some of us are just pretty literal rule followers (and we know when things do or do not make logical or other sense). and it is my firm stance that an inanimate thing that doesn't make arbitrary choices should spell out specifically what it does or does not do, and then do what it says it does, all (read as 98+% of) the time, unless some unusual mechanical or electronic malfunction happens.

Either that or the developers (including volunteer ones) should design it differently if it doesn't operate how they wrote that it would, and/or be straighforward and take the 12 seconds to add/change the code in the program to have the settings window show only accurate messaging. For example, making the settings pane display under that checkbox:

• does not apply in private mode
• does not apply in incognito mode

etc.

Honestly I am a bit flabbergasted that I'm the first one, apparently, who thinks this is a thing in all the years of Firefox, etc. I'm not really that smart, mostly just analytical and usually thorough, sometimes a.k.a. a bit anal lol. But only about certain things, like handwashing and coughing/sneezing into one's arm, and people and things that don't do what they say they do, and trying to find out what every. single. setting. does. whether I need it or not, because I can't help but do that apparently.

With people it's sometimes easier to understand that we don't do what we say we will do. We are pretty arbitrary sometimes and other times things just happen beyond our control like memory issues. :-) Okay maybe I'm expecting too much of machines designed by imperfect people in an imperfect world, but I still think the 98%+ thing... it should do what is claimed it does and be designed accordingly, or make a different and more accurate/true claim.

Anyway, unless it changes I'll just know what to expect now, so thanks for that. :-)