doesn't need to be remotely as big as Chrome or as IE was before Chrome... It just needs to be big enough to matter in privacy and open standards and to keep the other browser makers honest.

But this is a troubling loss of the only mainstream browser not owned by a major advertiser or tech giant.

The internet is a much better place if Firefox can claw its way back to 10-15 percent market share.
It's now hovering at around 8 percent with Chrome at 70+%....

@tchambers 46 million... lord... that pretty much it's an unannounced sentence of death.

I stopped using Firefox because it's almost unusable on a Raspberry Pi 4, Chromium is just much better.

@tchambers @lukaso666 I’m watching Linus Tech Tips video of trying out the Stream Deck, and when he tested it with a monitor he opened a browser and of course it was Firefox.

Firefox is currently getting drowned out largely because other browsers are defaults on hardware. Perhaps the Steam Deck has a chance to spread that advantage around a little bit.

Firefox is preinstalled in the most Linux distros and in Windows AME
@tchambers @lukaso666

@tchambers Firefox is at a huge disadvantage today:

1. It doesn't own a platform where it can be the default web browser (or set policies preventing other browsers from running).

2. Since it doesn't own platforms, it also can't market as effectively or as aggressively.


@cstanhope @tchambers I doubt Firefox is failing for these external factors. The core reason IMO is that it is failing its loyal users, who are finally dumping it, realising they are not important at all to Mozilla. My thoughts and feelings in greater detail:

@cadadr It certainly doesn't help when people feel betrayed by Mozilla or Firefox. But I'm not convinced that explains their declining market share. Their decline in market share began with the introduction of Chrome, which Google heavily marketed through their search engine and other places. It's been going on a while:

There's also this video, which goes further back in time:

@cstanhope That's a fact but I think that's only part why. In the video you can notice a plateau about 2017 and then a quick fall again. The graph in the other link doesn't reflect this but in my experience from interacting with people there was that plateau somewhere, and it corresponds with the addonocide mainly (FF57).

I'd say in an alternate timeline w/o quantum, "studies", Firefox OS, Pocket, and if Mozilla was more selective towards web standards and focused better on what made FF unique and on FF for Android, that number may have stayed ~15%-20%.

@cadadr Possibly. I'm pretty sure you're right about them shedding a chunk of users right around the time they changed up the extension mechanism. It's a shame since, from what I read, it was necessary for them to be able to maintain Firefox moving forward.

I was a fan of FirefoxOS, and it was a bold move, but I admit in hindsight that it was probably a poor direction for them to take given their limited resources.

@tchambers Oh, and @cadadr reminded me of a third point, third parties willingly doing the marketing for Chrome.

3. "This site works best in Chrome."

@cstanhope all true. It tried to own low end smartphones and frankly that cost them in focus and innovation everywhere else.

@tchambers 8% is generous, I've mostly seen ~5%. I basically don't see a way for Mozilla to get out of the spiral at this point; weird thinking about that when back in high school I was all "I wanna work for Mozilla"

musing on how mozilla could survive 

@tchambers At this point I think literally the only thing that would work is simultaneous antitrust action against Microsoft and Google requiring them to debundle, spin off their browsers, and pay enormous monetary damages to Mozilla and Apple for the purpose of catching the other browser engines up.

@tchambers This has been brewing for a while, I think Mozilla themselves lost a lot of focus in the last decade. They'll get it together, a lot of good people there.

@tchambers "Mozilla’s browser exploded onto the scene in 2002 with the explicit intention of disrupting the monopoly Safari and Chrome had long enjoyed"

uhhh is this some kind of Mandela Effect thing? that's not the 2002 I remember.

@clacke @technomancy @tchambers Safari came out in 2003. Chrome was 2008.

I wonder if the author of the article was even born when this played out?

@technomancy @tchambers re chrome: "The release announcement was originally scheduled for September 3, 2008"

so this person is fucking high

@tchambers I may be misremembering the numbers, but originally when Netscape Navigator was refactored to become #Firefox, didn't it only have around 4%? Obviously this was far than ideal, but encouraging to consider that Firefox grew from tougher spots before.

@Blort Agreed, I think there is a future where they grow back to a stable meaningful share.

@tchambers iirc this only looks like it cuz firefox changed their user agent and the shit they used to look for market share were looking for the old usere agent, thus not categorizing the newest firefox as firefox.

@tchambers I think #Firefox doesn't focus on privacy quite enough; like why does Brave work on integrating #IPFS, decentralised DNS, Tor in a tab, webtorrent etc.

This is all things #Firefox should be mainstreaming, minus the Brave token stuff, imo.

@MatejLach Agreed that Mozilla should do more faster and differentiate itself from Chrome and Safari on privacy….on every front you mentioned…


Personally I am done with mozilla.
They implement the most ridiculous standards like vr plus i have to spent a good 3 hours removing spying when i install it. Not worth it anymore.

Plus the ceo pay scandal.

@tchambers I stopped using firefox mostly because it added a checkbox to turn off accessibility features. As soon as Orca started working with Chromium based browsers, I switched to Brave.

I think the last time I actually enjoyed using Firefox was around version 3. I did use it for years after that, because it was the only browser that worked decently well with Orca. But the appearance of that checkbox to turn off accessibility features says to me they really don't want us here. It would be like putting a button on a wheelchair ramp that if pressed, turned it into steps.
Sign in to participate in the conversation

INDIEWEB.SOCIAL is an instance focused on the #Openeb, #Indieweb, #Fediverse, #Mastodon #Selfsovereign #identity (#SSI), #Humanetech and #Calm technologies evolution.