Firefox desktop market share now below 9% • Hacker News Board

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#591

Post by kup0 » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:21 PM UTC

WA wrote: post #518

moccachino wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair it does take much more than $20 worth of effort to migrate all your stuff from gmail. How much more I don't know since I've yet to do it, even though I've been paying for another email service for more than a year.

The smart choice would've been to not use Gmail in the first place. The fact that Google doesn't have your best interest in mind is nothing new. The fact that Gmail invades your privacy by reading your emails to show you ads has been in there from day 1. I'm saying this, because you started with "to be fair...". As if this was a good explanation for the double-standard your parent poster mentioned. You can still fix…

It's easy to say the smart choice was to avoid it, but I think that's quite a naive comment.

Hindsight is 20/20 and the email landscape is different now than it was then. At the time I got my gmail (back when invites were still a thing) most options available to me were either ISP email or free web email, and gmail was one of the best. Not to mention, I was a lot younger and probably not in a position where paying for email made sense, and certainly not running my own.

For those of us that started many many years ago with gmail and kept it out of an inertia of convenience, now it is difficult to get everything switched off of it.

The difficult part isn't moving emails over. The difficult part is all the accounts and websites online I've signed up on with gmail that I need to switch the email address on. That's going to be a nightmare.

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#592

Post by mstade » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:22 PM UTC

kakarot wrote: post #587

mstade wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, I pay $50/year for my Fastmail account. I use a custom domain, so total cost is a bit higher, probably something like $60-$70/year, not sure. Moving from gmail to fastmail, given their integrated migration process, was a complete breeze. I still have gmail forwarding set up to my new email address, but I haven't logged into the account for well over two years at this point. This reminds me to actually check how…

How is hosting your data with Fastmail and allowing them to sniff your traffic better than hosting with Google? Out of the frying pan and into the fire, if you ask me.

Sure, but that's a different discussion altogether. The post I replied to was implying the effort is greater and more complex than most think, and I'm saying it probably isn't – at least not for the common cases. Privacy is a very real concern, but a different conversation.

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#593

Post by eternalny1 » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:25 PM UTC

kansi wrote: post #452

Reading this breaks my heart. I have been a Firefox user for almost a decade now and I have good and bad memories with it. Since Quantum release my experience with FF has been nothing but exceptional. On a general day I have around ~15 pinned tabs and more than 50 other tabs open and FF handles it like a breeze. The memory usage is good given the fact that my workload is heavy. On a dual-core machine, I am able to re…

I've been using Firefox since it was Phoenix and Firebird in a zip file as a faster alternative to Netscape.

I am loving Quantum, and I don't understand why Firefox continues to slide.

With this Edge announcement (a new Microsoft Chromium browser), I'm nervous we're getting into not a duopoly, but potentially a monopoly.

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#594

Post by kup0 » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:27 PM UTC

Freak_NL wrote: post #536

bad_user wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My FastMail account costs $50 / year or $130 / 3 years, thus with a monthly cost starting at 3.6 USD. That's less than the price of a Starbucks Grande Latte. Google's G Suite, which is still better than free web mail since you no longer have the lock-in, plus a better privacy policy, is $5 per month, which is almost the price of a Starbucks Venti Latte. And this is actually an expensive offering in the business. So n…

> That's less than the price of a Starbucks Grande Latte. A cup of coffee is a pretty lousy indication of cost. For some people going into a Starbucks for a $5/€4,40/£3,92 gluten-free-unicorn-sprinkles-ariana-grande-latte may be part of a daily routine, but for others, coffee means using a coffee-maker to brew your own cup for a few cents, or just getting a cup to go at a some kiosk.

I think that's a pedantic detail that actually ignores the point being made. I've seen the "cheaper the the cost of a coffee per month!" type of phrasing used to commonly refer to Starbucks/etc

I almost never buy coffee out anywhere like Starbucks, but it was easy for me to understand in the context of his post

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#595

Post by bad_user » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:27 PM UTC

kakarot wrote: post #587

mstade wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, I pay $50/year for my Fastmail account. I use a custom domain, so total cost is a bit higher, probably something like $60-$70/year, not sure. Moving from gmail to fastmail, given their integrated migration process, was a complete breeze. I still have gmail forwarding set up to my new email address, but I haven't logged into the account for well over two years at this point. This reminds me to actually check how…

How is hosting your data with Fastmail and allowing them to sniff your traffic better than hosting with Google? Out of the frying pan and into the fire, if you ask me.

It's not the same thing. First of all lawful companies don't do anything that isn't in the terms of service, that being the legal contract that describes your relationship with the company. Otherwise you can sue them. I'm in the EU and in my country there are state agencies that protect the consumer and handle the suing. Filling a complaint for me is easy and I've had great results in the past.

This is why even an upgrade to GSuite is better, being governed by a different ToC.

Google's standard ToC says that their service:

1. may use tracking pixels, web beacons, browser fingerprinting, and/or device fingerprinting on users

2. may collect your device fingerprint

3. can use your content for all their existing and future services

4. can share your personal information with other parties

5. may stop providing services to you at any time, for any reason

6. keeps the rights on your content when you stop using it

And as we've seen, Google indeed does all of the above.

The second problem is one of lock-in. If you're using an email address that's not on your own domain, you're locked into Gmail and the cost of switching is higher, as can be seen by the people complaining about it. But that's a situation of making your bed and then sleeping in it.

And in the case of Chrome, we are already in a situation in which Google can crush its competition and impose whatever standard they want. It's the new IExplorer and the fact that it has an open source core doesn't matter that much when speaking of Google's lock-in on the market, because the Google-free forks are completely irrelevant.

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#596

Post by kuroguro » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:28 PM UTC

mikekchar wrote: post #514

realradicalwash wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I finally did it this year! All the scandals (dragonfly, drone programme, auto sign-in in chrome, grabbing data through auto translate, etc.) were just too much. Getting away from the convinient variant, for which I paid with my user data, to privacy oriented choices felt empowering. I went with Posteo for email and calendar (EUR12/pa), went from mostly FF to all-in FFk (donated to Mozilla), from Google search to DDG…

I use OpenAnd for maps/navigation installed from fdroid (although I've paid for it previously on Play). I find it does everything I want.

Did you mean OsmAnd? I couldn't find anything named "OpenAnd".

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#597

Post by internalfx » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:29 PM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #480

kansi wrote: post #452

Reading this breaks my heart. I have been a Firefox user for almost a decade now and I have good and bad memories with it. Since Quantum release my experience with FF has been nothing but exceptional. On a general day I have around ~15 pinned tabs and more than 50 other tabs open and FF handles it like a breeze. The memory usage is good given the fact that my workload is heavy. On a dual-core machine, I am able to re…

> “ I am tired of listening to people screaming their lungs out about privacy when their actions don't reflect their opinions. ” Those screaming for privacy, like myself, are in fact a small minority. Also regardless of the topic, double standards are rampant in this community. You’ll often see people screaming against Google but still using @gmail.com because paying for a domain and the price of one coffee per month…

I have run a Zimbra server for several years now, it's a full size enterprise grade email server.

I can run it on a $10 droplet from Digital Ocean. $10 is kinda high just for my email, but the bonus is I host _all_ my family's mail. Wife, kids even mom and dad!

It's been nice not being concerned about email privacy. Zimbra is a great piece of software. I think more people should look into it.

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#598

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:32 PM UTC

agumonkey wrote: post #446

mort96 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Your system doesn't handle running at max CPU and GPU usahe even for what I presume is seconds before thermal shutdown? That seems like an extremely serious issue with your system.

All I can tell is that ffx quantum is the only program that triggers that behavior. And it's not seconds it's maybe one second. 70-80-90 off.

[deleted]

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#599

Post by pluc » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:33 PM UTC

sametmax wrote: post #500

mehrdadn wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually tried switching. I found Firefox to be still slower than Chrome. At least on Google sites it may not be their fault but knowing where to put the blame doesn't help me on my end. Marketing doesn't seem like the likely fix.

Are you on Mac? If yes, it's not a feeling, it's a real problem Mozilla is trying to address but have yet to crack. Firefox is an order of magnitude more performant on windows and linux.

Hasn't Firefox been around for longer than Chrome...? It's a bit off-putting when they can't seem to solve popular platform issues.

I've been on Chrome for a long time, tried to switch to FF when Quantum came out and couldn't hear myself think over the sound of my laptop winding up.

Re: Firefox desktop market share now below 9%

#600

Post by agumonkey » Tue, Dec 04, 2018, 2:34 PM UTC

pcwalton wrote: post #552

agumonkey wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't matter, I burn the cpu with multiple gcc builds and it doesn't rise the same. I had thermal shutdowns it can happen, but not like ffx quantum.

I'm going to guess your problem is not CPU related, but rather a hardware issue relating to other hardware that Firefox uses (GPU, audio, …) Firefox spends most of its time idling in event loops; it's not a batch job like a compiler.

Note that I'm not blaming ffx, just witnessing something weird and wondering if it's due to using rust parallelism in ways not done through the usual cpp libs.