31–40 of 949 posts
I don't think Firefox needs saving. Those who use it are active and committed to it.
The number one issue with the browser ecosystem right now is Safari. iPhone browsers being forced to render with Safari's engine is already bad. Blocking browsers from having extensions is far worse in my opinion. Most of the reason I use Chrome and Firefox on my desktop is their rich array of extensions. If I were Firefox, I'd sue Apple to hell for abusing their dominance in OS and device market share to block me fr…
Safari only makes up 8.87% of the global share (and Firefox is 7.69%).
From a mobile perspective and limited to the US - https://www.statista.com/statistics/272664/market-share-held...
Safari makes up only 54.87% of the mobile browser market and chrome makes up another 38.95%.
Another set of graphs - https://backlinko.com/browser-market-share
Even if every safari user switched (desktop and mobile), it still wouldn't do much more than double the marketshare and yet remain a small fraction of what Chrome has.
I find it difficult to say that iPhone safari is the reason that Firefox is having trouble when overall, iPhone safari has less of an overall market share than Firefox currently has.
----
Mozilla can't save Firefox. It's not that Firefox can't be saved, but rather that Mozilla as an organization is not capable of doing so.
My take is this - Despite a history of being relatively privacy friendly, the vast majority of funding for the organization comes directly from Google (To the tune of ~90% of their total funding, straight from Google so that Google can maintain its position as the default search in Firefox).
That leads to insurmountable conflicts of interest - They claim they are for people and for privacy, but they are funded almost entirely by Google, and have to secure search deals for their continued existence (the latest just this year: https://www.pcmag.com/news/mozilla-signs-lucrative-3-year-go...).
In this light - I believe it actually BENEFITS mozilla to keep Firefox relevant, but not good enough to replace Chrome. If the browser genuinely becomes good enough that customers start switching from Chrome to Firefox en mass, Mozilla needs a replacement funding plan because Google can essentially turn the lights off at any point by simply refusing to pay them for search at next contract renewal.
While they've dipped their toes into paid products... most of them are not particularly relevant or compelling on their own merits (that's not to say they're bad, just not all that innovative or likely to drive enough revenue to replace the 500million a year google is paying them)
So not only do I not believe that Mozilla is capable of "saving" Firefox in this way, I don't believe they have the right incentives to even seriously try.
Firefox itself is just one in a series of reinventions. I am at peace with using a Firefox branded chromium fork in some future date as I think a balanced corporate sharing economy similar to Linux is probably the best we can hope for.
On that theme, some kind of more loosely combined ecosystem that involves internet archive, Wikipedia, Mozilla, OSM, Atom, open standards, free software, royalty free tech and democratic governence and pro-consumer advocacy in a global context is probably a good idea, to counterbalance large corporate interests. It probably already kind of exists in some ad-hoc manner, but further moves in that direction would be good.
Every time I restart Firefox, I get about 8 different prompts for "See what's new!" "Reset your Firefox profile now!" "See our new diversity initiative now!" etc. It feels like opening a Windows Me installation from 2000. I just want to get browsing done.
Maybe it has to do with its competitors being a 1.7 trillion dollar company and a 2.5 trillion dollar company! Winning against those requires not only better technology AND marketing AND consumer favor, but also leverage in the legal processes that enable/disable network effects. So anti-trust is unfortunately one of Mozilla's biggest hopes.
They should focus on saving Firefox. - Cut out all (or at the very least, most) initiatives that don't serve the goal of promoting Firefox's market share or sustainability going forward - Donate the major money drains that aren't Firefox to the Apache Foundation or another worthy custodian - Fire all inessential staff that don't want to work on Firefox. - Get a CEO/upper management that are in it for the passion, not…
There are a lot of people oh HN who agree with that but then use a different browser for whatever reason. I feel like these people are being very hypocritical and should use what they want to succeed. Firefox is very usable and increasing its market share starts with you. Or to use another cliche - be the change you wish to see.
That's not to say Mozilla doesn't need to get their shit together, but if market share drops too low they will not be able to get money to do the things they need to do.
I’d make it work with the password manager in chrome, and tell everyone the dev tools are better. That’s what would make me seriously try it again.
This is my personal opinion only, so take it with a grain of salt. ---- Mozilla can't save Firefox. It's not that Firefox can't be saved, but rather that Mozilla as an organization is not capable of doing so. My take is this - Despite a history of being relatively privacy friendly, the vast majority of funding for the organization comes directly from Google (To the tune of ~90% of their total funding, straight from G…