Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 245 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#161

Post by frostiness »

happymellon wrote: post #146
frostiness wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, as someone on an old android device, the performance difference between the two is massive and it isn't getting better. Some sites (usually the ones that are actually important such as restaurant menu) are perfect on Chrome and nearly unusable on Firefox, even with an adblocker. Performance already matters a lot on desktop browsers, but when battery life is thrown into the mix, it matters even more…

How old? My S10e isn't very new and FF works great.

It's an S7. Though newer phones probably don't have as noticeable performance issues, it still indicates that the browser's going to use more power even if the performance is fine.

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#163

Post by frostiness »

genocidicbunny wrote: post #156
frostiness wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, as someone on an old android device, the performance difference between the two is massive and it isn't getting better. Some sites (usually the ones that are actually important such as restaurant menu) are perfect on Chrome and nearly unusable on Firefox, even with an adblocker. Performance already matters a lot on desktop browsers, but when battery life is thrown into the mix, it matters even more…

I know it's just anecdata, but on my 2 year old phone, Firefox+Adblock+NoScript uses about 33% less power than the stock Chrome. I grant that my browsing habits aren't such that I tend to use a lot of media-heavy sites in the first place, so perhaps on those I wouldn't see such savings.

I do the same, and honestly it's why I still use Firefox on mobile at all. But stock Firefox (which is what most people use anyways) has clear issues.

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#164

Post by fooker »

genocidicbunny wrote: post #158
fooker wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit perplexing to me that Firefox proponents keep denying performance issues for years. You can just compare it yourself or look at the some of the zillion benchmarks.

Are they...issues? Like, I frankly couldn't care less if Chrome is capable of running some funky JS that is mainly used on sites that I don't visit a bit faster, or is capable of rendering some css animation that I would honestly prefer died in a fire a bit faster.

They aren't if the goal is having a Firefox useful to you.

They are, if the goal is to figure out why Firefox market share has plummeted. People do care about `funky` websites being faster.

The modern web has immensely useful software which a good fraction of web users depend on that are rendered unusable on Firefox once in a while.

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#165

Post by Vrondi »

harpiaharpyja wrote: post #87
damnesian wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a developer on a team of developers for a large data and interaction-rich website and we've watched the stats morph over the past 8 years from 23% mobile to 23% desktop. It's been a very swift revolution. I do a lot of QA on my phone now. I have been a Firefox proponent for at least ten years and resolved to do most of my QA on FF since I was most familiar with its features. Something that is very irksome about…

You can't use uBlock Origin on iOS?

Every time I have even the slightest mild thought of trying iOS again, I learn something like this which ensures I will not do it.

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#166

Post by genocidicbunny »

fooker wrote: post #164
genocidicbunny wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they...issues? Like, I frankly couldn't care less if Chrome is capable of running some funky JS that is mainly used on sites that I don't visit a bit faster, or is capable of rendering some css animation that I would honestly prefer died in a fire a bit faster.

They aren't if the goal is having a Firefox useful to you. They are, if the goal is to figure out why Firefox market share has plummeted. People do care about `funky` websites being faster. The modern web has immensely useful software which a good fraction of web users depend on that are rendered unusable on Firefox once in a while.

I don't disagree, I'm just trying to address the incredulity that perhaps for some people, Firefox might not have problems, or (gasp!) for some, Chrome might be the one with problems.

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#167

Post by aednichols »

Shorel wrote: post #138
pwg wrote: post #2

One of the reasons: Massive advertising by Google to convince people to "try chrome". It is only relatively recently that visiting a google property was not met with: "Google X is best used in Chrome -- install Chrome now." (with "install chrome" being a link to the installer. No such massive advertising campaign ever existed to try to convince folks to "install Firefox".

So, the only way to grow Firefox now is to have a website Google can't hijack to advertise Chrome, and also a website everyone wants to use. "ChatGPT runs better in Firefox. Click here to install it."

DuckDuckGo has billboards. Mozilla has money. I think share growth is expressly a non-goal from Mozilla leadership, judging by some of the other comments.

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#168

Post by genocidicbunny »

frostiness wrote: post #163
genocidicbunny wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it's just anecdata, but on my 2 year old phone, Firefox+Adblock+NoScript uses about 33% less power than the stock Chrome. I grant that my browsing habits aren't such that I tend to use a lot of media-heavy sites in the first place, so perhaps on those I wouldn't see such savings.

I do the same, and honestly it's why I still use Firefox on mobile at all. But stock Firefox (which is what most people use anyways) has clear issues.

Which I think further speaks to my point I made elsewhere in this thread, that a huge part of the problem is that the web itself is shittier. Chrome can just handle that shittiness a bit better by default.

I would love to see a comparison of Firefox vs Chrome with the same set of uBlock and NoScript rules applied to both. I suspect Chrome would probably still win, but perhaps the gap won't be as big.

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#169

Post by _8j50 »

It's not default on anything and gmail users naturally default to it. It doesn't market as much as MS and Google either. People using firefox specifically seek it out. I'd wager, at least 80% of users haven't heard of firefox.

I was on a call with people from big G several years ago, explaining issues I had with a product in firefox and out of 3-4 of their people (not engineers or very technical people), not one knew what firefox was, even as I shared my screen. I don't blame them, just pointing out how outside of tech people circles firefox does not really exist even as a term. Back in the day, it made a name for itself as an IE alternative but now it is forgotten thanks to Chrome.

I've worked at several big companies, one of the few policies they all had was "chrome is the only approved browser".

Re: Ask HN: Why does Firefox have such a low market share anyways?

#170

Post by fooker »

genocidicbunny wrote: post #166
fooker wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't if the goal is having a Firefox useful to you. They are, if the goal is to figure out why Firefox market share has plummeted. People do care about `funky` websites being faster. The modern web has immensely useful software which a good fraction of web users depend on that are rendered unusable on Firefox once in a while.

I don't disagree, I'm just trying to address the incredulity that perhaps for some people, Firefox might not have problems, or (gasp!) for some, Chrome might be the one with problems.

I'd argue that the market share reflects the ratio of these two `some`s.

Unfortunately the party with the deeper pocket tends to win in these cases as long as they care to.

Post reply on HN