This December, if there’s one tech New Year’s resolution I’d encourage you to have, it’s switching to the only remaining ethical web browser, Firefox. According to recent posts on social media, Firefox’s market share is slipping. We should not let that happen.
↫ Roy Tanck
I mean, yes, obviously, but how depressing is it that the only choice we have is between a browser made by Google, and a browser kept afloat by Google money?
Where’s the real sustainable alternative?
Firefox is SO slow, I refuse to use it.
I use Edge and Chrome at work and Firefox on all my personal devices and it runs great. I don’t see any perceptible difference between it and the chromium based browsers.
I agree, choosing Firefox is the best thing to do no matter the platform.
I’m with cmdrlinux on this. I don’t think you can back this with performance test data.
Firefox was always reliable, unlike Chrome for a long time (I lost my tabs multiple times after a crash). When I have a resource issue, I don’t hesitate to kill Firefox, and I know it will come back just the way it was.
This year I finally switched over to Firefox on my phone.
I’ve been using Firefox since it was called Phoenix, and I don’t notice any speed difference between Firefox, Chromium, or Chrome.
It’s not the speed. It’s the bugs.
Just last night my wife was getting ready to give an interview and Firefox — for whatever reason — wouldn’t allow any websites access to her camera or microphone. We had our permissions set properly, and even spent some quality time in about: config. All no good. A setup that worked for her for weeks just stopped working once upon an automatic update.
I’ve been a Linux+Firefox user for about 20 years before that point. You know how many events like that it takes for us to jump to another browser? Just the one.
And I think that’s been the story with Firefox for the last five or seven years. Every time someone finds a new bug, they jump ship. And those numbers add up.
Brainworm,
Some websites can break even in browsers that follow the standards correctly because the website is at fault. You didn’t provide any detail here from which to gather evidence, but just know that it’s technically possible that the website may have been at fault.
Alas to an end user, they don’t care who’s fault it is. If a browser doesn’t work, then the user’s reaction is to automatically blame the software. This is a natural reaction, but this has precedent for being weaponized. Before their antitrust cases, microsoft would introduce application specific bugs into the OS in order to break competing software, and users would react by proclaiming the software buggy, exactly as you just did in your post
Now obviously I don’t want to make allegations this is happening to FF without evidence. Although… just a month ago google was caught delaying youtube loading, just with firefox.
https://www.osnews.com/story/137889/youtube-says-new-5-second-video-load-delay-is-supposed-to-punish-ad-blockers-not-firefox-users/
Whether or not google’s claim that this was to punish adblockers was true, the reverse engineered code clearly proved that the payload was specifically targeting firefox. Chrome users, even using the same adblockers, and other adblockers like pihole, were NOT impacted. So I think we should be keeping a close eye on these things. There’s not much we can do to stop it, but if they’re caught red handed then the least we can do is blow the whistle.
If you haven’t tried it in awhile, you should — they fixed the memory bugs that slowed it to a crawl quite a while back. With tab counts over ~100 it’s definitely more performant than Chromium browsers and it ekes out a bigger and bigger lead the bigger a hoarder one is. If you’re the type of person limited to a handful of windows or a dozen tabs then they are about the same in my experience – these days anyway.
You could always use Safari, which is funded by hardware sales.
Which brings its own host of problems, mainly that the hardware vendor has a financial interest in making sure webpages are accessible only by their browser so that you have to buy their hardware in order to have their browser. And they will try to make that happen if their browser ever gets a majority marketshare using EEE (embrace, extend, extinguish) techniques.
We’ve seen it with IE, which was mostly funded by Windows licenses (aka hardware sales and upgrades).
mostly funded = funded (sorry)
Also, the hardware vendor can gain marketshare by making their browser multiplatform, and if they achieve that then gradually add exclusive features (aka the “extend” stuff in EEE) only to the version for their OS. Or, you know, discontinue the versions for the other OSes entirely.
After all, Internet Explorer for Mac was a thing once.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thom Holwerda,
Pretty sure you are holding it wrong 🙂
On a serious note though, it saddens me to see FF in such trouble. Even if everyone in tech circles circled our wagons behind FF, which we won’t, it still wouldn’t make a dent in the monopoly. As a FOSS browser, maybe someone can pick up the pieces if mozilla fails, If that happens, I’ll miss the browser more than the company, but I don’t know that anyone else would even be able to do the legwork that mozilla’s been doing. And I don’t think the monopoly conditions are going to be much kinder under new leadership.
My concern has been feature set. Speed on Firefox is fine, extension support is fine, but features that are rolling out quickly on other browsers never seem to arrive on Firefox. Tab management and workspaces on Vivaldi, in my opinion, are executed to perfection. I have gone through all of the extensions available to Firefox to try to replicate that feature set and it is not nearly as elegant.
You can only use Safari on mac hardware.
Realistically speaking, paying for the browser like in the Netscape days (pre-IE). Any competitive browser that is given away for $0 requires some other way of funding development which will inevitably include some uneasy partnerships.
But we all know that paying for the browser won’t happen. I personally wouldn’t pay for a browser when most OS vendors bundle a browser with their OS and Mozilla and Google give a browser away for $0.
So, the Mozilla method of making money by selling a spot in a search bar to some search engine while having complete creative freedom otherwise is the most sustainable realistic option.
The Google method of giving a way a mostly open-source browser that can be forked with minimal replacement code is the second best.
Let’s appreciate what he have for a moment and imagine how much worse things could have been: Imagine an alternative reality where Microsoft and Apple are EEE-ing the web in various ways in an attempt to force people who want to browse the web to use their OS. Microsoft almost got there around the turn of the century.
This has already happened in other industries by the way: Just look how much the MPEG standards have been forked by private companies: DVD-Video, Blu-ray, UHD Blu-ray. All of them closed defacto standards that you have to use in order to achieve compatibility with optical disc players, even if making completely unencrypted content, because you can’t trust a DVD player to play an .mpg file (or a Blu-ray player to play an mp4 file). That the “extinguish” part of EEE btw.
Another example is the endless incompatibilities in J2ME, where smartphone vendors extended it in all kinds of imaginative ways. For example, some phones (Sharp GX series) replace the sound and save functionality with their own “Vodafone Services Class Libraries”, so generic J2ME apps would work without sound or save functionality on Sharp GX phones. You had to buy an app from Vodafone Live that uses VSCL to have sound or save functionality (and of course those apps wouldn’t work on other phones). Some other phones would use weird keyboard layouts and also need custom apps.
Really, the web we have now is not that bad. At least when it comes to encrypted content, it’s all accessible via Chromium, and Chromium is open-source and hence readily forkable.
At least when it comes to encrypted content = At least when it comes to non-encrypted content
kurkosdr,
First, I agree with you that both microsoft and apple were more aggressive at effective at exploiting their market control to their ends. I also think we’re lucky that a lot of google’s initiatives to lock down the web with DRM and ban traditional adblockers have failed so far, but I don’t think we’re on stable ground here, these developments are on-going and the failure of one of the last true FOSS alternatives gives google the keys to the kingdom. Google have already been planning to take control away from users in the interests of their advertising business. I am not at all comfortable with where things are or that the open web is going to be ok without more diversity. “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Well, just because something is open source doesn’t mean it can’t get “tivoized”.
I give it 2 years.
Epiphany is doing well these days.
Google already holds back some features from Chromium.
Chromium is 3-clause BSD, so any day Google could pull the string to lock out MS, Opera, et al, but really they’re probably going to abuse their monopoly by pushing anti-features which will pollute the ecosystem.
I am content running FF for now. I’ve tried it before but it was a long time ago, maybe it’s time I give it another shot.
Not only that, but there’s no forking downstream code either. I downloaded the official MS edge browser open source code and was really disappointed to discover that it was almost all stripped out, down to a husk. There wasn’t even a buildable project.
I know people dislike the GPL, but this is exactly the scenario it was written to address so that the source code can’t be moved into closed projects.
Then perhaps Firefox should stop making changes that people hace.
Go ahead and put up the list, so I can check off those bingo squares.
I donate to Mozilla to keep it’s products alive. It’s a small amount of money and hopefully it continues to keep it alive!
I use Firefox exclusively across Linux, android and osx. There are increase in sites that are buggy with Firefox, fewer people testing. Increases in adoption should improve support
The CEO seems to be doing fairly well as it is:
https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/02/mozilla_in_2024_ai_privacy/
Hard pass. I’d consider Firefox if they hadn’t removed the handful of features that made me want to use it and keep making it worse and worse. That last UI redesign was the last straw.
Epiphany is doing rather well these days. I’ve run into bugs with the Flatpak version, but the version from the Fedora repos is working really well.
Comparatively, there are a few features missing, like extensions and profiles/containers, and I’m not sure about the web dev tools. However, the basics are there.
So it’s missing extensions, profiles, and containers? So, common main features. No thanks.
I used to prefer Firefox over Chrome. In 2014, I switched to Chrome because a leader in the Mozilla foundation was supporting a same-sex marriage ban. (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/01/mozilla-ceo-brendan-eich-refuses-to-quit).
Regardless of what Mozilla has done since, or their general relevance to the Firefox project, this is unforgivable to me. I’d much rather have my privacy compromised than lose the family I’ve worked so hard to build. I don’t want to collaborate with homophobes or any company that won’t immediately fire such a person. I know these folks are legally protected, but I don’t care. It’s not forgivable to me.
Did you stop supporting Mozilla because he was doing things while acting in his official capacity, or because you simply disagree with his personal views? You better be careful if it’s the latter. People are allowed to have opinions, even if they don’t agree with your own, and punishing a company not because of their actions or policies but over the personal views of (an) employee(s) that you don’t agree with doesn’t benefit anyone in any way.
You mean you dropped Firefox over Brendan Eich’s personal stance on gay marriage? The Brendan Eich who resigned 2 days after the article broke that you linked to? Mozilla reacted pretty quick on this one.
Why should any company fire someone over their personal beliefs? There is no way Mozilla can claim to be ethical when they do this sort of thing.
Using Netscape from the (my) beginning years with internet, after that discovered Opera v.4? and been paying and using it as my main browser until they throw their Presto engine to the trash bin (v.12). Moved then to Firefox until they began to do somewhat political statements while their browser became slower and buggy day-by-day. Moved to Vivaldi and been using it since then, supporting also Otter browser.
Haha, no way, being unable to block Youtube ads since a couple of weeks, Firefox is a thing of the past for me, switched to Brave and I think there is no come back, even Brave has now a Sync-like feature. Its NO ADS on videos or NOTHING for me. Also, awfully slow, bad UI, etc. They don’t know how to keep the market share, keep adding stuff that get things really worse.
I was using Firefox earlier this morning to watch ad-blocked Youtube videos. Maybe it’s time you update your filter cache.
friedchicken,
Same here, however reports were that these FF restrictions weren’t deployed to users universally. Consider that it makes it harder to identify / subvert restrictions when they aren’t universal and the discussion goes like this…
I have no idea how google chooses the set of users facing additional FF restrictions, but strategically it would make sense to target a demographic who aren’t savvy enough to fix the problem easily. For example, don’t block mozilla or adblock developers.
If everyone had the same experience, they could quickly narrow down and identify the real cause and develop countermeasures.
I’ve noticed the same thing with paywall sites. They want to incentivize bloggers and search engines to link to articles, but then block access for the masses. I’ve noticed that some of these paywall sites look at the browser’s useragent string – if you pretend to be a google-bot, you can access the article. I’ve also noticed some that use javascript delays to block the article. This makes me wonder if anybody’s studied this aspect of the web providing different experience to different groups. It would be an interesting topic.
At first I wasn’t affected by the Youtube adblock block, but then I was. A filter cache refresh resolved it for me, which is why I made the suggestion. Your breakdown is pretty on-point though. I’ve seen that exact scenario play out countless times. More often than not I think the average user just wants to get on with life and isn’t interested in troubleshooting the problem very far. I’ve admittedly chosen that path myself, especially when the issue is interfering with something more important.
Slow on youtube? You realize Google has been intentionally nerfing Firefox on their sites right? It’s got a good chance of ending up in some kind of antitrust lawsuit breaking up the alphabet co IMO.
Easier synchronization of passwords, extensions, bookmarks and so on with your own server would be nice, especially for the Firefox user base who, generally, don’t go with the big crowd.
Setting op an accounts and weave (sync) server currently is like practicing black magic without a spell-book.
I used Firefox since the Phoenix days, resisted Chrome for the longest time, and after years of its surging popularity, only decided to switch to Chrome due to Firefox’s (at the time) very bad, persistent memory leaks. I dealt with the leaks for probably about a year, at least, before deciding to switch–so it’s not like I didn’t try. And worse, I stuck around all the way up until Firefox tried to become another Chrome, down to the release cycle and user interface, at which point itdentity didn’t even matter anymore: what made Firefox Firefox was gone, it had already gone full Chrome ripoff.
It wasn’t a switch to be taken lightly, and neither would a switch back. The only problem is… as pointed out… I would be going from a Google browser to a Google-backed browser. I just don’t see the point anymore. The state of web browsers is in a very bad spot, it’s like we left one bad spot for another with the decline of Internet Explorer and the eventual rise of Chrome.
UltraZelda64,
I see your point about mozilla being funded by google. But even so I think using google chrome is just that much worse for the mono-culture.
Just saw this in the browser news…
“Google agrees to settle Chrome incognito mode class action lawsuit”
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/12/google-agrees-to-settle-in-chrome-incognito-mode-class-action-lawsuit/
As much as I like standing up for privacy, it does appear that the judge in the case fundamentally misunderstands what incognito mode is. it doesn’t stop server side tracking, something that’s not really possible for a browser to do short of preventing the user from logging in at all via an incognito window.
I actively use a Firefox instance on my desktop for one of my work identities. I think it’s good enough for most people that don’t need to support advanced use cases.
I can narrow down what keeps me reliant on Chromium-based browsers:
– They make it very easy to switch between multiple profiles within the same browser instance.
– You can run multiple browser instances, in case you need even more separation between identities. Firefox complains if you try to run more than one instance at a time.
I have a soft spot for Firefox, so I would be happy to return to it if Mozilla met at least two of the following conditions:
1. They drop their woke agenda. (“Mozilla Community Participation Guidelines”)
2. Firefox will run as fast as Chrome-based browsers. The difference is very noticeable on Raspberry Pi devices.
3. Mozilla will start listening to user suggestions regarding browser customization. In other words, it will take itself from the past or look at the current solutions adopted in the Vivaldi browser as a role model . For example in the current Vivaldi browser, the icon grouping extensions CAN be removed.
niebuszewo,
They’re not perfect, I know, but honestly it’s too late for all that, it may be your last chance to support them before they go under.
Woke agenda, Hi, Always Trumper. Well regardless I say happy New year to You and Trump Akbhar. Don’t forget to pray to Trump tonight and bully anyone with views opposite to yours tomorrow. Those woke Firefox users – lock them up hey? Trump Akbhar!!!
As for the woke agenda, I grew up in the 80s in communist Poland. I know what my gender is, I remember when people like you recently tried to cancel Richard Stallman, and I don’t like it when someone decides what views I should have for me, whether it’s someone from the left or the right. Odnośnie zaś trumpistów to ja obok nich w życiu nawet nie stałem 🙂
People who stood against slavery were Woke of the day. The Northern states of the US of the time cancelled slavery. Let’s look at some other things that would be considered woke by definition; Sex with a minor as a crime, Atheism, Antibiotics, Equality for woman, multiculturalism, stem cell research, minimum wages, scientific development against religion doctrine, computer automation, freedom to be friends with/date/marry the love of your life regardless of what colour their skin is/race/culture/social background . All these ideas, all the people promoting them had detractors like you trying to cancel them, calling them Woke. Stop being so damn closed minded and hateful – it’s 2024 deal with with. Stop praying to Trump Akbhar.
Detractors like me? I am a programmer and a proud atheist. And what’s wrong with these antibiotics, equality and multiculturalism? 😀
You mean the things that have been Woke at one point in time. Can’t have it both ways, be yelling out cancelling and wokeism and then be a part of it.
I’ve been watching browser engines slowly combine over the years. It’s kinda scary to be honest. We’re giving very few groups the power to control the web.
Some days I think the only solution is everyone switching to Gemini. (though I kinda hate Gemdoc’s limitations)
FYI if you look at Mozilla’s financial statements for 2020, 2021 and 2022 you’ll notice that the share of income coming from royalties (from search, which is mostly Google but not entirely) has been decreasing. On the other hand the share made up by subscriptions and ad revenue is going up: from 24m$ in 2020 to 56m$ in 2021 and 75m$ in 2022. That is, while Mozilla still makes most of its money from Google it’s increasingly and successfully diversifying its income, with the goal of being independent from Google.
Disclaimer: I work for Mozilla (corporation)