Ask Slashdot: Why Is Firefox Losing Users?
'This weekend finds some long-time Slashdot readers debating why research shows Firefox losing market share. Long-time Slashdot reader chiguy shares one theory: "Firefox keeps losing users, according to this rant, because it arrogantly refuses to listen to its users." Slashdot reader BAReFO0t countered that that can't be the reason, "because Google does that too." (They blame Chrome's "feature" addition treadmill, where "they keep adding stupid kitchen sinks for the sole and only purpose to make others unable to keep up.") Long-time Slashdot reader Z00L00K thinks that "All those totally unnecessary UI changes are what REALLY annoys users. Not only the immediately visible things in the header but also the renaming of items in the menus just bugs people." But long-time Slashdot reader AmiMoJo argues that "the most popular browser, Chrome, has all those things. In fact all the browsers that are more popular than Firefox do, so the idea that those are unpopular and driving people away doesn't really hold up... Firefox's decline is mostly due to Chrome just being really good, and [Firefox] not having a decent mobile version." I'm still a loyal Firefox user. (Although the thing that annoyed me was when Firefox suddenly changed the keyboard shortcut for copying a link from CNTRL-A to CNTRL-L.) The "rant" at ItsFoss argues that Firefox's original sin was in 2009 when it decided to move tabs to the top of the browser, and when favorite features could no longer be re-enabled in Firefox's about:config file. But that's what I like about Firefox -- at it's best, it's ultimately customizable, with any feature you want easily enabled in what's essentially an incredibly detailed "preferences" menu. Maybe other browsers are just better at attracting new users through purely mechanical advantages like default placement on popular systems? Long-time Slashdot reader zenlessyank is also a long-time Firefox user -- "Been using it since Netscape" -- and countered all the doubters with a comment headlined "Firefox rocks!" "Doesn't matter to me how many other users there are or aren't I will still use it as long as it stays updated." But what are your thoughts? Feel free to share your own opinions and experiences with Firefox in the comments.' -- source: https://news.slashdot.org/story/21/09/12/181257 Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 (office) +64 (7) 577-5304 (home office) http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:13:07 +1200, Peter Reutemann quoted:
Long-time Slashdot reader Z00L00K thinks that "All those totally unnecessary UI changes are what REALLY annoys users..."
I doubt it. Because Firefox is open source; if anybody really cared about such things, we would see a fork offering precisely that option by now. Besides, the health of an open source project never depended on sheer numbers of passive users: what has always been important has been the strength of contributions from the community.
Long-time Slashdot reader Z00L00K thinks that "All those totally unnecessary UI changes are what REALLY annoys users..."
I doubt it. Because Firefox is open source; if anybody really cared about such things, we would see a fork offering precisely that option by now.
Besides, the health of an open source project never depended on sheer numbers of passive users: what has always been important has been the strength of contributions from the community.
Yes and no. In case of Mozilla, those passive users generate money due to Mozilla's global search collaborations, which feeds into the development of Firefox: https://www.feedough.com/mozilla-business-model/ Unfortunately, a complex piece of software like Firefox is not easily maintained (status quo) or further developed (adding new features) using a purely hobbyist basis. Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 (office) +64 (7) 577-5304 (home office) http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 15:11:27 +1200, Peter Reutemann wrote:
In case of Mozilla, those passive users generate money due to Mozilla's global search collaborations, which feeds into the development of Firefox: https://www.feedough.com/mozilla-business-model/
You don’t need $100 million a year to develop a browser, though. Much of that money seems to go to other projects.
Unfortunately, a complex piece of software like Firefox is not easily maintained (status quo) or further developed (adding new features) using a purely hobbyist basis.
There seems to be no shortage of forks already: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_browsers_based_on_Firefox>.
In case of Mozilla, those passive users generate money due to Mozilla's global search collaborations, which feeds into the development of Firefox: https://www.feedough.com/mozilla-business-model/
You don’t need $100 million a year to develop a browser, though. Much of that money seems to go to other projects.
Diversification, in order to attract other sources of revenue apart from search engines (which can easily disappear once an agreement expires). Relying on just a single source of income is never a good idea...
Unfortunately, a complex piece of software like Firefox is not easily maintained (status quo) or further developed (adding new features) using a purely hobbyist basis.
There seems to be no shortage of forks already: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_browsers_based_on_Firefox>.
How much do those forks rely on the base project to add features, develop the rendering engine, etc? If the base project stops, how many of these projects will continue to exist? Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 (office) +64 (7) 577-5304 (home office) http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 15:40:25 +1200, Peter Reutemann wrote:
You don’t need $100 million a year to develop a browser, though. Much of that money seems to go to other projects.
Diversification, in order to attract other sources of revenue apart from search engines (which can easily disappear once an agreement expires). Relying on just a single source of income is never a good idea...
Source is an entirely separate issue from amount.
There seems to be no shortage of forks already: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Web_browsers_based_on_Firefox>.
How much do those forks rely on the base project to add features, develop the rendering engine, etc?
Picking a few at random, e.g. from <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Moon_(web_browser)>: * its motto is "Your browser, Your way" * Replaces the Gecko browser engine with the Goanna fork * Uses the pre-Australis Firefox user interface * Supports add-ons exclusive to Pale Moon, including dozens of themes. (etc)
* includes additional security features, such as the option to block third party zero-length image files resulting in third-party cookies, also known as web bugs * also has functionality to set a different user agent string each for different domains
From <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilisk_(web_browser)>:
* Like Pale Moon, Basilisk is a fork of Firefox with substantial divergence.[11] Basilisk has the user interface of the Firefox version 29–56 era (unlike Pale Moon, which has the Firefox 4–28 interface). And that was just from five minutes spent looking. Want to know more? Go see for yourself.
If the base project stops, how many of these projects will continue to exist?
That’s up to their communities, same as for Firefox itself. Forks can fork, too. Stop thinking in proprietary terms.
That’s up to their communities, same as for Firefox itself. Forks can fork, too. Stop thinking in proprietary terms.
That's based on personal experience (and, yes, open source, not proprietary). Being reliant on a base project that then goes dormant and not having the resources to maintain that project as well, that leaves you high and dry. But then, I tend to work/develop in niche domains. Cheers, Peter -- Peter Reutemann Dept. of Computer Science University of Waikato, NZ +64 (7) 858-5174 (office) +64 (7) 577-5304 (home office) http://www.cms.waikato.ac.nz/~fracpete/ http://www.data-mining.co.nz/
On Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:13:07 +1200, Peter Reutemann quoted:
Long-time Slashdot reader Z00L00K thinks that "All those totally unnecessary UI changes are what REALLY annoys users..."
Here <https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/04/waterfox_firefox_fork/> is another good analysis of the range of options available. Basically, as soon as Mozilla decided to abandon the XUL UI engine, other developers stepped in to fill the breach. Further back, when the “Australis” theme was introduced, another fork went off to keep the old theme. Still like classic-style browser extensions? There’s a fork for that, too. And if you still pine for the original do-everything “Netscape” browser with integrated e-mail, IRC, and web authoring (from which Firefox was originally born by getting rid of the bloat), that’s still available, believe it or not. As I (and no doubt others) have said before, the health of an open-source project doesn’t depend on the sheer number of passive users, but on the level of active contributions from the community. The former may be what makes it visible, but the latter is what keeps it alive.
participants (2)
-
Lawrence D'Oliveiro -
Peter Reutemann