Firefox Marketing Head Expresses Concerns Over Google's Apparent 'Only Be On Chrome' Push (medium.com) 189
Eric Petitt, head up Firefox marketing, writing in a blog: I use Chrome every day. Works fine. Easy to use. There are multiple things that bug me about the Chrome product, for sure, but I'm OK with Chrome. I just don't like only being on Chrome. And that's what Chrome wants. It wants you to only use Chrome. Chrome is not evil, it's just too big for its britches. Its influence on the internet economy and individuals is out of balance. Chrome, with 4 times the market share of its nearest competitor (Firefox), is an eight-lane highway to the largest advertising company in the world. Google built it to maximize revenue from your searches and deliver display ads on millions of websites. To monetize every... single... click. And today, there exists no meaningful safety valve on its market dominance. Beyond Google, the web looks more and more like a feudal system, where the geography of the web has been partitioned off by the Frightful Five. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple and Amazon are our lord and protectors, exacting a royal sum for our online behaviors. We're the serfs and tenants, providing homage inside their walled fortresses. Noble upstarts are erased or subsumed under their existing order. (Footnote: Petitt has made it clear that the aforementioned views are his own, and not those of Mozilla.)
ONly Only Only (Score:5, Insightful)
Only be on DOS
Only be on Windows 3.1
Only be on Netscape
Only be on AOL
Only be on IE
Only be on Mac
Only be on iPhone
Only be on Windows phone
Only be on Android
Only
Only
Only
Manufacturers have been trying to lock people into their platform since people began selling stuff. Computers, software, tools, vehicle, you name it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: ONly Only Only (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Manufacturers have been trying to lock people into their platform since people began selling stuff.
Do you see something Google is doing to lock people into Chrome? Serious question. I don't but maybe I'm missing something.
For the record, I'm totally in favor of a diverse browser ecosystem. I'd like to see every browser below 30% market share. Though, honestly, the present situation isn't too bad... Chrome has the majority of the market, but it's a thin majority so web sites still need to test on several browsers and Chrome can't dictate browser standards. Still, it would be better if Firefox market sha
Re: (Score:1)
Do a google search on mobile Chrome and on mobile Firefox and you'll see that there is some useful functionality that is only available on Chrome. Specifically if you check the images search.
Regardless, Mozilla is at fault for its dwindling marketshare. FF used to be great before they decided to ignore what the users want and make it a Chrome lookalike.
Re: (Score:2)
I find Firefox to be far more functional prime example https://adnauseam.io/ [adnauseam.io] , clicking all those ads so that you do not have to, flooding data mining perves and freaks with bullshit data. Which is exactly why Google is definitely not to be trusted.
Re: (Score:2)
Do a google search on mobile Chrome and on mobile Firefox and you'll see that there is some useful functionality that is only available on Chrome. Specifically if you check the images search.
I don't think that's anything to do with Google. Android and Search are both very careful not to provide any favored Chrome-only APIs or services. I can't tell you why it doesn't work on mobile FF, but it's not because of anything Google has done.
Re: (Score:2)
You may be telling the truth - but we just do NOT trust Google.
Fair enough. But it should be relatively easy (with the appropriate skills) to decompile Chrome mobile, or trace the pattern of messages made by Chrome desktop, to see exactly what's going on. For that matter, as far as I can tell Google Image search works perfectly fine with Chromium, so you can just look at the source code, no need for decompilation!. Finally, if Google were exploiting the popularity of its search engine to make Chrome work and FF not work, wouldn't Mozilla be pointing it out? Perhaps eve
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome can't dictate browser standards.
Not completely true. See the autocomplete="new-password" [stackoverflow.com] solution to prevent Chrome from auto-filling passwords. If have a create user form that Chrome keeps filling with my current credentials (username & password)
Re: (Score:2)
There was an other major element going on. Microsoft was trying to use their dominance to take over the web standards.
Microsoft never liked HTML. So at first with Windows 95. IE was such a basic browser it's only job was to download Netscape. But the point was to get people to use MSN a dial up service like AOL instead. That is where they put the effort. However it never kicked off so Microsoft did a big push to improve IE and embrace, extended and extinguished the web. New versions of IE which were li
Re: (Score:2)
I then tried Konqueror because I thought my noscript on FF might be the issue. That failed, so I tried Chrome and it worked.
The Gmail team (like all Google web properties, actually) runs automated regression tests on every change, on all major browsers and some minor ones, but I doubt they test with noscript. I'm surprised if Gmail works on *any* browser with Javascript disabled, and I'll bet it doesn't work very well.
It may not be a cospiracy, but the sheer dominance of Chrome is starting to lead to an IE6 style lock-in.
It's possible, but it seems hard to believe that 60% market share is enough to allow that sort of complacency on the part of web site developers. I suppose it's possible that some sites have a much higher percentag
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Wait, let me get this straight. This guy heads Firefox Marketing, but uses chrome all day... and writes an article about using chrome all day. And he doesn't see the obvious?
My Gawd, the people at Firefox are stone-cold fucking stupid. I sill use it.. .but with Jackwagons like this Jackwagon, I guess it is doomed. Wow.
I also guess this is why the people at Firefox keep adding and taking away stuff people really do care about. They don't actually use the product they make. Wow, again. ~
Re: (Score:2)
And they all got rich from it, even if it was only temporary.
Re: (Score:2)
Too funny for words
Need a competent DOJ (Score:2, Insightful)
It's time for the DOJ to crack down on Google for anticompetitive behavior. They're quite possibly even worse than Microsoft was in the 1990s. Unfortunately, I have no confidence that a DOJ in the Trump administration will enforce the nation's laws. Get rid of Trump and Sessions, and perhaps there will be hope of enforcing existing antitrust laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Anticompetitive behavior? In what way?
Is Chrome pre-installed by default on Linux? No.
Is Chrome pre-installed by default on Windows? No.
Is Chrome pre-installed by default on Macs? No.
Is Chrome pre-installed by default on iPhones and iPads? No.
Is Chrome pre-installed by default on Android? I'm guessing yes, but as far as I know Android's marketshare is much lower than all others combined.
Re: (Score:3)
but as far as I know Android's marketshare is much lower than all others combined.
Android has recently surpassed Windows as the world's most used OS, and it has 80% of the mobile market.
Re: (Score:2)
And even on Android, you can set the default browser to be something other than Chrome. Unlike this Windows 10s thingy where Edge is the default browser, Bing is the default search engine - end of story. Yes you can use others, but can't set defaults.
I have my Android set to default Opera - not because Chrome is bad, but because some mobile websites are unusable without an ad blocker.
Re: (Score:2)
because some^H^H^H^H almost all mobile websites are unusable without an ad blocker.
Re: (Score:2)
because almost all mobile websites are unusable.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm running Windows 10. Edge is installed, of course, but I don't use it, nore is it my default, IE 11 is.
I also have Chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
haha, i have windows 10, i have edge, which i cant remove(anti-competitive much?) And Chrome, Set as default browser.. Although over HALF of the programs i can click links in, open edge... even know chrome is default browser. and on windows 7 those same programs(same versions even) opened chrome no problem. So i dont know what wonder world you live in. but i would like you to share how you REALLY got windows to use the "default" browser.. or does it only allow different defaults if its a microsoft product?
Re: (Score:2)
Unlike this Windows 10s thingy where Edge is the default browser, Bing is the default search engine - end of story.
You're talking about Windows 10 S [arstechnica.com], the special locked-down version of Windows.
We'll see how much penetration this "walled-garden" variant of Windows really gets. And people can allegedly upgrade out of it [arstechnica.com]. I'm not worried that Windows S is going to force its way onto people's desktops any time soon (unless OEM's start pre-installing S on new PC's in place of Home, charging a premium for Windows Home as an option, and Pro becomes a super-premium).
On the other hand, if Windows S is directed to schools and o
Re: (Score:2)
Where do I get the Windows OS with chrome pre installed?? I have never seen such a thing. Please do share. That would save me minutes when I reinstall Windows. And I would never even have to open edge.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect I recall the 1990s with a great deal more clarity than you do.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, right now Google has changed so that Google Earth no longer is an application but you shall instead use Chrome. That adds to the bloat in Chrome.
A tool that can do "everything" is rarely very good on anything.
Re:Need a competent DOJ (Score:5, Insightful)
Do a google search on mobile Chrome and on mobile Firefox and you'll see that there is some useful functionality that is only available on Chrome. Specifically if you check the images search.
Tailoring their web pages to limit functionality on competing browsers is anticompetitive.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, but the only reason the marketing is converging on Chrome is the only reason the market converged on IE, because like Netscape before it, Firefox is simply a shit browser nowadays.
If Mozilla has a problem with market domination, it'd do well to realise that the market isn't going Chrome for fringe Chrome only features that people have to Google for to find they even exist. No, it's going Chrome because it's simply a better browser.
When a browser vendor like Mozilla starts attacking Chrome over largel
Re: (Score:2)
I guess you're one of Mozilla's dumb fuck devs that trolls here and regularly shows their technical ineptitude.
I'll spell it out simply for you - Firefox used to have the largest marketshare because it was better than IE. Then it got shit, because it is, whatever you might tell yourself - memory leaks, slow, removal of much loved features, UI redesigns that no one liked and so forth, and so people conciously chose to move to Chrome.
There's no conspiracy theory here, Firefox is shit, Chrome is better - the c
Re: (Score:2)
He's too busy playing identity politics to read and actually add anything to this conversation.
Oh deary deary me. (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny how Mozilla/Firefox weren't complaining when they had a large marketshare. It is called competition and if people are going to a competitor's product you need to look at why, what you offer and what you could offer which would persuade people to yours. You have no right to market share, you have no right to anything at all. I also find it quite hypocritical that you mention the advertising given the tie-ins Firefox and Mozilla have had in the past and the fact that on the leading Linux platforms Firef
Re:Oh deary deary me. (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps given your job title you should look at your own performance and take a closer look at home as to why Firefox doesn't do as well as it should. If you don't competition get out of the game.
Read through this bug on adding concurrency to Firefox to get a good feeling why Mozilla lost so much browser market share:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s... [mozilla.org]
"Always with you what cannot be done."
$350M in funding per year, and they couldn't straighten out threads/processes. A bunch of crazy-ass trendy projects that got killed - those got millions of dollars in funding each. Users cursing at their slow browser - not even a priority.
If Chrome is winning (has won?), it's because its dev team seems to have an "OK, we'll fix that" attitude.
Re:Oh deary deary me. (Score:5, Interesting)
Read through this bug on adding concurrency to Firefox to get a good feeling why Mozilla lost so much browser market share:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/s... [mozilla.org]
After reading, what I get is the devs saying procceses/threads as dictated wont solve the problems being described. And that they will work to solve them a different way.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
A bunch of crazy-ass trendy projects that got killed
You should read up on Mozilla's Electrolysis [mozilla.org] and Quantum [mozilla.org] projects. Seems like Mozilla's got an "OK, we'll fix that" attitude to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh deary deary me. (Score:5, Insightful)
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Cool the torches there buddy. I get where you are coming from but I think we're a little past that point. You've got a great argument at say 20% delta between first and second place, but we're way, way, way past that point. Chrome is at 54% with second place at 15% and that's Apple's Safari which I'm sure 90% of that 15% is iPhone. That's an almost 40% difference between the two. While no one is screaming monopoly (okay maybe a few but no one cares about them), we're in the territory where we should grow a bit concerned.
The W3C manages the standards of the web and even then Google has an insanely heavy hand in the process there and even if W3C doesn't agree to something, who cares, Google just does it anyway. So I get it, competition and all, but there's a point where we should pro-actively start looking at what checks are in place to ensure that Google doesn't make W3C, OASIS, et al completely irrelevant.
You know how people say that "gee I wish people were more proactive before monopolies formed?" Yeah, we're there, this is that point where it is time to ask questions. Not asking questions, not ensuring that Google just doesn't start stomping standards and going the non-evil form of embrace, enhance, and extinguish, ensuring the young whipper snappers that Google hires don't GNOME 3 the hell out of the Internet, that's the entire point. It's not to say, "OMG! Google is just too big, has way too much a lead over other browsers, it's just not fair *wail to heavens*". It is to say, "Hey, uh, do we have enough checks and balances to ensure that Google doesn't use their lead to just fudge bomb how the web works?" The answer is pretty much no and that's been a concern for like forever (I remember conversations about this issue back in late 1990s and W3C was way smaller then), but more so now that I lot more people happen to be on the Internet daily.
Totally understand your position, but just up and up being cynical and telling them to go f'off, !!CAPITALISM!! Is exactly the crap that just leads to an insanely high level of apathy that ultimately leads to the same folks that said !!CAPITALISM!! saying, "WTF?! Where were you all and why didn't you stop them?!?!" I for one don't want another IE and neither should anyone else. We need an organization that can literally say, "Google Chrome is not compliant with ISO(ideally W3 as opposed to ISO)-96716723(whatever) of HTML rendering standards, they are a non-standard browser." And we should actively shun non-standard browsers.
Also, just want to add that this nowhere even gets into how slow the W3C has been, how they totally missed the ball on mobile-everything, and how they are totally getting left behind in IoT. So there's an even amount of blame to lay on W3C's feet too. Also mobile OS makers and what not, there's some blame heading to them too... It's a really complex topic, but yeah screaming !!CAPITALISM!! isn't going to fix jack crap and possible just make it worse off.
Re: (Score:1)
As the head of Firefox marketing, maybe Eric should take a good hard look at why Firefox has gone from the most popular browser to only 1/4 the market share of Chrome.
After using Firefox since version 0.7 (when it was called Firebird) and rarely ever using any other browser, I switched to the Palemoon fork of Firefox after the “Australis” debacle that completely ruined what used to be the best browser around. Since then, they've been on an all out campaign to destroy Firefox, and their market sh
Re: (Score:2)
Did you say the same when IE 6 had 90% of the market?
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't competition get out of the game.
Wow... I've never seen competition as a verb before.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Be Brave (Score:2, Informative)
A great option (or at least a GOOD option) IMO is Iridium. It mostly is Chromium recompiled with some privacy defaults (that you could set in Chrome or Chromium in about 5 minutes), but also ALL the google hooks removed.
Brave sounds ok, but given that they have tried offering stuff like "replace your ads with ours" and are busy studying "how to monetize the web" or whatever with an "attention token", I wouldn't feel comfortable going all-in on them.
https://brave.com/about_ad_replacement.html
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Be Brave (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Be Brave (Score:5, Funny)
No, for that you need Courage.
Simple solution (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
I had some bugs explained on the mozilla forum then they wiped everything and said missing stuff had to be entered again. What, no backup? Can't be bothered. I want to use Firefox as i like plugins but I can't be dealing with stuff like the Google Keyboard not working properly on firefox (but is fine on every other app including chrome), specifically the ability to move the cursor by swiping the space bar left/right or holding the delete button and swiping left/right so I'm back to chrome.
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly what I came here to say, FF just became a pain in the ass to use, and since it was a pain in the ass to use chrome clone by the time I stopped using it, I just went to chrome... why use a bad clone of something that's right there waiting for you
Re: (Score:2)
Make Firefox not suck. I had a laundry list of issues with FF that culminated in my switching to Chrome, where everything "just works". I used FF for *years*, until I literally couldn't make myself keep fighting with the browser.
Agreed. I've been a long time Firefox user - from the 1.x days (even looking at when it was still Phoenix), and really really loved the Pandora/TabGroups functionality that was introduced in FF4. However, they've making changes that are about to toss out nearly all of the add-ons, and make it near impossible for some add-ons (which TabGroups is again) impossible to do going forward. It's made me actually start using Chrome for more than just Netflix.
Unfortunately, Chome doesn't really have a good solutio
Re: (Score:2)
It seems all Firefox users are in this thread, and we agree. I still find FF usable (on a mac), but every time they manage to fuck up something that worked well for someone. I was on "Nightly" for some time, and then they stopped supporting the plugins. Which is the only fucking reason I still use Firefox, dammit! They seem intent on following some blueprint from 1998 without listening to their users, a sure way of killing a product.
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't just Google's fault. (Score:3, Insightful)
This is not just Google's fault - people are writing Chrome-only websites. Not surprisingly, google.com only supports U2F (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_2nd_Factor) on Chrome. Surprisingly and infuriatingly, other tech companies are doing the same, even though Firefox supports U2F with a plugin. Dropbox and Atlassian both require Chrome for U2F, and refuse to try to work with Firefox. (Kudos to Github for doing it right.)
Re: (Score:2)
This is not just Google's fault - people are writing Chrome-only websites. Not surprisingly, google.com only supports U2F (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_2nd_Factor) on Chrome. Surprisingly and infuriatingly, other tech companies are doing the same, even though Firefox supports U2F with a plugin. Dropbox and Atlassian both require Chrome for U2F, and refuse to try to work with Firefox. (Kudos to Github for doing it right.)
That is because U2F is not as much a standard or new technology as much as it is a really ugly hack, and no one wants to port that horrible code to other browsers. The other browsers have all looked into it and decided to do something else.
Re: (Score:2)
U2F... 2.0 is also know as "Web Authentication: An API for accessing Public Key Credentials" https://www.w3.org/TR/webauthn... [w3.org]
Appears to be on it's way to a real standard
FYI, Mozilla and Microsoft are currently working on U2F in Edge and Firefox
Re: (Score:2)
U2F... 2.0 is also know as "Web Authentication: An API for accessing Public Key Credentials" https://www.w3.org/TR/webauthn... [w3.org]
Appears to be on it's way to a real standard
FYI, Mozilla and Microsoft are currently working on U2F in Edge and Firefox
Yes, WebAuthentication, but not the standard currently implemented in Chrome, which is what everybody is using until the replacement is done. Until then it is Chrome only.
Re: (Score:2)
That's how web standards start... HTTP2.0 came from Google's Chrome-only SPDY
Re: (Score:2)
Try again with Firefox 58 or later. Due out end of this year.
Re:This isn't just Google's fault. (Score:5, Insightful)
Try again with Firefox 58 or later. Due out end of this year.
And no longer have (a) tab groups and (b) 90+% of the add-ons and extensions for Firefox out there. FF57 is where I believe their putting the guillotine to their own necks.
Re: (Score:2)
When that happens, they can kiss my ass goodbye too. So where do you complain against this? Is there a forum that Mozilla reads at all?
Re: (Score:2)
When that happens, they can kiss my ass goodbye too. So where do you complain against this? Is there a forum that Mozilla reads at all?
Sadly, the AC in parallel to this is right - they're only response is "RESOLVED - WONTFIX" in their bugzilla DB, and mozilla forums. They seem to have entirely lost focus on who their customer is, who their end-user is, and that their purpose as a company is.
The Five (Score:3)
Beyond Google, the web looks more and more like a feudal system, where the geography of the web has been partitioned off by the Frightful Five. Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple and Amazon are our lord and protectors, exacting a royal sum for our online behaviors.
Segmentation is natural in a oligarchy. I would suggest to you that Microsoft, was one the sole leader in the tech world, and lost its dominance by thinking it was "it". The others will eventually fail. We may be too short sighted to notice it happening.
The point being, the "next" big thing is going to hit, and these guys are all going to miss it. Probably, because the next big thing won't be anything we expect, it will happen organically. This is why I don't see 3D stuff as being successful. It might be, when there is a "killer app" that requires it to function. Since 3D porn, movies and games haven't really taken off yet, it is either too premature, or not required for functionality.
I haven't a clue what the next big thing is, because it likely hasn't reached maturity, and hasn't found the "killer" status that will cause it to take off. If I had a suspicion, I would think augmented reality would be the "next big thing", but it is still years away from being "killer".
Re: (Score:3)
"I haven't a clue what the next big thing is, "
Ransomware.
Re: (Score:2)
and lost its dominance
Did it? It still owns the productivity of the entire world. It has a very significant market share in Cloud services where it was late to enter. And it's market cap has never been higher than it was now.
If that is "failing" then I don't want to win.
Wish Google sites would shut up (Score:5, Insightful)
What I'd really like is for all the Google service sites to STFU and remember when I say I don't want Chrome. Every fucking page for every fucking site has some sort of pop-up box, banner, or somesuch that uses Microsoft tacticts to suggest that somehow this web service will work better in Chrome than some other web-compliant browser like the one I'm already using (Firefox). If closing/dismissing/saying "NO" would silence them for good that'd be one thing, but they won't fucking go away. They keep coming back.
Sorry, Google, but the dozen or so background processes Chrome launches that arrogantly assume that you're doing nothing else with your computer and Chrome therefore has implicit permission to own every all RAM and CPU 100%, crowding out everything else with they sheer quantity of the number of spawned threads has resulted in you being banned from my systems. Go the fuck away and leave me alone and stop trying to take over the world, assholes.
I literally never see these. (Score:3)
Firefox. uBlock Origin, Privacy Badger, HTTPS Everywhere. Pfsense box is the gatekeeper to my network. pfBlockerng + DNSBL lists means I can watch youtube videos on my smart tv with 0 ads.
Take back YOUR network; YOUR computer.
Avoid Chrome, get Brave or Iridium (Score:2)
Look for a well supported Chromium-based browser:
There is not only Brave but also **Iridium Browser** (https://iridiumbrowser.de).
They claim adherence to European data protection standards, as well as having an reproducible and audible build process.
Re: (Score:2)
> If closing/dismissing/saying "NO" would silence them for good that'd be one thing, but they won't fucking go away. They keep coming back.
You look like you're trying to complain about a tool popping up unwanted and not going away. I can help with that.
Re:Wish Google sites would shut up (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it does not "trump all other factors". I don't care if every install of Chrome got you $10. Chrome is blatant spyware, and "factually" slows down your computer. I know many previous Chrome fans who've ditched it and gone back to Firefox for this very reason (an issue on both MacOS and Windows).
Gmail, Google, Hangouts, Calendar, Contacts, and so on all work 100% perfectly fine in Firefox. But without giving away your soul by letting Google know every click on every site.
Re: (Score:2)
Chrome is blatant spyware
A key part of being spyware is that something operates completely covertly. Google is very open about what Chrome does. Don't redefine the term, you're helping no-one.
"factually" slows down your computer
An extraordinary claim. Care to back them up?
I know many previous Chrome fans who've ditched it and gone back to Firefox for this very reason
Anecdotes are fun. I am a previous Firefox fan who ditched it for Chrome for this very reason. Surely we can't all be right.
Re: (Score:2)
Google Cloud stuff (Compute Engine, etc) only works in Chrome though. If you choose to buy Google Cloud, then you have to take Chrome, or else you can't control your account.
I can get that its easier to make a UI work in one browser than many, but I'd have much less of a problem with it if the one browser it worked with wasn't made by the same company as the UI. It's Microsoft all over again.
Re: (Score:2)
At this point, even MS Edge is better than Chrome. I only use it because I like the UI and inspector.
I don't get it (Score:2)
If you want people to use FireFox just because Google is too big, that's not enough. It needs to be clearly better than Chrome in meaningful ways.
Re: (Score:2)
I wasn't aware of the Turnaround ads, mostly because I stopped watching TV by that point. I used to joke about their old slogan: "Don't get the door, it's Domino's." Their stuff was so bad I got a better experience from a Tombstone and some extra oregano.
Stop trying to be Chrome then (Score:5, Insightful)
Mozilla has been pushing hard to make Firefox to be exactly like Google Chrome along with its limitations and lack of customizability. By Firefox v57 there will be no reason to ever use Firefox anymore because of Web Extensions won't allow users to install real extensions that allow them to actually change Firefox's behavior and UI as they want it to instead of Mozilla's ideology of having Firefox be a Chrome copycat. The pathetic Theme options in future Firefox versions is just as awful as Windows 10's themes and limited color choices, meaning no real options at all.
So I find it hilarious that somebody from Mozilla is concerned with Chrome becoming the only web browser in town when it's Mozilla themselves pushing the remaining Firefox users away towards Google Chrome because of their behavior and border-line user hostility. Because why bother using a gimmick when you can use the real thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. I used Firefox for years, and avoided Chrome mainly because I didn't like its UI. Even though Chrome did work much better than Firefox.
Now Firefox's UI seems identical, so why not use the horrible-UI-browser that works better?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Clever (Score:2)
This is a clever bit of marketing. The intro makes it sound like it's a thinkpiece, about to explore some interesting hidden issue that you didn't know about, and which is forcing Chrome's dominance on the world. But then it segues into its real purpose, which is to market Firefox, to convince you that it's actually pretty cool these days and you should give it another try. Clearly, the author hopes the intro will make it go viral, including things, like, oh, making the front page of /. and hackernews (does
Not that clever (Score:2)
Personally, I thought it started as a thinkpiece and then seques into a whine that life isn't fair.
How is it doing that, exactly? (Score:2)
I just don't like only being on Chrome. And that's what Chrome wants. It wants you to only use Chrome.
Uh huh... and how is it doing that, exactly? Does it stop websites working in other browsers? Does it fail to tell people that other browsers are available? Because I think the others fail to do that too.
Firefox really has improved a lot... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Why would I go back to Firefox when I now run Pale Moon?
Basically, it's Firefox before it turned to shytte.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not perfect, but I like it a lot, and now use Pale Moon as my go-to browser. In its efforts to be like Chrome, Firefox has sacrificed everything that made me choose it in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely true. But it's STILL, in my view, better than what Firefox has become. Certainly it's better for my needs and preferences. If Keyword.URL is important to you, by all means continue with Firefox. I have to suspect, though, that sooner or later they'll kill it off, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Does its UI resemble Chrome, or have they reverted back to the Firefox look of old?
What's FireFox's Value Proposition? (Score:3)
I agree totally with Mr. Petitt, that there needs to be independence from corporate giants on the web and, as somebody who opens a lot of tabs, running faster and leaner is something I like.
But that ain't enough of a value proposition for me and my business. Google provides email, storage and on line apps for free to any computer with a Chrome browser. Google offers analytics that allow businesses to track their web presence. Then there's the search thing. To be fair, many of these resources are available from Google on Firefox, but then you get a nagging message saying that others aren't available except on Chrome.
I'm looking forward to widespread adoption of HTML5 and it's APIs to help level the playing field, but without solid, tangible tools and resources uniquely available to Firefox it's always going to be used as an open-source, non-evil alternative to Chrome.
You've got mail! (Score:2)
This is why I have always used America Online. I don't trust this Netscape Navigator thing or Chrome. I remember reading on alt.computers.users that AOL is the only safe, secure way to use a computer.
Plus, I really love those wave files in the chatrooms, like {S alphabetsucks and {S zuckerbergishitler.
Whiny marketer is whiny. (Score:3)
I head up Firefox marketing, but I use Chrome every day.
That speaks volumes to the quality of Firefox.
But talking to friends, it sounds more and more like living on Chrome has started to feel like their only option. And unfortunately, too many people think Firefox isn’t a modern alternative.
Except it is. Yes, three years ago, Firefox was reeling. But today, Firefox is SO much better than it was even a year ago.
So, you're failing at your job and blaming your friends for not using a browser that you won't even use? Hold on, I came prepared. [blogspot.com]
Gave up on Firefox (Score:3, Informative)
When they changed, unnecessarily mind you, the interface to their browser for about the millionth time. Just right when I was completely comfortable with the reload button being in the Nth spot and the Cancel button being in the Nth+1 spot they decided to move it all to the other side or just plain hide it from me.
Which meant I had to one figure out where things went to. Second, had to try to get used to the new button locations.
The Thunderbird project has a very bad habit of doing the same thing as well.
Only use Firefox now for compatibility testing. Otherwise it is just a memory hog that I remember as being run by people who do not have any appreciation for how they really upset people's workflow when they get a wild hair and feel the need to have all of the furniture on the other side of the room.
Re: (Score:2)
More recently, the download progress UI in Firefox was changed so it no longer tells you the size of the file you're downloading, it only gives you a progress indicator. I'm still banging my head trying to figure out why they thought that information was so useless that it HAD to be removed to make it "better."
I use Pale Moon as my primary browser, and Firefox as a backup if a web page doesn't work. If a web site doesn't work with either browser, I don't bother viewing it and just go somewhere else. To h
Feudalism, LOL (Score:2)
exacting a royal sum for our online behaviors
Lately my 'online behaviors' have consisted of "Tor" and "<null>", because I'm tired of snoopers. Let's see them monetize THAT.
But Rick, Tor exit nodes are all bugged and hacked!
So's your VPN. Or do you really think they're telling you the truth?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'm prepared to abandon the Internet if it becomes necessary. We survived and thrived just fine before it, and we can all do so once again. When there's no one of value using the Internet anymore, it'll either die off, or there will be reforms.
Privacy and Plugins, Firefox Wins (Score:2)
I can block more junk, ads, spying, etc. using Firefox, so I mostly use Firefox. The Tor Browser is really just Firefox.
I mostly use Chrome when I want to be as non-private as possible for testing. Simple as that.
When Noscript Blocks Too Much (Score:2)
My main browser in the desktop is Seamonkey. I use it on Windows, I use it on NetBSD, I would probably use it if I ran a linux desktop. I usually only run Chrome if I really need to access something on a url where noscript just won't allow it to load. Chrome is the throwaway browser I am not afraid to wipe and reinstall if I need to go somewhere that might be toxic.
No shit... (Score:2)
And here Mozilla is, actively emulating Chrome more and more (when it's not boot-strapping itself to failing initiatives) and actually innovating in their browser...not at all...
A blind vegetable could have seen this coming!
C'mon Mozilla! Time to stop bitching about the fecal smell pull your fucking collective heads out!
Head Up Marketing (Score:2)
Eric Petitt, head up Firefox marketing, writing in a blog:
Why does Firefox need a head up marketing?
Shouldn't they just be programming motherfuckers [programmin...fucker.com]?
Then make a better browser (Score:2)
Sounds like sore loser syndrome...
Chrome got such a market share because it made for a better (or less worse) experience. I used to swear by Firefox until, for a period, certain releases would just start consuming the entire system's resources. So I switched... to chrome.
Has the problem with Firefox gone away? Almost certainly.
But that is not enough to make me switch back. So long as chrome does not screw me over, and Firefox doesn't offer me anything revolutionary, I will remain. There is inertia with most
Well, it's not entirely Google's fault (Score:2)
Firefox also worked on making web standards more and more complex, after all, they are in the standard committees. If they'd refuse to accept dubious standards, and instead focus on trying to make web standards orthogonal and as simple was possible while still keeping them flexible, there would be a healthy competition.
Instead Mozilla keeps semi-implementing standards, while making the GUI less and less usable.
'Frightful Five? (Score:2)
All round "Huh?" from me. I kind of know what they're getting at, but it's swing-and-a-miss.
Still Just Using The Best Browser I Can Find (Score:2)
I'm only on not Chrome because.. (Score:2)
There is also the Vivaldi Browser which users the chrome engine and gives you full control. (http://www.vivaldi.com) by the guys who made Opera. I find it very slick and runs on all my platforms (Linux, M$ Window$, MacOS) Always better to have choice.