Thread 106959162

Why did Firefox become the Linux of browsers?

Because of women, rust and trannies

No, seriously

>>106959190
This is the answer

>>106959162 (OP)
dumb people ruin everything.

good, stay away from my browser

Google told people to switch to chrome and made a clean little button and suggestion, asked nicely
I used Opera in that era when Chrome was new

>>106959190
>>106959199
You are retarded

brave loads webpages and videos faster so I switched, it also opens quicker which is neat

>>106959162 (OP)
I don't actually know, I've had firefox the last couple of decades. I install it on all family members pcs as well.

You tell me

>>106959162 (OP)
Before Chrome browser updates were not common, if i remember firefox was on version 3 or 4 when it came out. Google on the other hand was pumping out updates left and right and as a company they were everyone's darling, search, the free gmail with loads of space, the youtube so everyone started switching to it. Other browsers tried to keep up but couldn't initially and chrome took over. Mozilla then got hooked up into activism and diverted most of the money Google gave them, to prevent monopoly allegations, to activism. So now they're "activist first" and will remain that way until they burn up all the money they have laying around then jump ship leaving firefox half ruined.

>>106959162 (OP)
Chrome is pre installed on phones. Edge is pre installed on Windows.

>>106959162 (OP)
spyware

KHTML based browsers combined are ~98%, more than the 95% IE had in 2003.

>>106959162 (OP)
safari + chromium browsers come preinstalled but its also a worse browser experience for the average user, so hardly anyone installs it. literally look at any gradient and its visibly worse.

>>106959162 (OP)
There's more Linux users than Firefox users.

>>106959401
About the same amount on Desktop(5%).

>>106959347
Gradients are bloat, don't use them. Do you see a gradient on 4chan.org? No, of course you don't. You don't need 'em.
Also they fixed the gradient issue in the latest Firefox.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=627771

>>106959344
It's going to get worse, hundreds of millions of smartphones are being distributed to the third world each year all with Chrome pre installed. India is practically a Chrome only internet.

>>106959415
Make sense given most desktop-oriented Linux distros pre-install Firefox.
>>106959401
Maybe on servers and embedded devices (which admittedly make up the majority of Linux's install base)

>>106959210
i accept your concession

smooth tab detachment when?
chrome already had it 15 fucking years ago

>>106959494
How often are you detaching tabs? I use new windows probably more than I spend my time detaching and reattaching tabs. Don't get me wrong, it's neat that Chrome can neatly animate that but it's a feature almost nobody fucking cares about.

>>106959162 (OP)
Can't compete with google bombing you with ads about installing chrome every time you look for something online.

>>106959208
Opera, whatever happened there...

>>106959232
I'll tell you, you astroturfing cocksucker. You are a fucking pathology.

>>106959449
>Also they fixed the gradient issue in the latest Firefox.
15 years later lmao, they would have never fixed it if some youtuber mustache faggot was crying about it.

Glad to not be using popular things, the unwashed masses march towards their doom

Because Firefox sucks ass. I'm going back to Chrome but find it hard to switch and the alternatives are awful too, although less awful than Firefox.

>>106959319
This

literally for some reason my firefox can't restore previous tabs despite this feature being staple for years, everything chromium based works, firefox is good only if you have old system or shit

>>106961094
>I'm going back to Chrome but find it hard to switch
why? open browser, import bookmarks, install ublock origin lite, done

>>106961272
>install ublock origin lite
l to the m to the a to the o

>>106959162 (OP)
Because google became evil and integrated itself in every internet aspect that people see as convenient

>>106959162 (OP)
I wanna say because of that ad where they compressed all the tabs into the top bar made everyone cream. But then after it wasn't anything special, the fact that everyone uses google.com see the little download chrome button and are like why not. Then added with the full traction of "well, everyone else is using chrome, I might as well use chrome" as well as some websites saying that most of their website issues can be fixed by using chrome, pretty much secured their dominance.

>>106959162 (OP)
Samsung Internet Browser mentioned!

>>106959717
but nobody uses google chrome, everyone uses thousand forks available

>>106961439
>but nobody uses google chrome
I switched back to chrome after 8 years of firefox. there's no point in using firefox which has become chrome but has less good dev tools and a shit engine.

>>106961439
>but nobody uses google chrome
Oh that's fucking bullshit. Nobody uses those forks, maybe Edge to some degree because it comes with Windows.

>>106959162 (OP)
Good products think they don't need marketing.
Meanwhile, bad products use marketing and drown in normie users.

I use brave but brave is chrome
i do have firefox too but i don't like it

>>106959162 (OP)

I think after Firefox 4.0 it started going downhill. The incentive to install it alongside alternatives dropped as a result. Competing browsers also gained traction like Chrome (which was a total meme at its start). Chromium started outperforming the gecko engine to the point people were content with chromium.

Quantum was like a burp of torque in a struggling automobile. By that point I’d say it’s only a matter of time until it is discontinued.

>>106961479
Firefox's engine is still better at some things like fonts. Chrome's font rendering is still garbage to this day, although some people swear by it for some reason.

>>106961588
If Firefox is discontinued it's because Mozilla is dead and that's a sad day for the Internet if that happens because they're the last independent browser that is actually usable. Maybe Servo and Ladybird will get there someday but they're not there today.

>>106961623
>Servo
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Servo-0.0.1-Released

>>106961663
Yep, it's very much still alive but early days yet. Like Ladybird it's not really usable yet. It doesn't pass all of the Web Platform Tests (WPT), etc.

Making a brand new browser is really hard.

>>106961673
>Making a brand new browser is really hard.
Definitely.

As others have mentioned Brave offers significantly better privacy options OOTB, and its adblocker is built into the browser itself. It has better fingerprint resistance, loads modern pages faster, etc.

Also people don't really care if Mozilla dies, in fact many people are almost wishing for it at this point. They've put on a master class of eradicating good will, and people are rather certain after looking at their public finances that Mozilla as a company exists to funnel money through to elsewhere. None of the money it makes or is given makes it back to the browser, a quarter of it goes to the CEO, and the rest kind of just fucking evaporates under numerous DEI programs and whatnot.

Its blatantly obvious Mozilla doesn't give a fuck about firefox, why should everyone else?

>>106959162 (OP)
Google owns web standards. Mozilla is run by retards.

>>106961825
>None of the money it makes or is given makes it back to the browser, a quarter of it goes to the CEO, and the rest kind of just fucking evaporates under numerous DEI programs and whatnot.
That has always been the case because Mozilla ORG is a non-profit that owns Mozilla Corp but doesn't fund them directly (because then they'd lose their non-profit status).

Mozilla Corp (the browser company) gets most of its money from Google, even if they did get the donations that Mozilla ORG collects this wouldn't be anywhere near enough money to sustain the browser development.

Yes, this means that ironically Firefox is only allowed to continue its existence because Google is still able to fund it. Potentially this crucial revenue could have been cut-off if the anti-trust case against Google decided to do so. In a sense, Google needs Firefox to stay alive to prove they don't have a monopoly.

>>106961835
That's why we need more independent web browsers though. The W3C used to run web standards until Google decided to circumvent them with WhatWG (yes, that tongue in cheek name literally meaning "What working group? Where? Nothing to see here, we do what we want", is what they replaced the W3C with)

>>106959162 (OP)
It depends.

Does this chart distinguish between Destop & Android Chrome?
The majority of people today online;
>Didn't start using internet until smart phones; this includes young people & boomers
>they understand there's choice of apps, but dont fully grasp that theres choice of browsing apps
>They likely just use the pre-installed webbrowser (Chrome or Manufacturer's browser), because most of their internet experience is apps, not websites, and so dont vale mobile webbrowsers like desktop users do

I'd like to see desktop only data

>>106961869
That is why I was hoping Google would lose and couldn't fund their "opposition" anymore. Either Mozilla would have to get its shit together immediately or cease to exist.

>>106961955
They would cease to exist. Nobody wants to admit it but they need Google, they can't operate on a shoe-string budget. What would follow is a mass firing of developers whose salary they can't pay anymore followed by lots of talk about how Firefox is trying to be leaner and how its open source and they can use this to its strength (reality: Browser development is hard and open source contributions from non-paid employees rarely help that much)

>>106961998
That would be a perfectly acceptable outcome.

>>106962007
Acceptable if you don't want to see independent web browsers, maybe. Chrome basically owns the web at this point.

>>106959162 (OP)
third worlders and tech illiterate people use chrome

>>106961955
>>106961998
firefox recently added more google (google lens) to get more money, and they partnered up with Perplexity. This tells you everything. If those companies cut the money firefox is dead.

>>106962015
Desperation breeds innovation, and Mozilla maintaining the status quo and providing the absolute garbage that is Firefox which continuously enshittifies is not ideal.

I'd rather it die outright if they're incapable of maintaining it on their own and see what else pops up on the market eventually. Also the perplexity partnership is...lmao.

>>106959162 (OP)
Because it was the only alternative for a long, long time. And it was actually decent up to 2014 when trannies took over Mozilla.

>>106962059
Does it really though? Do you think someone would innovate a new Mozilla overnight? The web is too big for that now.

Reminder that JavaScript was something Brendan Eich made in a weekend because he wanted something like Java available to the web browser. Nowadays, just building a JavaScript engine is a massive endeavour, this is even before we talk about all of the rendering complexities with CSS and HTML, etc.

>>106962115
Not implying it has to happen over night and I know it wouldn't. I'm just that spiteful since they've continuously fucked their own userbase and now are doing shit like lens and perplexity search integration.

I'm very serious in that I'd rather them die off, even if it took years for a remotely comparable non-chromium product to pop up.

>>106959217
me too mate
firefox will never be fast as chromium

>>106962132
The thing is, this would serve nobody but Google. Ladybird and Servo will get there eventually but it will take years. Firefox works today, and the AI stuff and ads, etc, can all be disabled (they need money and when you need money that leads to you compromising your ideals).

why does firefox have so much javascript?
https://github.com/mozilla-firefox/firefox

>>106959162 (OP)
Chrome was unironically faster and better in 2010 so people started to catch on.

>>106959162 (OP)
because of normies

>>106962215
Tests, PDFjs (the PDF reader) and the desire to re-use as much of the engine as possible.

>>106962202
Again, that is completely fine even if it benefits Google.

FF exists in a state where Mozilla basically gleefully abuses its position the market as the only serious non-chromium option. It stays? Benefits google as controlled op. It goes? Benefits google because they don't have to fund them anymore and they scoop up a few extra % of the market share.
I don't care if the continuous enshittified stuff can be manually turned off and I don't care if it technically works, even though its objectively technically inferior because its allowed to be.

Completely content with axing it. I'll sit on the jeet browser brave until servo and or ladybird becomes a viable option. I won't keep swallowing mozillas turds for zero return.

>>106961623

Oh I agree. But it’s already toast because it’s biggest source of income is freaking Google. Firefox is like Sears/KMart.

>>106962272
The irony of you sitting on Brave is that also indirectly benefits Google through monopolisation of their engine.
Firefox is the one usable alternative and you would rather there be no usable alternatives until Servo and Ladybird get their act together.
How does that help anyone but Google?

>>106962339
I'm not sure why you're so obsessed with the idea of me benefiting google. I never claimed that was a major problem for me.

Sure in a perfect world I'd rather not, but I dislike nu-Mozilla enough that I'm happy for them to die a painful death, even if it means I'm stuck with chromium slop for a few years until ladybird and or servo. I'm tired of Mozilla actively leveraging their very lucky position against their own userbase.

>>106962407
They're not leveraging anything though? They just sort of exist in an irrelevant vacuum where Google is the dominant force. It's fine if you're okay with that but some people do actually want an alternative and not having one would mean one less player to pressure them.

>>106962436
And by not having one, I mean not having one today because it really could take years and years and years worth of development before Ladybird and Servo are anywhere the level of compatibility that Firefox has.

That's bad for the web if developers continue to build Chrome optimised sites.

>>106962436
Yes, they are. They know these changes are unpopular, even if they can be disabled and the signals it sends to users. They know they've been obliterating good will with unpopular change after unpopular change. They are hedging their bets against the fact of them being the only reasonable-ish alternative, people will stay regardless.

>>106959162 (OP)
because chrome is slightly better and google runs the internet so the advertising is far more powerful.
It is better because some websites won't embed maps properly example.
>inb4 shit website
not an excuse
I use firefox(for ublock on YT) but i have to switch to chrome sometimes

>>106962466
It might surprise you but some people actually want these AI tools in their browser (tools which can be completely disabled if you don't want them. It's silly to get your panties in a twist over a completely optional feature yet Firefox "users" fall into that trap time and time again).
People look at the other browsers which also have AI integration now and wonder where Mozilla is. Well this time around they actually have it implemented and there's also support for local agents if you don't like Perplexity AI (or any of the others that are supported, hyper-focusing on Perplexity AI is stupid in that context).

>>106962510
It doesn't surprise me, nowhere did I claim that there aren't users that want this shit. I'm not sure why you keep attributing arguments to me I'm not making.

But obviously whatever they are doing, isn't working with their continuously shrinking market share, and I am still, once again, reinforcing that I wouldn't be particularly upset if I was left with no options if it means Mozilla dies a painful death, and I have to wait for servo/ladybird.

>>106961673
it's crazy how hard it is, even after removing r&d cost that lead to the current landscape.

servo is noble, but it's only a rendering engine, to make a javascript engine that can compete, you'd need to implement jit and virtualization which is near impossible without a dedicated team

>>106962546
I think you don't understand what they're up against since you don't seem to realise why it would be bad to not have Firefox as an option.

Google is a giant and it doesn't matter what Firefox does, they aren't ever clawing back users.

>>106962559
I understand, I just don't care.
I hate Mozilla that much. They've completely burned through any good will I had as a user of their product. I have also demonstrated I'm well aware not having Firefox for the market is overall a bad thing in the meantime until something else comes along.

Again, I don't care.

>>106962554
I think they re-use Mozilla's Spidermonkey which is honestly fine. I think they could always switch to a Rust based engine in the future if one gets developed.

>>106962578
You might as well hand the web over to Google on a silver platter then. Let them have their Manifest V3 and ruin content blockers like uBlock Origin and do whatever they want with no reasonable alternative against that cabal.

>>106959190
fpbp /thread
>insult your users
>start beef with your developers
>focus 95% on oUtReAcH pRoGrAmMs and 4.99% on UI redesigns no one asked for
>surprised when market share tanks at the same rate as worthwhile development

>>106962593
Oh well, as long as Mozilla ate shit in the process for being enormous, manipulative faggots.

>>106962607
>When your grudge against a company is more important than Enshitification

>>106962614
more like
>when your grudge against a company due to enshitification is more important than whatever happens to the wider market

>>106962632
>It's okay when Google shits

>>106962635
Its not okay when anybody shits, we're not jeets.
But I'm not going to eat Mozilla's flavor of shit anymore, and if they needed me to in order to maintain marketshare they should have thought about their retarded decisions first.

>>106962661
But you will eat Google's shit which doesn't even have proper content blocking APIs anymore?
>Make it make sense

>>106962678
I've made it make sense for you, I hate Mozilla and no amount of whinging about google is going to get me to come back.

>>106962688
I know:
>>106962614

Your grudge is more important than the web so you'd rather use a shitter product because Perplexity AI raped your Mom or something. You do you.

>>106962698
I will, thanks.

>>106959162 (OP)
Google had a huge promotion campaign in early 2010s. They used to pay developers to include Chrome in their installers.

>>106962751
I think they still do for all the boomers that download CCleaner, etc.

>>106959162 (OP)
>statcounter
it relies on javascripts to get stats. many people with firefox and adblockers aren't registering at all. then you have chrome on mobile devices, which it doesn't separate into "android" or whatever.

>>106962751
nah. the stats on this trash site are consistently unreliable. but that's what you get when you're dealing with some scam company that doesn't exist outside of a mail box in an irish industrial park. i shit you not, all that exists of this website's business is mail box.

>>106962593
>You might as well hand the web over to Google on a silver platter then.
You mean do what Mozilla did ages ago?

>>106962751
Recently installed windows and let Asus GRID install itself from mobo because there was no way to get fan control otherwise. It default checked the box for chrome install too. This is a movie from ~2016

>>106962832
Mozilla never did that though, Google's marketing did which people bought hook, line, and sinker. They idea that Mozilla could ever be expected to compete with an ad-agency like that is quite frankly ridiculous.

The only way I can imagine they could have done that is by introducing cosmetic filters to hide all of the ads for Chrome that were everywhere but there were also targeted video ad campaigns, etc, Chrome was everywhere on the marketing front. Most people ended up switching to it until Firefox Quantum was a thing and by that time it was too little too late.

>>106962923
>Mozilla never did that though
>W-w-w-w-wwell actually they w-were never c-competing a-anyways!
Get your fucking cope straight before you embarrass yourself further by shitting out your drivel.

>>106962957
How do you expect them to compete with an ad-agency on marketing?

It would be extremely dubious to go down the route of perusing dark patterns to try to block out the marketing blast or convince people they might not need to switch. Once you've lost the user they're unlikely to come back. A targeted marketing campaign will cause any established user-base to bleed if its done on the level that the marketing for Chrome was at.

>>106959190
This and choosing a political side when they didn't have too. Claim they are about freedom and privacy while supporting ideas and people who don't.
>>106962601
also this.

>>106962454
>That's bad for the web if developers continue to build Chrome optimised sites.
we build for the browser which has the larger user base, if it was firefox, we would develop for firefox. So yes, we will continue to develop for chromium browsers.

the web is over. chrome won.

>>106963605
You should be building for commonly adopted standards or at the very least polyfill or have fallbacks for Firefox and Safari. You're a shit developer if you're not doing that.

>>106964006
of course I test on firefox and safari. but what can I do as a developer when (it's fixed now after 15 years in firefox while even safari had it working) when a browser engine can't show gradients for example. or something like pic related when we are talking about standards, it's not my fault when they are slacking

>>106964006
>>106964278
I forgot something very important, the shareholders, very often they even say "fuck other browsers, we dont have time to fix it for their little marketshare we need to deploy rather yesterday"

>>106959162 (OP)
Google monopoly abuse

>>106959162 (OP)
don't listen to the "muh i'm afraid of black people" retards, it's just that google has more pull to advertise and push their chrome shit

when google.com and youtube add an alert to tell hundred of million idiots to download chrome, hundred of million idiots will download chrome.
also, android

>>106964278
You can try not being a faggot designer with aids ridden black cock shoved down your throat and design something without gradients

>>106964587
have you ever worked, professionally, as a web dev?

>>106964652
Thankfully not. I get that your entire job revolves around pushing disgusting crap to users eyeballs to try to get as much impressions from them as possible and cheap tricks like an unnecessarily flashy gradient can help accomplish that though.

>>106959162 (OP)
because firefox tried too hard to become like chrome and its shit ui so people just opted to go for the original instead of the pale copy.
shouldn't have dropped XUL, retards

>>106963620
I would use firefox if they had an equivalent to Opera's "Easy files" feature

>>106959162 (OP)
>Phoneshit
>Useragent spoofing
Imagine using Chrome and being sentient.

>>106965145
You have Palemoon and Basilisk if you want XUL. People aren't exactly flocking to it though.

>>106959162 (OP)
i use firefox on linux

>>106959232
I audibly groaned when reading this. I am so fucking tired of DEI. I have DEI fatigue. I can't believe someone gets paid to write this shit.

also
>8% DEI
>assuming 100 employees, that's literally just 8 people
holy shit it's so meaningless

>>106959190
Because of women, enough said. Trannies and rust aren't a problem on their own as long as they are allowed to do work.

>>106959162 (OP)
>Linux of browsers
This is retarded comparison because unlike Firefox, Linux never had the chance to dominate the desktop ever. Wherever Linux had the early mover advantage, it blew tf out of the competition and stayed at the top(Android, embedded, etc...).

>>106966875
Just because Android is technically Linux doesn't mean it has any similarity to the Linux experience

>>106966951
I'm talking about Linux, the kernel, not GNU/Linux OS. No one who is running anything useful is running a film GNU/Linux OS in embedded either.

>>106966986
>film
*full

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/leadership/

Most of the people on the page can be laid off tomorrow and it wouldn't cause any negative outcome for the company. Why does a company whose business model is just to sit back and collect paycheck from google need dozen of corporate suits?

They chose to prioritise paying these parasites instead of hiring more developers to improve their browser.

>>106959234
>leaving firefox half ruined.
It was entirely ruined for a while. It only got better recently because they stopped fucking with it finally.
cubeb.sandbox.enable false should be the default on Linux since sound breaks otherwise.

>>106963377
>supporting ideas and people who don't.
MAGA republicans?

>>106966818
>Trannies and rust aren't a problem on their own as long as they are allowed to do work.
Yeah, if I was bravoman I would have poached servo team as soon as mozies laid them off.

>>106959190
ALL they had to do was endorse Trump
That would have single-handedly saved the company

>>106959162 (OP)
jewish money/power influence

>>106968680
t. dicklicking troon

>>106961094
>>106961479
>>106961825
>>106962272
Firefox works fine on my machine. Maybe you just have trouble with tech?

It's owned by google now no?

>>106959210
Found the tranny

>>106959162 (OP)
trying to be like chrome, bring back the photon UI.

>>106961609
My understanding is Chrome and Firefox dont have any code for text rendering. They offload that task to DirectWrite, Skia, etc

>>106969699
google keeps the mozilla foundation alive so that they cannot be sued as monopoly.

>>106959162 (OP)
People are generally lazy and retarded.
I have a coworker that uses Edge without adblocker on his work laptop because "if the company wanted him to use something else they'd have installed it for him". Triggers the fuck out of me to see his browser plastered with ads all the time and him seemingly not being bothered by it.

>>106969737
most normies are like that
they thought ads are unavoidable and they just don't care. they also watch ads on youtube

>>106969683
maybe you should just kys

>>106959162 (OP)
They literally are the epitome of FOSS fags.
>can we have this feature chromium hell fucking edge before it became chromium based had?
USE CASE?!?!
Technical shit like mkv support, hdr on windows, fuck they JUST got vertical tabs. They're like a soviet union auto maker. What the capatlist pigs create we will do the opposite. They're the 4chan of browsers, so many QoL shit missing yet their fanboys will ask "do you really need more than 4mb upload"?
I only use it because videodownload helper doesn't need a license.

>>106959319
underrated post, chrome is still so popular because its the default on crapdroids
you can see just how much influence the default browser on mobile phones has on usage with safari, theres absolutely no reason to use safari on anything other than an ios device

>>106970592
Well that'd be a great argument if it was still 2003 and installing Firefox in place of internet explorer lead to a better experience.
But it's 2025, going from chrome or edge to Firefox as a regular user is dogshit. You'll notice the issues immediately. Let's not pretend Firefox doesn't get its ass beat on benchmarks even by safari.
Even as a power user Firefox is ass, most competent tech people are already blocking ads on a system or network level ala pihole or adguard.
The Firefox experience is dogshit now. It's own browser can barely keep it together with memory leaks and bugs.
Speaking of mobile did you know that Firefox for android got a download manager literally last month.
The ability to see your fucking downloads and their progress was a feature added a few weeks ago it's insulting how shit Mozilla let that browser become.
Also pic related is a reason to never need Firefox

Average Firefox user.

>>106970583
>HDR
macOS and Linux has it, time to move off of the Windows slop
>Vertical tabs
Do you really need them? It's nice that we have them now but I don't use them. They work horrifically if you re-size the viewport smaller than the sidebar then Firefox will force a minimum viewport width to accommodate it and you can't re-size the browser smaller than that anymore.
>Mkv support
Websites should be using Webm (a subset of Mkv) or Mp4 for video. I've never encountered a single Mkv video on the web in my entire lifetime but you've got support for it now so can shut up.

>>106970668
>if doesn't matter if the direct competition has it you don't need it
As someone who has been around Firefox since 3.6 you're the reason why it's dying a dog's death. Maybe China will bail them out if them become the CCP's firewall lapdog.
How the fuck are you going to have less features and run shitter? For years now! It's like watching those foss desktop environments take decades to catch up with windows 95. Sad really. Keep using Firefox tho I'm sure it's retarded nature makes you feel connected to it.

>What's a Firefox user most visited website?
[spoiler]about:config[/spoiler]

>>106959162 (OP)
>STATCOUNTER
The stats are very unreliable because they're measured by a third-party script. Most Firefox users have an ad blocker that blocks StatCounter, but almost none of Chrome users have one. That's why you see meaningless stats like "98% use Chrome and 2% use Firefox." If you block it, you're just not counted.

>>106970892
Yes and actually Linux is at 34% on steam as well. They just don't fill out hardware surveys.
Take a statistics class and try that again.

>>106970642
thats a vicious cycle caused by webshit being developed for chrome
chrome, firefox and webkit all use completely different rendering and javascript engines and there is barely any standardisation between them
html, css and js that works on one, doesnt immediately port onto the other
webkit is famous for not even supporting html5 in the year of our lord 2025

chrome is the most popular so webshitters target it
causing chrome to be the most usable and therefore most used

>>106971025
>be a video platform and add hdr implementation to your videos
>Literally only one browser doesn't support it on the most popular operating system
Let's be fair Mozilla is not making it easy or convenient for people to write shit tailored towards their userbase.

>>106969699
>>106969713
I think when a browser like ladyboy comes out with its own engine etc. there will be no point for google anymore to giving money to mozilla, this will be the death of firefox

>>106961479
Adblockers.

>>106971013
>idiot lecturing about statistic classes whilst completely ignorant to biases

>>106971048
windows isnt a serious operating system for serious people doing serious work, its a launcher for games

>>106971066
webkit didnt kill firefox

>>106970642
No one uses browsers on phones.

I'm not going to say that sacking Brandon Eich was their only stumble. But at least whatever accountants their browser division (and not their activist division) has should be looking at the trickle of development funding and going "Well this is shit now.".
Mozilla is basically just a Democrat lobbying group with the starving and neglected and unloved red-headed step child of NCSA Mosaic living under the staircase like Harry Potter.

>>106970789
>use chrome
>you can't even turn the embedded adverts off
>it forces you to comply with DRM

It is actually usable unlike l*nux.

So can Chrome users click multiple tabs and save just those selected tabs?
No?

You can only save ALL of the tabs in the browser at once?
Damn, that must be tough.

>>106970583
Chrome can't even select multiple tabs and save them as bookmarks.
Fuck off pajeet.

>cucking for proprietary shit
Only pajeets do this.

>>106967564
Absolutely, the issue has always been the admins that run the company that don't know how to make a browser.
Same issue as Google Chrome incidentally. That's why it's still slower than firefox despite this.

>>106962923
It doesn't help that google searches would tend to favour promoting Chrome over competitors.
It's the same reason why pajeets embed JS analytics into everything nowadays. Google told them to do this.

>>106962228
Fuck off, it WAS faster until 2010, when I switched to Firefox because it started to get slow and also restricted my ability to hack my browser for my purposes (that is, hide their fucking ads in everything nowadays).

>>106959190
Huh, trannies are literally keeping firefox alive at this stage with forks so they can goon in peace from google's eye.

>>106959162 (OP)
I have a theory that firefox's userbase hasnt actually significantly changed, but all new internet users install chrome by default. theres like a billion pajeets that first started using the internet since the start of that graph

>>106959162 (OP)
Your premise is so fundamentally flawed that it betrays a catastrophic lack of understanding of both subjects. To compare the two is an insult; not to Firefox, but to Linux.

Allow me to elucidate this for you. The Linux kernel, for all the autism surrounding its desktop implementations, is an undeniable, world-altering success story. It is the literal backbone of the modern internet, a testament to the power of a genuine FOSS development model. Firefox, conversely, is a cautionary tale of ideological rot and corporate capture. It is a bloated, dying browser with a shrinking user base, kept on life support as Google's "controlled opposition" to stave off antitrust suits, with a foundation that siphons the vast majority of its revenue into the pockets of its CEO and vapid DEI initiatives instead of actual development.

One is the engine of the digital world; the other is a slow, buggy mess coasting on the fumes of its former glory. The only thing they have in common is an insufferable user base. Please try to engage your brain before posting next time.

I just switched back to chrome, installed ublock origin lite and scriptcat for 4chan-xt. everything works like before. thanks mister google for all the security

>>106961582
Nobody asked, Devansh. Keep your street-shitting-nanigans to yourself.

>>106961673
I mean, it's just an engine, people still have to build browsers with it.

>>106961869
>Firefox is only allowed to continue its existence because Google is still able to fund it
That's a colossal crock of shit, The mozilla foundation is only allowed to continue its existence because Google funds it, Firefox or a fork's development would happen with or without them. Plenty of corporations like IBM contribute code to the project.

The biggest lie the devil ever told was making you think Firefox needs the mozilla foundation to continue existing.

>>106971587
>Firefox needs the mozilla foundation to continue existing.
It needs a competent dev team. FOSS is cool for Unix exclusive shit but when better alternatives run on Linux you have to step your game up.

>>106971610
I think they do have one, and you're not equipped to make that assessment. Say what you will about it, but it's managed to survive google's fuckery of the web over the years while remaining performant and compatible. Look at the clownshow that is webkit, or how Microsoft bitched out of developing their own engine.

>>106970583
>They're like a soviet union auto maker. What the capatlist pigs create we will do the opposite. They're the 4chan of browsers, so many QoL shit missing yet their fanboys will ask "do you really need more than 4mb upload"?
that's based though
it's why 4chan isn't full of bloatware and doesn't use up 50% of cpu just by scrolling up and down
contrast that with modern web5.0 sites with gigabytes of jeetscript automatically downloaded from a CDN.
force people to properly encode their media and not just post a 50MB, 10 second video straight from their iPhone

>>106959162 (OP)
Chrome got better than it

>>106959162 (OP)
>why has the internet turned to shit?
Smartphones, and the retards using them who were previously filtered from using the internet.
They now carry the loudest voice, the strongest vote. Welcome to free market democracy.

Has there really not been a single new browser that is trying to replace these old ass slow RAM hogs?

>>106961439
just like nobody uses firefox, everyone uses the thousand of forks available

>>106968680
terrible bait/10

>>106959162 (OP)
Jewgle used the same tactic as M$, M$ made their office suite use hidden API calls on Windoze which made it better than the competition, Jewgle owns the most popular websites and made their browser tailor made for them.

>>106959190
Just normies spreading chrome like fags spreading aids

>>106959162 (OP)
The fact that you ask proves that you never used it on poor hardware.
It needs easily twice as much disk speed as Chrome.
Memory management is archaic.
Some websites require to wait absurdly long the first time you access them, like 30s, before finally being rendered. The worst example I have is outlook.

>>106959162 (OP)
Firefox was never "good", it just introduced the idea of tabs. That's it. That's literally all Firefox ever was.