Firefox dropped below the 10% share value on Netmarketshare

Martin Brinkmann
Jun 4, 2018

Netmarketshare's browser market share has just been updated to include May 2018 share information. The company recorded a drop below the 10% mark in the desktop and laptop devices market for the Mozilla Firefox browser.

Firefox had a market share of 12.63% in June 2017 according to Netmarketshare and even managed to rise above the 13% mark in 2017 before its share fell to 9.92% in May 2018.

Google Chrome, Firefox's biggest rival in the browser world, managed to increase its massive lead from 60.08% in June 2017 to 62.85% in May 2018.

Microsoft's Internet Explorer dropped a percent point to 11.82% in May 2018 and Microsoft's Edge browser gained less than 0.50% to 4.26% over the year.

firefox drop 10

Netmarketshare recorded a downwards trend for the Firefox browser in the past 12 months and while that may sound alarming on first glance, it may not be as bad as the numbers indicate.

Netmarketshare collects usage stats and does not get "real" numbers from companies like Mozilla, Google or Microsoft. The company monitors the use of browsers on a subset of Internet sites and creates the market share reports using the data it collects.

While that is certainly good enough for trends if the number of monitored user interactions is high enough, it is not completely accurate and real-world values can be different based on a number of factors. While it is unlikely that they differ a lot, it is certainly possible that the share is different to the one reported by the company.

Mozilla launched Firefox 57 Quantum in 2017 as an effort to revitalize Firefox by dropping support for legacy systems such as the classic add-on system in favor of the new standard WebExtensions, and integrated new features such as support for multiple processes, and faster components in the browser.

Mozilla has yet to reveal how successful the change was for the organization in terms of users. How many users did switch from Firefox to another browser, and how many switched to Firefox because of the new browser?

Netmarketshare's statistics indicate that Firefox lost more users than it gained but we don't know for sure unless Mozilla reveals before and after numbers to the public.

Firefox is still the third largest desktop browser right after Chrome and Internet Explorer. Actually, only Chrome and Internet Explorer have a market share above 10% according to Netmarketshare's latest figures while all other browsers are below the mark.

The end of Firefox?

Even if Firefox lost users it is not the end of the browser. Opera, Vivaldi and other browser companies show that it is possible to develop browsers with a lower market share and the same can be true for Mozilla. The organization may need some restructuring in the coming years to take this and -- probably -- falling revenue from search engine inclusion deals into account but Firefox won't just go away because it is dropping.

Now You: What's your take on the situation?

Firefox dropped below the 10% share value on Netmarketshare
Article Name
Firefox dropped below the 10% share value on Netmarketshare
Netmarketshare's browser market share has just been updated to include May 2018 share information. The company recorded a drop below the 10% mark in the desktop and laptop devices market for the Mozilla Firefox browser.
Ghacks Technology News

Tutorials & Tips

Previous Post: «
Next Post: «


  1. asok asus said on July 25, 2018 at 12:48 am

    “revitalize Firefox by dropping support for …”

    uh, yeah …

    this exactly why firefox is going the way of the Dodo bird …

  2. pasu said on July 1, 2018 at 5:19 pm

    The main reason I used Firefox is that it had so many addons which provided unlimited functionalities and customizations. No other browsers could provide this level of freedom and extra functionalities like Firefox.

    I am sad to see the drop of Firefox market share. I can understand and also agree that Firefox needs to change to regain its users. However, I can not understand why Firefox decided to replace the fully functionally XUL with a half baked WebExtensions framework.

    IMHO, there are some other options that would cause less pain to the users, like improving the XUL framework while adding new browser engine and multi core support, or keep the XUL for a while until WebExtensions is fully functional.

    I am sorry to see what Firefox is trying to do, but I respect the decisions the development team made. Firefox is a free product and I enjoyed it a lot. I should probably not asking it for more.
    However, I would like to give some of my humble opinions. IMHO, Firefox is a co-production of Firefox developer and the addons developers. If Firefox want to achieve something, it should combine the wisdom and power from both side.

    For the time being, I will keep using Firefox 55 until I have better option. Thanks.

  3. rodndtube said on June 12, 2018 at 1:13 am

    After Firefox v55 started going south on my Add-Ons and User Interface Options last Fall and I learned where FF was headed, I jumped ship after 10 years, and headed over to Pale Moon, waiting in the wings for Basilisk, which I have been with since Nov 2017. Both Pale Moon and Basilisk are customized and virtually touch and feel as my Firefox was last September. Basilisk is my everyday browser.

  4. S Williams said on June 11, 2018 at 1:18 pm

    I pretty much stopped using Firefox when support for legacy addons (and hence CTR) was dropped. I realise that you can customise Firefox in other ways post CTR but frankly it is not worth the faff. What is the point of supporting Mozilla when they have been putting their middle fingers up at users like me for years. SeaMonkey with its traditional browser and email client UIs is my main choice on desktop machines. Which is also a Mozilla (derived) product.

    Mozilla broke Firefox on ARM Linux a while ago, the bug report said that this problem was not going to be fixed soon. So this forced me to try Chromium as a main browser on my RPis (as far as I know there is no build of SeaMonkey for ARM Linux). To be honest, there is nothing I miss from Firefox on both my “desktop computers” and ARM boards. Even Chromium’s UI is now more appealing than the current offering from Mozilla.

  5. Data Cow said on June 9, 2018 at 4:14 am

    Firefox is best in the market brpwser yet for business and personal use. Are teenagers suggesting Google Chrome here? Huh.

    Big part of my daily business is market research for competitors/products/prices/newcomers. Firefox gives me all what I need: Powerful Bookmark and History manager by TAGS, visiting stats and more.
    Firefox is the most customizable/flexible in the market. You can customize for your privacy needs.


    Someone can be tough..

    1. Farid Le Fleur said on June 9, 2018 at 11:45 am

      @Data Cow Firefox was in the past the best browser, as it was featuring customization and massive options to change the interface the way you wanted it. Now, with lowering the quality to other browsers like Edge or Chrome…

      Firefox is exactly as bad and unoriginal like the mentioned browsers. You do not have a clue about real customization. What you can today is just flip some switches for privacy related settings as you said – but that has nothing to do with real original creative customization.

      A product is always as bad as the template which it tries to emulate. Mozilla wants to be like Edge… like Chrome.. So, they are playing in their league as well. The league in which Firefox playing years ago.. in the one where creativity was outsmarting simplicity and minimalism is today out of league. And this out of league play-field was and is still league number 1.

      That’s the way it is!

      1. Jody Thornton said on June 16, 2018 at 2:51 pm


        @Data Cow is saying that Firefox Quantum is customizable enough for his tastes (and for many power users that’s actually true). Less UI customization is becoming necessary as most are using a mobile OS, and in that vain, you take it or leave it. There are tons of rendering settings that you can change with Quantum, that you cannot with all of the Blink variants.

        Bad and unoriginal is what will win for Opera and Chrome. Stakeholders in Mozilla need to see the company as trying to play in that space, because that’s where the users are. There’s no sense catering to us customizing desktop users who will eventually disappear. That’s short-term thinking with no leads to a future. Even if Firefox fails because of these changes, they needed to try something.

        Look at Microsoft. Windows 8 was an unmitigated disaster (to bad actually because it’s a fine OS). Everyone hated the Start Screen and what Ballmer was doing with the Windows Store and apps. Enter Windows 10. Satya Nadella, has brought back the Start Menu (but guess what – it’s just basically the Start Screen that you know hate from Windows 8.). And everyone seems to love Edge, Cortana and the new Mail Client – all universal (ahem – Metro) apps that everyone hated in Windows 8. It’s all in the marketing and in persistence. Now Windows 10 (sadly in my opinion) is off to becoming an unrivaled success, as right now it sails past Windows 7 in terms of usage share.

        Mozilla wants to be that persistent in terms of its path. It may not work in the end, but their stakeholder INSIST they try.

  6. Kubrick said on June 8, 2018 at 6:50 pm

    I am currently using puppy linux slacko 64 and im using firefox 45 with no apparent issues and it is not offering any form of update.Not been using slacko for long so im assuming firefox 45 is the standard version for puppy.Runs really well and see no reason to update at this present time,and seamonkey is installed too.

  7. Krixus said on June 8, 2018 at 10:45 am

    Mozilla has become cheap men’s Chrome variant.

    Removing powerful add-ons, themes, customization options to be attractive for the simple users! Chance the way the browser works to make it more comfortable for simplistic users to use. Why shoud someone use a cheap variant of Google Chrome with just another engine – if the original is around?

    And anyone seriously wonders WHY Mozilla is bleeding users away. And the only valid answer? Like Space-Dandy would most likely say right now:

    Self inflicted wounds, baby!

  8. lord lestat said on June 7, 2018 at 10:24 pm

    So, that are also the masses of Chrome users which are now using Firefox. They are coming in such masses that the market share even wanders in the different direction.

    What is this? Some kind of soup-magic? :D

    1. Farid Le Fleur said on June 8, 2018 at 4:52 pm

      Uhm… soup magic? Didn’t you mean more something like “magic mushrooms?”


  9. bawldiggle said on June 7, 2018 at 12:21 am

    Mine is bigger than yours … debate !

    If “it” works for you what is wrong with fringe browsers.
    and if it stops working or lets me down there is always the blue pill … Pale Moon

    Nothing wrong with small ones … and they get the job done
    Viva la choices !

    I am very peed off that mosquito-fella has treated me (all of us) as irrelevant
    What are they going to do to Tbird. They gave it away and now they want it (took it) back ?

  10. Appsterfan said on June 6, 2018 at 8:40 pm

    First of all… Where is the Appster when you need him!

    I am still using firefox 54.0.1
    I have a working coolpreview addon too! Thats one of the reason I still use this version :) there is a way around to use it… google it!

    I dont understant you people that thinks they have to update their firefox… why? Dont say security! You are firefox users who is in You dont even need antivirus so why bother for firefox’s security patches?

    I have ublock, requestpolicy, decentraleyes, canvasblocker, long url pls, no recource URI leaks, Google search link fix and neat URL addons for privacy and security… and that team of addons does its jobs!

    but addition to that I use ghacks-user.js file too…

    and lets talk about costumization…
    Ok. This is how my firefox looks:

    yes that thin black line of BAR all I need to surf.. because ı am a pro :)

    I am using gigabyte p25k model laptop with windows 7 os on it… my firefox cold start takes just 5 seconds!
    so… stop cying like babies! Old firefox still there! and its not old, it can be secure with addons, its fast, user friendly and super configurable!

    and last one thing…. WHERE Ä°S THE FRÄ°CKÄ°NG APPSTER!

  11. yogaisevil said on June 6, 2018 at 4:14 pm

    Shill more please!

  12. Emil said on June 6, 2018 at 2:39 pm

    No reason to use FF anymore now that it’s just an appendix of Google I guess. I’m still liking my classic Cyberfox setup but how much longer…

  13. John Doe said on June 6, 2018 at 2:57 am

    Google is Big Brother, literally (CIA, NSA, etc.);

    Mozilla is not.

    Chrome is proprietary software;

    Firefox is not.

    1. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 6:46 am

      Mozilla is financed by Google. This kind of hurts your story, doesn’t it?

      Besides, Chrome is built on Chromium, which isn’t proprietary.

      1. John Fenderson said on June 6, 2018 at 5:39 pm

        @Iron Heart: “This kind of hurts your story, doesn’t it?”

        I don’t see how that matters very much. I haven’t seen even a hint that Google has any undue influence over Firefox development. If you have evidence otherwise, I’d be very interested in seeing it.

      2. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 7:50 pm

        @John Fenderson

        Mozilla does not do all that is in their power to protect user privacy. The Firefox standard setup, with prefs unchanged, basically exposes you to all sorts of tracking. That could be prevented, if Mozilla really wanted to. I don’t assume that Google gives money to Mozilla for the search engine alone, you see. Because – let’s face it – people will be switching back to Google anyway as one of their very first steps after installing Firefox – provided Google isn’t the default already. Mozilla once made Yahoo! default, and there was absolutely no improvement(!) in the Yahoo! market share mid- and long-term. Moral of the story?
        I don’t exactly need “proof” (which only Mozilla staff could deliver) to put 1 and 1 together. Why give money for the standard search alone when it is self-evident that most people will switch to your search engine anyway? This leaves the Firefox defaults, and here you may be able to find the reason for Google’s cash flow. Many people can change search engines, only comparatively few can change about:config. And that I would classify as “influence over development”. Food for thought.

      3. John Fenderson said on June 7, 2018 at 12:47 am

        @Iron Heart: “Mozilla does not do all that is in their power to protect user privacy. ”

        This is true, but I disagree with you about the reason for it. I think the reason for it is that there is a fundamental tradeoff between security and convenience, and the average person only wants security up to the point that it becomes inconvenient.

        Mozilla is concerned with making their browser more popular, and so they’ve compromised their default security settings so that ordinary people won’t stop using it in frustration. I see no reason to think it has anything to do with Google.

        “I don’t exactly need “proof” (which only Mozilla staff could deliver) to put 1 and 1 together.”

        In other words, you’re blindly speculating. Which is fine — I do that all the time as well — but it’s important to remember that when we speculate, we’re making assumptions that tend to be predetermined by our already existing biases.

  14. JD said on June 6, 2018 at 1:47 am

    What I never get, when occasionally reading Firefox discussions:
    users are bitterly complaining that Mozilla removes crucial features like image or javascript toggles, which truly is a killer. Fully agree, Mozilla wants to suicide.
    But why is it still such a secret that those Toggles still work perfectly fine?

    That it is NOT necessary to install addons, although it sure is a lot handier to toggle prefs with buttons or menus, instead of using about:config page.
    And there exists a whole bunch more “secret”, global prefs of the same family as “permissions.default.image”: for iframes (“subdocument”), html5-videos (“media”), flash or other plugins (“object”), “stylesheet”s, “script”-Files etc. etc. All extremely handy global settings with Block-All/None/3rdParty options. Mozilla has been hiding those since many years, they never even made it into a GUI, and not even into about:config page, although most work since FF2 or FF3
    Search for “permissions.default.subdocument” to find an ancient list, and “nsPermissionManager” for a newer and longer one.

    All those prefs can be toggled on about:config directly (after creating the hidden ones manually)
    Of course, using addons is a lot more comfortable. Which are very light and simple if only toggling a native pref.
    But again a mystery to me, wherever I look, most people consider only highly complicated stuff like NoScript or ABP, while the light+easy global toggles are widely unknown. If any at all, people use single addons for every single pref-toggle.

    This is a hardly known Addon for handling several of the default “permissions” prefs:

    Companion Addon to the above: Black/Whitelist exceptions
    Tiny too, this simply adds or removes a line in the native file “permissions.sqlite”
    (Attention: exception domains work bottom-up from element-sources, not upside down from the urlbar-domain)

    And this big but extremely customizable addon for toggling all sorts of stuff:

    They all say “not for Quantum”. That means they will be deleted by Mozilla in some weeks. They really hate their users :-(

  15. John said on June 5, 2018 at 10:18 pm

    If I quit using Firefox, Chrome would not even be an option. I mean we are talking about a company who admittedly (and purposefully) circumvented users privacy settings in their browser. It was created by a company whose business model relies on collecting as much information about users as possible.

    We know what Google did even when people could find out about it. I can’t imagine what they are doing in the proprietary code of Chrome that no one is going to find out about.

    But the sheople are flocking to Chrome like lambs to the slaughter.

    1. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 7:15 am


      “But the sheeple are flocking to Chrome like lambs to the slaughter.”

      Same can be said for Android, and Windows. And the Apple OSes. Moral of the story? Corporate offerings tend to harvest user data unless hindered by the state, but the state won’t exactly do that, as the intelligence agencies are gathering valuable information from these sources. This is widely known.

      Corporate offerings in general tend to have huge marketing budgets behind them. And corporate OSes are not going to produce forks (unlike Linux), meaning companies have an easy time programming for them. Nobody wants to burn money by having to support hundreds of different OSes. Moreover, Microsoft made sure that PC vendors have Windows preinstalled in the 80s and 90s. If you wish to understand the present, have a look into the past!
      Once dominant, let alone a monopoly, it is very hard to overcome this state of the market. It only happened twice, AFAIK. First when Firefox emerged against the Internet Explorer, but this only happened because the Internet Explorer was a nightmare to use and due to the fact that Microsoft didn’t bother to make it better anytime soon. The second occasion was when Apple overtook Nokia, Blackberry & Co. on the phone market, but again this was due to the prior offerings being of far worse quality. The iPhone was revolutionary in its own right. The app ecosystem today, however, likely ensures that both Android and iOS stay on top, as it would be very hard for an emerging platform to get any app developers on board. It’s the same story with browsers, Chrome just hasn’t fucked up greatly yet and no far superior offering is in sight (No, Quantum is by no means “far superior”), so people continue to use it.

      TL;DR: When you are on top, harvesting data becomes a profitable business. And people don’t seem to mind Big Brother.

      1. Anonymous said on June 6, 2018 at 6:30 pm

        Apple did not overtook Nokia and BB, Google did.
        Nokia did not want to use Android, they kept making Windows phone. BB also did not want to use Android, they kept making BB OS phone.
        Android phone won the market because of the price, it’s free while the other OSes need license fee, of course people will choose cheaper phone with same capability.
        After everyone left those two companies, they started making Android phone. It’s already too late.

        It’s different case with Internet Explorer. IE was at the top because it kept improving from the result of competition with Netscape. By the time it got majority market share, Microsoft did not bother to update IE anymore. Microsoft was complacent and neglected IE for a very long time.
        Other browsers kept improving like adding tab functionality which is now very crucial for web browsing while IE stays without it.
        By the time IE added tab functionality, it’s already too late.

        Chrome now is like Windows. Those softwares are already mature enough so I bet many years ahead from now Chrome and Windows will still hold majority of market share.

      2. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 8:02 pm


        Maybe my iPhone example was a bit of an overreach, but one thing is sure: The iPhone set the stone in motion. I agree with you that Android finished the job and became even more successful during a later stage. Laziness and bad management contributed to the downfall of the former big phone manufacturers.
        With the IE it was bad management and lacking innovation on Microsoft’s part as well.
        By the way, the iPhone and Firefox are perfectly comparable in a way. The iPhone set the stone in motion against Nokia/Blackberry, and Firefox did against Microsoft IE. iPhone had a peak market share of 40% (At least in the USA I think, don’t quote me on that figure), and Firefox had around 30% at its peak. In both cases Google finished the job (Android, Chrome) and created a new monopoly-alike state.

        My point is, e.g. Windows and Chrome have not driven away users just yet, most people are still happy with them. No far superior offering has appeared just yet. And as long as this is the case, the companies behind them will continue to harvest user data. And most people obviously don’t mind (or don’t have another choice, which would often be true for Windows).

  16. yogaisevil said on June 5, 2018 at 8:45 pm

    Google has the brand recognition. MS got too comfortable and lost respect when their browser fell. Mozilla (Netscape) was always the underdog.

    But hey, every single modern browser has ‘Mozilla/5.0’ in it’s user agent.. they certainly don’t need it now days. So technically Mozilla has over 98% browser share!!

  17. Kevin said on June 5, 2018 at 6:54 pm

    No surprises here. After stealth-installing extensions without permission (Mr Robot) and taking out useful features (Javascript/image loading toggles) from the preferences dialog so that I now need to get extensions to expose these options, which then consume more memory and break with Firefox updates/when the extension author doesn’t feel like supporting them anymore, not to mention Mozilla breaking sound on systems that don’t use Pulseaudio post Firefox 52, the only reason I still use Firefox is because every other browser on Linux is worse.

    But the question is, how much worse can Mozilla make Firefox before I change my mind? If I wanted a bloated consumer product that’s engineered to put the interests of large companies above mine, I would run Windows. With the lack of fundamental options like JS and image loading toggles being in the browser, that’s what Mozilla has morphed Firefox into. Many sites use JS to implement annoyances and anti-features, and I shouldn’t need an extension to protect myself from that.

    And again, on the sound thing, there are hundreds of comments complaining about Mozilla’s actions which break sound on systems without Pulseaudio. They claim that PA is necessary to support sandboxing, but Chrome does it just fine without PA.

  18. Teiji said on June 5, 2018 at 5:45 pm

    I switched (back) from Chrome to Firefox when Quantum first released. Best decision ever. Love the speed and customization (through userChrome.css). As long as Firefox is still fast like the competition (or faster) and doesn’t freeze or BSOD my computer, I’ll continue using it.

  19. me said on June 5, 2018 at 4:38 pm

    vivaldi for me. almost everything else is dumbed down to the lowest common denominator which happens to be 99.999% of market.

    1. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 12:08 pm

      Vivaldi uses the Blink rendering engine and thereby helps Chrome’s market share. One really should care about the health of the world wide web and use something that isn’t Chrome.

  20. John said on June 5, 2018 at 4:16 pm

    Chrome is dominating not just a popular browser, it is at levels of market share similar to what Internet Explorer had back when. But what’s even more significant about Chrome’s success over IE is that it has plenty of competition that fails at winning Chrome users. IE had very little competition in its days of domination. Firefox was really the last browser that had any real hope of gaining market share from Chrome. All these users who think one day a Pale Moon or Opera, or some other Chrome knock off will be successful are fooling themselves. Firefox is quickly joining the bottom feeders of all the “other” browsers who fail completely at understanding users except for those odd ducks who go off the beaten path.

    1. Anonymous said on June 5, 2018 at 7:20 pm

      I think the only browser that has chance now is Edge. It’s much faster and lightweight than Chrome nowadays. Firefox is even using more resources than Chrome after the Quantum update.

  21. STech said on June 5, 2018 at 2:05 pm

    … sorry, don’t bother, I didn’t get it that the values are averages for the last 12 months….

  22. STech said on June 5, 2018 at 1:58 pm

    I went on and for May, in Desktop/Laptop category, Firefox is credited with 11.47%. Then I followed your link from the article and the result was the same… Is the percentage so volatile or there was an error on their site?

    1. Martin Brinkmann said on June 5, 2018 at 2:03 pm

      The value is not the value for May 2018. If you hover the mouse over the May part of the graph, you get the May numbers. I think it is the average for the selected time period but don’t quote me on that.

      1. CB said on June 10, 2018 at 3:37 am

        Just a note that Firefox and clones are one of the few privacy browsers that have addons that allow you to randomly change the User-Agent so no site has the ability to know which browser you are using to thwart their tracking. This is a primary reason to use them and thus directly distorts these stats. As a result, you should note this in the article as it may have a minor or major impact on the veracity of this article.

  23. Tom Hawack said on June 5, 2018 at 11:06 am

    Popularity has never been relevant of quality but popularity may bring quality to its knees when smart enough to be elected. People have elected Google, obviously.

    “The truth does not wait for the number of votes” would say Mahatma Gandhi, approximately translated from my French memory. truth as well as quality.

    That’s all I’ll say.

    1. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 6:56 am

      Popularity can be an indication for quality. Chrome was objectively speedier and pretty easy to use when it first came out. Some would argue that this is still true. And people obviously don’t mind Big Brother, so there is that.

      1. John Fenderson said on June 6, 2018 at 6:50 pm

        @Iron Heart: “Popularity can be an indication for quality.”

        It can be, but you can’t assume that it is. More often than not, how popular something is is not well correlated with quality. It does provide some indication that it meets minimum quality standards, but nothing more — and even that’s not guaranteed.

      2. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 8:25 pm

        @John Fenderson

        When people leave a product rapidly and in great numbers for another product, it can be said that the other product is of far superior quality, especially when both products are in the same price range. DVD overtook VHS, because the quality (of life) improvements were obvious. Firefox and then Chrome grew rapidly because the Internet Explorer was garbage. People didn’t use IE in spite of it coming with any and all Windows PCs preinstalled, mind you! The iPhone and later Android phones bested Nokia and Blackberry quickly because the offerings of the latter two were harder to use in comparison. The iPhone was even priced higher than Nokia/BB phones at the time(!), so people were willing to pay a premium to get away from Nokia and BB.

        I think you need to look at the circumstances when one product overtakes another, but I think it is fair to say that Chrome was
        – faster
        – easier to use
        – more stable
        than other offerings at the time, so a great many people made the switch. It was the superior offering. And marketing helped it, no doubt – but this can’t explain away everything, since people would have ditched Chrome quickly if it had not met their requirements in any way, no matter how well-made the marketing was.

      3. John Fenderson said on June 7, 2018 at 12:37 am

        @Iron Heart: “When people leave a product rapidly and in great numbers for another product, it can be said that the other product is of far superior quality”

        Sometimes. Certainly not always. I’ve seen people bail on higher quality products many times because of things that were very important, but not related to product quality.

        ” I think it is fair to say that Chrome was
        – faster
        – easier to use
        – more stable”

        I don’t think that’s obvious at all. It was faster and more stable on certain platforms than Firefox, but there have long been other browsers that matched or exceeded Chrome, but don’t get much attention.

        But note — I’m not saying product quality isn’t important. It is. But it is just one factor in a whole host of factors that people take into account when they’re deciding what to buy or use.

        As an example, look at the time-honored marketing truth that if your product isn’t very good, an option is to market and sell it as a “premium” product at a significantly higher price. People tend to think that the price tag is an indicator of quality, and so will perceive a product as being higher quality than it is when it’s expensive.

        All I’m saying here is that you can’t equate popularity with quality. They are two different things with different characteristics.

  24. noe said on June 5, 2018 at 10:12 am

    it is only due to two factors: stupidity and bad taste

  25. XenoSilvano said on June 5, 2018 at 9:59 am

    this has to be a joke, right(?) users got butthurt because of the deprecation of the add-ons system

    I use Chrome to do one task that it currently does much better than Firefox, if it was not for that necessity, I would not be using Chrome at all, it is always lagging up, in my experience, I only have 40 tabs open in Chrome but yet it is laggy, I have more than a 100 tabs open in Firefox and yet most of the time it is always on point

    as long as Mozilla keeps developing Firefox, I will continue to stand by it, I have been using Firefox for more than a decade now

    1. Farid Le Fleur said on June 8, 2018 at 4:50 pm

      Users are complaining because Mozilla gave them a reason to complain. Not staying loyal to your own users is really disgusting.

      No serious developer would do that. But Mozilla did. They screwed up their own power users, they screwed up their add-on and theme developers. For what? To gain users who are only wanting one thing:

      “All bloat removed and speed only”

      So, that kind of users have a valid reason to be hurt, to be angry. You know, it is not a nice thing if the dev of your choice suddenly basically says:

      “Sorry, you are not good enough for me, you lose all you loved, please understand, but other users are more important than you and others”

      It would be understandable if Mozilla actually would GAIN users, but so far the very special users Mozilla wanted are ignoring them. And for this non-existing user switching, power users have lost almost all their fav toys.

      Yes sir, people have a reason to be pissed. And it is Mozilla’s fault alone that that happened actually.

      1. Richard Jameson said on July 4, 2018 at 2:41 pm

        @Farid Le Fleur

        “All bloat removed and speed only”

        That’s precisely what I wanted, and I got it.

    2. Krixus said on June 8, 2018 at 11:18 am

      @XenoSilvano perhaps you are not angry because of Mozillas betrayal. But tons of users are indeed.

      Because Mozilla has taken all the options away that category of users has been using – and why? Because being Firefox was not enough for Mozilla. They wanted instead being like the rest of the competition.

      And if a large percentage of your users are geeks or nerds.. What do you epxect… That they suddenly spread tears of pure joy?

      Please.. First thinking, then writing!

    3. Krixus said on June 8, 2018 at 11:14 am

      People are angry because Mozilla decides to support simple users instead of geeks – Firefox always had a status of a geek browser – and now Mozilla has abandoned all that users – for gaining simple ones.

      People are not butt-hurt, they are in a legitimate way angry because Mozilla has decided to give them the middle-finger.

      They are the same morality-less sell-out pranksters like the Opera guys.

    4. John Fenderson said on June 5, 2018 at 2:47 pm

      @XenoSilvano: “users got butthurt because of the deprecation of the add-ons system”

      If by “butthurt” you mean that the change resulted in a browser that doesn’t meet their needs nearly as well, then I agree. If by “butthurt” you mean an irrational emotional reaction, then I think that you’re mistaken.

  26. Nik said on June 5, 2018 at 8:02 am

    I am shocked. S H O C K E D ! ! !

  27. Dave said on June 5, 2018 at 6:48 am

    You can’t say “Fuck You” to all your users without repercussions.

    1. Mikhoul said on June 5, 2018 at 6:07 pm

      👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍 😀

  28. Curtis K said on June 5, 2018 at 6:23 am
  29. JaySee said on June 5, 2018 at 6:01 am

    Forced to use Chrome for Google Docs and Sheets, some YouTube features.

    Ditched Firefox Quantum for Waterfox. Still using Firefox on my mobile since Waterfox isn’t stable yet.

  30. edge user said on June 5, 2018 at 5:18 am

    mozilla should make hardware support for firefox better, when i use firefox in youtube, firefox use heavy resource than other browser. especially from edge

    1. Cigologic said on June 7, 2018 at 1:54 am

      @ edge user: “when i use firefox in youtube, firefox use heavy resource than other browser”

      If by “heavy resource”, you mean that Firefox uses lots of CPU to play Youtube videos, could it be that your GPU card or driver version is blocked by Firefox ? Or are you using a dual-GPU system ?

      If your GPU card/ driver version is blocked, or if you are using dual GPUs, Firefox will not use hardware acceleration (ie. GPU acceleration) even if this is enabled. In which case, Firefox will fail to off-load video rendering to the GPU, but instead use the CPU to do the heavy lifting.

  31. ULBoom said on June 5, 2018 at 5:13 am

    FF works fine for me, fast, renders everything correctly and is eminently customizable. The only chrome thing I’ll use or allow on any of our devices is woolsys chromium and even that’s too chrome like. Google called chrome a browser based ad server when talking up their successes in their latest financials. They don’t even try to hide what they’re doing but it’s easy to ignore how chrome apes your movements if you just don’t look closely.
    Claiming a browser doesn’t work well when using outdated (yeah 7 is still my favorite but 10 can be shut up. No, NT 3.51 was my best!) OS’s and machines with memory limitations is kind of disingenuous.
    Having to home brew software just to not have it shower you with garbage features or hide in your shorts is a real PIA but that’s how it it is for the most part. I’d pay for most free software I use if they would play nicely.
    Gotta wonder if people generally are so worn out by online phone BS that they don’t care what’s being done to them. Phone withdrawal clinics are becoming a big industry. Sad.

  32. nibbana said on June 5, 2018 at 4:15 am

    ——– schadenfreude.————————————————–

    – Memory leaks, autonomy stolen by mozilla, no control of background connections, doesn’t respect user choices, collects data, blocks options and forces stuff as if their users were their property, mozilla is a collectivistic communistic company(parasitism), staff is pro perverts and minorities who do not deserve to be there(equality) made deals with the devil(Google), obtained tons of money and still dares to ask for donations(thieves), etc.

  33. M B said on June 5, 2018 at 3:38 am

    Riddles to enjoy between Chrome crashes:

    What do you call a Google-themed flea market for malware and deprecated javascript?
    Chrome webstore

    What do you call a browser that can’t reliably play video?
    Chrome stable version

    How do you know when Chrome has been updated?
    When page load time slows to a crawl and the changelog says “fixed bug that slowed page load time to a crawl.”

  34. Anonymous said on June 5, 2018 at 3:08 am

    Snubbing their userbase by killing their powerful add-on repository, embedding Google Analytics tracking scripts (so much for privacy amirite) and trying to replicate what other browsers have been doing for a while led to this. Now there’s really nothing left to distinguish Firefox from competitors so there’s no point in using it.

  35. Shannana said on June 5, 2018 at 3:06 am

    Perhaps Firefox should offer their own email service? Yet without a commercial partner, I don’t see how they could financially support that. Regardless, if they had that, and Google/Chrome got hit with some very bad news, then perhaps many folks would go back to FF? I know I would. Beyond that, I have little idea in how FF could regain that lost market share.

  36. Anonymous said on June 5, 2018 at 2:52 am

    Mozilla did report on early returns for Firefox which looked promising:

  37. FERNANDO said on June 5, 2018 at 1:50 am

    fun story, every time someone try force another to comply they seek a alternative. I don’t know why people can’t accept being told what to do.
    I hate the lost of privacy on chrome but using a old 56 firefox ins’t working for me anymore

  38. Coriy said on June 5, 2018 at 1:42 am

    Reasons I don’t use Firefox…
    1) Intrusive telemetry (cuts out a lot of other browsers, too). I’d be okay with telemetry if it was a staggered opt-in.
    2) The customization options used to be much better.
    3) Bad plugin support. Yeah, I know that Flash and others are “going away” but crippling them doesn’t help me when I need to go to an older site that still uses flash
    4) Pocket and Sync integration plus the other “default” add-ons like Activity Stream; Aushelper; FollowOnSearch; On-Boarding; Screenshots; Shield-Recipe-Client.
    Yeah, I can remove ’em (and did) but still, I want a browser like it was in the Phoenix days. Just the browser with the ability to add what I want / need instead of some invisible corporate “big bro” telling me what I need..

    Well, those are the big ones.
    FYI I use Waterfox and have tried out Basilisk by the same folk. Decent, fast, and except for the baked-in sync, quite free of what I don’t want.

  39. Lugo said on June 5, 2018 at 12:21 am

    Even your screenshot in this article taken from Chrome :(
    We need alternatives to make the internet better. Google services are so common in thr world. They offer many things for FREE and they now started to make Chrome mandatory to use.
    For example, visit the new web Earth service, it forces you to use Chrome. Try with Firefox, you will see! Most of the website owner suggest Chrome to view their website without a problem.
    Chrome community is happy with their Chrome Sync feature, most of the people of this community use Android (so Chrome and other Google services)

    Why Firefox? I even see no point to use Firefox (as a loyal Firefox user)

    Firefox will die soon because Google will take over the internet. Gathering everything under the hands of a single company has very bad consequences, just my 2 cents.
    I will use Firefox as I continue to live.

    Long live Firefox, the old good friend!

    1. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 12:18 pm


      Indeed, very true. Google has taken over the browser market. Alternatives need to arise, I think we all agree on that. However, recognizing the necessity of alternatives and believing that Mozilla can pull it off are two totally different things. Mozilla is just not competent enough to do it, if the past few years are any indication. Plus developing an engine these days is ultra-expensive. A start-up can’t do that. In fact, the minor browser are all using someone else’s engine.

      Use Firefox as long as you can, and let’s hope that someone ambitious who happens to have the monetary means changes this sad story for the better.

  40. George said on June 5, 2018 at 12:20 am

    This was perfectly predictable, Mozilla is getting closer to shutting Firefox down. Well done, I guess and congratulations for not listening to your (ex) users.

  41. Andrew Deal said on June 5, 2018 at 12:19 am

    Agreed. Most people never read the EULA before installing Chrome. Many companies (including mine) block Chrome because Google can lay claim to any IP transmitted through it. What’s astounding though is how Firefox has survived and improved its product despite Google’s onslaught.

  42. Gribert said on June 5, 2018 at 12:10 am

    I don’t understand how you can even think about using Chrome.
    Are people that stupid? Do they even understand what it means to use Chrome?
    Yeah screw my privacy and all my data. Just give it to the biggest player out there for free.

    Firefox is a good browser and even if you don’t think so, there is no alternative to it if you care about your privacy the slightest.

    1. Mikhoul said on June 5, 2018 at 6:04 pm

      Have you ever looked at what Chromium send with a TCP/IP sniffer before saying such thing ?

      Basically Chromium send less information to home than Firefox back to home, look for yourself with UrlSnooper ( instead or parroting non-sense. ✌️

      1. John Fenderson said on June 6, 2018 at 5:35 pm


        Yes, I’ve looked. Firefox sends nothing home once you turn off the telemetry. Can you say the same for Chrome?

      2. Mikhoul said on June 7, 2018 at 4:10 am

        “once you turn off the telemetry. ”

        Chromium is the same “”once you turn off the telemetry” it don’t send anything obviously.

        Moreover with Chromium I don’t have to each month to look in my setting to see if Mozilla opted me silently in one of their shady program like Mr Robot to sell my date under the guise of telemetry like it have done numerous times.

        Also I don’t have to check each month if new shady addons have been pushed in my browser to bloat the whole thing and collect my data.

        Mozilla it’s so shaddy that it hide deep in about:config all the privacy settings which most users don’t know how to disable it:

        Do you really think a casual user will go through the about:config hell to disable all spywares:


      3. John Fenderson said on June 8, 2018 at 5:00 pm

        @Mikhoul: “Do you really think a casual user will go through the about:config hell to disable all spywares:”

        No, and I also don’t think that it’s necessary. You can turn off all the spying stuff in the main config options.

      4. lmao said on June 6, 2018 at 9:04 am

        @Mikhoul Less information? lol
        If that was the case, Ungoogled Chromium wouldn’t have to “replace many web domains in the source code with non-existent alternatives ending in qjz9zk (known as domain substitution)” and that’s not the only thing they need to do. With FF you at least have about:config to disable undesirable shit or even better just use one of the privacy focused FF forks like Waterfox. It’s more up to date than other Chromium forks.

  43. ddk said on June 4, 2018 at 11:55 pm

    There’s some websites that do not render in FF, specifically Venturesky; a neat animated weather site and Google Earth. Also Chrome is faster overall, FF tends to slow over time even with Quantum.

    OT. Was kind of surprised that Win 7 has a significant lead over 10, will MS ever get their billion installs of Win 10?, maybe after 7 is retired in 2020 although some are speculating MS might extend support for 7 based on its currently popularity.

    OSX stays consistent in 2nd place.

    Linux continues to flop around in the mud (quicksand) & I tried Mint 19 Cinnamon, while they did make some minor improvements, serious bugs remain. One is the package installer crashing, couldn’t install Chrome and Wine not working. I don’t understand how or why two very important programs having these kind of regressions could slip past QA/QC, even in a beta environment, this is inexcusable.

    I’ll stick with Win 7…still rocks.

    1. Mikhoul said on June 5, 2018 at 5:58 pm

      “, FF tends to slow over time even with Quantum.”


    2. Noir said on June 5, 2018 at 9:50 am

      I have no issue with either on 18.3

  44. Yuliya said on June 4, 2018 at 11:14 pm

    This is what happens when you claim to be a privacy advocate, to listen to your users, but all you manage to achieve in two years is a couple of deals with some data gathering/processing and analytics companies, snuck in some unwanted extensions, provide a modified version of Firefox to a fraction of your userbase as an “experiment” and get rid of features of which 90% of your users opposed of being removed. Exteremely hostile behaviour.

    To top it all, you don’t have capabilities of providing a properly working piece of software. This “quantum” junk is broken, since the initial v57 release up to the current Nightly: memory leaks, crashes, high CPU usage, it performs very poorly. It’s unbelievable how badly things went after v52. I have never seen any other software becoming so bad after an update. Not even Microsoft managed to pull such a thing, and you’d expect them to do it, it’s almost as if that’s how they operate. But Mozilla did.

    And this is what happens when you do all the above but lack the budget, and the means to aggressively push your software down user’s throats (see Google’s Chrome, which is also rubbish, but they hand it over like free candy to children).

    It’s sad, really. Right now there is not one decent browser left in the market with ESR52 being on its last legs.

  45. Spihcnurc said on June 4, 2018 at 11:02 pm

    I switched from FF to Chromium and never looked back

  46. Ben said on June 4, 2018 at 10:50 pm

    Quantum is crap, lots of addons I need no longer work.
    That shitty browser neither has proper mouse-gesture support nor a proper session management.
    Well maybe in some years it will be somewhat viable again. Until then, Waterfox it is.

  47. Gon said on June 4, 2018 at 10:45 pm

    The only reason I still used Firefox 52 is because of classic extensions. I’ll still on be it until next month when it’s axed. Will probably switch to Basilisk or Waterfox to keep my extensions. The problem with new Firefox is that even with its new improvements, it doesn’t add anything over Chrome that would make regular users want to use it. Beside the privacy conscious crowd (even that is a joke in itself as Firefox comes with ads on the newtab, telemetry by default, and Google search keystroke spying) no one else see the need for it. The web as of now is ok with V8 and webkit/blink. Until some paradigm shift like builtin IPFS, I just don’t see the market is changing anytime soon.

  48. Kendon Murphy said on June 4, 2018 at 10:27 pm

    Switched from Firefox to Chrome at FF58. Won’t go back.

  49. Riley said on June 4, 2018 at 10:25 pm

    Central question is whether Mozilla’s evisceration of Firefox in an attempt to create a clone of Google Chrome will attract new users to the browser.

    First problem is that no one wants to use a clone of Chrome when they can just use Chrome itself.

    Second problem is that in its pursuit of a me-too variant of Chrome, Mozilla destroyed everything that made Firefox interesting and unique. That being Firefox’s support of XUL addons that enabled extensive customization.

    Bottom line is that new users aren’t attracted to a me-too variant of Chrome. Old users are finding there way past or around that same me-too variant…

  50. toni said on June 4, 2018 at 10:25 pm

    happy user with firefox for years. chrome…oh, personal information sucking software…no, thank you. once it was fast and not bloated with everything. now…meh.
    if you can push chrome installation with “every” software and after that make chrome default browser, i believe it has 60+ percent share…

  51. Tony "The Shovel" Brizzi said on June 4, 2018 at 10:17 pm

    I’m currently using Waterfox 56.2.0.

    I’ve tried several times to move on to new versions of Firefox but every time i went back to pre-quantum version of Firefox. Customizing new versions to my liking have become too much time consuming (via CustomCSSforFx) and i could never fully customize it the way i wanted. On top of that, most of my addons stopped working.

    I hope that Waterfox will be actively developed in the future. I’m also looking at Basilisk browser to see what’s gonna happen to it.

  52. zilla said on June 4, 2018 at 10:04 pm

    Does the statistics include those who use 3’rd party build such as waterfox or only the original firefox from mozilla?

  53. Anonymous said on June 4, 2018 at 9:44 pm

    Mozilla need to implement much more telemetry to know better what the users need..

    1. John Fenderson said on June 5, 2018 at 2:36 pm

      Telemetry doesn’t really tell you what users need.

    2. Anonymous said on June 5, 2018 at 1:59 am

      That’s sarcasm right?

    3. Andrew Deal said on June 5, 2018 at 12:23 am

      You sound like you’re from Microsoft. “Telemetry” serves them well when it comes to slowing down systems and and applications to push their upgrades. Our I.T. staff have had this discussion ad nauseum.

    4. Bobby Phoenix said on June 4, 2018 at 11:50 pm

      They probably have enough now, but the real issue is listening to what the users want, and don’t change things to change things. Sure you can replace the extension style for security, but changing the look, feel, and places things are stored, is just wrong. It’s like every release the settings page changes around to something you have to go searching for.

    5. F. Kesan said on June 4, 2018 at 11:31 pm

      Telemetry is exactly what got them where they are now. They need to listen to what their users want, instead.

    6. ShintoPlasm said on June 4, 2018 at 11:14 pm

      Hell yes!

  54. kstev99 said on June 4, 2018 at 9:41 pm

    It will be a sad day if I ever have to resort to using Google Spyware Browser. Even with the recent changes, Firefox remains the most customizable browser available.

    1. FR said on June 5, 2018 at 4:49 pm

      Out of the box there’s just no way to completely turn off Chrome/Chromium’s Google telemetry and that’s the major reason I never feel comfortable with it. It is quite odd when someone complains about FF telemetry but then switch to using Chrome when FF forks is clearly the better alternative.

      1. John Fenderson said on June 6, 2018 at 12:54 am

        @FR: “It is quite odd when someone complains about FF telemetry but then switch to using Chrome when FF forks is clearly the better alternative.”

        I suspect that this never happens (or happens so rarely that “never” is a reasonable approximation). If someone is concerned about privacy and are aware enough of the landscape to know that FF includes telemetry, they aren’t going to view Chrome as being acceptable regardless of their feelings about FF.

        What I’m constantly amazed at is that people think of browsers as if the only choices are FF or Chrome, when there’s a whole spectrum of other options.

      2. FR said on June 6, 2018 at 8:51 am

        @John: “I suspect that this never happens (or happens so rarely that “never” is a reasonable approximation).”

        It is more likely than you think.

    2. Anonymous said on June 5, 2018 at 2:00 am

      Maybe the EU will block Chrome for illegal data collection?

    3. Darren said on June 5, 2018 at 1:32 am

      Customization is the main reason I use Firefox still. Also, Google is enough of an influence over the internet and my life, I’d prefer to not also use their browser.

    4. James Deal said on June 5, 2018 at 12:15 am

      Agreed. Most people never read the EULA before installing it. Many companies (including mine) block Chrome because Google can lay claim to any IP transmitted through their browser. What’s more astounding is Firefox surviving and improving despite years of Google’s onslaught.

    5. John Fenderson said on June 4, 2018 at 9:43 pm


      Even if FF ceases to exist (which isn’t going to happen), there’s no need to use Chrome. There are lots of other browsers out there.

  55. AnorKnee Merce said on June 4, 2018 at 9:29 pm

    With FF 57 Quantum and webextensions, Mozilla wanted Firefox to become like Chrome and to be as popular as Chrome. Instead, FF is becoming like Opera and Vivaldi, ie a smallish world marketshare.

    Sometimes Open-source tech companies are “stupid is as stupid does”.

  56. Marcin said on June 4, 2018 at 9:06 pm

    Clearly, this is not very reassuring and can difficulty be perceived as a positive news.
    In the same time, Firefox is still alive.

    1. Sam said on June 5, 2018 at 4:15 pm

      Firefox recently started to block trackers by default in private browsing mode. A third of the population use private browsing mode anywhere from daily to at worst once a week.

      Market share measurement is done with trackers.

      There’s also the fact that worldwide market share hides way too many different situations to be relevant. For instance, Firefox doesn’t have much of a presence in China which represents an ever increasing part of the worldwide online population, weighting down artificially on Firefox.

      European numbers are more interesting to look at. IIRC, Firefox is at, ~30% in Germany, ~20% in France.

    2. Sam said on June 5, 2018 at 4:13 pm

      Firefox recently started to block trackers by default in private browsing mode. A third of the population use private browsing mode anywhere from daily to at worst once a week.

      Market share measurement is done with trackers.

      There’s also the fact that worldwide market share hides way too many different situations to be relevant. For instance, Firefox doesn’t have much of a presence in China which represents an ever increasing part of the worldwide online population, weighting down artificially on Firefox.

      European numbers are more interesting to look at. IIRC, Firefox is at, ~30% in Germany, ~20% in France.

      1. John Fenderson said on June 6, 2018 at 12:50 am

        @Sam: “Firefox doesn’t have much of a presence in China which represents an ever increasing part of the worldwide online population, weighting down artificially on Firefox.”

        Your point about trackers is well-taken, and is a big part of the reason why any of these “market share” numbers mean nothing at all except (maybe) as a trend indicator.

        However, your point that I quoted above is dubious, I think. The numbers are supposed to be worldwide numbers, so the Chinese population is not “artificially” bringing the percentage down. If you’re going to pick and choose the regions that “count”, then the analysis becomes meaningless as you can select specific regions to back up anything.

        Also, I doubt that Mozilla only counts Germany and France. I rather suspect they’re interested in the entire internet population.

    3. Sam said on June 5, 2018 at 4:12 pm

      Firefox recently started to block trackers by default in private browsing mode. A third of the population use private browsing mode anywhere from daily to at worst once a week.

      Market share measurement is done with trackers.

      There’s also the fact that worldwide market share hides way too many different situations to be relevant. For instance, Firefox doesn’t have much of a presence in China which represents an ever increasing part of the worldwide online population, weighting down artificially on Firefox.

      European numbers are more interesting to look at. IIRC, Firefox is at, ~30% in Germany, ~20% in France.

      1. ams said on June 5, 2018 at 11:21 pm

        “Market share measurement is done with trackers.”

        check your facts, Sam.

        websearch “browser market share”. Visit the wikipedia page linked in the search results. Read about the methodology employed by the various (netmarketshare, statcounter, w3counter, etc) entities. Takeaway: the stats consider the user-agent reported in the http header of requests as reported by th topXX heavily-trafficked websites.

  57. bloopercomics said on June 4, 2018 at 9:02 pm

    Firefox Who?

  58. Iron Heart said on June 4, 2018 at 9:01 pm

    “The end of Firefox?”

    No, just the end of Mozilla staff living like princes.

  59. John Fenderson said on June 4, 2018 at 8:47 pm

    “What’s your take on the situation?”

    Things like Netmarketshare are dubious under the best circumstances, so I wouldn’t draw any conclusions based on this.

    However, I do know this — among my friends and professional colleagues, there were basically two camps — people who left Firefox for Chrome years ago, and a much smaller group of those who stuck with Firefox.

    The people I know who left for Chrome aren’t switching back to FF — FF doesn’t offer a compelling reason for them to. They’re happy with Chrome, and a competing browser becoming more like Chrome isn’t a reason to switch to the competing browser. They’re already using the original, after all.

    The people I know who stuck with FF are leaving it (mostly to the pre-Quantum forks). If they wanted Chrome, they would have switch long ago — so making FF more like Chrome actively makes the browser less appealing to them.

    1. Anonymous said on June 5, 2018 at 10:10 am

      Bang on target, John. I’m one of those who, having persevered with Firefox after the change to “Australis”, finally ditched it in favor of Pale Moon when “Quantum” essentially replaced Firefox with yet another Chrome-clone. I have no illusions though that Mozilla are going to chance anything or about the long term prospects of Pale Moon, Waterfox, etc.

    2. Anonymous said on June 5, 2018 at 5:52 am

      Yup, let’s wait until the new ESR hit the market. People using ESR because of legacy addons will switch to Chrome eventually. Same thing with Waterfox which will use the new ESR as its base later.

      1. John Fenderson said on June 5, 2018 at 2:35 pm

        @Anonymous: “People using ESR because of legacy addons will switch to Chrome eventually.”

        That’s doubtful. Chrome isn’t the only alternative, and those people don’t want Chrome (if they did, they’d already be using it). I know that for my part, I honestly can’t imagine any reason why I’d start using it.

    3. Mikhoul said on June 4, 2018 at 10:33 pm

      I switched completely in May to Chromium and I don’t regret it at all, more snappy, use less ram, compatible with everything and moreover showing to Mozilla that I’m against their changes and madness.

      Also I brought with me more than 10 others customers I have and I will bring more customers to Chromium since when I repar a computer that’s the browser I install/suggest.

      The big big big error Mozilla have done is to piss power-users like me that define what others non-tech people will use everyday as browser.

      1. asok asus said on July 25, 2018 at 12:58 am

        “The big big big error Mozilla have done is to piss power-users like me that define what others non-tech people will use everyday as browser.”

        indeed. As a VAR, i’ve always installed FF. Now I have to install Chrome as well because almost none of my customers want to use FF. I still install FF, but that’s mostly for me to use as a support tool …

      2. Jody Thornton said on June 5, 2018 at 5:32 am


        But how does going to Chrome show Mozilla that you’re against their changes? Chrome is what they are trying to become more like, except Firefox is still more customizable.

        That I just don’t get.

      3. Mikhoul said on June 5, 2018 at 5:52 pm

        “But how does going to Chrome show Mozilla that you’re against their changes? ”

        Since Mozilla don’t listen to their users and particularly power users when I use Chromium I use “my voice” to let them know that I don’t agree with their crazy decisions. When the Firefox share will be under 4-5% maybe they will rethink their strategy to make a browser for the dumbs.

        Also losing me as user (power-user) have the effect that al computer I fix are also migrating to chromium, it’s not only me as a user that Mozilla lose but everybody around me that rely on my knowledge to fix their computers. 😉

        The only reason I was using Firefox was the Powerful XUL addons, I don’t have any reason now to stay with the slow ram-eater that Firefox is.

        Also Chromium is more snappy, use lot less ram, I don’t need to restart it every 2-3 days to recover my memory, I don’t have any of those problems that plague Firefox since many many months:

      4. Cigologic said on June 7, 2018 at 1:28 am

        @ Mikhoul: “Since Mozilla don’t listen to their users and particularly power users when I use Chromium I use “my voice” to let them know that I don’t agree with their crazy decisions. […] The only reason I was using Firefox was the Powerful XUL addons”

        Jody Thornton has a good point there. How does moving to Chromium/ Chrome signal to Mozilla that you don’t agree with Firefox’s current direction ?

        If you are trying to protest Mozilla’s decision to drop XUL support in Firefox, wouldn’t it make more political (& logical) sense to adopt a Firefox fork that pledges to continue supporting XUL addons ?

        In contrast, moving to Chromium (which doesn’t support XUL addons in the first place) is reminding Mozilla that it should try harder to make Firefox even more Chromium-like.

      5. Mikhoul said on June 7, 2018 at 5:23 pm

        Your logic is flawed here, what many devs and power-users like me reproach to Mozilla is not the technology used by Mozilla (webExt) but the fact that Mozilla did not listen them when everyone was telling them than before killing XUL Addon you must have the API ready to replace them.

        Moreover most of the API were not ready one year ago and Mozilla DON’T WANT to implement powerful API for power-users it’s simple like that, THEY DON’T CARE ABOUT POWER_USERS, Mozilla is now lead by conservative (not the political meaning) who are stubborn and don’t care about anything but themselves. They are pretentious too thinking they know better that their users what they need.

        Using a Firefox fork would not change anything and using old deprecated technology would not resolve anything. The problem here is not WebExt technology but the way Mozilla choose to implement it and there hate for power-users.

        Mozilla have the worst memory management right now from all browser, it don’t release all the memory after you close a tabs so after 2-3 days it become slow as molasses and it is not usable.

        With the powerful addons XUL addon I was willing to make the trade (using insane amount of memory and having to restart Firefox every day to keep it snappy) but now since XUL addon have been killed and Mozilla don’t intend to make the API needed for power-users and Dev there is NO REASON to use it anymore.

        Even if Firefox have few customs API that Chrome don’t have those API are just cosmetic so there is no reason to exchange some light cosmetic change to have a Ram Eater like Firefox as my browser.

        For me a browser is a tool and I need powerful/stable tools for my work and Firefox have no advantage on Chromium in those fields, moreover Mozilla lost my trust with all there shady trick like Mr Robot and using money to make addons like pocket which should be done by third party, Firefox is plagued by unanswered security bugs and bugs since many years and nobody fix them at Mozilla, they prefer to change UI colors shape, remove options and hide options than fixing real bugs.


  60. tru dat said on June 4, 2018 at 8:44 pm

    dead browser same as pale moon

    1. julia schieffelin said on August 27, 2018 at 10:25 am

      i like firefox because when i use chrome, and ie, i get alot of ssl erors where i dont under ff

    2. Weilan said on June 5, 2018 at 7:45 pm

      I know. xD It’s true. FireFox used to be the best, but they made a lot of stupid decisions – the browser got slow and bloated, with version 4 they destroyed the UI and the versioning numbers to copy Chrome, not because it affects development in any way, but because feeble-minded ones think that if a browser’s version is a bigger number, it’s obviously superior, simple consumer psychology. Now they proceed copying Chrome, stripping the browser of its identifying features so it can be more like Chrome, but this was the last straw when they alienated even their core users and supporters which are now using alternatives like WaterFox, Pale Moon, Basilisk and the rest of the forks.

      FireFox will always be the underdog since Chrome took the lead and will compete with Opera and Vivaldi in the coming months. xD

      It used to be good, the 2.x and 3.x UI was amazing and I don’t like the fact that they removed it from the browser for the sake of copying Chrome. I might have still used FireFox if the old school UI was still there:

      1. Anonymous said on June 6, 2018 at 5:35 am

        I disagree. Die hard Firefox fans will still use Firefox. I’m wondering what they see in Firefox now that it’s a Chrome clone

      2. John Fenderson said on June 6, 2018 at 6:44 pm

        @Anonymous: “Die hard Firefox fans will still use Firefox.”

        In a way, perhaps. I’m a diehard Firefox fan, but aside from regularly testing out each post-Quantum release, I’m not using Quantum and it looks like the day when it will be acceptable is a very long way off, at best.

        However, I’m still using Firefox — I’m just using it in the form of Waterfox. And once Waterfox hops on the Quantum train, I’ll just stick with the older version until/unless I find a browser that works better for me.

      3. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 12:21 pm


        Firefox still plays a role in preventing the Blink rendering engine (which Chrome uses) from taking over the market. Firefox uses Gecko, a fact that forces website owners to not optimize their sites for Blink only. That’s why it is a bit unfair to call Firefox a Chrome clone. Once it adopts Blink I’ll join the crowd which claims as much.

      4. John Fenderson said on June 6, 2018 at 5:30 pm

        @Iron Heart: “a fact that forces website owners to not optimize their sites for Blink only”

        Tell that to all the websites that optimize for Blink only. Firefox doesn’t have enough market share to have this pull anymore — I think that’s what they’re trying to fix.

        Personally, though, which rendering engine a browser uses doesn’t mean much to me. What is meaningful to me is how well the browser meets my needs. Chrome isn’t even in the running for that.

      5. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 8:09 pm

        @John Fenderson

        “Tell that to all the websites that optimize for Blink only.”

        Well, yeah. At this point in time Chrome may have reached a market share at which website owners don’t care about other browsers anymore.

        “Firefox doesn’t have enough market share to have this pull anymore — I think that’s what they’re trying to fix.”

        Mozilla won’t fix it. Even if they were very competent, the fact remains that most people seem content with Chrome. So, unless Firefox offers something revolutionary or far superior, people have no incentive to switch. I expect Firefox’s market share to further drop or at best to stagnate.

        “What is meaningful to me is how well the browser meets my needs.”

        OK, yet competition still dies out and Google rules the web. We all contribute our little share to that, sometimes for understandable reasons (when a browser meets our needs, or not), this doesn’t improve the situation though. There used to be competition on the browser market.

    3. dark said on June 5, 2018 at 3:40 pm

      Doesn’t Google owns Mozilla? Its no wonder Firefox is dying then.

      PS i prefer Firefox base so am using Waterfox.

      1. Frank said on June 6, 2018 at 1:44 am

        No. Mozilla is an independent non-profit organization. It is the only one of the major browsers that is not own by a major corporate business. A large percentage of their funding does come from Google mostly in form of payments for being the default search engine and for searches done on Google through the Firefox search bar.

      2. Richard Jameson said on July 4, 2018 at 2:24 pm

        You’re correct on at least one account, and allow an old man one last small pleasure — a chance to to explain why by way of an unapologetic, self-indulgent soliloquy to Mozilla and the open Web.

        You’re correct in that because while it’s certainly true that Mozilla is a not-for-profit foundation, it nonetheless has under its purview a profit-making arm, the Mozilla Corporation, whose raison d’être is to funnel much-needed funds back into the foundation for Firefox and other related development. Developing browsers for the World Wide Web circa 2018 is not for small fry, and one needs significant investment in both infrastructure and mind-share to so much as hope to succeed at it.

        And just as well, for we probably owe Mozilla’s continued existence to the benevolent welfare of the bitterly resented Google, a prolific data mining corporation. You see, I doubt that Mozilla could do it (produce a non-rubbish, competitive and independent browser) completely on its own and not sink into oblivion or not completely abandon their own technology for that of the competitor (cf. Opera). Apart from these two, the only other games in town (Chrome, Internet Explorer, Edge, Safari — in that order) are also backed by some of the most valuable technology firms this side of Sol.

        And this is why Mozilla seems, for all appearances, to be a Google welfare recipient. Astoundingly, Mozilla receives annual monetary aid from Google to ultimately assist in the decrease of Firefox’s own market share (by aggressive advertisement on the Google search page for Chrome itself) in the Web browser space and, sadly, further erode what scant little is left of user privacy and security on the Web (and ultimately the Internet).

        But I suspect that Mozilla has no choice. It knows that by working against its own actually-stated interests (an open, privacy-respecting Web free of unscrupulous data miners (Google, Microsoft) and similar profiteering dreck) it is ultimately tying the noose that will sooner or later hang it by the neck. Mozilla is like the archetypal Shakespearean tragic character with whom we all are wont to empathize, in that though it senses somehow the futility of its fight against an enemy too strong and a host too mighty, it nonetheless picks up its sword and shield and goes to make war with the enemy anyway, because there is something worthy in the fight far beyond its immediate confines; and there is something worthy, something at greater than us at stake, and something of whose destruction we ought to be incensed. I’m talking about a free and open Web.

        Mozilla’s war is Sisyphean, and it will probably perish in the end, but like Mozilla’s rise from the ashes of Netscape two decades ago, another a phoenix will take its place, to prolong the fight yet another day. We all owe Mozilla a lot more than we may realise. We have tasted of the goodness of life and have joyed in it: for us there is no going back.

        And so in 2018 we come full circle when even Internet Explorer (which after all these long years must be hanging on out of sheer spite for Mozilla alone), an inexplicably dogged foe, it seems for the moment at least, will have the last laugh after all. Let us hope not.

        In closing, it pays to remember that Firefox has never ruled the roost in numbers alone. Chrome, like Internet Explorer before it, will have its time in the sun now, but not forever. Think of this not as a loss, but as a reminder of the consequences of complacency for one, once established, cannot then hope to subsist on reputation alone, and neither can one hope to solely subsist on technical merit either. The middle is best, and something beyond.

        As for my dog in this fight: I have used Mozilla’s products since its Netscape days, and have been equal amounts frustrated and jubilant, and hopeful and weary; but the direction of the current for me has always been towards Mozilla rather than away from. I doubt that will change for me moving forward: an dog and new tricks and all that. Quantum is fast in a way no Firefox before it was. That is ultimately what matters to me. Extensions were once a stronger pull for me than now, but I’ve come to realise over time that more extensions are more security holes to plug. I understand that it isn’t the same for everyone. We are a diverse assemblage, and all the better for it.

        But don’t worry, for it is much easier to stay in the leader’s slipstream than to keep abreast of him, for much of the headwind is dissipated across him before it ever hits you. All the best to Mozilla, to Firefox, and to the community of talented developers and devoted users the world over.

      3. Iron Heart said on June 6, 2018 at 6:53 am


        Wrong. Mozilla is fully dependent on Google financially, and he who pays the money calls the shots. Also, only part of Mozilla is non-profit. There is also Mozilla Corporation, which is its business unit. People should really stop mindlessly spreading this “Mozilla is non-profit” sentiment at this point.

    4. Jody Thornton said on June 5, 2018 at 5:29 am

      Well actually, most of the times when I look at most people’s desktops, they have Google Chrome as their primary browser. The other one they have is Firefox. In corporate environments, I still see either Internet Explorer 11 or Firefox being used.

      And by the way, most users don’t care if Firefox has made all of the Photon/Stylo/Quantum changes. It’s just life as usual.

      So no, Firefox is far from dead. Now as for @George coming back with Pale Moon going from “Strength to strength” ….. er, OK you believe that. Come on George, even IE is more relevant to people than Pale Moon is. And I say that while typing on the New Moon variant that Roytam1 on MSFN has been making.

      Pale Moon is fine, but I also live in reality.

      1. Cigologic said on June 7, 2018 at 1:09 am

        @ Jody Thornton: “Come on George, even IE is more relevant to people than Pale Moon is.”

        It appears that many devoted Pale Moon stayers were former users of IE on their personal PCs. Or at least, this is what I observed about frequent commentators at AskWoody. And some of these Pale Moon users are far from being PC noobs.

        Also, interestingly, quite a number of AskWoody users who were previously on Google Chrome (including Woody himself) actually like Firefox Quantum — & might even have switched to FF Quantum as their main browser.

        So perhaps that is what George meant by “going from strength to strength”. In other words: “to each his/her own”. Reality is complex — different browsers have more relevance to different groups of people. And surely the world is wide enough to include browsers of various kinds, including minority ones.

        PS: I’m speaking as someone who has never used Pale Moon; who has no idea how to like Google Chrome (or any Chromium variant); & who has avoided Firefox Quantum to to its disappointing direction.

      2. Rainer Müller said on July 25, 2018 at 10:14 pm

        because most people on the internet are stupid AF!

      3. George said on June 5, 2018 at 11:03 am

        @Jody Thornton Pale Moon’s goal isn’t to dominate the browser market – Mozilla’s was. So keep comparing apples to oranges if you wish – you obviously haven’t learned a single thing after all this time.

      4. Jody Thornton said on June 5, 2018 at 8:21 pm

        Then @George, what on earth did you mean by “strength to strength”? Maybe since you decided to do the apples to oranges comparison by bringing up Pale Moon, why don’t you educate me on what I obviously haven’t learned by now? I guess SMH doesn’t know either.

        Don’t start a conversation and not expect me to chime in if I don’t agree. you compared the two products – not me.

    5. George said on June 5, 2018 at 12:24 am

      Funny little post, but unfortunately -for you- Pale Moon is going from strength to strength.

      1. SMH said on June 5, 2018 at 4:14 pm

        >Pale Moon is going from strength to strength.

        Pale Moon debuted in StatCounter statistics at 0.03% in 2012-06. Its market share since then has kept fluctuating between 0.02% and 0.05%. For 2018-06, it is at 0.04%. For 2018-03, it was 0.02%. For 2018-01, it was again 0.04%. This is likely all within the margin of error.

        Source: Click ‘Download Data (.csv)’
        Netmarketshare doesn’t even measure Pale Moon.

      2. Rainer Müller said on July 25, 2018 at 10:13 pm

        only stupid folks care about market share, wen it comes to security/save browsers.

      3. George said on June 5, 2018 at 9:08 pm

        @SMH Like I mentioned elsewhere, I wasn’t talking about numbers so no point in continuing this.

Leave a Reply

Check the box to consent to your data being stored in line with the guidelines set out in our privacy policy

We love comments and welcome thoughtful and civilized discussion. Rudeness and personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please stay on-topic.
Please note that your comment may not appear immediately after you post it.