I have no sense of what they stand for
That plus seeming to chase every hype wave (Crypto, now AI) I just don’t get why I should care about them.
There a nice Mozilla Manifesto explaining the Mozilla mission and their values [1].
Apparently, it's difficult to find a stable, independent, and effective revenue model for an open-source browser that is completely free as a product, should not contain shady ads or product promotions, does not sell user data, and always puts the user first.
This is especially difficult because there are other free browsers with a similar mission that don't need to incur the cost of developing their own web engine.
Mozilla is a strawman for google that they can claim there exists another browser that is not chrome because of antitrust laws. And now that Microsoft forcefeeds win11 user with Edge it will not take long and google doesnt need firefox anymore.
For sure I would give a donation to firefox if they would build a decent browser which listens to the user but not as they do now.
just my 2 ct
Maybe that's why they're complaining. Maybe they don't want Firefox spending it's time working itself into oblivion.
Of course the Mozilla Foundation isn't bound in any way to listen to them so it's going to happen anyway, but Firefox's users are upset for good reasons.
(Guiltily raises hand. Although lately I've noticed a ping option, so I left that enabled.)
To be frank, I find that use of analytics as the primary determiner to be incredibly intellectually lazy. They’re being used as a stand-in for deep, holistic thought in product design, user research, 1:1 interviews with users, etc when they shouldn’t be, and it’s making software as a whole much crappier than it needs to be.
I declined, but later they reintegrated their request with a servey, which I did accept.
These requests were presented through a dialog box attached to an extension (which many Firefox features are, internally, built-in extensions.)
I really want Firefox to succeed. Please enhance our security, privacy, ensure a performant browser AND I also like the project that Mozilla undertakes (rip send) hope to see more in the future.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/12/mozilla_doj_google_se...
Were this 10 years ago, I'd say nothing. Today, google is turning into one of the worst at using user data against the users. From pushing ads disguised as search results to mining user data for adverts across platforms.
Making google the default search engine opts non-savvy users into using a bad actor for their searches.
No, I'm just stating why using google as the default engine is user hostile.
> What's your complaint?
Mostly that it's a user hostile move. Is it bad enough to make me personally switch? No. Part of why I use firefox is because I don't like the idea of consolidation for browsers into one renderer.
Organizations can make decisions I don't like and I'll still use their products. I'm allowed to identify those as issues. Mozilla hasn't done something that'd make me boycott their products.
> Do you pay for Firefox?
Yes, I donate to the Mozilla foundation.
Users tend to talk about mozilla like it's holding firefox hostage or something, but really the main gripe they have is building and maintaining browsers is beyond the scope of an individual. THEY couldn't fork firefox, but it's not impossible for someone with resources and connections to MAKE an entity that does. It just... hasn't happened again. Mozilla is a pretty insane freak-of-nature in the business world, and there's honest frustration about that which grows into "Firefox is doomed".
These things are far too complex and expensive to be produced as they should and as most FOSS is: for free, by a group of individuals who could fit around a breakfast table and don't answer to anyone but each other.
If people saying what's wrong plainly and clearly is "vitriol" to you, then you have a problem with criticism.
I think some feel they are being held to extremely high standards.
As someone who's avoided the drama, and is a power user, Firefox has been great to me, and continues to be so.
Of course; Mozilla proudly proclaims that they live by higher standards, so their users hold them to higher standards.
The speed comparisons make no sense either. Chrome is slightly faster so you should give up your ability to block all ads and let Google abuse you in myriad ways while supporting a virtual monopoly? FFS.
Firefox is simply a better browser, hands down. It's a better design and more user friendly than Chrome. I only regret being on Chrome for so long.
Am I the one who is crazy and nitpicking here?
- when the browser is not in the visible workspace, chromium's cpu usage actually goes to 0 whilst firefox's usually oscilates around 5%
- every new window costs 30mb of ram for chromium and 100mb for firefox
- this one is weird, but when lightly using firefox while overall ram usage spilled well into swap, often after some time terminal emulator process will get swapped-out as if firefox eventually touched memory used by every tab sitting in the background
I don't care about the Ai stuff as long is mostly opt-in or easily disabled at least.
Having said that I've been looking forward the Ladybug project as a another browser not part of the chromium swarm. I'm sure I'll give it a try when it's more mature.
If you think the product is good keep using it - why on earth would you give up one of your most important pieces of software on your machine because you don't like the company that runs the main repo?
Because the nature of the dislike is that they keep making their software do things against my desires/interests.
And yesterday, same with a local club's website. Didn't even work in Firefox for Android, but worked in Vanadium. I got the website's custom loading sprinner, so that loaded and worked, but whatever was supposed to change the screen when everything else loaded, did not work.
Discussions:
Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46288491
Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46299934
No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46295268
Make Me CEO of Mozilla
I personally agree with these complaints. I think most people who intentionaly install Firefox agree with them. Despite all it's attempts otherwise, Firefox was and still is mostly used by "power users" and we're pretty much the only ones left that intentionally install the browser. Mozilla being the only working alternative to Alphabet domainance over the web doesn't change the validity of these issues. The real issue here is that Mozilla wants to be HUGE instead of just being a browser for humans.
I'd been a Firefox user since K-meleon (with a gap decade when Opera was actually a real browser and innovating). But for me the breaking point wasn't all this ad-tech stuff or the signalling of AI. It was when Mozilla showed they no longer cared about their core userbase and wanted to chase after demographics that didn't care about browsers at all; when they made the security theater Add-ons signing portal in version 37 and made it so one could not edit or install such things without Mozilla's central and continued approval (also, baking in 3 year expiring add-on certs making FF trial-ware). These days, for me, it's just a fallback for my bank. I use a Firefox fork for my main browsers which is much more Firefox than Firefox.
This really isn't the case. Firefox has almost 200 million users, yet sub 10% of them have uBlock Origin installed:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/ublock-origin...
Less than half have any extensions installed (with extensions include language packs):
https://data.firefox.com/dashboard/usage-behavior
The users who talk about Firefox online are not the average user.
But the final bit in this post is really where I'm at: I have no idea where to go from here.
Currently on mobile I use Orion--it's the only mobile browser I've found where setting up AdBlocking is reasonably easy. Maybe I'll try it on Desktop.
But this doesn't really address the issue of there being only one rendering engine out there because it uses WebKit.
That's a good question. Mozilla has something like a half-billion dollars of assets, which is more than twice what the Linux Foundation reports. Does maintaining a web browser cost more than twice as much as maintaining an operating system? Hopefully not, but maybe it's time we find out.
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ublock-origin-lite/id674534269...
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/wipr-2/id1662217862
on android I use firefox with the regular ublock origin extension
full disclosure: one of the devs is a friend of mine
if for some reason you want to use webkit on desktop (linux), there's always gnome web, but in my experience it can't handle anything beyond very basic browsing (for example, a youtube video will cause it to crash)
Nobody stood up for Brendan. Nobody is going to stand up for you.
More specifically in the case of software, egos kill projects, and expanding the scope of your project to include broader economic or social causes usually does the same.
This is correlated to a huge change in nerd culture - pseudonymity was much more common and encouraged, with people's real-life identities or views not really taken into account. ("on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog")
Social media happened, and now most people use their real-world identities and carry their real-life worldview into the internet.
This had a huge negative effect on internet toxicity and interpersonal trust, and Eich is a good example of that - auxiliary things being dredged up about someone, used as a cudgel against them for their real or perceived transgressions.
The end result is that effective project management has become a rare breed and we see all these colossal failures like Firefox...
First they're a cypto/addtech company, which is a type of company I wouldn't trust to run my browser. And this has resulted in them doing things in the past like:
Blocking ads and replacing them with their own ad networks ads: https://archive.is/W0k4j
Their rewards crypto was opt-in for creators. Making it look like creators were openly asking for donations in Braves crypto currency without their consent. They had to change this due to complaints: https://brave.com/blog/rewards-update/
Inserting their own affiliate links: https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/8/21283769/brave-browser-aff...
Installing a non-free VPN without user consent: https://www.xda-developers.com/brave-browser-installs-vpn-wi...
They criticise the effectiveness of ad block testing websites, and urge people to use and trust privacytests.org instead. They fail to mention the conflict of interest in that privacytests is run by a Brave employee. https://brave.com/blog/adblocker-testing-websites-harm-users...
Firefox gets 90% of its funding from Google, putting Google effectively in control of Mozilla.
Ideally, Firefox would be financially supported by its users, like Wikipedia. But that requires ads nagging users to donate, preferably on a subscription plan.
Most of Firefox's users block ads, and they refuse to pay Mozilla a dime under any circumstances. Their users are freeloaders, providing no value to Firefox's other users or to Mozilla.
It would be nice if Mozilla could ignore the freeloaders and simply nag for donations anyway, but if the freeloaders leave and Mozilla tries to serve its donor users, they'll lose all of their Google funding and die.
I don't know if its possible because its not been tried, but it doesn't work from a low trust position and Mozilla is very much not trusted.