7 ms·

The actual report is at: https://metrics.mozilla.com/firefox-hardware-report/ https://metrics.mozilla.com/firefox-hardware-report/ It's interesting that we are

The actual report is at: https://metrics.mozilla.com/firefox-hardware-report/ https://metrics.mozilla.com/firefox-hardware-report/ It's interesting that we are entering 2017 and the most popular configuration for users are Windows 7 (45%), 1366x768 as resolution (33%), CPUs with 2 cores (70%) and a majority have 4 GB of RAM or less. I have a ThinkPad Edge (the cheap version) from ~2012 with Core i5, 8 GB of RAM and SSD. It's incredible that it's still top of the line in these stats. PCs aren't dead, the problem for the PC industry is that old PCs are good enough, hence people don't feel the need to upgrade. Of course mobiles are now more attractive for the industry, because most of them have a 2 years of life expectancy. And it's funny that Windows 7 is still the most popular OS, even with Microsoft's aggressive upgrade tactics.

odabaxok 10y ago
...people don't feel the need to upgrade. Exactly! I have similar specs on my Asus from the beginning of 2012, Core i5, 8 GB of RAM (originally 4), an SSD (I replaced the dvd-drive), and a nvidia GT540M (2GB) graphics. I bought it for ~500 EUR. If I browse laptops within the same price range, what do I get? Core i5, 8 GB RAM, nvidia 920MX (2GB), HDD, I don't even get a HD screen (or a touch screen - I would like to try those). I would buy a new laptop, but I would have to pay double the price to get something that it is much better than my current one. Until this does not changes, I will stay with the old one.
- Jarwain 10y ago
  If you're comfortable with messing with the hardware, you can purchase a higher resolution screen and swap it out depending on your laptop's model
  - odabaxok 10y ago
    Nice tip, thanks! I have not thought about this, but it seems it is possible to buy one for my model for 50$. I will consider the replacement.
- leoedin 10y ago
  The difference in performance between a recent laptop and a 2012 era one is marginal, but the difference in power consumption is considerable. My 2012 Asus has a i5-2410M, which has a passmark score of 3154 and a TDP of 35W. My recently purchased Dell XPS13 has a i5-6200U, which has a passmark score of 3926 and a TDP 15W. A 25% improvement in raw power, but a 190% improvement (almost a factor of 3!) in performance per watt. The reality is both are fine for day to day browsing. The real difference is that the power difference means the Dell has a smaller battery, so can be thinner and lighter. Given that I use my laptop plugged in and with a monitor 99% of the time, there's no real reason to upgrade.
swiley 10y ago
Most people don't need to run VMs probably. Of the people that do most probably run GNU/linux which is usally fairly lightweight. So the only memory heavy app is their web browser.
ChoGGi 10y ago
I do find it entertaining that as soon as Microsoft stopped pushing the free update the numbers levelled off.
- rebelwebmaster 10y ago
  I never understood the logic behind trying to charge for the upgrade after giving it away for a year. Who was seriously going to pay for it after clearly going out of their way to avoid updating prior to that?
  - T-hawk 10y ago
    The logic was to impose a deadline on the free upgrade as an impetus for users to take it now rather than procrastinating on it forever.
yoodenvranx 10y ago
> the problem for the PC industry is that old PCs are good enough Yes. I use a T61 with a Core2Duo 2.5 Ghz, 3 gb of ram , and a SSD for browsing, Python and some image editing. Yes, it could be a bit faster but overall it's fine and I don't see any reason to upgrade. Actually I don't want to upgrade because I love the 14" screen with 1400*1050 resolution. It's perfect for reading and programming.
pmontra 10y ago
That was my laptop from 2006. Core Duo 2, dual core and RAM limited to 4GB, but with a 1680x1050 screen, or something like that.
jccalhoun 10y ago
I wonder what the breakdown is between homes and offices? My office computer (I'm an adjunct instructor) is slightly below those specs and slow as crap.
my_ghola 10y ago
That's just stats for people who use Firefox, right? I'm sure there isn't a large amount of Firefox users among people who browse the web in tablets, phones or chromebooks.
- yoasif_ 10y ago
  Just people who use Firefox on "desktops" -- so tablets and phones are excluded. Pretty sure you can't run alternate browsers on a Chromebook.
  - dylanh 10y ago
    Firefox for android runs nicely using the new android layer on chromebooks.
mbesto 10y ago
> 2017 and the most popular configuration for users are Windows 7 (45%), 1366x768 as resolution (33%), CPUs with 2 cores (70%) and a majority have 4 GB of RAM or less. Not a knock on you but...surprise surprise Silicon Valley, the world isn't full of MacBook Pros.
- JTenerife 10y ago
  I think he thought about upgrading to Windows 10, not to a Mac.
sdeziel 10y ago
> the problem for the PC industry is that old PCs are good enough, hence people don't feel the need to upgrade. Throwing away a working electronic device to replace it with a new one is really bad when you think of the ecological impact. I'm glad that some resist to the urge of buying shiny new stuff.
- at-fates-hands 10y ago
  This. I've had my HP Workstation for 5 years now. I found an xw8400 workstation off of EBAY for around $400. Oh sure the specs are a little lower than what you'd find on the newer PC's: - Dual intel Xeon x5355 processors at 2.67GHz - 16GB of DDR2 RAM - Two 500GB hard drives in RAID config - nVidia Quadro FX 4600 768mb video card But I can expand the RAM out to 32GB and I've already upgraded the RAID drives to an SSD. I can also upgrade the video to 1.5gb or 2gb video card. I'm still impressed how stable its been and how even the 768mb card handles Adobe resources without any lags - I constantly have two or three Adobe programs running at a time which is normally a huge resource hog. I just fell in love with the performance and the stability of the HP workstations. For a fraction of the cost, and its easily upgradeable so I don't feel like I need to go drop 1K on a new laptop or PC. Also, with such an abundance of these on the market, you can always find a really good deal on them.
  - VodkaHaze 10y ago
    That sounds like a lovely workstation. I had a dream machine of overclocking a dual x5670 xeon machine, but motherboards that let you do that now are too rare and expensive.
  - seanp2k2 10y ago
    Yep, and ECC RAM starts getting pretty important >8GB if you value stability. Workstations depreciate like bricks typically, so a last-gen system can be had for a song if many cores if what you're after. A short while back, some Xeon engineering samples were flooding eBay and were a better deal per-core than whatever the latest i7s were at the time. I forget the model number.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
digi_owl 10y ago
> because most of them have a 2 years of life expectancy. Mostly from OEM "neglect" than customer wishes. I used a Android 4.0 tablet until recently. And only had to give it up because the USB port gave out so i can no longer charge it. The whole 2 year replacement cadence reeks of planned obsolescence.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
JTenerife 10y ago
Even I'm no longer fond of upgrading my OS. Still refusing macOS Sierra. My PC is on Windows 10, but honestly, Windows 7 did the job pretty well. My parents hate every change on their devices. So does almost everyone I know who's not an enthusiast. So yeah, I agree. 95 % of the people need very basic hardware and a small, simple OS.
warp 10y ago
Those specs are not just found in old PCs, that's exactly what you find on brand new $200 to $300 laptops (HP Stream, etc..). I expect those are popular devices for people buying a first laptop for their kids or folks who just need to occasionally use Microsoft Office.
wvenable 10y ago
> old PCs are good enough I disagree. Old PC's are awful. The problem is that a good chunk of new PC's are just as awful. The sub-$400 laptop space is filled with low spec machines that still have 1366x768 resolution screens, low RAM, and slow processors. There has been very little spec change in that space for a long time. Windows 7 is still popular because most companies have not upgraded to Windows 10 yet. But it is starting to happen. I expect an explosion of Win10 users in the next year.
Lagged2Death 10y ago
It's interesting that we are entering 2017 and the most popular configuration for users are... But the stats cover Firefox users, not average PC users. I'd guess there's a lot of overlap between (people savvy enough to keep old PCs in service) and (people savvy enough to download a browser that didn't come built-in to the system). In particular, if you're using an older PC to browse the web, you're pretty likely to want to do some selective content blocking. I believe Firefox has more plugin options for that than the other big contenders. Similarly, Firefox may be the best choice on Windows 7. But on a brand-new Windows 10 PC, many people may be satisfied with built-in Edge.
kasabali 10y ago
> 4 GB of RAM or less With 70% having 4GB or less RAM, I hope this makes it clear to Mozilla people that the 20% memory tax of Electrolysis is simply not acceptable. I'll take less memory usage over benefits of multi processes browser any day.
milankragujevic 10y ago
To be honest, it's not as unusual to see the OS still being used because with the bunch of things Windows 10 runs in the background that can't be turned off it can get rather slow. Plus it hates 2 GB of RAM or less.

odabaxok 10y ago

...people don't feel the need to upgrade. Exactly! I have similar specs on my Asus from the beginning of 2012, Core i5, 8 GB of RAM (originally 4), an SSD (I replaced the dvd-drive), and a nvidia GT540M (2GB) graphics. I bought it for ~500 EUR. If I browse laptops within the same price range, what do I get? Core i5, 8 GB RAM, nvidia 920MX (2GB), HDD, I don't even get a HD screen (or a touch screen - I would like to try those). I would buy a new laptop, but I would have to pay double the price to get something that it is much better than my current one. Until this does not changes, I will stay with the old one.

Jarwain 10y ago
If you're comfortable with messing with the hardware, you can purchase a higher resolution screen and swap it out depending on your laptop's model
- odabaxok 10y ago
  Nice tip, thanks! I have not thought about this, but it seems it is possible to buy one for my model for 50$. I will consider the replacement.
leoedin 10y ago
The difference in performance between a recent laptop and a 2012 era one is marginal, but the difference in power consumption is considerable. My 2012 Asus has a i5-2410M, which has a passmark score of 3154 and a TDP of 35W. My recently purchased Dell XPS13 has a i5-6200U, which has a passmark score of 3926 and a TDP 15W. A 25% improvement in raw power, but a 190% improvement (almost a factor of 3!) in performance per watt. The reality is both are fine for day to day browsing. The real difference is that the power difference means the Dell has a smaller battery, so can be thinner and lighter. Given that I use my laptop plugged in and with a monitor 99% of the time, there's no real reason to upgrade.

swiley 10y ago

Most people don't need to run VMs probably. Of the people that do most probably run GNU/linux which is usally fairly lightweight. So the only memory heavy app is their web browser.

ChoGGi 10y ago

I do find it entertaining that as soon as Microsoft stopped pushing the free update the numbers levelled off.

rebelwebmaster 10y ago
I never understood the logic behind trying to charge for the upgrade after giving it away for a year. Who was seriously going to pay for it after clearly going out of their way to avoid updating prior to that?
- T-hawk 10y ago
  The logic was to impose a deadline on the free upgrade as an impetus for users to take it now rather than procrastinating on it forever.

yoodenvranx 10y ago

> the problem for the PC industry is that old PCs are good enough Yes. I use a T61 with a Core2Duo 2.5 Ghz, 3 gb of ram , and a SSD for browsing, Python and some image editing. Yes, it could be a bit faster but overall it's fine and I don't see any reason to upgrade. Actually I don't want to upgrade because I love the 14" screen with 1400*1050 resolution. It's perfect for reading and programming.

pmontra 10y ago

That was my laptop from 2006. Core Duo 2, dual core and RAM limited to 4GB, but with a 1680x1050 screen, or something like that.

jccalhoun 10y ago

I wonder what the breakdown is between homes and offices? My office computer (I'm an adjunct instructor) is slightly below those specs and slow as crap.

my_ghola 10y ago

That's just stats for people who use Firefox, right? I'm sure there isn't a large amount of Firefox users among people who browse the web in tablets, phones or chromebooks.

yoasif_ 10y ago
Just people who use Firefox on "desktops" -- so tablets and phones are excluded. Pretty sure you can't run alternate browsers on a Chromebook.
- dylanh 10y ago
  Firefox for android runs nicely using the new android layer on chromebooks.

mbesto 10y ago

> 2017 and the most popular configuration for users are Windows 7 (45%), 1366x768 as resolution (33%), CPUs with 2 cores (70%) and a majority have 4 GB of RAM or less. Not a knock on you but...surprise surprise Silicon Valley, the world isn't full of MacBook Pros.

JTenerife 10y ago
I think he thought about upgrading to Windows 10, not to a Mac.

sdeziel 10y ago

> the problem for the PC industry is that old PCs are good enough, hence people don't feel the need to upgrade. Throwing away a working electronic device to replace it with a new one is really bad when you think of the ecological impact. I'm glad that some resist to the urge of buying shiny new stuff.

at-fates-hands 10y ago
This. I've had my HP Workstation for 5 years now. I found an xw8400 workstation off of EBAY for around $400. Oh sure the specs are a little lower than what you'd find on the newer PC's: - Dual intel Xeon x5355 processors at 2.67GHz - 16GB of DDR2 RAM - Two 500GB hard drives in RAID config - nVidia Quadro FX 4600 768mb video card But I can expand the RAM out to 32GB and I've already upgraded the RAID drives to an SSD. I can also upgrade the video to 1.5gb or 2gb video card. I'm still impressed how stable its been and how even the 768mb card handles Adobe resources without any lags - I constantly have two or three Adobe programs running at a time which is normally a huge resource hog. I just fell in love with the performance and the stability of the HP workstations. For a fraction of the cost, and its easily upgradeable so I don't feel like I need to go drop 1K on a new laptop or PC. Also, with such an abundance of these on the market, you can always find a really good deal on them.
- VodkaHaze 10y ago
  That sounds like a lovely workstation. I had a dream machine of overclocking a dual x5670 xeon machine, but motherboards that let you do that now are too rare and expensive.
- seanp2k2 10y ago
  Yep, and ECC RAM starts getting pretty important >8GB if you value stability. Workstations depreciate like bricks typically, so a last-gen system can be had for a song if many cores if what you're after. A short while back, some Xeon engineering samples were flooding eBay and were a better deal per-core than whatever the latest i7s were at the time. I forget the model number.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

digi_owl 10y ago

> because most of them have a 2 years of life expectancy. Mostly from OEM "neglect" than customer wishes. I used a Android 4.0 tablet until recently. And only had to give it up because the USB port gave out so i can no longer charge it. The whole 2 year replacement cadence reeks of planned obsolescence.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

JTenerife 10y ago

Even I'm no longer fond of upgrading my OS. Still refusing macOS Sierra. My PC is on Windows 10, but honestly, Windows 7 did the job pretty well. My parents hate every change on their devices. So does almost everyone I know who's not an enthusiast. So yeah, I agree. 95 % of the people need very basic hardware and a small, simple OS.

warp 10y ago

Those specs are not just found in old PCs, that's exactly what you find on brand new $200 to $300 laptops (HP Stream, etc..). I expect those are popular devices for people buying a first laptop for their kids or folks who just need to occasionally use Microsoft Office.

wvenable 10y ago

> old PCs are good enough I disagree. Old PC's are awful. The problem is that a good chunk of new PC's are just as awful. The sub-$400 laptop space is filled with low spec machines that still have 1366x768 resolution screens, low RAM, and slow processors. There has been very little spec change in that space for a long time. Windows 7 is still popular because most companies have not upgraded to Windows 10 yet. But it is starting to happen. I expect an explosion of Win10 users in the next year.

Lagged2Death 10y ago

It's interesting that we are entering 2017 and the most popular configuration for users are... But the stats cover Firefox users, not average PC users. I'd guess there's a lot of overlap between (people savvy enough to keep old PCs in service) and (people savvy enough to download a browser that didn't come built-in to the system). In particular, if you're using an older PC to browse the web, you're pretty likely to want to do some selective content blocking. I believe Firefox has more plugin options for that than the other big contenders. Similarly, Firefox may be the best choice on Windows 7. But on a brand-new Windows 10 PC, many people may be satisfied with built-in Edge.

kasabali 10y ago

> 4 GB of RAM or less With 70% having 4GB or less RAM, I hope this makes it clear to Mozilla people that the 20% memory tax of Electrolysis is simply not acceptable. I'll take less memory usage over benefits of multi processes browser any day.

milankragujevic 10y ago

To be honest, it's not as unusual to see the OS still being used because with the bunch of things Windows 10 runs in the background that can't be turned off it can get rather slow. Plus it hates 2 GB of RAM or less.