8 ms·
Firefox Public Data Report
- ece 5y ago~20% of users are still on 32-bit, how?
- picklebutter 5y agoMost likely ignorance, but also maybe: can't afford or don't want to spend money on new hardware when the old one still works (this is a stretch but possible still), don't see the need for 64-bit, and I'm sure a few other reasons that elude me.
- agurk 5y agoThe company I'm currently doing some work for has all the main applications as 32-bit running on 64-bit Windows. I have no idea why, but thankfully Firefox is part of the standard build so at least some of the people here will be showing up on this list involuntarily.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y agoYeah, I've certainly known people who just kept using the computer until it broke. We're talking 7 year old machines with the last major change being when Windows force updated itself to 10.
- magicalhippo 5y agoActually just yesterday I was thinking maybe I could get 32bit Firefox to run on Linux instead of 64bit, so that there's a hard-cap to how much memory it uses (per process)... would be a less invasive option than disabling swapping like I'm currently doing.
- coldpie 5y agoCheck out cgroups(7).
- Narishma 5y agoI still use a 32-bit Atom netbook from a decade ago daily.
- cptskippy 5y agoMicrosoft offered a 32 bit version of Windows 10 up until May of last year. 20% of users will still on Windows 7. I'm surprised the number is as low as it is.
- ciberado 5y agoTwo hundred million computers actively using Firefox each month. How is it possible we cannot make it sustainable without the money from Google?
- ape4 5y agoBut how to monetize? Place ads somewhere in the application?
- lucideer 5y agoAny option whatsoever to donate to Firefox (specifically as a project, not to Mozilla) would at least be a start. I'd happily sign up to a monthly subscription. Would it bring in equivalent sums to search deals: of course not. But I think it would be at least a not-insignificant addition.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mtmail 5y agoThere is a monthly donation option for Mozilla https://donate.mozilla.org/en-US/ https://donate.mozilla.org/en-US/ I don't understand why "any option whatoever to donate" must exclude non-Firefox projects. In my opinion that is the start, available right now.
- lucideer 5y agoMozilla Foundation donations do not go toward Firefox development.
- coldpie 5y agoSuppose at some point hypothetically, Moz Foundation donations exceeded Google's payments. Presumably they would reshuffle things in order to fund Firefox's development, too. While Firefox is the most important thing Mozilla does in my eyes, I also like their non-Firefox work, so I'm happy to fund them. If at some point those donations outpaced Google, or the stability of Google's funding comes into question for some reason, then I'd like to show there are other funding models available. So I donate. How they spend the money in the meantime is up to them.
- mrpotato 5y agoI would have thought the share of ad block users would be higher. That being said, it is pretty telling that 6 of the top 10 add-ons are ad blockers.
- picklebutter 5y agoThe number of people I see without adblockers in the wild is really high. When I ask, most people don't know what I'm talking about or they don't care... that is until I show them if they allow me to. Most people just want to browse Facebook or their bank and don't have a clue about adblockers, add-ons, etc.
- twobitshifter 5y agoIt’s possible that people with Adblock are also often disabling telemetry.
- M2Ys4U 5y agoI'm guessing, but I would expect that there's a fair few people using ad blockers that have turned off telemetry, and thus aren't included in the report.
- WorldMaker 5y agoFirefox's Enhanced Tracking Protection seems to serve my needs out of the box enough that I see a ton of nags to "disable ad tracking" on various websites. Why install a third party add-on when the in box tools are sufficient?
- jimmyed 5y agoHeh, why do Indians use the browser only for ~3.5h? A typical work day would be longer I presume.
- input_sh 5y agoYou're severely overestimating the amount of people that interact with a computer during workdays.
- jimmyed 5y agoYawn. If I had a dollar for when someone goes out with the racist trope that Indians don't use computers but perform physical labour as part of their day jobs...
- shakow 5y agoIt's not a question of Indians vs. not Indians, it's a question a people working with a computer daily vs. people who don't. The latter are present in massive numbers in all countries.
- pornel 5y agoIt's quite eye-opening how much lower-end hardware is out there. Too many users to ignore have either 2 cores, or 4GB RAM, or 768px resolution, 32-bit OS, and hardly anyone has a discrete GPU.
- apocalyptic0n3 5y agoRandom anecdote: we recently had to launch a fairly large site that targeted 800x600 because that was the resolution of the monitor the old guy who owned the company used and he refused to believe anyone was using anything different. It was really frustrating to work with them, to say the least.
- hulitu 5y agoI wish it would be more of this "old guy". A lot of developers have the latest and the greatest machine. That's why the programs are slow for us, mere mortals. It is a pity that x86_64 allows more than 4 GB of RAM. We could have had much better SW.
- Tajnymag 5y agoAt least part of those machines could be VMs running in CI/CD. However, you are right that we shouldn't overestimate the client capabilities in the global scale. There's a huge market in developing countries, where every working computer is taken as a blessing.
- martini333 5y agoNot fair to compare Windows to MacOS, when Windows 10 has way more incremental updates. It would like be grouping MacOS 10.x
- ephaeton 5y agoI hate the fact that they collect so much data. It's just the next company saying "nah, we're not evil! Don't worry that the browser we make sends home five hundred columns of data about your box and your usage patterns! We really really do promise not to peel out your identity from the data mud and monetize it! pinky promise! Just like google, we're not evil!!" To those who claim you can opt-out of the "experience": You can spend quite some time configuring firefox not to check for updates, get rid of all mentions of mozilla's servers in the config, try to have it not phone home, opt-out of any data sharing .. then you start it, and it does nonetheless: "Hey, update me please!" And what data do they share when checking for updates? Too much - I instructed the software to shut the fuck up and not ask for a fresh version, and surely don't communicate that I'm just using version X on my OS under my IP for fuck's sake! And that's just the obvious part of data that'll have to be transmitted in order for an update check to work! See pinky promise, above. And then, after an update, if you don't start it with -ProfileManager to force your old profile (under linux), it will start with a fresh profile and ... phone home. With fresh settings. Which, by default, share your data. Oh and you can't control what it does while it sits there in the profile manager window. I presume it phones home. How can we be so blind and think this is a good alternative? I know for me, it's exhaustion, and the inability to quickly scan the obfuscation mess that mozilla calls firefox's source code. What is it for you?
- ______- 5y ago> You can spend quite some time configuring firefox not to check for update Yeah I tried doing this once. I searched about:config for any mention of `mozilla.org` and deleted it. It still pinged Mozilla looking for an update. You're probably wondering why I wanted to disable updates, well I have a few toy browsers I don't want updated because I like the specific version and some addons I have are not compatible with newer Firefox (due to the webextensions overhaul). My solution was to use an older version of Waterfox (Waterfox Classic) which still supports older addons. I also use Palemoon for oldskool extension support, but don't use it as my main browser for obvious reasons.
- circularfoyers 5y agoSetting "app.update.auto" to false in about:config would have prevented Firefox from updating to the new release.
- ______- 5y agoWow great to see uBlock Origin as the top addon installed: 1 uBlock Origin 4.189% 2 Adblock Plus - free ad blocker 2.462% 3 Video DownloadHelper 2.397% 4 Cisco Webex Extension 2.375% 5 Facebook Container 1.735% 6 DuckDuckGo Privacy Essentials 1.434% 7 AdBlocker Ultimate 1.415% 8 Adblock Plus - kostenloser Adblocker 1.230% 9 Grammarly for Firefox 1.160% 10 Adblock Plus - bloqueur de publicités gratuit Video Download Helper looks good, but I prefer `youtube-dl`[0] as there's more control. [0] https://www.youtube-dl.org/ https://www.youtube-dl.org/
- nerbert 5y agoOnly 4.189%?! I find that amazing. I would have imagined a MUCH bigger number.
- mateo1 5y agoHow much do you trust add-on developers? For the past 5 years I'm only using add-ons during recreational browsing. The market for personal information is just too aggressive to assume you're safe. I imagine this is part of the reason. Another reason could be that "power users" opt out of analytics right away, leading not only to skewed statistics but also awful UI decisions by Firefox, as they have to make their decisions based on the data they collect.
- ______- 5y ago> Another reason could be that "power users" opt out of analytics right away, Yeah I imagine a good chunk turn off Mozilla telemetry and data collection 'features', meaning the percentage of users using uBlock Origin is likely much higher.
- slightwinder 5y agoWould that also remove server-side logging?
- WorldMaker 5y ago
- PrivacyDingus 5y agoA list absolutely dominated by anti-tracking extensions, you love to see it.