4 ms·

Dumb question: who’s Firefox target user? Chrome is able to capture the mass consumer market, due to Google’s dark pattern to nag you to install Chrome anytime

Dumb question: who’s Firefox target user? Chrome is able to capture the mass consumer market, due to Google’s dark pattern to nag you to install Chrome anytime you’re on a Google property. Edge target enterprise Fortune 500 user, who is required to use Microsoft/Office 365 at work (and its deep security permission ties to SharePoint). Safari has Mac/iOS audience via being the default on those platform. Brave (based on Chromium), and LibreWolf (based on Firefox) has even carved out those user who value privacy. What’s Firefox target user? Long ago, Firefox was the better IE, and it had great plugins for web developers. But that was before Chrome existed and Google capturing the mass market. And the developers needed to follow its users. So what target user is left for a Firefox? Note: not trolling. I loved Firefox. I just don’t genuine understand who it’s for anymore.

sdf4j 2y ago
I value my privacy and use Firefox. Honestly, I have trust issues with volatile “security focused” forks. I feel the risk of them been tampered are greater than the marginal gains.
- threeseed 2y ago
  Firefox like Chrome still allows long-lived i.e. 400 days first party cookies. This is being abused by advertisers to track you across the web. If they do care about privacy it would be good for them to copy Safari and make this 7 days.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
    > If they do care about privacy it would be good for them to copy Safari and make this 7 days. If I get logged out of every website on a weekly basis I'm going to be annoyed. > This is being abused by advertisers to track you across the web. How do they use first party cookies to track you?
    - davidfischer 2y ago
      There's a few ways first party cookies can track you. Probably the biggest single way is Google Analytics which by default uses only first party cookies. Even without cookies at all, GA could track you across the web although first party cookies do make this a little easier and "better". However, first party cookies can help trackers in other ways like for CNAME cloaking[1] which basically makes a first-party cookie function similarly to a third-party one. Disclosure: I work for a small privacy focused ad company. [1] https://webkit.org/blog/11338/cname-cloaking-and-bounce-tracking-defense/ https://webkit.org/blog/11338/cname-cloaking-and-bounce-trac...
    - threeseed 2y ago
      > If I get logged out of every website on a weekly basis I'm going to be annoyed. Then those websites should move to Passkeys. > How do they use first party cookies to track you? Because Meta and Google allows websites to submit advertising data to them server side using a self-hosted JS file which sets the first party cookies on your behalf.
      - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
        > Because Meta and Google allows websites to submit advertising data to them server side using a self-hosted JS How does ex. 7d expiration help with that?
    - majorchord 2y ago
      > How do they use first party cookies to track you? domain fronting
  - cpeterso 2y ago
    Does a 7 day expiration matter if the tracker can just set new cookies with new 7 day expiration dates as it tracks you? Also, Firefox partitions cookies by site (aka Total Cookie Protection), so first-party facebook.com cookies, cross-site facebook.com cookies on example.com, and cross-site facebook.com cookies on example.net all get separate cookie jars. https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/02/23/total-cookie-protection/ https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/02/23/total-cookie-pr...
    - threeseed 2y ago
      Total Cookie Protection is a completely useless feature. Advertising industry has been moving to first party cookies ever since Apple implemented ITP.
dtx1 2y ago
> So what target user is left for a Firefox? Google, so they can pretend they don't have a monopoly so the antitrust lawsuits are kept at bay. And Mozillas CEO[0] so they can extract millions while fucking us all. [0] https://itdm.com/wp-content/uploads/Mozilla.png https://itdm.com/wp-content/uploads/Mozilla.png
- alberth 2y ago
  That is such a weird graph, because it doesn’t show Mozilla revenue. On that same timescale, Mozilla revenue went from: 2009: ~80M 2019: ~$800M That’s a 10x increase in revenue, for an organization already at scale. It’s totally expected that a CEO of a company generating ~$1B revenue, would be making $2.5M. Heck, there’s FANNG individual contributors who earn that much. I’ve clearly never understood the gripe in Mozilla CEO pay. Because how are you going to attract top talent to run an organization that big if you paid any less? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
  - dtx1 2y ago
    That would almost be a good argument but the reality is that they cannibalized their core product to increase their revenue but have done so to the point where it no longer remains viable in the market. Alas, the locusts have had their feast and we are all worse of for it.
    - alberth 2y ago
      So in hindsight, if you were CEO of Mozilla - what would you have done differently that you believe would have maintained Firefox market share? —— I think diehard Firefox fans don’t understand that, no matter how great you make Firefox - it will always lose share to better distribution. Google had the best distribution because it was the vast majority of consumers homepage. And on the homepage, it was nagging users to install chrome. Distribution > Better Product
      - sltkr 2y ago
ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago
All devs should be using Firefox. If not, you are failing in your moral duty.
- hulitu 2y ago
  [flagged]
SXX 2y ago
Firefox target users are whoever need Manifest v2 extensions to work on Chrome after Google will completely remove it. So basically everyone who want working ad-blocker.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
hintymad 2y ago
> due to Google’s dark pattern to nag you to install Chrome anytime you’re on a Google property I'm not sure if that's true. I switched to Chrome because Chrome felt snappier than its competitors. Its multi-process model made Chrome more robust. It's developer tool had better usability than Firefox's. And Chrome's extensions, at least initially, offered better experience and wider selections. Oh, Google's integration of Chrome with Google's identity system was a nicer experience too.
- nolist_policy 2y ago
  It was a conscious choice for me as well. After the Bundeswehr Taurus leak[1] there was a lot of speculation of how the meeting was tapped. One possibility is that they mitm't the guy joining from Singapore with a Certificate from a Chinese CA. Now Google saw auch a possibility and introduced Certificate Transparenty a few years ago which burns the whole CA if it signs sich a mitm Certificate. However, Firefox does not check for CT timestamps to this date. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Taurus_leak https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Taurus_leak
attendant3446 2y ago
I still think that desktop Firefox is better than any other browser. Their mobile browser is just average though.

sdf4j 2y ago

I value my privacy and use Firefox. Honestly, I have trust issues with volatile “security focused” forks. I feel the risk of them been tampered are greater than the marginal gains.

threeseed 2y ago
Firefox like Chrome still allows long-lived i.e. 400 days first party cookies. This is being abused by advertisers to track you across the web. If they do care about privacy it would be good for them to copy Safari and make this 7 days.
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
  > If they do care about privacy it would be good for them to copy Safari and make this 7 days. If I get logged out of every website on a weekly basis I'm going to be annoyed. > This is being abused by advertisers to track you across the web. How do they use first party cookies to track you?
  - davidfischer 2y ago
    There's a few ways first party cookies can track you. Probably the biggest single way is Google Analytics which by default uses only first party cookies. Even without cookies at all, GA could track you across the web although first party cookies do make this a little easier and "better". However, first party cookies can help trackers in other ways like for CNAME cloaking[1] which basically makes a first-party cookie function similarly to a third-party one. Disclosure: I work for a small privacy focused ad company. [1] https://webkit.org/blog/11338/cname-cloaking-and-bounce-tracking-defense/ https://webkit.org/blog/11338/cname-cloaking-and-bounce-trac...
  - threeseed 2y ago
    > If I get logged out of every website on a weekly basis I'm going to be annoyed. Then those websites should move to Passkeys. > How do they use first party cookies to track you? Because Meta and Google allows websites to submit advertising data to them server side using a self-hosted JS file which sets the first party cookies on your behalf.
    - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
      > Because Meta and Google allows websites to submit advertising data to them server side using a self-hosted JS How does ex. 7d expiration help with that?
  - majorchord 2y ago
    > How do they use first party cookies to track you? domain fronting
- cpeterso 2y ago
  Does a 7 day expiration matter if the tracker can just set new cookies with new 7 day expiration dates as it tracks you? Also, Firefox partitions cookies by site (aka Total Cookie Protection), so first-party facebook.com cookies, cross-site facebook.com cookies on example.com, and cross-site facebook.com cookies on example.net all get separate cookie jars. https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/02/23/total-cookie-protection/ https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/02/23/total-cookie-pr...
  - threeseed 2y ago
    Total Cookie Protection is a completely useless feature. Advertising industry has been moving to first party cookies ever since Apple implemented ITP.

dtx1 2y ago

> So what target user is left for a Firefox? Google, so they can pretend they don't have a monopoly so the antitrust lawsuits are kept at bay. And Mozillas CEO[0] so they can extract millions while fucking us all. [0] https://itdm.com/wp-content/uploads/Mozilla.png https://itdm.com/wp-content/uploads/Mozilla.png

alberth 2y ago
That is such a weird graph, because it doesn’t show Mozilla revenue. On that same timescale, Mozilla revenue went from: 2009: ~80M 2019: ~$800M That’s a 10x increase in revenue, for an organization already at scale. It’s totally expected that a CEO of a company generating ~$1B revenue, would be making $2.5M. Heck, there’s FANNG individual contributors who earn that much. I’ve clearly never understood the gripe in Mozilla CEO pay. Because how are you going to attract top talent to run an organization that big if you paid any less? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
- dtx1 2y ago
  That would almost be a good argument but the reality is that they cannibalized their core product to increase their revenue but have done so to the point where it no longer remains viable in the market. Alas, the locusts have had their feast and we are all worse of for it.
  - alberth 2y ago
    So in hindsight, if you were CEO of Mozilla - what would you have done differently that you believe would have maintained Firefox market share? —— I think diehard Firefox fans don’t understand that, no matter how great you make Firefox - it will always lose share to better distribution. Google had the best distribution because it was the vast majority of consumers homepage. And on the homepage, it was nagging users to install chrome. Distribution > Better Product
    - sltkr 2y ago

ilrwbwrkhv 2y ago

All devs should be using Firefox. If not, you are failing in your moral duty.

hulitu 2y ago
[flagged]

SXX 2y ago

Firefox target users are whoever need Manifest v2 extensions to work on Chrome after Google will completely remove it. So basically everyone who want working ad-blocker.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

hintymad 2y ago

> due to Google’s dark pattern to nag you to install Chrome anytime you’re on a Google property I'm not sure if that's true. I switched to Chrome because Chrome felt snappier than its competitors. Its multi-process model made Chrome more robust. It's developer tool had better usability than Firefox's. And Chrome's extensions, at least initially, offered better experience and wider selections. Oh, Google's integration of Chrome with Google's identity system was a nicer experience too.

nolist_policy 2y ago
It was a conscious choice for me as well. After the Bundeswehr Taurus leak[1] there was a lot of speculation of how the meeting was tapped. One possibility is that they mitm't the guy joining from Singapore with a Certificate from a Chinese CA. Now Google saw auch a possibility and introduced Certificate Transparenty a few years ago which burns the whole CA if it signs sich a mitm Certificate. However, Firefox does not check for CT timestamps to this date. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Taurus_leak https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Taurus_leak

attendant3446 2y ago

I still think that desktop Firefox is better than any other browser. Their mobile browser is just average though.