After the discussion yesterday I was thinking, and the passion that went into this full two page marketing campaign in the NY Times is what is needed to save Firefox.
They need to get themselves back to this place mentally, get the community rooting for them again. And spend some money on a passion based marketing campaign.
Edit:
Just to add, back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers, basically making them use it. Google co-opted the same army just four years later with similar marketing to get everyone installing Chrome on their family’s and friends computers.
They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take.
I suspect the thing holding them back is the danger that attacking Google on privacy grounds in order to push themselves as better could damage the lucrative revenue that they receive from Google.
> Just to add, back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers, basically making them use it. Google co-opted the same arm just four years later with similar marketing to get everyone installing Chrome on their family’s and friends computers.
> They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take.
This worked because, at the time, Firefox was genuinely, and more importantly, visibly better. You can't honestly say that about Firefox nowadays, and after Mozilla's management laid off tons of their engineering talent, there's been no plausible path for them to get there.
> back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers.....
Yeah. I did that. Probably closing to a thousand, from pushing inside Enterprise to libraries and Uni Campus. And I watched first hand how they all slowly migrate themselves to Chrome. Because it was faster. I still have vivid memory of it happening.
>I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take.
I did that too. Against Google. Heck That was before anyone on the internet even suspect Google was a privacy nightmare. Every single one believed their Do No Evil BS. ( Even Mozilla ). I was the contrarian then. And that didn't work either.
I was there in 2004 NY Times Ad. Or even pre Firefox era. Firefox was a better browser than IE6. And even then fighting against IE6 was hard. Very hard. The lesson I learned was that most people dont care much about ideology. ( As long as it doesn't hurt their interest ) They just want a browser that worked. And would only switch if it was better. I dont think Firefox is a bad browser in 2022, but I also dont think it is faster or better than Chrome either.
At the end of the day people can only do so much to help push Firefox. It ultimately falls back on Mozilla. It is Mozilla that needs to change or up the game. Unfortunately history dictate the only way to solve this problem is Mozilla think of it as a problem. Otherwise its current status at ~10% marketshare is enough to sustain its operation. Nothing bad enough is happening, no interest or incentive for changes. Inertia. Let's keep thing this way. The exec keeps getting paid.
So yes, it is counter intuitive. The only way to save Mozilla ( or change Mozilla's direction, I guess the word "save" is a hyperbole, at least from Mozilla's perspective. ) isn't trying to get more user to use it. It is actually to push people to abandon it.
>After the discussion yesterday I was thinking, and the passion that went into this full two page marketing campaign in the NY Times is what is needed to save Firefox.
I've been thinking too and really I feel the only way to save Firefox at this point is to destroy it. Mozilla is too bloated and the executives have zero interest in working on a browser and extremely wasteful spending, firing engineering teams.
The best thing that could ever happen to Firefox at this point is Mozilla running out of funds and disbanding and something new made from the ashes and the codebase.
If you think I'm wrong, remember Firefox was originally called Phoenix for a reason.
IMO the angle back then was the mission to free the web from a corporate stranglehold — “Take Back the Web”. I believed this mission was Mozilla's primary focus.
That mission is even more relevant now than it was 18 (!) years ago, and yet Firefox is trying to be just another pushy lifestyle brand. They're friendly like a used car salesman.
Firefox should show people (show, not “tell loudly”) that software can be a useful tool that isn't trying to trick them. A lot of people expect computers and phones to be hostile, because that's all they've ever known.
Spin up a virtual machine and compare Firefox's first-run experience with GNOME Web's first-run experience. Which feels more like a tool you're in control of?
The pure browser business doesn't bring in any money. Browsers are a commodity, you sell them as a vehicle for the real thing. Much like razor handles for the razor blades.
Firefox is a great handle but nobody wants or needs their blades.
> I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take.
They are close to being best here.
Fix extensions is on top of my personal list.
But so far you get moderated (edit: for advocacy even, what an irony given the title of this post!) if you try to remind them about the parts they broke a few years ago, see all the hidden comments at the bottom of this bug for an example: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447
Personally I am moving to LibreWolf these days (Firefox with minor fixes). LibreWolf can halfway expect to see donations this spring. If they also fix the extension API it will become a "must have" product for me.
So, as the OP, just want to add my current advocacy thoughts.
I have advocated for my family to use three different browsers of the last 20 years. First Firefox, then Chrome, now I push them all to just use Safari. They have all slowly migrated to Apple completely, fist with iPhones then to Macs.
Over the last 5 years I have pushed them to all use Safari, as it has better battery usage on all Apple devices, a “just works” sync across devices, and better default privacy situation than Chrome.
For me to advocate for Firefox (and move to it myself) it would need to be better at at least two of those three things than Safari.
I have no idea how representative my views are, but despite liking the browser, I find Mozilla's current marketing creepy, and it puts me off donating to the company. For one example, they send the same weird Valentine's day marketing email every year (that Cupid and the Grinch thing), which I wouldn't mind too much, except that the way it's written comes across like it's trying to trick the reader into thinking it's relating a recent conversation. I also find the tone of the email offputting; the first time I saw it, it made me feel like I was eavesdropping on someone's in-joke with their friend, while I didn't know anyone involved. This may be too much attention to give to one marketing email, but then they do send the same exchange every year!
Also, personally I would prefer them to focus on privacy and security and avoid anything more partisan; I haven't counted up but it feels like the majority of their campaign emails are about battling 'unsafe' content online, and I have no reason to trust them to be the judges of what qualifies as unsafe. So it puts me off donating any money for the things I do care about, because I can't trust they won't use it for something I completely oppose. I also would expect that a company that starts getting into the business of content moderation is going to find it conflicts with any privacy and security work they're doing, sooner or later.
Was it Ubuntu or Firefox that would mail you a free sticker pack if you asked? sometime between 2002-2005. I think that era is my favorite internet era that I experienced. Mid 90s was cool too.
I still try Firefox every few years, and then go right back to Chrome because the FF renderer doesn't feel as fast as Chrome's. Goosing performance would go a hell of a way towards piquing my interest again.
It is too late. Firefox is just a reskinned chrome. The only reason i still have firefox on my computers is because there are websites who only work in chrome or firefox.
As I user of Firefox for ~ 13 years who switched to Chrome a few years ago, I think the ultimate question is what would the users want, what would distinguish Firefox from Chrome and how many actual users would care about that.
In my opinion privacy focus of firefox is important, but I doubt it'll be enough to bring large number of users from Chrome. I.e. have ublock, but I also use a lot of google products so the inconvenience of changing the browser, installing new extensions etc is not worth some hard-to-measure increase in privacy.
Back in the day the reason why I liked firefox is because of so many extensions for everything, but when they broke many of them 4-5 years ago, that was a moment I switched to chrome.
Firefox, too, is beholden to the ad industry. That's the problem.
They could get popular fast by blocking ads by default, but of course, they'd have no income then.
Nevertheless, there's a bunch of other stuff they could do to help their popularity that they aren't currently doing, I'm sure. I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
I mean the alternative to free and ad-driven is a paid service; what could a browser offer to make people (companies, consumers) pay for a browser? Ideally a subscription fee. I can think of a few things.
The big one: Highly efficient, network-level ad blocking by default, as well as other nuisance blockers (newsletter sign-ups, cookie opt-in, etc). This one would be very popular since it removes 80% of the bulk and annoyances of the modern internet, but it would likely become problematic as they would get blocked by websites everywhere.
Built-in VPN / TOR. Difficult because those get blocked a lot. I wouldn't want my computer to be used as a TOR exit node either if I paid a monthly subscription for my browser, putting me at risk for investigations by local law enforcement.
Access to other services like e.g. youtube premium, again in the name of an ad free experience. That would require Google being on board with it though, and since their income is mainly ads they would be quite antagonistic.
I still think if Chrome hobbles ad blockers it'll be a great day for Firefox. Whenever I set up a new machine for family members an ad blocker is one of the first things I install. It's not just to get rid of the digital pollution that most sites engage in now, it's also a security improvement to block ads.
I have spent years advocating for mozilla and firefox but now I do the opposite. They are a blight that needs to be put down. I honestly think they are worse than the googlopoly at this point because of the manipulation and dishonesty involved in trying to keep some semblance of "moral high ground" when all they do is work against the common interest of the FOSS community.
Well if Brave is the spiritual successor to firefox I'm done with the web.
This is not a jab on you or Brave. I'm simply completely disenfranchised by the whole browser / web thing. Firefox keeps alienating me, Brave is not the answer as it never passed the smell test with all their crypto bullshit. The web itself is run by corporations trying to mine and sell our attention.
More and more I feel like gemini is the only answer to these issues. I will keep the general web as a gateaway to email and bank accounts and forget that it exist.
I already pay premium for some things for the sake of not being a part of the ad economy. Sam Harris's podcast being one example.
How about selling a premium version of Firefox, with polished versions of uMatrix and uBlock included? I might pay a small renewing subscription for that and for other things like that.
Firefox apparently has less than 200 million users left. 0.1% of those taking part of such a thing (say $5/mo) would mean a monthly revenue of 10 million. That would make some sort of a dent in their finances and if they communicated this clearly, it would be harmonious with their mission.
"Mozilla Foundation places two-page
advocacy ad in The New York Times (2004)"
Okay, I will respond with some feedback
intended to be helpful. I'm a long time
Firefox user. Until recently Firefox was
my "default" Web browser.
I'm trying to remain a good and happy
Firefox user, trying REALLY hard, but
Mozilla is trying even harder to have me
quit using Firefox. Mozilla has already
in the last few weeks finally gotten me to
tell Windows that my default browser is
Chrome and no longer Firefox. I WANT
Firefox back as my default Web browser,
but for that Mozilla has to stop working
so incredibly hard to have me quit using
Firefox.
"Mozilla, NO, greater than 99 44/100% of
the time I do NOT want a proctology exam,
an unanesthetized root canal procedure, a
piercing for a nose ring, a tattoo, a
Firefox update, a popup window, a
popup window announcing another Firefox
update, or the Firefox update that
enabled those 10s of thousands of popup
windows I have gotten in the last few
months.
A Firefox popup window is where Mozilla
believes that it has some information for
my eyes, attention, and work more
important to me than the Web page the
popup window is covering and that I was
trying to read, and that belief is nearly
always badly WRONG.
A popup window is where Firefox stops
and refuses to continue until I stop what
I'm doing, pay attention to why my
computer has stopped, move my hand, and
click on NO once more of the tens of
thousands of times recently. I can be
patient, but somewhere on the way to >
20,000 times, I can become infuriated.
I HATE, to be more clear, deeply,
profoundly, bitterly HATE and despise, am
outraged and infuriated by, unwanted
updates and popups.
In the last few months I have declined
Firefox updates announced in popup windows
literally, conservatively > 20,000 times.
To be fully clear, did I mention, I HATE
nearly all updates and popups."
Here is some feedback on some of the
current disaster:
From some Firefox update, that I did not,
NOT,
N.O.T.
approve, my current version of Firefox is
badly broken. Why: When I try to have
Firefox display a Web page, from a URL on
the Internet, a tree name on Windows, or
the Web site that has my email, I get a
popup that says that Firefox is not my
default Web browser, which was false, or a
popup saying that Firefox is starting in
"safe mode", which from all I could tell
was inappropriate. Then I get another
popup window announcing that a Firefox
update is available.
My suggestions:
(1) Cut WAY back on the popup windows. If
there is a really serious computer
security problem, then announce that via a
popup window. Announce it no more than
three times. On average, there should be
less than one such serious problem a year.
(2) Restore the option that permits a user
to decline updates and also decline
announcements of updates.
(3) Document your work. There is a lot to
usage of Firefox -- DOCUMENT that work in
TEXT in high quality technical writing.
(4) For options, be willing to write the
option values to a text file with a simple
syntax, a file that a user can edit with a
standard text editor and then specify to
Firefox as the options to be used.
[+] [-] samwillis|4 years ago|reply
They need to get themselves back to this place mentally, get the community rooting for them again. And spend some money on a passion based marketing campaign.
Edit:
Just to add, back then Firefox had an army of advocates installing Firefox on their family’s and friends computers, basically making them use it. Google co-opted the same army just four years later with similar marketing to get everyone installing Chrome on their family’s and friends computers.
They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take.
I suspect the thing holding them back is the danger that attacking Google on privacy grounds in order to push themselves as better could damage the lucrative revenue that they receive from Google.
[+] [-] murderfs|4 years ago|reply
> They need to find a way to get that to happen again. I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take.
This worked because, at the time, Firefox was genuinely, and more importantly, visibly better. You can't honestly say that about Firefox nowadays, and after Mozilla's management laid off tons of their engineering talent, there's been no plausible path for them to get there.
[+] [-] ksec|4 years ago|reply
Yeah. I did that. Probably closing to a thousand, from pushing inside Enterprise to libraries and Uni Campus. And I watched first hand how they all slowly migrate themselves to Chrome. Because it was faster. I still have vivid memory of it happening.
>I don’t have the answers but suspect privacy and security may be the angle to take.
I did that too. Against Google. Heck That was before anyone on the internet even suspect Google was a privacy nightmare. Every single one believed their Do No Evil BS. ( Even Mozilla ). I was the contrarian then. And that didn't work either.
I was there in 2004 NY Times Ad. Or even pre Firefox era. Firefox was a better browser than IE6. And even then fighting against IE6 was hard. Very hard. The lesson I learned was that most people dont care much about ideology. ( As long as it doesn't hurt their interest ) They just want a browser that worked. And would only switch if it was better. I dont think Firefox is a bad browser in 2022, but I also dont think it is faster or better than Chrome either.
At the end of the day people can only do so much to help push Firefox. It ultimately falls back on Mozilla. It is Mozilla that needs to change or up the game. Unfortunately history dictate the only way to solve this problem is Mozilla think of it as a problem. Otherwise its current status at ~10% marketshare is enough to sustain its operation. Nothing bad enough is happening, no interest or incentive for changes. Inertia. Let's keep thing this way. The exec keeps getting paid.
So yes, it is counter intuitive. The only way to save Mozilla ( or change Mozilla's direction, I guess the word "save" is a hyperbole, at least from Mozilla's perspective. ) isn't trying to get more user to use it. It is actually to push people to abandon it.
Unless they are threatened, they wont compete.
[+] [-] whywhywhywhy|4 years ago|reply
I've been thinking too and really I feel the only way to save Firefox at this point is to destroy it. Mozilla is too bloated and the executives have zero interest in working on a browser and extremely wasteful spending, firing engineering teams.
The best thing that could ever happen to Firefox at this point is Mozilla running out of funds and disbanding and something new made from the ashes and the codebase.
If you think I'm wrong, remember Firefox was originally called Phoenix for a reason.
[+] [-] grey_earthling|4 years ago|reply
That mission is even more relevant now than it was 18 (!) years ago, and yet Firefox is trying to be just another pushy lifestyle brand. They're friendly like a used car salesman.
Firefox should show people (show, not “tell loudly”) that software can be a useful tool that isn't trying to trick them. A lot of people expect computers and phones to be hostile, because that's all they've ever known.
Spin up a virtual machine and compare Firefox's first-run experience with GNOME Web's first-run experience. Which feels more like a tool you're in control of?
[+] [-] _Algernon_|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jhoechtl|4 years ago|reply
Firefox is a great handle but nobody wants or needs their blades.
[+] [-] skinkestek|4 years ago|reply
They are close to being best here.
Fix extensions is on top of my personal list.
But so far you get moderated (edit: for advocacy even, what an irony given the title of this post!) if you try to remind them about the parts they broke a few years ago, see all the hidden comments at the bottom of this bug for an example: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1332447
Personally I am moving to LibreWolf these days (Firefox with minor fixes). LibreWolf can halfway expect to see donations this spring. If they also fix the extension API it will become a "must have" product for me.
[+] [-] samwillis|4 years ago|reply
I have advocated for my family to use three different browsers of the last 20 years. First Firefox, then Chrome, now I push them all to just use Safari. They have all slowly migrated to Apple completely, fist with iPhones then to Macs.
Over the last 5 years I have pushed them to all use Safari, as it has better battery usage on all Apple devices, a “just works” sync across devices, and better default privacy situation than Chrome.
For me to advocate for Firefox (and move to it myself) it would need to be better at at least two of those three things than Safari.
[+] [-] strong_as_oak|4 years ago|reply
Also, personally I would prefer them to focus on privacy and security and avoid anything more partisan; I haven't counted up but it feels like the majority of their campaign emails are about battling 'unsafe' content online, and I have no reason to trust them to be the judges of what qualifies as unsafe. So it puts me off donating any money for the things I do care about, because I can't trust they won't use it for something I completely oppose. I also would expect that a company that starts getting into the business of content moderation is going to find it conflicts with any privacy and security work they're doing, sooner or later.
[+] [-] tored|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nimajneb|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shadowgovt|4 years ago|reply
I still try Firefox every few years, and then go right back to Chrome because the FF renderer doesn't feel as fast as Chrome's. Goosing performance would go a hell of a way towards piquing my interest again.
[+] [-] JohnJamesRambo|4 years ago|reply
Make it lighter and faster than Chrome and with more privacy. That’s all that matters.
[+] [-] hulitu|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shp0ngle|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] skinkestek|4 years ago|reply
Shortly after they had two extension competitions with large prizes.
Some fantastic extensions was created and bootstraped the extension ecosystem.
At its peak even what later became the ubiquitous developer tools across all modern browsers was just an extension to Firefox (Firebug).
[+] [-] wackget|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sega_sai|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hericium|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] CabbageRice|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] the_other|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PostOnce|4 years ago|reply
They could get popular fast by blocking ads by default, but of course, they'd have no income then.
Nevertheless, there's a bunch of other stuff they could do to help their popularity that they aren't currently doing, I'm sure. I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
[+] [-] Cthulhu_|4 years ago|reply
I mean the alternative to free and ad-driven is a paid service; what could a browser offer to make people (companies, consumers) pay for a browser? Ideally a subscription fee. I can think of a few things.
The big one: Highly efficient, network-level ad blocking by default, as well as other nuisance blockers (newsletter sign-ups, cookie opt-in, etc). This one would be very popular since it removes 80% of the bulk and annoyances of the modern internet, but it would likely become problematic as they would get blocked by websites everywhere.
Built-in VPN / TOR. Difficult because those get blocked a lot. I wouldn't want my computer to be used as a TOR exit node either if I paid a monthly subscription for my browser, putting me at risk for investigations by local law enforcement.
Access to other services like e.g. youtube premium, again in the name of an ad free experience. That would require Google being on board with it though, and since their income is mainly ads they would be quite antagonistic.
[+] [-] BoxOfRain|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jamesy0ung|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] agumonkey|4 years ago|reply
Web is getting increasingly integrated in real life so bridges and apps may take the spotlight (just a guess).
[+] [-] zabil|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] openfuture|4 years ago|reply
Fuck mozilla.
[+] [-] mariusmg|4 years ago|reply
It still is :)
[+] [-] lanewinfield|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hunterb123|4 years ago|reply
Firefox is a glorified Google referral system first, a slow, bloated browser second.
Mozilla has been ruined by highly paid executives draining the organization and the Google search referral income stream.
How long will they be able to coast off of their organization's reputation?
[+] [-] arepublicadoceu|4 years ago|reply
Well if Brave is the spiritual successor to firefox I'm done with the web.
This is not a jab on you or Brave. I'm simply completely disenfranchised by the whole browser / web thing. Firefox keeps alienating me, Brave is not the answer as it never passed the smell test with all their crypto bullshit. The web itself is run by corporations trying to mine and sell our attention.
More and more I feel like gemini is the only answer to these issues. I will keep the general web as a gateaway to email and bank accounts and forget that it exist.
[+] [-] openfuture|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aokiji|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] vegai_|4 years ago|reply
How about selling a premium version of Firefox, with polished versions of uMatrix and uBlock included? I might pay a small renewing subscription for that and for other things like that.
Firefox apparently has less than 200 million users left. 0.1% of those taking part of such a thing (say $5/mo) would mean a monthly revenue of 10 million. That would make some sort of a dent in their finances and if they communicated this clearly, it would be harmonious with their mission.
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] graycat|4 years ago|reply
To: Mozilla
Subject: The Popularity of Firefox
Dear Mozilla:
Just saw the headline,
"Mozilla Foundation places two-page advocacy ad in The New York Times (2004)"
Okay, I will respond with some feedback intended to be helpful. I'm a long time Firefox user. Until recently Firefox was my "default" Web browser.
I'm trying to remain a good and happy Firefox user, trying REALLY hard, but Mozilla is trying even harder to have me quit using Firefox. Mozilla has already in the last few weeks finally gotten me to tell Windows that my default browser is Chrome and no longer Firefox. I WANT Firefox back as my default Web browser, but for that Mozilla has to stop working so incredibly hard to have me quit using Firefox.
"Mozilla, NO, greater than 99 44/100% of the time I do NOT want a proctology exam, an unanesthetized root canal procedure, a piercing for a nose ring, a tattoo, a Firefox update, a popup window, a popup window announcing another Firefox update, or the Firefox update that enabled those 10s of thousands of popup windows I have gotten in the last few months.
A Firefox popup window is where Mozilla believes that it has some information for my eyes, attention, and work more important to me than the Web page the popup window is covering and that I was trying to read, and that belief is nearly always badly WRONG.
A popup window is where Firefox stops and refuses to continue until I stop what I'm doing, pay attention to why my computer has stopped, move my hand, and click on NO once more of the tens of thousands of times recently. I can be patient, but somewhere on the way to > 20,000 times, I can become infuriated.
I HATE, to be more clear, deeply, profoundly, bitterly HATE and despise, am outraged and infuriated by, unwanted updates and popups.
In the last few months I have declined Firefox updates announced in popup windows literally, conservatively > 20,000 times.
To be fully clear, did I mention, I HATE nearly all updates and popups."
Here is some feedback on some of the current disaster:
From some Firefox update, that I did not, NOT,
N.O.T.
approve, my current version of Firefox is badly broken. Why: When I try to have Firefox display a Web page, from a URL on the Internet, a tree name on Windows, or the Web site that has my email, I get a popup that says that Firefox is not my default Web browser, which was false, or a popup saying that Firefox is starting in "safe mode", which from all I could tell was inappropriate. Then I get another popup window announcing that a Firefox update is available.
My suggestions:
(1) Cut WAY back on the popup windows. If there is a really serious computer security problem, then announce that via a popup window. Announce it no more than three times. On average, there should be less than one such serious problem a year.
(2) Restore the option that permits a user to decline updates and also decline announcements of updates.
(3) Document your work. There is a lot to usage of Firefox -- DOCUMENT that work in TEXT in high quality technical writing.
(4) For options, be willing to write the option values to a text file with a simple syntax, a file that a user can edit with a standard text editor and then specify to Firefox as the options to be used.
(5) Instead of icons, use text.