Trust in Firefox and Mozilla Is Gone – Let's Talk Alternatives

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

State of Firefox & Mozilla

  • Many see Firefox as the only serious non‑Chromium, cross‑platform engine left; losing Mozilla would leave effectively a Chrome/Safari duopoly.
  • Others argue Mozilla has become “permanently distracted” from Firefox, mismanaged and ad-driven, and that Firefox might be better off spun out or even post‑Mozilla, like Thunderbird.
  • Recent ToS/”we don’t sell your personal data” wording changes and ads/telemetry resets deepen distrust; some donors feel misled and are pursuing chargebacks.

Can the Community Replace Mozilla?

  • One camp believes that if Mozilla dies, the community (or a new org) will pick up Firefox, as happened with Netscape → Phoenix → Firefox, citing Linux as precedent.
  • Skeptics counter that browsers now require huge, paid teams, standards participation, and constant “web compatibility” work that hobbyists or small orgs can’t sustain; any fork would quickly fall behind and break on modern sites.

Alternative Browsers & Engines

  • Firefox forks (LibreWolf, Floorp, Waterfox, Zen, IceCat, Mullvad browser, Tor Browser) remove telemetry/ads but all depend on upstream Firefox/Gecko.
  • Chromium derivatives (Brave, Vivaldi, Ungoogled Chromium, Opera, Edge, DDG browser) are seen as pragmatically good but strategically dangerous, reinforcing Google’s engine dominance. Brave is criticized for ads, crypto, and past affiliate hijacking.
  • WebKit-based options (GNOME Web/Epiphany, Orion, DDG/Apple platforms) exist but are platform-limited or closed-source; engine diversity still boils down mostly to Blink/Chromium vs Gecko.
  • New engines (Ladybird, Servo) generate hope but are acknowledged as far from being full, secure, compatible browsers.

Funding Models & Governance

  • Core tension: browsers are expensive to build, “free” pushes them toward ads/data; non-profit/donation models are seen as failing to align Mozilla with users.
  • Proposals include: paid browsers (Orion-style), user-earmarked funding for Firefox-only development, or a multi-company privacy consortium backing a shared engine.
  • Others note that major engines (including Safari and Firefox) are effectively funded via Google search deals, creating a structural conflict of interest.

Web Complexity & Practicalities

  • Web complexity and ever-expanding specs make new engines or “maintenance-only” forks unrealistic for general browsing; sites increasingly assume Chrome behavior.
  • Some users already mix multiple browsers (e.g., Firefox + Chromium, or Safari + specialized browsers) and accept partial breakage.
  • Sync, extensions, accessibility, and passkeys are important practical blockers to switching; current alternatives only partially cover these needs.
  • Several commenters conclude that no current browser is clearly “good”; the ecosystem problem (standards, funding, incentives) is deeper than swapping products.