A look at Firefox forks

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Firefox vs. Forks: Why People Switch (or Don’t)

  • Many see Firefox as still the “least bad” non-Chromium, open-source browser, despite dissatisfaction.
  • A visible minority report switching (often to LibreWolf, Mullvad Browser, Orion, Waterfox, Zen, Floorp, IceCat), but others suspect the actual migration numbers are small and partly “performative.”
  • Some stay with stock Firefox plus hardening configs (e.g., arkenfox, extensions) rather than relying on small forks that might die or lag behind.

Privacy, Telemetry, and Trust

  • Core complaint: Firefox was founded on anti-tracking principles yet now ships default telemetry, advertising integrations, Pocket, sponsored features, and uses opt-in technical data for ad-tech.
  • Debate over recent terms-of-use/privacy changes:
    • Critics say Firefox is effectively “selling data” and using legalese plus non-binding PR to obscure that.
    • Defenders argue misunderstandings of regulations (e.g., CCPA), claim little has actually changed, stress open source and strong privacy features (uBlock Origin, Android extensions).
  • Some users accept crash reporting and opt‑in telemetry but reject any default telemetry or ad tie-ins.

Engine Monoculture vs. Multiple Implementations

  • Strong resistance to “just use Chromium”:
    • Consolidation under Blink is seen as a security and governance risk (single zero-day, “benevolent dictator,” ad-block API deprecations, hardware-access APIs, AMP/Dart-like pushes).
    • Specs benefit from at least two independent implementations; Firefox’s independent engine lets it oppose user‑hostile standards.
  • Counterpoint: multiple engines duplicate effort; some ask if diversity still outweighs cost when specs are open and engines are OSS.

LibreWolf, Mullvad, Tor, and Other Privacy Forks

  • LibreWolf/Mullvad praised for stripping telemetry and tightening privacy/anti‑fingerprinting.
  • But defaults are “aggressively private” and often break sites: timezone forced to UTC, WebGL disabled, logins and scheduling tools failing, captchas and fraud checks triggered, broken games/media.
  • Some users tweak about:config or overrides, or keep stock Firefox alongside forks for “when things break.”

Zen, Floorp, Waterfox, Seamonkey and UX‑Focused Forks

  • Zen is widely praised: Arc‑like workspaces, vertical tabs, command‑palette location bar, strong UX; still rough in places but rapidly developed.
  • Floorp offers customization and sponsored new‑tab shortcuts without tracking; Waterfox emphasizes user control but its ad‑tech ownership episode causes lingering distrust.
  • Seamonkey valued for preserving older, stable UI paradigms.

Funding, Governance, and Mozilla’s Structure

  • Many want a paid or “Pro” Firefox/fork focused on polish and power‑user features instead of ad deals.
  • Skepticism that user donations could approach current search‑deal revenue; some cite examples like Thunderbird or Tor to argue a modest but real donor base exists.
  • Serious frustration over Mozilla’s governance:
    • Donations go to the foundation (advocacy) not directly to Firefox development.
    • CEO pay and non‑browser projects are seen as misaligned with users’ desire to “fund the browser.”
  • Some propose a separate non‑profit or co‑op fork that only strips antifeatures and feeds patches upstream.

Security and Maintenance Realities

  • Forks inherit engine work from Firefox; they rarely do heavy standards or security lifting themselves.
  • Concern that if Firefox loses share or funding, all forks suffer; a true hard fork with independent security maintenance would be extremely costly.
  • Others worry more about Blink monoculture and see independent projects like Ladybird as an important hedge.