Hang on to Your Firefox

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Firefox’s shrinking market share and Mozilla’s recent product and business decisions are prompting both strong loyalty and deep frustration among power users. Many see Firefox as the last mainstream alternative to Chromium-based engines and essential for web diversity and robust ad blocking, yet complain about performance issues, UI changes, telemetry, “enshittification,” and dependence on Google funding. Others point to emerging projects like Ladybird and Servo, forks such as Zen and LibreWolf, and built-in blockers in browsers like Brave as either hopeful successors or inadequate substitutes, underscoring anxiety about a de facto Chrome/WebKit duopoly.

Role of Firefox and Browser Diversity

  • Many see Firefox (and Gecko) as the last widely‑deployed non‑Chromium engine and therefore critical to avoiding a Blink/WebKit monoculture and “IE6 2.0.”
  • Others argue that new engines like Ladybird and Servo are progressing, but most agree they are years away from being mainstream and Firefox is the only practical counterweight today.
  • Some fear that loss of Google search funding (e.g., after antitrust changes) could force Firefox to adopt Blink or wither, worsening engine concentration.

User Experience: Performance and Features

  • Experiences diverge sharply: some run Firefox with dozens or hundreds of tabs (often on old hardware) without major issues; others report high RAM/CPU use, leaks over days, and sluggishness vs. Chrome/Brave.
  • Web compatibility is also mixed: several say Firefox works on essentially all their sites; others cite issues with Google properties, government/banking sites, JS-heavy games, and YouTube performance.
  • Mobile Firefox draws complaints about UI polish, inconsistent reader mode, gestures, and lack of keyboard shortcuts; a minority find it polished and value add‑ons support.
  • Recent tab management features (vertical tabs, tab groups, containers) are praised by heavy users.

Adblocking, Privacy, and Tracking

  • A central pro‑Firefox argument is full uBlock Origin support (unrestricted by Manifest V3) and generally stronger request/element control.
  • Some say Brave, Safari+AdGuard/1Blocker, Vivaldi built‑in blockers, or uBO Lite are “good enough” in practice; others stress that MV3‑limited blockers miss tracking and advanced filtering.
  • Several note that most non‑technical users don’t install any adblocker at all, even when they could.

Mozilla’s Decisions, Funding, and Trust

  • Strong frustration with Mozilla leadership: perceived “enshittification” (AI features, Pocket history, VPN upsells, ad‑tech acquisitions, telemetry/ToS changes), high executive pay, and focus on side projects over core browser quality.
  • Defenders argue Mozilla must fund development somehow and that optional features can be disabled; critics counter that Firefox is becoming user‑hostile by default and that donations cannot be targeted to Firefox alone.
  • Some worry Mozilla’s behavior is driving away exactly the power users who historically evangelized Firefox to others.

Alternatives and Ecosystem Dynamics

  • Users mention forks (LibreWolf, Waterfox, Zen, Mullvad Browser, Palemoon, etc.) as ways to keep Gecko without Mozilla’s defaults.
  • Others rely on Chromium‑based browsers (Brave, Vivaldi, Edge, Island) or Safari for performance, workplace requirements, or mobile integration, while acknowledging this strengthens Google’s influence.
  • Several note that web developers and product managers largely target only Chrome, making alternative engines harder to sustain regardless of Firefox’s technical merits.