Recommended Posts

I use several browsers, Safari, Firefox & Chrome on my Macs and Firefox, Chrome, IE on my PCs.  Firefox, imo, is the easiest and most convenient browser by far.  It's plugins are just as good if not better than Chromes and on my low-end netbooks its INFINTELY faster than Chrome and even IE.  Why is it losing market share and withering away? With Spartan just around the corner in Win10 does Firefox even have a chance at surviving?

 

In the last 12 months, Firefox's user share -- an estimate of the portion of all those who reach the Internet via a desktop browser -- has plummeted by 34%. Since Firefox crested at 25.1% in April 2010, Firefox has lost 13.5 percentage points, or 54% of its peak share.

 

At Firefox's 12-month average rate of decline, Mozilla's desktop browser will slip under the 10% bar in June, joining other third-tier applications like Apple's Safari (with just a 4.8% user share in February) and Opera Software's Opera (1.1%). If the trend continues, Firefox on the desktop could drop below 8% as soon as October.

 

 

http://www.computerworld.com/article/2893514/an-incredibly-shrinking-firefox-faces-endangered-species-status.html

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1249350-firefox-an-endangered-species/
Share on other sites

People used Firefox back then because the stock browsers were terrible. Safari and IE were both pretty bad, the only other option was Firefox and Opera. Firefox had a lot to offer like customization and the vast amount of add-ons over the years. However, once Chrome was released, people moved over simply because it was a quick browser. Right now Firefox doesn't offer the average user too much benefits over Chrome.

 

 

I'm thinking that Chrome will become the new "Internet Explorer" as it's starting to disregard web standards and not very friendly on some of the older computers. Once Project Spartan is released, Chrome will lose a fairly good chunk of its users. As for Firefox, I'm not sure how long they'll last seeing that they are relaying on partnership with Yahoo, sponsors in the new tab page, and asking for donation here and there.

  • Like 2

 With Spartan just around the corner in Win10 does Firefox even have a chance at surviving?

 

even if it is a niche market,  it will be fine.  I have used it from version 1

even though i tried every other major browser available since,

i am not planning to switch.  i am sure many feel the same.

 

r1alis.jpg

I still use and like Firefox the best. 

 

I've had many different issues with Chrome over the years.  Last year it kept constantly crashing when using Flash (Maybe more Adobe issue than Chrome), sometimes Flash videos don't act right, but they did fix the Tab behavior, finally, so it's not quite as bad. 

 

IE takes longer to start.  Not so much actually open, but the initial page load takes a while.  IE11 has been better than 9 or 10, though.  Lack of plugins is the killer for me, though.  Waiting to see what Spartan has, but haven't tried Win10, yet.

 

I think mostly, Chrome was the "cool" new thing for a while.  We're a GAFE school, so it makes sense to use Chrome and it has a little extra functionality for Google Apps, also.  IE is on every Windows machine, so a lot of people use it only for that reason.

The best browser is the one you don't notice.

...yep that's why I've been an Opera user for years. They went over quite a speed-bump moving to the Chromium engine but I still appreciate Opera and use it as my main browser because it offers a different, commonsense approach. I moved from Firefox sometime around 2007.

 

Firefox recent updates have made it look more like Chrome, and this was a bad decision in my view. Chrome didn't become more popular because of its looks, it was because it was quick, and linked into existing services people use, and it's being pushed at people by a 300 million ton gorilla known as Google.

 

Firefox already had a rather nice minimal interface. They aren't going to gain market share by looking more like the competition that has overtaken them.

 

The security focus is a good thing, though. As long as it doesn't get in the way.

Where Firefox went wrong is that it has been reduced to copying Chrome.

 

When is the last time that Firefox introduce innovative features that make people want to say, "Woo! I want to try that" ?

 

The annoying updates that keep breaking extensions doesn't help either.

  • Like 1

Mozilla just moves too slow. Firefox carries a lot of baggage that needs shed. It's not 2004 anymore.

They added more bloat with a chat client that no one wanted and reduced their search engine to Yahoo.

Bad decisions all around.

At home, I pretty much stopped using Firefox when Chrome came out. Chrome is still a lot faster in my experience, and works all around better. At work, I tend to use Firefox since I can use the IETab extension. I typically leave Chrome and Firefox installed on all my machines, just so I have a backup browser. These browsers have all become bloated though, except for IE, which is relatively very quick (especially IE11 on W8.1) 

I posted in another Firefox thread that I recently wanted to switch from Chrome but hit too many speedbumps that I couldn't solve.  I really wanted to give it a try...   My next switch will be to Spartan, so we'll see how that goes...

If Firefox did like Google does with Chrome and had it installed by naive users then Firefox would be much bigger then Chrome. Really I don't like Chrome at all or the newer Opera (Chrome by another name). I'm always taking Chrome off peoples machines that I work on. I first ask them "did you put Chrome on this machine"? About everyone says, "I don't know what it is and don't know where it came from".

Meh don't care about marketshare, not a sheep, will continue to use Firefox till they stop making it.  Or Chrome starts to suck a whole lot less.. some of the new changes are just absurd, that new bookmarks.. thing.. for example, and the old one was fairly weak to begin with.  The speed difference that used to be noticeable with the older versions is pretty much nonexistant nowadays, addons are much more flexible, uses a lot less resources in the process, and I can set it up how I want it, not the authors.. Chrome's severely limited in what you can change with it.  Will reserve judgement on Spartan till I actually get to use it, but sounds promising.. first time I'm anxious to try MS' browser in years.

If Firefox did like Google does with Chrome and had it installed by naive users then Firefox would be much bigger then Chrome. Really I don't like Chrome at all or the newer Opera (Chrome by another name). I'm always taking Chrome off peoples machines that I work on. I first ask them "did you put Chrome on this machine"? About everyone says, "I don't know what it is and don't know where it came from".

Aren't most web browser usage numbers gathered from web pages that poll the browsers that reach it?  If that's the case then "accidentally" installed browsers wouldn't really count because they are probably not being used.

If Firefox did like Google does with Chrome and had it installed by naive users then Firefox would be much bigger then Chrome. Really I don't like Chrome at all or the newer Opera (Chrome by another name). I'm always taking Chrome off peoples machines that I work on. I first ask them "did you put Chrome on this machine"? About everyone says, "I don't know what it is and don't know where it came from".

 

EXACTLY! The only reason most people have chrome is because it was bundled with something else.

I gave Firefox a try last week.  Unfortunately I kept running into hangs that would last around 5 seconds.  Very frustrating because I do want to move to a more privacy-oriented browser but they have to get the quality bar up.

Firefox/Waterfox never crash on my computer.  I think it has to do with Flash.  Remove/Uninstall Flash from your computer.  You'll notice your computer will never crash.  That is if you don't have a lot of other crapware/malware.

  • Like 1

Mozilla just moves too slow.

 

Strangely enough many would argue just the opposite, that Firefox started becoming crappier when Mozilla started chasing Chrome's version numbering with its own rapid release model that resulted in half-baked 'features' being pushed out every so often (along with add-ons being broken).

 

Firefox/Waterfox never crash on my computer.  I think it has to do with Flash.  Remove/Uninstall Flash from your computer.  You'll notice your computer will never crash.  That is if you don't have a lot of other crapware/malware.

 

Flash is still used by many sites that haven't moved on to HTML5 yet, or else I'd definitely leave it off. Can't wait for the day I can get rid of Flash just like I did with Java (undoubtedly the two biggest malware vectors thanks to how sloppily they're coded).

They added more bloat with a chat client that no one wanted and reduced their search engine to Yahoo.

Bad decisions all around.

Please cite your source that the chat client has any effect on the speed of Firefox? Mozilla reduced the available search engines on Firefox? Nope! It has the same search engines as always but Yahoo is the default now which can be changed with a couple of "clicks". Why would you post a 100% wrong comment?

  • Like 2
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!