this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2024
169 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

34413 readers
803 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] takeda@lemmy.world 55 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Absolutely. If you think you can switch when chrome will be completely hostile it will be too late.

The reason they are trying those things in chrome is because the market share of Firefox is currently low. They are counting that you won't have the option to run Firefox anymore, because sites will stop supporting it. Don't let that happen.

[–] breakingcups@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Also, Firefox is in a tough situation where they have to purposefully shoot themselves in the foot, because their builtin tracking protection means Firefox usually doesn't show up in a lot of browser usage stats.

[–] takeda@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I didn't think about it, though if that makes it harder to track it (can't they just check the user agent?) could that actually be good, as the sites will never know exactly how many users they will lose, so might be more hesitant to pull the trigger?

[–] Skydancer@pawb.social 6 points 1 month ago

That would be true for competent web developers. Unfortunately, those are a vanishingly small subset.

[–] breakingcups@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

No, they'll just see the management summary that Firefox occupies less than 0.5% of their users' marketshare and prioritize their budget accordingly.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That blocks user agent string? Answer: no it absolutely doesn't

Explain how this comment isn't completely wrong

[–] breakingcups@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If you use a third-party analytics service such as Google Analytics, as almost all serious parties do (with their nice dashboards and reports), then you'll notice Firefox is severely underrepresented because the request never reaches Google

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I think that may be true if you set the privacy protection to strict, which is not default.

I wonder if it's underrepresented more so because people who use Firefox are more likely to install privacy centric extensions

[–] blaine@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 month ago

Too late. Lumen5 crashes on Firefox. Google Cloud Console barely loads. I was a Firefox user for YEARS but finally had to uninstall this week. The amount of "Firefox is not supported" warnings and weird issues I was running into every day was getting a tad ridiculous.