I just don’t care for downstream projects on browsers, with software so critical I want to get the updates in as fast as possible. I know some of those mentioned in OP had issues with that in the past. And not much reason to anyway for me to switch, Firefox works perfectly fine for me, so there’s not much added benefit.
I’ve been using the Firefox mod Zen Browser on Linux Mint. When Firefox released an update in February, my Zen had it the next day. People depending on the “official” Firefox were left waiting over a week, with multiple threads in the forums asking “when is it coming?”
Zen: On one machine, Flatpak. On the other, AppImage through AM.
Firefox: Mint-maintained version from Mint repo (deb).
I can’t remember the exact differences between Firefox upstream and Mint version. But I believe Mint began maintaining their own deb at a time when upstream Ubuntu was only offering Firefox as a snap, which Mint is against, and Mozilla hadn’t yet begun offering their own deb repo.
Understand your point of view but in fact the 2 problems you mentioned are mainly not problems :
1 - Updates? The main downstream browsers received updates the same time as Firefox the same day and sometime the same hour
2 - Benefits? The benefits are mainly under the hood, removing Mozilla telemetry and annoying features (account, pocket…) AND the biggest advantages are the gain in term of privacy due the increase of anti fingerprinting methods
This needs to be higher up. We need firefox as an alternative to a chrome engine monopoly. ToS and telemetry are miniscule issues compared to what we are up against
Firefox is literally the last thing standing between google controlling the entire browser landscape and having control over all web standards (as if they dont already have too much influence)
People ditching firefox over tos, telemetry, AI, CEO pay, etc. are cutting off their nose to spite their face. Do i wish mozilla would stop doing stupid shit? Of course. But the alternative is far worse. Dont let perfect be the enemy of good. Mozilla will never be as ideologically pure as we want them to be, but that’s OK (for now)
Depends on which way the Firefox ditchers jump - jumping to Chrome, yeah… not great. Jumping to more privacy respecting options… it’s your data, you should be able to choose (if you care…)
They are better in most of the case, Firefox only is not that good…
I just don’t care for downstream projects on browsers, with software so critical I want to get the updates in as fast as possible. I know some of those mentioned in OP had issues with that in the past. And not much reason to anyway for me to switch, Firefox works perfectly fine for me, so there’s not much added benefit.
I’ve been using the Firefox mod Zen Browser on Linux Mint. When Firefox released an update in February, my Zen had it the next day. People depending on the “official” Firefox were left waiting over a week, with multiple threads in the forums asking “when is it coming?”
Also when I looked into mods updates for a critical security fix in November, practically all the mods had updated within 24 hours of FF’s update. (Exceptions: Midori and Mercury.) https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?p=2554267&sid=4f140800c5d62939af8e6394514b9aab#p2554267
Did Zen come from flatpak and Firefox from deb?
Zen: On one machine, Flatpak. On the other, AppImage through AM. Firefox: Mint-maintained version from Mint repo (deb).
I can’t remember the exact differences between Firefox upstream and Mint version. But I believe Mint began maintaining their own deb at a time when upstream Ubuntu was only offering Firefox as a snap, which Mint is against, and Mozilla hadn’t yet begun offering their own deb repo.
That’s where the delay comes. Though I guess it does point out that even with just Firefox the differences are small in how quickly you get updates.
Understand your point of view but in fact the 2 problems you mentioned are mainly not problems :
1 - Updates? The main downstream browsers received updates the same time as Firefox the same day and sometime the same hour
2 - Benefits? The benefits are mainly under the hood, removing Mozilla telemetry and annoying features (account, pocket…) AND the biggest advantages are the gain in term of privacy due the increase of anti fingerprinting methods
But who’s making these “updates”? Who’s doing the actual work of keeping the software secure? Mozilla is.
If everybody moves to a free-riding fork, Mozilla goes to 0% and there will be no browser let alone updates.
This needs to be higher up. We need firefox as an alternative to a chrome engine monopoly. ToS and telemetry are miniscule issues compared to what we are up against
Firefox is literally the last thing standing between google controlling the entire browser landscape and having control over all web standards (as if they dont already have too much influence)
People ditching firefox over tos, telemetry, AI, CEO pay, etc. are cutting off their nose to spite their face. Do i wish mozilla would stop doing stupid shit? Of course. But the alternative is far worse. Dont let perfect be the enemy of good. Mozilla will never be as ideologically pure as we want them to be, but that’s OK (for now)
Depends on which way the Firefox ditchers jump - jumping to Chrome, yeah… not great. Jumping to more privacy respecting options… it’s your data, you should be able to choose (if you care…)
Read the post above mine… “Privacy respecting options” are almost always downstream forks of firefox. Abandon/kill the source, and downstream dries up
I suspect Tor Browser would fork and soldier on if Firefox became an unsuitable base.