We may be at a final farewell for me and Firefox

I have long used Firefox as my primary internet browser. It was pretty much the original non-corporatized browser. Today, for PCs, it's definitely "do evil" Chrome by Google, or else Edge by "do evil and also make crap" Microslob.

On Macs, which is what I am normally on, it's those or Apple's own "do a fair degree of evil and turd-polish yourself" Safari.

There are other older browsers, of course, like Opera, and newer ones like Brave.

But, I have generally stayed with Firefox.

Until it has problems from time to time.

Like being a memory hog.

Or slow.

Or now, busting stuff.

A week ago, on my office Mac, I got prompted to update Firefox. Not a problem.

Until the restart, then yes a problem.

Substack is broken.

And, it's worse in various ways.

I commented on Shitter, from the office, tagging both Firefox and parent Mozilla. No response.

I then went to Mozilla's website, to the bug-reporting page.

You can do it anonymously, or through GitHub. No account with it, and don't want to bother. But, the fact that they don't even ask for an email is problematic.

Even more problematic for them as a tech company?

They asked if the problem was on Mac OS X 10.15. (That's the way they wrote it, redundancy and all.)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I'm on Ventura, specifically 13.5, at the office. (I get prompts to update to 14, but I hesitate to play with electronics not my own.)

Anyway, I am NOT NOT NOT on Catalina!

And, if you're getting that wrong, how fucked up are you?

Anyway, at home, I thought I would go on Facebook.

Nope.

Mozilla's account there dead since 2018. Won't even take FB messages.

Firefox's semi-dead since 2022. Takes FB messages, as far as still having a "post" feature, but no response.

Speaking of messages? 

Went back to Shitter.

Thought I would DM them there, rather than tag them.

Nope. Both Mozilla and Firefox have Shitter messaging turned off.

So, at least at work, if I ditch FF, it is likely permanent this time. 

So, I looked up alternatives to FF at home.

LibreWolf got high remarks. The worry is about it being such a tight fork off FF that it might break Substack, too.

Anyway, I downloaded it at home.

Problem?

Wouldn't import a thing from FF. Didn't even show it as "available," only Chrome and Safari. 

==

There's other reasons NOT to like FF 139. If you're a FF user do NOT NOT NOT update to this.

One issue is that it has an AI chatbot option that's embedded in a narrow left-hand rail. The fact that that's the top icon on the rail shows that FuckFox is trying to shove this down our throats. 

How Mozilla screwed the pooch on Firefox, in my opinion

And, everybody knows they DID, but, per Wiki and others, it's fallen off the cliff. 

Let's start with the nice big graphic Wiki has from Stat Counter. It is only through 2020, so no Brave.

 

The biggie is the spike in Chrome, even more than the drop in Firefox. 

What about smartphones? Well, Android is counted separate from Chrome. As for smartphones vs. desktop and laptop computers? They got the majority of browser share in November 2016 and haven't looked back.

I first thought that was the problem, but, Firefox's sagging starting in 2011. That said, not anticipating a Google-based option to an iPhone didn't help.

Given how buggy, and how insecure, an Android phone is, something cheaper than an iPhone, possibly cheaper than an Android, and maybe "locked" like an iPhone with some narrow, specific apps could have taken off like hotcakes. I would have bought one when my last flip phone, or "dumbphone," crapped out and Sprint told me smartphones were all it had available.

A second graph has more food for thought:

As you can see on it, mobile passed both Firefox and IE in 2013.

Had Mozilla put out an APB by the end of 2014, it probably could have had something to market by 2016. Partner with Samsung or someone else that got into Android smartphones early. Maybe try to resurrect a Nokia from the semi-dead by getting it to reverse engineer an Android.

But, after that, it might have been too late. By the end of 2016, Firefox was at 15 percent (and IE dying at 10 percent).

But, nobody sounded the "all hands in deck" in 2014 or even 2015.

Instead, in early 2022, we get Mozilla trying to backdoor paid search on us if we use the nav bar for searching, until it got busted at that.

Mozilla might take consolation in having a steady 10 percent of users. Should it?

The browser is a bigger memory whore than Chrome or Safari. (Never used Edge. Haven't used IE for 15 years. Opera is not as much a whore either. Haven't used Brave; downloaded but didn't install after its early kerfuffles.)

From what I've heard from friends (I haven't used it in years) recent iterations of Mozilla's email client, Thunderbird, are even more craptacular.

All of this should make you wonder how much of a player the Mozilla Foundation will be in the future world of the internet in general.

Not interested in Internet-spying job search agencies

Endeavor Agency recently sent me an unsolicited email about executive and semi-executive job placement. The company VP offered a video interview time.

I decided I would go to its website instead.

I was on Chrome, not Firefox, at the time, and apparently some tracker got through.

Same VP of placement emailed just an hour or two later and bluntly said: "We saw you looking."

And, dude, that's the last I'll look.

I don't like the use of whatever trackers you use to tell people are looking.

I also don't like the crudely framed (not in the four-letter word sense) response.

Google creating a #fail?

Google may be right, to some degree at least, about the "torture" of Windows-based computing.

But, I'm with Computerworld's thoughts: a "locked" (as in locked like an iPhone is locked), cloud-based laptop ain't the answer.

The website notes that (as "jailbroken" iPhones show) people want control over their Internet devices. It also notes Chrome as a browser still falls short of Firefox in some ways. Finally, the website also notes, cloud-based computing WILL have various issues in the future, though it doesn't specifically talk about security breaches.

The Internet itself can't be trusted to handle 100% of our computing needs.

Google's own Blogger service went down for more than 24 hours this week. To restore service, Google rolled back to an older, backed-up version, which didn't include 30 hours of blog posts for Google's millions of users. As I was writing this column, Google was working to restore the lost posts.

Such disruptions happen all the time, even for cloud-based services that are supposed to be bulletproof. Amazon's EC2 website hosting service -- which exists to provide fail-safe, totally reliable hosting -- experiences catastrophic outages. The most recent outage occurred in April. The glitch took down Foursquare, Reddit, Quora and other major services. It took Amazon four days -- four days! -- to return service to normal.

The final question is, what if Google bails on this?

Thanks, Big Bad G, but I'll pass.

Cloud computing is great, but only in combination with "regular" computing. The only reliable way to manage data is to store and back up locally, and also to the cloud.

More reason to be wary of Google, cloud computing

That big December cyberattack on Google? It hit its internal password system, which, per the story, is designed to let both users and employees sign in with their password just once to run a number of services.

Even though individual users' passwords do not appear to be stolen, this is still serious:

The theft leaves open the possibility, however faint, that the intruders may find weaknesses that Google might not even be aware of, independent computer experts said.

And, hence, worries about the security of cloud computing, a concern I've already seen mentioned in tech magazines, since cloud computing hasn't really been "scaled up" yet.

The new details seem likely to increase the debate about the security and privacy of vast computing systems such as Google’s that now centralize the personal information of millions of individuals and businesses. Because vast amounts of digital information are stored in one place, popularly referred to as “cloud” computing, a single breach can lead to disastrous losses.

And, who knows if this is over yet?

Rodney Joffe, a vice president at Neustar, a developer of Internet infrastructure services, said, “It’s obviously a real issue if you can understand how the system works.” Understanding the algorithms on which the software is based might be of great value to an attacker looking for weak points in the system, he said.

Folks that's why I don't use Google Apps, Docs, Chrome etc.

Finally, another worrier about Google Chrome

Jonathan Zittrain points out a variety of issues, including not just Google getting hacked and your documents exposed to public view, but cloud computing making you subject to the Patriot Act. And those are not all the worries of Zittrain.

Google Chrome OS a Microslob warning shot?

Some interesting thoughts on that very subject, and why the two companies warily circle each other rather than going for the kill.

A Google OS? No thanks

Well, it looks like Google is ready to put in place the final brick of its cloud computing master plan.

Now, right now, the Google Chrome Operating System is only for netbooks. But, if it has any success, it will be scaled up into a version for traditional computers. Or, Plan B, it could team with netbook makers to market them to replace more and more laptops or even desktops.

And, from the company that’s now charging for its Google Apps, which means pay up to free your Google Docs from permanent bondage, do you really trust the company that’s becoming Microsoft 2.0?

Jeff Jarvis sucks

Since Amazon won't let me type that as a book review title, I'll do it here, taking a page from his "Dell sucks" blog post that he mentions in his new book, "What Would Google Do"?

Here's the deal with the book, a one-star turkey.

This books is basically nothing but uncritical Google-olotry, as shown by the errors Jarvis makes in just his seven introduction pages.

1. Google's alleged customer service? Google's Blogger blogs get no more customer service than Microslob offers on Outlook/Outlook Express.

2. Related to that, through things such as Chrome, Google Docs, cloud computing, Google IS the new Microslob in many ways. Jarvis completely ignores that.

3. Related to THAT, Jarvis laughably claims that Google AdSense lets you be "part of Google." Jeez, just how much has Google brainwashed him? Instead, Google's ever more closely monitoring his Google searches, etc., and targeting ads to that end. (Do a fake Google search at least once a week to screw Google up, is my suggestion.)

4. Jarvis ignores the multiplicity of Google business flops of the past, which are well-documented elsewhere.

Beyond that, Jarvis is a name-dropper, etc. Read other one- and two-star reviewers for more.

Mac and Firefox users love me

Sitemeter, the visitor statistics add-on that is in the upper right-hand corner of this blog, upgraded its basic accounts over the weekend, and now provides a welter of new information.

Among this:

•Almost 25 percent of readers are using some version of Firefox and more than 5 percent are using some version of Safari.

•15 percent of visitors are on Mac OS X, well above ownership averages. I'm even getting a few Linux users.

My past comments about Mac have been about the cult of Mac and cult of Steve Jobs, I should note. As a newspaper editor, I have used Macs at work for more than a decade, and now have my first home Mac.

As for browsers, PLEASE ... no Google Chrome users. As much as I've kicked the ass of Obama and many other Dems, as well as the GOP, on stuff like the FISA bill, I don't want people who will blindly use the Big Brother Browser™ to visit here.

That all said, Sitemeter has rolled back to the older version of its service, but may be looking at relaunching a similar version soon.

See you in court, Google!

When BushCo hires the Carter DOJ’s top antitrust lawyer, looking at the Google-Yahoo ad deal of earlier this summer, you know the fat’s in the fire.

And, reportedly, Sanford Litvack’s bailwick isn’t just limited to that. Maybe he’ll follow up on my thought of last week and see if Google Chrome is committing fraud over how it handles pop-up ads.

Is it rare for DOJ to hire an outside lawyer for this?

Yes.

Last time? 1998.

Lawyer? David Boies.

Civil defendant? Microsoft.

Have fun in court, Sergey and Larry.

Could Chrome get Google sued?

For false advertising, deceptive trade practices, fraud or something similar?

Based on what it does with pop-up ad concealment (NOT blocking, concealment), I’d say it’s at least a possibility.

Chrome loads ads, including pop-ups, as opposed to Firefox’s AdBlock, but conceals them from user view.

And Google’s still going to bill advertisers for these as “viewed ads.”

If this isn’t actionable, it obviously means the death of the pop-up ad as we know it, which certainly ain’t bad.

Google Chrome nice but not platinum

JavaScript speed, from-scratch platform, and Google interoperability all pluses, but “cloud computing” focus raises new round of Google as Big Brother questions

Google is coming after both Firefox AND Internet Explorer with its own web browser.

Contra the Microslob spokesperson touting IE8 (in beta now), given how slow IE7 loads pages, AND given that it has fewer features in many ways than FF2, let alone 3, I ain’t downloading IE 8. Beyond that, IE8 is supposed to use twice as much memory as IE7, itself a memory hog.

Meanwhile, Chrome has seriously souped up JavaScript speed.

Faster, especially much faster page loads mean it can load more complex ads, as well as webpages, which means more ad dinero, as CNET explains.

Over at The Dallas Morning News, Victor Godinez says this could be the Firefox death knell.

A full $56 million of Mozilla’s $66 million of revenue last year came from its Google partnership, which ends in 2011.

I disagree with Godinez, though, that Chrome will ONLY hit Firefox. (He claims that IE 8 won’t be hurt because many businesses require its use, and many home users aren’t aware of other browsers.

Victor, this is Google we're talking about. With Google marketing, etc. With Google's own autodownloader program. With Google's Blogger platform likely targeting bloggers to get special blog-related apps on Google.

And, on the business side, Google may push for a package of Google software to be preinstalled on computers.

Wired also disagrees with Godoniz on Chrome vs IE:

It’s an aggressive move destined to put the company even more squarely in the crosshairs of its rival Microsoft, which long ago crushed the most fabled browser of all, Netscape Navigator.

And, it runs JavaScript 10x faster than Firefox or Safari.

Oh, and based on info from Download Safari pages will render correctly in Chrome.

So, the idea of Safari for Windows, at least, should be considered dead.

Sayonara, Steve Jobs, on that baby.

And yet more info on Chrome, specifically in its Terms of Use, indicate Google is intent on becoming more and more of Big Brother all the time.

Given this, I doubt I’ll be any more likely to use Chrome than I will IE8. Indeed, it’s that concern that keeps me from using Google as my RSS reader.

The “Big Brother” worry about Google? Basically, it’s all about the fact that “cloud computing,” at least as Google is now pushing it, represents a loss of control, As John C. Dvorak simply and forcefully details.

In a nutshell, Dvorak says that for some specialized apps, a cloud-based bit of software may well be the superior solution. It’s hard to find what you want as a downloadable app, plus there’s what he calls “nagware”: the update reminders, etc.

Read the whole story for more.

That said, Chrome is NOT necessary, and a cloud-based, cloud-focused or partially cloud-based web browser offers no special convenience.

Move over Firefox AND IE

Google is coming after both of you with its own web browser. Right now, it’s only available in a PC version, with Apple and Linux apps to come. Google has had an ad partnership with Firefox, to take on Microslob’s Internet browser presence indirectly, but apparently decided it was time to strike.

That said, per the story, I didn’t even know Google HAD its own IM.

At the same time, contra the Microslob spokesperson touting IE8 (in beta now), given how slow IE7 loads pages, AND given that it has fewer features in many ways than FF2, let alone 3, I ain’t downloading IE 8. Beyond that, IE8 is supposed to use twice as much memory as IE7, itself a memory hog.

Meanwhile, Chrome has seriously souped up JavaScript speed.

Faster, especially much faster page loads mean it can load more complex ads, as well as webpages, which means more ad dinero, as CNET explains.

Over at The Dallas Morning News, Victor Godinez says this could be the Firefox death knell.

A full $56 million of Mozilla’s $66 million of revenue last year came from its Google partnership, which ends in 2011.

Meanwhile, Mozilla’s CEO whistles in the dark with this comment:

As much as anything else, it’ll mean there’s another interesting browser that users can choose.

I disagree with Godinez, though, that Chrome will ONLY hit Firefox. (He claims that IE 8 won’t be hurt because many businesses require its use, and many home users aren’t aware of other browsers.

Victor, this is Google we're talking about. With Google marketing, etc. With Google's own autodownloader program. With Google's Blogger platform likely targeting bloggers to get special blog-related apps on Google.

And, on the business side, Google may push for a package of Google software to be preinstalled on computers.

Wired also disagrees with Godoniz on Chrome vs IE:

It’s an aggressive move destined to put the company even more squarely in the crosshairs of its rival Microsoft, which long ago crushed the most fabled browser of all, Netscape Navigator.

And, it runs JavaScript 10x faster than Firefox or Safari.

Beyond that, Mozilla itself has a services suite in the works that could compete with some Google apps. And, per Google’s IM, Business Week notes that a number of Google products lost steam soon after launch.

Oh, and based on info from Download Safari pages will render correctly in Chrome.

So, the idea of Safari for Windows, at least, should be considered dead.

Sayonara, Steve Jobs, on that baby.

And yet more info on Chrome, specifically in its Terms of Use, indicate Google is intent on becoming more and more of Big Brother all the time.

Given this, I doubt I’ll be any more likely to use Chrome than I will IE8. Indeed, it’s that concern that keeps me from using Google as my RSS reader.

The “Big Brother” worry about Google? Basically, it’s all about the fact that “cloud computing,” at least as Google is now pushing it, represents a loss of control, As John C. Dvorak simply and forcefully details.

In a nutshell, Dvorak says that for some specialized apps, a cloud-based bit of software may well be the superior solution. It’s hard to find what you want as a downloadable app, plus there’s what he calls “nagware”: the update reminders, etc.

Read the whole story for more.

That said, Chrome is NOT necessary, and a cloud-based, cloud-focused or partially cloud-based web browser offers no special convenience.

So, yes, Mozilla should have an eye to its financial future. But, no, it shouldn’t be sweating bullets right now.