Mozilla In Denial in Terms of Firefox Users

[New Tobin Paradigm]

I hate to keep bringing up this point but it continues to show how pathetic Mozilla has become that we are not only sustainable but have achieved what i would regard as approx 98% independence from whatever it is that Mozilla does. All with our limited resources. Think what we could do if we had the monetary and human resources that Mozilla has even today in post-google breakup terms let alone pre-breakup.

There is just NO excuse for the ever accumulating Mozilla failures in wasted potential, time, resources, projects, and market share.

[Supernova]

Some people at Mozilla at least succeedeed to get the money in their pockets !

[megaman]

If they didn't stop Holly...

Firefox finally joins the 64-bit party, but in BETA form. (37B2 and B3)
I guess Chrome forced their hand?
What a joke! PM 64 makes both of them look outdated. (They're just posers at this point)

[Sajadi]

Well, 64 bit build, Apple software compatible Safari clone with Firefox skin plans... Mozilla's ultimate dream seems to be based on Webkit. I would not be surprised if this Safari/Webkit based "Firefox" they are planning is part one of their plan to create also a Windows/Linux version based on Webkit/Blink - and i would not be surprised if they would not make already some closed door tests internally how to combine a Firefox UI with Blink/Webkit for Linux/Windows just to see if they could pull such a stunt in the future if needed or seeing as more profitable in the end opposed to developing an own engine which costs tons of money and takes away many many resources!

Mozilla should stop pretending to do one thing while doing exactly the opposite. They should just speak out one time in a honest way, how they want to betray the users in the future!

Off-topic:
Conspiracy theory: Perhaps they make Firefox intentionally bad so they can say one day like Opera - "Sorry pal's we can't survive without being Blink based, but do not worry, we keep the features we still have" Boom - they pull an Opera - and all the rest of being unique is gone?

Off-topic:
Conspiracy theory the second: If you keep in mind that Microsoft's new engine will be very similar to Chrome's - perhaps we are soon facing an upcoming trend, that all new created engines are partly Blink/Webkit wanna-be's? Perhaps this happens with Servo too? Would also fulfill partly Conspiracy Theory number one! And it would make sense, seeing of how everyone wants to look like Chrome and work like Chrome, just to get parts of their users!

[Sajadi]

Hmm.. This looks like another one of Mozilla's "Ups, we screwed it up, we're sorry" - First thinking, afterwards acting - Mozilla does never learn

http://www.bretswanson.com/index.php/2015/03/netflix-mozilla-google-recant-on-net-neutrality/

[TwoTankAmin]

Well, the Feb. usage numbers from NetMarket Share for Feb are out. Two notables re Firefox: First, they dropped from 11.9% to 11.6% on their desktop share, but, second, they managed to move out of the "Other" category in mobile share. They now have a whopping 0.67% of that.

The next thing of note were the search engine shares. For Yahoo Global, their last 4 months of desktop search share look like this:

Nov 2014 3.52%
Dec 2014 9.31%
Jan 2015 7.79%
Feb 2015 6.47%

Over the past 11 months the market share loss for Google ended up going to Baidu not to Yahoo which actually lost .09%.

So you all tell me how Mozilla Firefox is really doing for itself and for yahoo?

[megaman]

So you all tell me how Mozilla Firefox is really doing for itself and for yahoo?

They made a search deal and maybe some profit from it. I highly doubt that they care about the search engine as long as they make their profit.
Mozilla might have thought about it and knew that Yahoo! might not climb up there, either slowly or not at all.

I wouldn't call Firefox hopeless, as it still has userbase, but it might be disappearing from mainstream...slowly.

[ashdav]

Regarding the usage figures, is Pale Moon included in the Firefox results?
I'm curious as to what Pale Moons share actually is.

[Night Wing]

Pale Moon is a fork of Firefox so its desktop market share is not included in Firefox's desktop market share.

I have no clue as to what desktop market share Pale Moon has percentage wise.

[Moonchild]

Pale Moon is a fork of Firefox so its desktop market share is not included in Firefox's desktop market share.

I don't think this is particularly true in all cases. Pale Moon in Firefox Compatibility Mode (the default) has "Firefox/xx" in its user agent so may still be counted as Firefox.

I have no clue as to what desktop market share Pale Moon has percentage wise.

Last time I had some details it was around the same percentage as Seamonkey, in some areas of the world a little more.

[Supernova]

That gives around 0,02% (with obviously significant error margin)

[Moonchild]

That gives around 0,02% (with obviously significant error margin)

That was a while ago, as well.
The average number of requests hitting cloudflare on my own domains has doubled since then, if I go by those statistics.

There just isn't any simple metric to use because I don't gather that kind of data. I can only go by indirect numbers which puts the number of active Pale Moon users at around half a million, perhaps a bit more by now. I don't know how much that is in terms of percentage for global browser usage, but that sounds to me like more than 0.02% (unless there really are 2.5 billion individual active users measured)

[Supernova]

Doubling when at 10% is way more obvious than doubling when, e.g., 0,02 to 0,03 already is +50%. Add rounding effect. Potentially, 0,02 to 0,03 can be 0,016 to 0,034 which is more than doubling

I relied on statcounter data which is the only "big" counting site which gives stats for small share too. Note they count hits, not unique visitor. At equal use, this give a bias against PM. Obviously there is a good number of other bias. The trend shall be correct, but there is not enough precision for this.
I'll correct my stance still, PM went from 0,02 to 0,03 since january on their stats. (It's more probably 0,0245 to 0,0255 but hey)