1. A marketing department that can get it more than 2% market share

2. A legal and advocacy department that can work with governments to stop monopolists like Google and Apple privileging their own browsers on platforms they control

3. To use its seat on standards boards to stop abhorrent practises like the W3C endorsing DRM, or Google dropping effective web-blocking APIs from extensions.

I wish mozilla would focus on developing decentralized/p2p features, from messaging to maybe tor-browsing.

I think this independence is much needed in the future to come.

Firefox should focus on not hemorrhaging users, they're about to reach the cutoff (1%) where the US government will no longer even support their browser.

No normal person will switch to Firefox for tor, despite us nerds thinking it's cool. And if they can't get actual users to switch, the browser has no future.

And if you want a browser that can do Tor, Brave has you covered.

All Firefox needs to do is make adblocking an integral part of the browser, but that would cut the Google money off.

I'm trying to use it right on mac right now. It's still slow with many tabs (even with autosleep enabled), visibly slower than both Safari or any Chromium based browser.

Also they killed visual tab expose, and any extensions that could replace it, so all I have for managing the tabs is a vertical list.

In addition to what everyone else said, comments like yours confirm that it would be a waste for me to check out Firefox for the hundredth time. You are among a sea of comments enumerating the specific reasons why it sucks, and you're here insisting with zero substantiation that it is "effective" and "by far the best browser around". A better approach would be to acknowledge the issues that users have had with it and explain how it has improved.

On the other hand, if your definition of "effective" and "best" describes Firefox the last time I checked it out, then our definitions do not match, and I don't need to check it out again.

The people using it.

> The people using it.

I'm not sure if you are serious. I mean, look at Chrome and Edge and Safari. They are managed by corporations that control their own platform. I get Chrome, Edge, and Safari because it is actively pushed onto me.

What does Firefox have?

The ugly truth is that browsers like Chrome and Edge and Safari are just as good as Firefox, and a user who is not a software militant doesn't really care or know what browser they are using. They open the "internet" app and browse away.

What leads you to believe this is a Firefox issue?

Edge and Safari yes, but Chrome doesn't come pre-installed in both Windows and MacOS. You and every Chrome user actively goes out of their way to download and install it.

> What does Firefox have?

Every single nontrivial Linux distribution out there comes packaged with Firefox as the default browser.

> a user who is not a software militant doesn't really care or know what browser they are using. They open the "internet" app and browse away.

Clearly then all Chrome users on laptops/desktops are software militants..

> What leads you to believe this is a Firefox issue?

Firefox had at least half a decade of a headstart against Chrome and did jack shit with it.

Google have at times used quite forceful messaging to push users of their search product to download Chrome.