Around these parts, folks are either cynical or using randoms as a scapegoat for their irl problems/issues. Therefore, the negativity. Just don't bother.
People don't seem to understand that a company can do more than one thing at a time. It takes a very long time with a large number of people to make changes to the code of a browser, with lots of incremental changes so that users' experience doesn't break, and doesn't break other functionality.
But a bit of swag and a new mascot requires a team of about 10-20 people in the marketing department working on just that for about a year.
They're different tasks with different requirements, working in parallel. I cannot hate them for this.
And if you think Mozilla shouldn't have a marketing department then you're part of the problem because you're basically saying that Firefox should just be forgotten.
As long as Firefox exists and keeps doing updates to the browser I'm happy. It's currently one of 3 browsers and if Firefox goes away I'm sure Safari will go soon after and Chrome will be all that is left.
I've looked into ladybird and from what I can tell, it's going to be intentionally devoid of extension support. that's a pretty big deal breaker for me.
all I really want is a simple and predictable web browser with no bells and whistles built in, but with the framework to add in whatever functionality I'd like
you know Ladybird isn't going to be a savior browser right? like it probably won't even be usable as a daily drive for a majority of web users for probably another 6+ years at least, even then I have my doubts, as much as I'm open to new browsers (not chromium) based entering the pool, it's not a small feat to even get close to web standard parity
I've been following the monthly dev updates for Ladybird and they have a bit of a different approach than others trying to enter the browser game. They focus mostly on the web platform tests and recently got 90% although most of the work is in that 10% that is left. They also prioritize features currently and not performance so it's very slow at some things. But their idea is too pass more feature tests and do the optimization later. I think they also try to focus on clean code so you don't have to be a browser genius to make a pull request.
But it's still far away from finished, but I'd say they will have a usable (slow) browser in 2 years.
Depends really what you mean. They aren't breaking the experience for probably 99% of users, only those that rely on esoteric modifications to things like userchrome, which anyone editing those files should expect to break.
Or changing how searching with a non-default search engine can be initiated.
There's also generally a ton of breakage with new features even if not used. I only looked into what tab grouping is, because I read about how the addition of that is the root cause of all the tab / toolbar freezing issues which are still happening now and then.
Nice :3 Fun fact, kit in Ukrainian is a word for a cat. So for me it's now mascot that looks like fox, named like a cat for a browser named after a red panda
10+ brand reworks in 15 years while their marketshare slides into oblivion and their browser is becoming less and less compatible with the modern web?
Like, yes, firefox needs marketing, and recognizable branding, and honestly the fox is pretty cute, I like it. But so was the last one. And the one before that. And before that. You don't see any other browser doing this, and the numbers don't lie. it's not helping them reclaim marketshare.
So, yeah, why would i donate towards the next cute fox redesign? It'll be gone in three years and even fewer websites will render correctly in firefox. If I could donate specifically to development of the firefox browser I would, but that's not an option.
We’re talking about changes to the software and you mentioned no changes to Firefox. The only technical thing you mentioned was that web developers don’t test their code against Firefox and wind up depending on non-standard Chrome features. That has nothing to do with Firefox development.
Over the past year, we’ve gotten progressive web app support and Firefox profiles. Both are incredibly important to modern web browsing imho.
We're not though, are we? This is the first time you've mentioned that you're only talking about software changes. Feels a lot like moving the goalposts.
Still, ok, that was an honest slip. You meant to specify software.
Honestly, my only major issue is how they've repeatedly watered down their privacy by default setup.
Other than that, no complaints. If I could donate money that I knew would be ringfenced to fund development of the core browser, I would. Profiles are great. I'm getting a lot of use out of tab groups. PWA's are whatever, but it's nice to have them available.
I just can't see the 10+ brand reworks as being necessary or proportionate. Yes, it's vital for firefox to market itself to users, but realistically how many brand refreshes do you need? Most browsers seem to get by with 1 a decade or so. 10ish in 15 years is absurd, and it clearly comes at the expense of actual marketing. I've seen ads for chrome(of course), brave, vivaldi and opera. I've never seen a firefox ad. I don't know anyone who's ever seen a firefox ad.
Combine that with reckless spending on experiments that were never going to turn a profit as their core business spiralled and it's hard to shake the idea that they've badly mismanaged their finances and direction over the course of many years. That in turn makes it hard to prioritize them for donations when there are so many other FOSS software projects which are better stewarded. My budget for donations is limited and I need to know that it's being spent responsibly. Mozilla has not demonstrated that they will do so.
their browser is becoming less and less compatible with the modern web
That sounds the wrong way around. It's not Firefox adding incompatibilities to their browser, it's the modern web developers not caring if their latest page rework works anywhere but in Chrome.
Multiple rounds of layoffs. A list of dead projects that's starting to rival google. Still slower than chrome. Almost extinct on desktop. Increasingly unsupported by websites.
19 billionth brand rework.
Are you guys OK? Has the CEO locked you in the basement?
You're aware that it wasn't the coders who designed this, right? It's not like time was taken away from development to work on a new mascot. That's a comoletely different team with a comoletelt different skillset.
It is important, very important. but just as important (if not more important) as having cute mascots or whatever is having a good and functional product. if a something is bad, it will remain bad no matter how much makeup you apply to it.
I have dealt with so many rendering problems while daily driving Firefox, not to mention the privacy concerns regarding the AI stuff they've been forcing into us. Honestly the only reason I have kept using Firefox is because I haven't found a good enough alternative for it.
It's on Mozilla for creating their bad reputation. I am not surprised seeing this attitude when they've had lots of other useless projects in the side in the past. At this point people just want them to focus on their browser.
I'd take some Thunderbird love too, but at this point it seems to be too much to ask for.
I don't even keep track of the other projects, I'm more puzzled about the extra features I'm not sure who asked for. For example I do wonder how much effort went into adding calendar, messaging, and other non-email features into Thunderbird, just to end up with a heavy client that's no longer good for emailing, as it for example can't even do filtering without known data corruption problems.
I promise you, the vast majority of the people just want a better browser. They don't care about Rust (which did pan out to be significant), Servo, Pocket, Fakespot.
Yes I'm aware. You are aware that brand designers don't work for free, right? They need payment for services provided. So it does take resources away from development, because the money being spent on this is not being spent on development.
This wouldn't be a problem if they had the funds to manage both, but we know that members of the core development team have been laid off in previous rounds of layoffs, so they clearly don't.
I don't mind firefox having a marketing team, but investing in multiple brand reworks whilst laying off developers working on your core product suggests extreme levels of mismanagement and detachment from reality.
You say this but marketing is largelly why Firefox is falling behind.
Besides YouTube being a bit iffy (which is at the very least semi-intentionally done by Google), I have noticed no large issues on Firefox in the past year or so that I've been using it as my primary browser (I actually had some rather big issues on Chrome).
You say this but marketing is largely why Firefox is falling behind.
Absolutely, but endless rebrands aren't marketing. Almost everyone who sees the rebrands is already a firefox user. Again, I'm not against them having a marketing team. They need one. They should be advertising and promoting firefox. Unfortunately that's not what they're doing. I don't know a single person who's seen a firefox ad.
I have noticed no large issues on Firefox in the past year or so.
It's infrequent(1-2 time a year), and usually with corporate or academic sites, but until about 5 years ago it had never happened to me. On one occasion I was informed that Firefox "is not targeted or supported" and directed to a list that included IE9. That used to be unthinkable. Firefox was too big not to support.
I get that there's a strong urge to defend Firefox against criticism. It's the only truly independent, open source web browser that's actually suitable for daily driving. It has played a huge part in keeping the corporate web bearable. Those are good things that we should celebrate. However, that doesn't make Mozilla immune to criticism. Firefox is on the brink. A future without it is now a real possibility. I don't think the blame for that can be laid entirely on googles door.
Mozilla has been putting noticeable energy into marketing, rebranding, and side projects while parts of Firefox’s core web technology support feel neglected or inconsistent compared to Chromium.
WebAuthn: Firefox technically supports it, but implementation and UX lag behind Chrome — things like passkey syncing, platform authenticator integration, and conditional UI prompts still feel unfinished or inconsistent across OSes.
WebUSB: Mozilla flat-out refuses to implement it, citing security and privacy concerns. They argue that WebUSB exposes too much low-level device access from the browser and that it could be exploited. Instead, they push for WebHID or native app bridging — but that leaves developers stuck writing Chromium-only paths.
WebGL / WebGPU: WebGL support exists but often lags in performance, driver compatibility, and extensions. WebGPU took ages to land and still doesn’t match Chrome’s stability or tooling (e.g., DevTools integration).
tails_the_god35@reddit
OMG i love kit! I love foxes not just fictional but real ones ♥️💯
ReadToW@reddit
It looks great. More appealing to a wider audience. I don't understand the negativity.
One good step doesn't cancel out many slow or bad steps.
I also want Firefox to be faster and Mozilla to be better.
But good steps can be praised
Beautiful_Crab6670@reddit
Around these parts, folks are either cynical or using randoms as a scapegoat for their irl problems/issues. Therefore, the negativity. Just don't bother.
deusmetallum@reddit
People don't seem to understand that a company can do more than one thing at a time. It takes a very long time with a large number of people to make changes to the code of a browser, with lots of incremental changes so that users' experience doesn't break, and doesn't break other functionality.
But a bit of swag and a new mascot requires a team of about 10-20 people in the marketing department working on just that for about a year.
They're different tasks with different requirements, working in parallel. I cannot hate them for this.
And if you think Mozilla shouldn't have a marketing department then you're part of the problem because you're basically saying that Firefox should just be forgotten.
Fun-Consequence-3112@reddit
As long as Firefox exists and keeps doing updates to the browser I'm happy. It's currently one of 3 browsers and if Firefox goes away I'm sure Safari will go soon after and Chrome will be all that is left.
ivosaurus@reddit
Praying that ladybird makes it to adulthood before Firefox completely slips into irrelevancy
that_one_wierd_guy@reddit
I've looked into ladybird and from what I can tell, it's going to be intentionally devoid of extension support. that's a pretty big deal breaker for me.
all I really want is a simple and predictable web browser with no bells and whistles built in, but with the framework to add in whatever functionality I'd like
NeonVoidx@reddit
you know Ladybird isn't going to be a savior browser right? like it probably won't even be usable as a daily drive for a majority of web users for probably another 6+ years at least, even then I have my doubts, as much as I'm open to new browsers (not chromium) based entering the pool, it's not a small feat to even get close to web standard parity
Fun-Consequence-3112@reddit
I've been following the monthly dev updates for Ladybird and they have a bit of a different approach than others trying to enter the browser game. They focus mostly on the web platform tests and recently got 90% although most of the work is in that 10% that is left. They also prioritize features currently and not performance so it's very slow at some things. But their idea is too pass more feature tests and do the optimization later. I think they also try to focus on clean code so you don't have to be a browser genius to make a pull request.
But it's still far away from finished, but I'd say they will have a usable (slow) browser in 2 years.
Exernuth@reddit
Too late for that. Thanks to Mozilla.
MuffyPuff@reddit
But like, they keep doing that… intentionally…
deusmetallum@reddit
Depends really what you mean. They aren't breaking the experience for probably 99% of users, only those that rely on esoteric modifications to things like userchrome, which anyone editing those files should expect to break.
MuffyPuff@reddit
Nah, changing the behavior of "clicking the url bar" it not "esoteric", for example
AntLive9218@reddit
Or changing how searching with a non-default search engine can be initiated.
There's also generally a ton of breakage with new features even if not used. I only looked into what tab grouping is, because I read about how the addition of that is the root cause of all the tab / toolbar freezing issues which are still happening now and then.
ward2k@reddit
Reminds me when people were pissed off at Halo for making a licensed cookbook when they could have been "spending the time fixing bugs"
Do people not realise they have completely different teams and departments doing different stuff at one time
ReadToW@reddit
I completely agree
Nereithp@reddit
Much like baseball is America's second favourite national pastime, bashing Mozilla is the second favourite pastime of r/Linux.
Ugly_Slut-Wannabe@reddit
Bonus points if someone recommends something like Brave or Vivaldi as an alternative to Chrome instead of Firefox.
-IiIIiIIIiIIIiIIiI@reddit
Is there any big "issues" with Vivaldi? The Brave ones I know about
ReadToW@reddit
No, but the design looks outdated
ReadToW@reddit
People who recommend Brave are crazy.
Firefox is much better despite all of Mozilla's real problems
Tellurio@reddit
Nah. Brave is fine. Used it for years, never had a problem with it.
kuroimakina@reddit
“It sucks, everything is chrome based nowadays! Google controls everything!”
“So… use Firefox?”
“Absolutely not! Firefox is terrible! Oh but maybe I’ll try Brave! Surely that’ll change things!”
prueba_hola@reddit
Gnome web + firefox is my way
Didgeridoo69420@reddit
The negativity is quite easy to understand after their ToS update from March.
NEXUSX@reddit
True, we owe a lot to Mozilla for the last 20 years of the web. I’m gonna buy a sweater to give back in a small way.
Understand some criticism around some actions but it seems overly negative about something nice.
Ethameiz@reddit
Nice :3 Fun fact, kit in Ukrainian is a word for a cat. So for me it's now mascot that looks like fox, named like a cat for a browser named after a red panda
greenknight@reddit
What is the Ukrainian word for a baby fox? That's a kit in English.
Ethameiz@reddit
Baby fox is lysenia (лисеня), fox is lys (лис) (male) or lysytsia (лисиця) (female).
ExPandaa@reddit
I'm so tired of Mozilla wasting time and budget on rebrands every 6 months.
DerfetteJoel@reddit
You do realize they make money with merchandise, not lose it, do you?
greenknight@reddit
How about Thunderbird Pro launch announcement guys!
I'll buy the swag after that.
Eubank31@reddit
I kinda love it
apo--@reddit
Not as good as Microsoft Bob but ok.
hlodowigchile@reddit
Wait, it's a fire fox, clever......
zachfromband@reddit
Looks cool! I hope it isnt some ai slop but luckily it doesnt look like it
TacticalSupportFurry@reddit
:3
AnsibleAnswers@reddit
If you want to improve Firefox, shut up and give Mozilla money.
Jacksaur@reddit
If they're making changes you disagree with, more money isn't going to cause them to change course.
AnsibleAnswers@reddit
What changes?
Audible_Whispering@reddit
10+ brand reworks in 15 years while their marketshare slides into oblivion and their browser is becoming less and less compatible with the modern web?
Like, yes, firefox needs marketing, and recognizable branding, and honestly the fox is pretty cute, I like it. But so was the last one. And the one before that. And before that. You don't see any other browser doing this, and the numbers don't lie. it's not helping them reclaim marketshare.
So, yeah, why would i donate towards the next cute fox redesign? It'll be gone in three years and even fewer websites will render correctly in firefox. If I could donate specifically to development of the firefox browser I would, but that's not an option.
AnsibleAnswers@reddit
So, you have no examples.
Audible_Whispering@reddit
If you choose to arbitrarily define anything you don't agree with as "not an example", no. But that's called a bad faith argument and can be ignored.
I mean, I could go on. But you'd just define those as "not an example" as well, so there's no point.
AnsibleAnswers@reddit
We’re talking about changes to the software and you mentioned no changes to Firefox. The only technical thing you mentioned was that web developers don’t test their code against Firefox and wind up depending on non-standard Chrome features. That has nothing to do with Firefox development.
Over the past year, we’ve gotten progressive web app support and Firefox profiles. Both are incredibly important to modern web browsing imho.
Audible_Whispering@reddit
We're not though, are we? This is the first time you've mentioned that you're only talking about software changes. Feels a lot like moving the goalposts.
Still, ok, that was an honest slip. You meant to specify software.
Honestly, my only major issue is how they've repeatedly watered down their privacy by default setup.
Other than that, no complaints. If I could donate money that I knew would be ringfenced to fund development of the core browser, I would. Profiles are great. I'm getting a lot of use out of tab groups. PWA's are whatever, but it's nice to have them available.
I just can't see the 10+ brand reworks as being necessary or proportionate. Yes, it's vital for firefox to market itself to users, but realistically how many brand refreshes do you need? Most browsers seem to get by with 1 a decade or so. 10ish in 15 years is absurd, and it clearly comes at the expense of actual marketing. I've seen ads for chrome(of course), brave, vivaldi and opera. I've never seen a firefox ad. I don't know anyone who's ever seen a firefox ad.
Combine that with reckless spending on experiments that were never going to turn a profit as their core business spiralled and it's hard to shake the idea that they've badly mismanaged their finances and direction over the course of many years. That in turn makes it hard to prioritize them for donations when there are so many other FOSS software projects which are better stewarded. My budget for donations is limited and I need to know that it's being spent responsibly. Mozilla has not demonstrated that they will do so.
I hope that changes in future.
LvS@reddit
That sounds the wrong way around. It's not Firefox adding incompatibilities to their browser, it's the modern web developers not caring if their latest page rework works anywhere but in Chrome.
Exernuth@reddit
Useless, considering that donations to Mozilla don't fun5FF development.
Audible_Whispering@reddit
Multiple rounds of layoffs. A list of dead projects that's starting to rival google. Still slower than chrome. Almost extinct on desktop. Increasingly unsupported by websites.
19 billionth brand rework.
Are you guys OK? Has the CEO locked you in the basement?
Peruvian_Skies@reddit
You're aware that it wasn't the coders who designed this, right? It's not like time was taken away from development to work on a new mascot. That's a comoletely different team with a comoletelt different skillset.
Hugogs10@reddit
It is resources that are being allocated to something that most users don't care about.
shegonneedatumzzz@reddit
i think you underestimate how much superficial things like a cute mascot can make an average consumer more interested in a brand
Neeyaki@reddit
It is important, very important. but just as important (if not more important) as having cute mascots or whatever is having a good and functional product. if a something is bad, it will remain bad no matter how much makeup you apply to it.
I have dealt with so many rendering problems while daily driving Firefox, not to mention the privacy concerns regarding the AI stuff they've been forcing into us. Honestly the only reason I have kept using Firefox is because I haven't found a good enough alternative for it.
836624@reddit
Branding and PR are vital to appeal to a casual audience.
adamkex@reddit
It's on Mozilla for creating their bad reputation. I am not surprised seeing this attitude when they've had lots of other useless projects in the side in the past. At this point people just want them to focus on their browser.
AntLive9218@reddit
I'd take some Thunderbird love too, but at this point it seems to be too much to ask for.
I don't even keep track of the other projects, I'm more puzzled about the extra features I'm not sure who asked for. For example I do wonder how much effort went into adding calendar, messaging, and other non-email features into Thunderbird, just to end up with a heavy client that's no longer good for emailing, as it for example can't even do filtering without known data corruption problems.
ThatOneShotBruh@reddit
You say that but people complained like crazy when Mozilla dropped Rust and Servo when neither of which directly benefit them.
I get that Mozilla isn't perfect (no company is), but at this point people are largely complaining about anything and everything they (do not) do.
adamkex@reddit
I promise you, the vast majority of the people just want a better browser. They don't care about Rust (which did pan out to be significant), Servo, Pocket, Fakespot.
Audible_Whispering@reddit
Yes I'm aware. You are aware that brand designers don't work for free, right? They need payment for services provided. So it does take resources away from development, because the money being spent on this is not being spent on development.
This wouldn't be a problem if they had the funds to manage both, but we know that members of the core development team have been laid off in previous rounds of layoffs, so they clearly don't.
I don't mind firefox having a marketing team, but investing in multiple brand reworks whilst laying off developers working on your core product suggests extreme levels of mismanagement and detachment from reality.
ThatOneShotBruh@reddit
You say this but marketing is largelly why Firefox is falling behind.
Besides YouTube being a bit iffy (which is at the very least semi-intentionally done by Google), I have noticed no large issues on Firefox in the past year or so that I've been using it as my primary browser (I actually had some rather big issues on Chrome).
Audible_Whispering@reddit
Absolutely, but endless rebrands aren't marketing. Almost everyone who sees the rebrands is already a firefox user. Again, I'm not against them having a marketing team. They need one. They should be advertising and promoting firefox. Unfortunately that's not what they're doing. I don't know a single person who's seen a firefox ad.
It's infrequent(1-2 time a year), and usually with corporate or academic sites, but until about 5 years ago it had never happened to me. On one occasion I was informed that Firefox "is not targeted or supported" and directed to a list that included IE9. That used to be unthinkable. Firefox was too big not to support.
I get that there's a strong urge to defend Firefox against criticism. It's the only truly independent, open source web browser that's actually suitable for daily driving. It has played a huge part in keeping the corporate web bearable. Those are good things that we should celebrate. However, that doesn't make Mozilla immune to criticism. Firefox is on the brink. A future without it is now a real possibility. I don't think the blame for that can be laid entirely on googles door.
Farados55@reddit
It’s really nice.
itsjustoneperson@reddit
Mozilla has been putting noticeable energy into marketing, rebranding, and side projects while parts of Firefox’s core web technology support feel neglected or inconsistent compared to Chromium.
WebAuthn: Firefox technically supports it, but implementation and UX lag behind Chrome — things like passkey syncing, platform authenticator integration, and conditional UI prompts still feel unfinished or inconsistent across OSes.
WebUSB: Mozilla flat-out refuses to implement it, citing security and privacy concerns. They argue that WebUSB exposes too much low-level device access from the browser and that it could be exploited. Instead, they push for WebHID or native app bridging — but that leaves developers stuck writing Chromium-only paths.
WebGL / WebGPU: WebGL support exists but often lags in performance, driver compatibility, and extensions. WebGPU took ages to land and still doesn’t match Chrome’s stability or tooling (e.g., DevTools integration).
SiggiJarl@reddit
so it's a kitfox?
Cold_Soft_4823@reddit
For those outside the USA, this isn't a "North American" store. It's a United States store with insane shipping to both Mexico and Canada.
prueba_hola@reddit
but... firefox was a red panda...
KoletrolTheSecond@reddit
Rebranding?
Berobad@reddit
The logo always was a fox.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_logo
ward2k@reddit
Slight misconception. The mascot is both a Red Panda and a fox (confusing I know)
The name comes from the red panda however all the designs have always obviously based on an actual fox instead
wackajawacka@reddit
A bit bland. Just put a giant firefox logo on a tshirt instead. Or make a beanie hat that looks like a sleeping fox.
ward2k@reddit
If you go onto the site and remove the filters they already have these?
wackajawacka@reddit
Ah, they do, you're right.
formegadriverscustom@reddit
It's kinda cute, yes, but I'd prefer that they brought back Mozilla, the dinosaur.
wszrqaxios@reddit
Huh, I was bracing myself to read "Say hi to Kit, our personal AI assistant"..
ComprehensiveYak4399@reddit
cute as hell omgg 😭
Paschma@reddit
i wanna pet kit
Cool-Arrival-2617@reddit
They already had Foxkeh, why create a new one?
MagicalPancakes404@reddit
Hi
Unable-Ambassador-16@reddit
I love Kit
I_Want_To_Grow_420@reddit
They need to appeal to a new generation.
dswhite85@reddit
I don't think I've ever wanted to buy Firefox merch in my life.
Dont_tase_me_bruh694@reddit
Another instance if wasting money on something no one cares about.
sunjay140@reddit
I care about it.
silenceimpaired@reddit
They are ignoring us quick do something flashy.
Shouldn’t we just stop annoying them?
Nah, something flashy.
donotfuckingpost@reddit
Just put the browser in the bag and shut up.
stommepool@reddit
So not a red panda after all.
ShitstormBlower@reddit
ughhhhhhhhhhhh
capitan_turtle@reddit
A poor attempt at a hostile takeover of google's furry division
hieroschemonach@reddit
Okay, I guess