> It seems that the market niche of tech-capable people who value privacy and customisation over a simplified UX is not capable of sustaining Firefox on its own.
Perhaps they could care for the automation niche. There are thriving communities on macOS who are deeply into automation, and virtually no one uses Firefox. The ones who do stop because Firefox’s AppleScript support is non-existent, while Chromium’s (and thus every browser based on it) is top notch, even better than Safari’s.
I’m not talking developers, either. Non-coders frequently cobble up short AppleScript snippets do to what they want. When they visit the forums asking for help and how to do what they want in Firefox, they are directed to the open bug report which is old enough to drink.
I have seen plenty of users abandon Firefox on account of that gap. I tried to convey that to Firefox developers multiple times—both in person and online—and their response was to not care.
If they're going to be paying developers to do it they'd need an expectation of a stronger ROI than their other efforts. I wonder if the size of the macOS automation community is large enough to make much of an impact on their market share. Would you estimate they'd gain hundreds of users? Thousands? Tens-of-thousands?
If they're relying on volunteers then they'd need a few folks with the right set of skills and a motivation to scratch that itch. I would personally love to see better AppleScript support in Firefox, but I won't judge anyone else for not stepping up if I don't have the inclination to either.
> I wonder if the size of the macOS automation community is large enough to make much of an impact on their market share.
The automation communities (plural) create tools for themselves and for others. That’s the important bit. It’s common for non-coders to resort to those communities (which can be as simple as a subreddit) to achieve a simple recurring task. If they use Firefox, they get turned away from it because it’s the only major browser lacking AppleScript support. Not only do those developers abandon Firefox, so do all their users.
> Would you estimate they'd gain hundreds of users? Thousands? Tens-of-thousands?
I estimate they wouldn’t lose as many as they do. What good is it to gain market share if you can’t stop the bleed? If Firefox can’t even be interesting to large sections of developers and power users, what chance to they have with the general populace?
I lost count to how many people asked for my tools to be ported to Firefox, and I’m a single data point with a single need. Before I stopped caring, I checked every (front page) Firefox story on HN and without exception I collected a new macOS grievance by someone different. Tellingly, I noticed that no matter how polite or constructive the criticism, it was invariably met by defensiveness of the “I don’t care for that feature, so it’s not the problem” kind. That’s in line with what I felt in my interactions with the Firefox developers I spoke to, despite ostensibly most of them using macOS.
It’s fine for Firefox developers to ignore whatever communities they want; that’s their prerogative. But they then need to accept when those same people assert they can’t use Firefox as their daily driver.
> they'd need an expectation of a stronger ROI than their other efforts
Their latest efforts are constantly criticised on HN precisely because they are gimmicks not related to the browser. I’m not a marketing expert, but I expect making a browser people want to use is better ROI than Mr Robot marketing stunts or short-lived file sharing services with no innovative features.
> Not only do those developers abandon Firefox, so do all their users.
Noted. The underlying question stands: what is the size of this (combined) community and is it large enough to make a meaningful impact on Firefox's market share? Some software can survive by finding a loyal niche, but a browser engine is probably not one of them as it requires a certain market share threshold to be a target for web developers.
> What good is it to gain market share if you can’t stop the bleed?
When the gain exceeds the loss from the bleed. (With the caveat that not all users are equally valuable -- users who are vocal, enthusiastic, and/or do not require niche functionality can be more valuable than others.)
> I noticed that no matter how polite or constructive the criticism, it was invariably met by defensiveness of the “I don’t care for that feature, so it’s not the problem” kind.
If it's any consolation, that is not my specific issue. I would love to have better automation on macOS and it frustrates me that I have to choose between an open web and end-user automation. I hear your frustration that you cannot help people use your tools with Firefox.
I also have no idea what Mozilla's expected return on their projects like file-sharing services were. (Marketing stunts are usually done to attract advertiser dollars, not users.) They don't seem to be making the tradeoffs and allocations I would personally make. Having said that, trying to halt or reverse a death spiral means making hard choices that invariably alienate some number of users.
Personally I am impressed that Mozilla has been able to outlast Microsoft and Opera in keeping up with Apple and Google for so long. But I would not be surprised if they too are forced to switch to Blink (or WebKit) eventually.
> The underlying question stands: what is the size of this (combined) community and is it large enough to make a meaningful impact on Firefox's market share?
I don’t have data to make that claim definitively. Even if it’s large enough and they catered to it now, would people come back? I don’t know.
But that’s not my larger point:
> Before I stopped caring, I checked every (front page) Firefox story on HN and without exception I collected a new macOS grievance by someone different.
An example is music producers missing the Web MIDI API. I focused on automation because that’s what I know, but my point is they have multiple communities to cater to. This conversation started with a quote about Firefox niches.
> When the gain exceeds the loss from the bleed.
I wasn’t talking in the abstract. Firefox is unable to get new users at that rate.
> I hear your frustration that you cannot help people use your tools with Firefox.
I no longer care. I let them know why Firefox doesn’t work and point them to the bug report but tell them to not get their hopes up. My tools are open-source and free, so it’s not like this feature gap impacts by bottom line. I want to add Firefox support because I want it to succeed. But they’re not making it easy for automaters to help; quite the contrary, every useful tool we build which supports every major browser except Firefox is another nail in the coffin.
> Marketing stunts are usually done to attract advertiser dollars, not users.
Their stunts actively lose them users. No users, no one to advertise to.
Perhaps they could care for the automation niche. There are thriving communities on macOS who are deeply into automation, and virtually no one uses Firefox. The ones who do stop because Firefox’s AppleScript support is non-existent, while Chromium’s (and thus every browser based on it) is top notch, even better than Safari’s.
I’m not talking developers, either. Non-coders frequently cobble up short AppleScript snippets do to what they want. When they visit the forums asking for help and how to do what they want in Firefox, they are directed to the open bug report which is old enough to drink.
I have seen plenty of users abandon Firefox on account of that gap. I tried to convey that to Firefox developers multiple times—both in person and online—and their response was to not care.