[calcifer]

> I'd get rid of any and all telemetry

> feature changes or additions would always be optional

> Ignore mobile

So... You are increasing costs ("everything optional"), reducing visibility ("no default telemetry") and ignoring the largest and fastest growing market (mobile). How is your FireFox Browser Inc. making money?

You also didn't respond to my question at all - how is any of this supposed to increase market share?

[SkyMarshal]

First step in increasing market share is to stop losing market share. Jacquesm’s strategy owns the market for privacy-prioritizing customers, creating a market share floor. It may be small but it’s a solid, committed base. Then you build on it.

Corporate and government data security is a related area that a strong privacy-preserving product and team with world class privacy/crypto/security expertise could expand into, especially in places like the EU and India that need a neutral and trustworthy alternative to Chrome-based and Safari-based products. Maybe even the US given the new “Clean Path” initiative.

There are opportunities but you have to stop the bleeding first. I think Jacquesm’s Apple-like strategy of focusing on the most important, already-market-proven product and saying No to most everything else is the best shot at that.

[kakamocha]

How does Firefox's telemetry have any value?

Disabling telemetry is one of the first things that nearly all advanced users do when using Firefox, or when using other products known to include telemetry that can be disabled.

So now any telemetry data that are collected are distorted, given that some of the wisest and most valuable users just aren't included at all because they've disabled telemetry.

Analysis done on the distorted data comes to distorted conclusions.

Product decisions made based on such distorted conclusions end up distorting the usability of the software.

Firefox has collected telemetry for quite a while now, yet I've yet to see that translate into any identifiable improvement.

Worse, a lot of very common Firefox user requests like "make it faster" and "make it use less memory" seem to get minimal attention.

I think Firefox would be a better product, and thus a more widely used product, if the telemetry were to be completely ditched, and the common user complaints that are voiced again and again in all sorts of discussion venues were listened to instead.

[sergiomattei]

I think the HN bubble is severely distorting this discussion: the amount of people that realistically care about telemetry is negligible at best.

[ori_b]

So is the number of people that realistically care about Firefox.

[gsich]

Sue Google. Force them to make them chose a browser like MS had to in XP times. Then Apple.

Assuming your mobile browser works though.

[jacquesm]

I don't see how making additions optional for a free browser would increase costs, telemetry does not increase visibility, but it is a serious privacy concern and the mobile market is owned by Google and Apple, two companies that are not going to be won over unless there is some serious firepower available, something FireFox does not currently have.

This is all wishful thinking on your part.

If you don't see how getting the second largest block of internet users strongly behind the one free browser might help to increase market share then that's puzzling but for me the GDPR + FireFox make good sense from an EU perspective. Consolidation + buildout is stop-the-bleeding 101.

That's a lot of users and a government that has made serious moves to show that they too care about user privacy.

Anyway, I did in fact answer your question, and quite exhaustively. But you did not answer mine: how much would it cost to run a lean-and-mean FireFox Inc?

[morsch]

It's Firefox. The second F is not capitalized. And please don't get rid of my privacy-first mobile browser (small market share notwithstanding) to focus on your privacy-first desktop browser.