The number of devs that see something isn't supported on FF and do something other than shrug their shoulders is probably me and one other person on the internet. Maybe. It could just be me.
I don't think that moves the needle much on if people care it doesn't work in FF.
> The number of devs that see something isn't supported on FF and do something other than shrug their shoulders is probably me and one other person on the internet. Maybe. It could just be me.
The number is likely extremely close to the number of Firefox users.
And yet you missed the self-deprecating humor in acknowledging FF users is such a small number, it's me and one other person. Did you think that was a literal number I believed to be true?
My (personally) humorous interpretation was that they were extending your joke by implying the only users using FF are devs and they are the ones that care.
If Firefox does release support, it shouldn’t be long before adoption is widespread:
> Since Mozilla throttles the rollout of a new version (incrementally upgrading the percentage of the population getting upgrades), it takes about four weeks for about 70% of clients to upgrade before stabilizing.
Unrelated but from that link "But why profiles? Why not just measure new user rate? Because we don't track users." is a weird thing to write after showing Monthly Active Users.
Use Firefox! It does not support sites that make you physically ill when you scroll them!