Firefox may not be _as_ fast as Chrome, but it's a fairly negligible difference nowadays. rendering speed hasn't been a limiting factor for a while, and i feel like network latency and poor application optimization has been more the culprit there. you can only squeeze so much blood from the optimizing inefficient JS stone, and no amount of rendering engine optimization will ever fix shitty backend API response times
Firefox fails because there is no actual industry pressure to build a better browser. you simply can't sell a browser alone anymore: the free offerings have been good enough since the early 2000s.
Safari only needs to be good enough for iOS users to not abandon the platform entirely, and the ecosystem wants to push you into native apps anyway (Apple wants their IAP cut).
Chredge is, well, _there_, but basically just a minimum batteries included that maybe funnels some set of users into other Microsoft offerings, but it isn't the core product.
Chrome is, well, Chrome.
Firefox is comfortably supported by Google funding as an antitrust action shield. there's no real pressure for them to try and beat Chrome in market share because they're explicitly paid to be minority market share, and aren't really going to lose that share because they already have all of the "intentionally don't want to use Chrome" market. Mozilla faffs about making also-ran internet services (idk, whatever the heck that VPN offering was, etc.) because they fundamentally can't lose their main revenue stream so long as Google wants to avoid antitrust action, and have no real pressure to offer a competitive product.
Firefox fails because there is no actual industry pressure to build a better browser. you simply can't sell a browser alone anymore: the free offerings have been good enough since the early 2000s.
Safari only needs to be good enough for iOS users to not abandon the platform entirely, and the ecosystem wants to push you into native apps anyway (Apple wants their IAP cut).
Chredge is, well, _there_, but basically just a minimum batteries included that maybe funnels some set of users into other Microsoft offerings, but it isn't the core product.
Chrome is, well, Chrome.
Firefox is comfortably supported by Google funding as an antitrust action shield. there's no real pressure for them to try and beat Chrome in market share because they're explicitly paid to be minority market share, and aren't really going to lose that share because they already have all of the "intentionally don't want to use Chrome" market. Mozilla faffs about making also-ran internet services (idk, whatever the heck that VPN offering was, etc.) because they fundamentally can't lose their main revenue stream so long as Google wants to avoid antitrust action, and have no real pressure to offer a competitive product.