>>53346810
It will probably bottom out just above Opera, which is actually hilarious.

Mind you, it appears they aren't separating mobile from PC which partially explains it.

Maybe if it "fails" all the bay area retards obsessed with novelty "web "technology"" will leave for another project and the core neckbeards can start trimming it back down and even recruit more neckbeards to help instead of wasting their time on webkit-gtk based vim workalikes.

>uc browser

The fuck?
The fuck is this

>>53346863
hopefully it keeps its position as the flagship loonix browser so that all the retarded forks & alternatives stop coming out

>>53346913
Chink browser that's also popular in India and places like that.

>>53346848
Firefox has a mobile browser though. If it was any good, it'd be helping prop up their market share. Just another thing that Mozilla missed the boat on whilst busy with their women's outreach programs.

>>53347056
but android already has chrome preinstalled, why should anybody download a secondary browser?

Googles advertising can do many things.

>>53347108
Windows already has IE/Edge preinstalled, why should anybody download a secondary browser?

>>53347108
Most have AOSP browser (and a skin on top)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11230084

and

http://logs.glob.uno/?c=mozilla%23seamonkey&s=2+Mar+2016&e=2+Mar+2016

What can you expect from a Browser developer who sells their users for money and accuses bad forks of stealing money and code? Still no reason to accuse a bad fork of that, because while a bad fork is and stays bad forever, Firefox is Open Source, so code can be borrowed and used and i see no real way to steal money from Mozilla (well, you can take a bit of market share away from them with using forks or other browsers, but that money loss is minimalist)

>>53347014
Is it good?

>>53347135
Because IE/Edge is shit

>>53347166
Its good if you're poor and have small data caps. Its bad if you dont

People still use FF? It's slow as fuck compared to Chromium and Mozilla is doing a good job removing actual useful features like tab tree.

>>53347176
Quite. People install alternative browsers if they're better than the default. So again, we're back to Mozilla's failings being to blame for their non-presence in mobile, rather than Chrome winning by default due to being preinstalled. If Firefox Mobile was good enough, people would seek it out, as they seek out alternatives to IE/Edge.

>>53347056
Yeah, but Chrome comes on every Android phone.

It's like how IE is ridiculously high on the PC market.

firefox lmfao