With the rise of hybrid working and data mismanagement continuing to dominate the headlines, you'd be forgiven for thinking that even the most unsuspecting users would be interested in protecting their privacy online..
However, new data provided to TechRadar Pro by digital intelligence platform SimilarWeb indicates that the growth of veteran privacy-focused browsers Mozilla Firefox and Opera has stalled.
A rough estimate of Opera's user acquisition rate (based on traffic to the browser's install page) suggests that June was a particularly low point, marking a 23,1% decrease in growth rate desde el comeenzo de. Ha habido ganancias menores desde entonces, pero Opera parece ser cada vez menos atractivo para los nuevos usuarios.
Meanwhile, Firefox fared even worse, perhaps due to the decision to focus on Mozilla VPN and other privacy products. In August, visits to the browser's install page fell 7% from January, and its market share (opens in a new tab) (once 30%) fell to just 3,35%.
Raw data shows that Firefox currently attracts only a few hundred thousand new users each month, while Opera attracts around two million. However, the market leader, Google Chrome, is said to be used by more than 3100 billion people (opens in a new tab).
The Rise of the "Big Default Browser"
SimilarWeb's release of the numbers coincided with a report (opens in a new tab) released by Mozilla in late September 2022 that accused Google, Microsoft and Apple of "abusing their privileged position" to make it "difficult or impossible" for the usuarios. los navegadores definidos por defecto por el sistema operativo.
Battle lines have already been drawn this year with European Union antitrust legislation targeting Google, Apple and Meta's stranglehold on browsers, search engines and other markets. Google also failed recently to overturn a €4.340bn antitrust fine for restrictions imposed on Android device makers to "consolidate the dominant position of its search engine", according to a spokesman for the EU Court of Justice.
Google Chrome and Microsoft Edge are very popular default settings that are almost entirely based on brand recognition and their status as default options across multiple operating systems (Chrome on Chrome OS and Android, and Edge on Windows 11). Other "big flaws" include the macOS and iOS versions of Safari.
"Default settings can create burdens for consumers who prefer to use a non-default browser, but can't or don't know how to change their default settings. From our research, we know that some consumers adopt unnecessarily cumbersome workarounds to stick with to your preferences,” the Mozilla report states.
Mozilla's report offers some explanation as to why operating system vendors pursue such strategies, claiming that developers of "big by default" browsers can profit from user data.
“Although consumers do not pay to use the browsers, their browsing history is valuable data for platforms with advertising companies such as Meta, Amazon, Google and Microsoft. It's not a coincidence that many of these companies have yet to implement strong anti-tracking technologies in their browsers or discourage third-party cookies," Mozilla said.
However, the company also acknowledged that Big Tech's motives go beyond data collection: "big default" browser operators earn significant sums from ads shown to blocked users on their proprietary search engines.
"Google Chrome is captive to Google Search (powered by Google advertising) and Microsoft Edge is captive to Bing search (powered by Microsoft advertising). Independent browsers are the only companies that can freely consider flaws search on behalf of They are also among the few companies that encourage the discovery, evaluation, adoption and innovation of alternative search and advertising experiences.
Browser Choice
Although Mozilla and Opera have struggled of late, a long-standing demand for "alternative" web browsers is supported by separate data from SimilarWeb.
From January to August, the privacy-focused Brave Browser saw its estimated monthly downloads increase by 272%. Admittedly, Brave only saw 17,827 and 66,340 visits to its install page during those months, respectively, but it's a significant growth rate nonetheless.
These numbers suggest that the continued success of "big flaw" browsers is likely not just a result of the removal of alternatives, but also a function of user apathy and brand recognition.
While Big Tech is chasing pure profit, privacy-focused browsers may be fighting each other. The growth in Brave installs this year suggests that Mozilla Firefox and Opera are losing market share to newer options like Brave and DuckDuckGo's new privacy browser (for which we currently have no data).
Overall, the statistics also suggest that the push for web browser privacy may be a small move, but one that is still capable of gaining momentum.
Apple's decision to allow users to change their default browser in iOS 14 is welcome in the fight for consumers to care about their privacy online, but the first step toward full browser independence is to abolish the idea of bugging by complete, something that may never happen. with Apple retaining its own "big flaw" in the most popular mobile operating system in the United States.
As it is, Mozilla may have made the mistake of assuming that all users of the "default" browser are potential converts. User apathy will always favor large and powerful companies; even without kill tactics, "big default" browsers would outperform independent alternatives in terms of monthly growth.
With a solution like requiring users to choose their own default browser from a list of privacy-focused alternatives, along with simple, reasoned arguments for doing so, that apathy could lessen. It is that legislating for something like this seems unthinkable for most legislators outside the European Union.
Mozilla, DuckDuckGo, and eleven other companies recently lobbied the US Congress to introduce a data privacy bill that would address big tech monopolies, default browsers, and unrestricted data collection, but The odds of movement leading anywhere are slim, thanks to big tech. lobbying resources.
In addition, the lack of regulation around "revolving doors" (through which politicians leave office, often to take up corporate positions, and use their connections to curry favor with legislators) in jurisdictions such as the UK United and Australia means that legislating for web privacy and freedom of choice for anonymous browsers can be an extremely slow process, if not a completely insurmountable problem.
Would privacy-focused browsers grow more evenly if users had the ability to make an informed choice between them? The problem right now is that we may never know.