Why most people prefer Chrome (despite the fact that Firefox has better ethics?)

Recently, Microsoft has planned to recast the Edge Browser to adopt the Chromium web engine, that was not a good new for Firefox now that Google will increase its dominance on the internet. The disappointment of Firefox is understandable since it's rather hazardous to let only one corporation taking the entire control over internet infrastructure, that, moreover, has a poor reputation in terms of respect of privacy and freedom of speech. I think that any conscientious people would be worried to learn that Mozilla will weaken for the benefit of Google.

We know that Chrome is the most popular web browser and dominates more than half of the market, but that Firefox provides more services to help to protect our privacy on the web. But in this case, why choosing Chrome instead of Firefox?

The fact is that if Firefox is better than Chrome in privacy, Chrome is, however, advantaged since most websites are more compatible with Chrome than with Firefox. Thus, Chrome is much better for developers than Firefox. Chrome is also better than Firefox for gamers since most game companies prefer working with Chrome than with Firefox.

We have to know that if most people daily use Chrome, those who are among my circle of friends on Twitter use, however, Firefox. Thus, Chrome is better for everyday consumers while that Firefox is better for activists for privacy and digital rights.

The reason why Chrome is the most popular web browser is the same reason why Disney is the most popular entertainment company while that political content is strictly prohibited on Disney-owned films and TV programs. In reality, if there are some conscientious people, these persons are, however, a tiny minority on the entire population. The rest of the population is especially composed of consumers easily seduced by the products of big companies who could with difficulty do without dominant web services. These people generally prefer to stay out of politics and sensitive topics, that could explain why they are always happy despite the decline of our digital rights and humanitarian disasters everywhere in the world. It's the reason why a protest content (i.e. punk music, anti-war movies, etc.) could with difficult access to the mainstream.

Doing without dominant web services require much ethics and consciousness about the rise of authoritarian politics, mass surveillance, the decline of our digital rights, etc. If you don't want to be dependent on Google, you will have to do without YouTube, its great catalog of films and free music and all meme and parody videos.

To summarize, if Firefox is less popular than Chrome, it's because it fails to attract people that are less affected by privacy and digital rights issues. It's unfortunate because it won't help to progress our humanity.

However, the facts demonstrated that in order to progress humanity, conscientious people must not belong to the mainstream, but instead bet other persons that share their common values and interests. Our humanitarian campaign will never concern the mainstream (composed of consumers who want first of all privilege their daily life and their family), but if some important millions of people around the world join us, we can create an important balance of power with dominant forces that lead our societies.