To combat a Chrome hegemony you need strong opposition, not a long-tail of weak opposition. Or in other words: Firefox needs to become more competitive. I (unfortunately) don't think having another 0.1% market cap browser is the solution, at least not for now.

Just to clarify: I'm in favor of Cloudflare donating to Ladybird, and I'm in favor of them building it! I just don't think that's the solution to combating Chrome dominance.

What is Firefox if not weak opposition? Even given a reliable firehose of income from Google they haven't cracked that 0.1% market cap, and I don't see how funneling more resources into a browser that's been floundering for over a decade now will change anything.

Ladybird is still a good few years away from being a serious competitor, but nonetheless it is the most viable candidate in the absence of a path for Firefox to become competitive.

I don't believe that Firefox can become stronger so long as Mozilla continues to be structured as it is.

It's possible combating it in terms of pushing for different standards could be sufficient. More little guys at the table means more sway to push things like JPEG XL through.

> To combat a Chrome hegemony you need strong opposition, not a long-tail of weak opposition.

Do you have any ideas on how to accomplish this in a better way than what Ladybird is trying to do? In other words, what should Ladybird be doing differently?

Especially not if that browser currently ignores the biggest markets (Windows and mobile).

Firefox is also sustained by Google. So you have a choice between Google and Google.