The Issue With Firefox is Not Its Brand
Hours ago I wrote: "Judging by analytics.usa.gov, in recent months the usage of Chrome rose from 60% to over 65% in the US (Firefox is now down to 1.7%), so it certainly "feels" or "seems" like the future of the Web is just one Web browser and clones of it (based on Chromium)."
A few days ago Firefox's 1.0 release turned 21. It was its likely most meaningful anniversary because there was no unambiguous start day and it wasn't always known as "Firefox" (there were prior names and projects). I had used Firefox since before its 1.0 release. I used it on S.u.S.E. (version 8.3 if I still recall correctly) and later on I installed it on more machines. I spent a lot of time advocating its adoption, both online and offline.
Mozilla's management mostly managed to make Firefox and Thunderbird better in the early years, owing largely to extensions and themes (which I myself made as well). In more recent years Firefox was made gradually worse, due to stupid policies of Mozilla and a generally bad direction. Mozilla thought the issue was its own logo and now it seems to believe that the logo of Firefox - the nice symbol that so many people (both young and old) recognise everywhere one goes - is the issue or part of the issue and therefore it needs to be replaced. That's on top of all the privacy issues, performance issues, lack of compatibility with "old" (but useful) extensions and so on.
Mozilla seems to be the biggest enemy of Firefox at this point. █