back
64 comments
Some of the difference will be due to who has moved from FF to Chrome as their main browser. People who didn't use many or any plugs have less holding them to FF so will experience less friction from the change, and people who use specific plugins will stay on FF at least until Chrome has an equivalent extension.

Also you need to factor in differences in the standard feature sets of the two browsers. As a developer the first thing I add to a new FF install is Firebug, but a chunk of that functionality seems to be built-in to Chrome. Some behavioral differences may explain some of the difference too: if Chrome already defaults to the behavior someone used an add-in for in FF then they won't need an extension to tweak the UI.

Further to that people associate FF primarily with add-in flexibility and Chrome primarily with speed - so this perception divides the audience before they even have one of them installed and if you a particular because of its flexible plug-in support and wide range of them available then you are more likely to be the sort of person that has a few installed than someone who chose a particular browser specifically for speed.

FYI: I tend to use Firefox more than anything else, but use Chrome/Chromium for one or two script intensive apps and for its convenient "incognito" mode (both for when others want to login to their webmail/facebook/what-ever quickly on my netbook without leaving traces or logging me out of my account, and for ahem other things).

Firefox is my add-on browser. Chrome is my lightweight browser. If I'm quickly checking my email I won't fire up firefox, I'll stick with my low-footprint chrome. If I want to do some web development, or know I'll be spending a while browsing, I'll use firefox. In other words, the lack of extensions on my chrome setup is the reason I use it (when I use it)
This is my setup exactly. Chrome is like the sports car, fast as, very zippy, but isn't all that comfortable.

Firefox is the big, chew-a-lot-of-petrol car with the cruise control, A/C and big comfortable seats. Takes a long time to get up to speed, but it's good for the long drives.

I don't use Chrome extensions. I used to use a lot of FF add-ons, but when I switched to using Ubuntu over Windows I don't think I reinstalled any apart from Firebug.

Now I feel like a Luddite, so do you or any HNers have any suggestions for useful add-ons or extensions that are "good for the long drives"?

I like your analogy. Firefox is still a memory hog.
For web development the Chrome developer tools are very good. Frankly I can't seen myself living without them now.
You should really give Firebug a try then ;-) Not that Chrome's dev tools are bad, but Firebug is terrific
EXACTLY my setup. Just compare how much more powerful "iMacros for Firefox" is compared to "iMacros for Chrome" (web browser macro recorder). Same for Firebug. The chrome API has still too many restrictions to make truly useful "system level" addons.
It's funny you put it like that. Opera is my main browser, Chrome is my heavy/with addons browser.
You're doing it wrong.
Same as mine. Except I have Silver Bird, Gmail Checker Plus and Tidy Read.
Checking your email in a browser?
I can't be arsed with all that. Takes too much effort switching around.

I have FF5, Firebug, FireQuery, YSlow and Adblock. That is all I need.

Chrome numbers are from Dec 2010 as compared to June 2011 in case of Firefox. I don't think it's valid comparison.
Mozilla also does a great job at marketing your extensions too. I've built two Firefox extensions and they're both steadily growing in usage everyday because of the traffic that's sourced on the Mozilla site and also because it's frequently displayed in users' add-on manager.

In contrast, my Chrome extension has been pretty static in usage - for me to see any hikes I'm actually going to have to hustle and market it. Firefox lets me kick back, be lazy, and helps me with branding it.

It probably doesn't count for all of the difference, but a lot of Firefox users have Firebug installed, and on Chrome the web inspector is built in.
That's true if by "a lot of" you mean "web developers", which are influential, by tiny fraction of both Firefox and Chrome user base.
I would wager that this is true for some other addons/features, too.
Hmm. A lot of you are comparing Chrome and Firefox in a way that many of us understand... but what I cannot understand is why you'd need any of the additional stuff. I like Chrome because it's... just chrome. A clear, transparent, and simple view into the web. I don't need all kinds of crap cluttering that up, even when I am developing. The Webkit inspector is terrific. No need to ever fire up Firefox ever.
Why we need the additional stuff, you mean add-ons? I think the main reason I won't switch to chrome is that there is no "tree style tab" add-on on it. Puts all the tabs on the left. I can't browse efficiently without this. I don't understand why it's not default since it's practical and logical with our new wide screens.
AdBlock, FlashGot, NoScript, IE Tab, Tab Mix Plus, SkipScreen- all of these make the web more convenient or secure. The Chrome equivalents of these are quite frequently underpowered.
It's called customization, for many people, one size does not fit all...
Firefox Add-ons are also way more powerful than Chrome extensions. Chrome extensions are more like Greasemonkey scripts
and glorified bookmarklets.

Seriously, you can see the differences of the API installing the Web Developer Toolbar on both browsers. If you get used to work with it on Firefox and switch to the Chrome's version you'll notice you are missing some tools. Even basic ones-- like deleting cookies.

Firefox users have had more time to accumulate extensions b/c they haven't switched to Chrome yet, which would reset the count to zero until they accumulated some for Chrome.
I am not sure it is that simple. For one, there are people who don't switch to Chrome because of specific Firefox extensions that they love [ed: you can pry Tree Style Tab out of my cold dead hands] and therefore maybe those who switch to Chrome are people who use extensions less extensively to start with.

In other words if you don't use extensions a lot, perhaps you are more likely to switch browsers.

And while I have no reason to believe I am representative, I don't tend to accumulate Firefox extensions the way I, say, accumulate iOS apps. There are advantages in culling, and new releases offer a frequent opportunity to do so.

The Chrome API isn't as powerful as Firefox's (which isn't surprising, considering Firefox itself uses the same infrastructure (JS + XUL) offered to extensions).

For example, I doubt Vimperator/Pterodactyl is possible on Chrome, and that's a killer feature for me.

Pentadactyl. Not trying to be a pedant, just trying to help if someone wanted to find it.

There are actually sort of similar addons for Chrome. Vimium has the keyboard navigation, but the full command line and customization is completely gone. It's basically just for keyboard navigation, and last time I checked, that was a little weird with Chrome's focus models (something about hitting escape and it working with my muscle memory; I don't recall exactly).

Just a thought. maybe this is an indication that Chrome is reaching out to more mainstream crowd (Read - non geeks non techies). An average user just wants to google search, check emails, facebook, read stuffs on internet and do shopping.
totally agreed with you. Firefox is browser for advanced users and chrome is more friendly to average user.
Same here. I believe they have a different "calling", Chrome is meant to be fast,light and simple.

Firefox feature-heavy and complex, a sort of web swiss knife.

While they are evolving towards implementing each other's strengths (Firefox more streamlined, Chrome more feature-laden) they kind of stay true to their origins.

I tend to use Chrome a lot more, but I always keep Firefox installed and updated as well.

There's so much (unintended) irony in your post. Firefox was supposed to be the fast, light and simple replacement of Mozilla...

And I would be glad if it could come back to this original intent: on my rather underpowered laptop I use mostly Chrome and Safari, Firefox is just way too slow.

This is not totally surprising - Chrome add-ons are quite impotent compared to what is possible for add-ons Firefox. People use more Firefox add-ons because they can actually extend the browser in meaningful ways. I still use chromium though because it is most useful to me for speed.
Agreed. One very good example of this is SlingPlayer. It requires a native plugin, and therefore only works in Firefox.
I'm not sure how reliable this data is because some vendors like AVG, Microsoft (for .net) forcibly install their extensions without prompting users.
Aah looks like they are only counting addons installed properly from https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/. So that rules out rude vendors.
Firebug is an extension, but the webkit DOM inspector tools are built in. Some FF extensions have been "quietly installed", like one by Microsoft during a security update. Did the methodology account for such differences?
"These stats are based on the add-ons hosted with AMO only, and don’t include personas and add-ons bundled with other software."
Those "quietly installed" things are plugins, not add-ons. Firefox doesn't even have extensions, if I recall correctly.
I use numerous extensions in Chrome and it's awesome because they're always synced across all my Chrome instances on other machines. Now if there was a way to sync browsing history...
Since you're a chrome user, I'm not sure that you've heard of this, but firefox sync is amazing! Syncs history/bookmarks/tabs/settings/passwords across all your firefox instances, including firefox for android. I can read something on my phone, while on the bus, then get home and open the same tab on my computer or vice-versa. Or if setting up a new machine, I can add it to my sync profile, and it near instantly has all of my browsing history etc.

I feel that's much more useful than syncing extensions, as those can be machine dependant (i.e. i wouldn't want the same layout modifications with firefox on my tiny netbook screen that i do on my desktop)

it might have to do with a lot of users having toolbars installed.., which don't exist in their natural form for Chrome I'm not saying that's the entire reason, but it might play a part..

Maybe people aren't as comfortable with the chrome extensions page? Maybe there just aren't as many add-ons for chrome?

Btw, if you upgrade to FF4, will it bring the add-ons with it from the previous version? My guess would be it does..

Maybe the 33% of Chrome users with extensions are the ones that switched from Firefox.
When I switched to firefox (from galeon), I had to install several add-ons just to get back thesame functionality I had been used to (eg smarter tabbing).

Are these 85% using add-ons because the add-ons are cooler? or because firefox just isn't as flexible/powerful out of the box?

Cool stat. I don't use extensions normally because I just don't feel like I have time to install them or care. I have a million ideas for serious life-changers, I swear. But at the end of the day, where do you fit in installing a browser plug-in to your schedule?
Interestingly it's a lock-in for Firefox users because extensions are not cross-browsers. I've heard people won't switch and those that did because Chrome extensions mirrored some extensions, eg adblock.

Maybe Firefox could have some way to have a cross-browser extensions standard to prevent integration concerns?

Difficult. Basically Firefox XUL allows extensions to do everything that is not forbidden, while the Chrome allows only things that have an explicit API function for it.