The two biggest privacy-oriented browsers, Firefox and Safari, have ~10% and ~5% desktop market share[1]. It seems like the overwhelming majority of people do not care very much.

[1] https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/worl...

They prefer the speed of Chrome. So give them that, with huge corporate backing, and privacy features and you have a good chance at taking some stuff away from Chrome.

> They prefer the speed of Chrome.

Judging by my experiences as a PC technician, 99% of those people wouldn't know if it's the browser that's slow or their PC or whatever crap adware they've managed to install or whatever. Most people don't know and don't care. Google has just leveraged their position as the dominant search engine to ensure their browser is the default. I've installed Firefox on enough devices to see that users just don't care - they'll use whatever is most convenient at the time and then they'll stick to it because they know it and because of habit. Hell, many people don't know what a browser even is, much less what the differences are between them. It's just that "internet thing".

Safari is only available on Apple devices hence the low market share.

And not all Apple customers use it because of the privacy features.

The number of desktop Apple customers - the only Apple customers that can use a third party rendering engine - is marginal compared to the number of iOS devices.

Or they don't know better. There's a very big difference. What's Edges market share? If Edge (or any other browser) suddenly gets added to the privacy-oriented list, the number of people using privacy-oriented browsers goes up, which is the important part. It doesn't matter if they care.

But why would Microsoft do this if it doesn't bring then new users?

Because it's the right thing to do. Yes, that sounds crazy to me too, but it's crazy that it's a crazy thing to say.

Well it's the right thing for users, but not for Microsoft and their shareholders.

A "user agent" should only act in the interest of it's user. If it does not, it shouldn't be used.

No matter how good they make the privacy in the browser, will people really believe it? Microsoft has done nothing but say how much they care about your privacy and security through the whole IE lifecycle.

Same as Safari. If any part of it is closed source, you're basically just taking their word for it that they're respecting your privacy.

Firefox is fully open source.

And how many people have actually inspected the source code of Firefox closely enough to be sure what it is doing?

Can someone explain how Safari is "privacy oriented" (or any other browser that claims that)?

Disallowing third party cookies by default, thus preventing most ad tracking. Some other browsers (ffox?) actively prevent fingerprinting techniques such as canvas fingerprinting.

> Privacy oriented Chrome

Brave already does this. Most people don't really care.

Not much hope for that when Windows and Office telemetry have been ballooning in recent years, with no end in sight.