And there's also a product C, D, E but when you check them out you realize they are essentially clones of product A?
Do some Google websites perform worse on Firefox? Sure, but the entire reason that's because people don't use Firefox enough i.e. some websites are worse on Firefox. You just go around and around. If the audience of HN is not able to make that sacrifice (not use some of the GOOG's website) then we deserve the monopoly of Chrome.
Other than that, I also think we need a third alternative for Browsers. Ladybird is in the news these days, and if you're a dev and care about this issue, we should all be contributing to it.
I agree about your clone comment ala Brave, and so on.
The audience of HN is unlikely to make a difference here.
Besides, we are not some political party who all need to vote in one way together. Each person individually here makes their own choices.
Personally I think making my life harder with pointless sacrifices is not useful. I ask myself, am I making this sacrifice to make myself feel good, or because I actually think it can make a change? In this case, I don't think it would make any difference and it wouldn't make me feel good so there's no utility in using Firefox, for me.
This subject - browser monopoly, and related things like OS or app store monopoly - needs to be tackled with regulation, not personal sacrifices.
im a relatively happy firefox user, but at this point to say mozilla significantly mitigates googles monopoly is as plausible as when microsoft claimed that BeOS somehow mitigated theirs.
