12 ms·

I hope so but sometimes tradeoffs have to be made. Compromise is the name of the game, and if BSD development is any indicator, security/privacy focus users ar

by rtpg 11y ago

I hope so but sometimes tradeoffs have to be made. Compromise is the name of the game, and if BSD development is any indicator, security/privacy focus users are not ones to jump in and help keep lights on in most circumstances That said I'm not sure FF could have done better things, but in their situation I would be trying to find some revenue streams that weren't Google

scrollaway 11y ago
There was no compromise necessary. Pocket is possible as an extension, cf the work being done right now to integrate it as one. Why was it rushed out before? What was so pressing about it that it needed to be in "the next firefox version" and massively damage Mozilla's reputation, instead of waiting a few months and passing it without a fuss?
sangnoir 11y ago
> Compromise is the name of the game In most cases, I'd agree.However, it's never a good idea to compromize on your mission statement. How does pre-bundled Pocket integration promote an open web? IMO, it goes against it. While they are losing market-share, Mozilla are not running out of cash any time soon and they are not in a death spiral. They can afford to, and should think long and hard about how they diversify their revenue streams, rather than trying random decisions that alienate part of their userbase trying to find anything that sticks - which is the impression I'm getting.