3 ms·

As a stubborn Firefox user, and the user many of their products some positive critics: there are a lot of open source projects which do miracles with less than

As a stubborn Firefox user, and the user many of their products some positive critics: there are a lot of open source projects which do miracles with less than 1% of what Mozilla earns each year. I find, Mozilla as an organization to be slow, inefficient and lagging in innovation. Mozilla can be more aggressive and productive: * Being an umbrella for succesful open source consumer software * Using kickstarter and other funding sites better * by evangelizing and implementing more browser features in Firefox (HTML5 and beyond). Things like web components or whatever. Caniuse.com is a good place to see that Firefox is a lazy follower of Webkit/Blink leadership. * Confronting Apple for not letting their rendering engines inside the app store. * Giving up copying Chrome visual appearance in every new version. * Focusing obsessively on performance (JS, rendering)

gcp 10y ago
there are a lot of open source projects which do miracles with less than 1% of what Mozilla earns each year There's none maintaining and improving a complete web engine though. I mean if you could do this on 1% of Mozilla's funds you'd have more Opera's. That's pre-Blink Opera's, mind you, because even they gave up on it.
- majewsky 10y ago
  > There's none maintaining and improving a complete web engine though. KDE used to maintain KHTML until a few years ago. I remember using it in 2008-2010 when it was a really solid, feature-complete web engine (even innovative at some points, e.g. it supported text-shadow long before Gecko). Then HTML 5 and ES 5 happened, and KHTML couldn't keep up anymore. I remember when, in 2011, I met the KHTML developer. Singular, not plural. </storytime>