3 ms·

Found this tidbit interesting: > We have repeatedly commented on Mozilla's precarious funding situation. According to Beard's answer in the interview 90% of th

Found this tidbit interesting: > We have repeatedly commented on Mozilla's precarious funding situation. According to Beard's answer in the interview 90% of the organization's income comes from search - i.e the royalties received from companies like Google and Yandex for including their search engines in Firefox. From our report on its 2017 balance sheet, the latest year for which it has published its accounts, Royalties amounted to $539,168,000 of total revenue of $562,279,000, which is around 96%. Anything to lessen that reality is probably a step in the right direction. In agreement with others, can't wait to vote for FF with my wallet (even though I might not use any of the features).

PostOnce 7y ago
I predict almost no sales. Imagine trying to make a dent in $500M selling a browser you can also largely download for free, with arguably better (to the average consumer) competing browsers, which are also free. Mozilla keeps building stuff nobody wants and employing a thousand or more people to affect that pointless effort. What Mozilla needs is not a new, paid product; what Mozilla needs is new management that understands what the point of Mozilla is.
- hardwaresofton 7y ago
  The idea isn't to sell a browser you can download for free, it's to sell value added services that they can cheaply produce/maintain to those who want to purchase it. I might agree that Mozilla might need some new management, but this seems like a good move not a bad one so...
tannhaeuser 7y ago
I've been using FF forever (never bought into the idea of using a browser from an ad company, or from the party running the web; checks and balances and all), and have recommended it many times here and elsewhere. But what's disturbing with only Chrome and FF left and Google financing both, is that this self-referential, self-sustaining situation can't develop the web into directions not benefitting the powers that be at this point. Imagine a political situation where you have only two parties to choose, with this binary choice having a qualitative rather than merely quantitative effect on democracy ;) It's most disturbing that those responsible for developing web standards are financially dependent on Google as well, and are thus incapable to drive material change, or even see a problem with the ever-expanding complexity of browsers.
akdor1154 7y ago
Half a billion US dollars of revenue per year!? I would have hoped you could just bank that and pay for Firefox development with the interest. What is Mozilla spending that amount of money on?
- reubenmorais 7y ago
  Mostly salaries, offices, and hardware for employees.
- hardwaresofton 7y ago
  Someone correct me if I'm wrong (I sure hope I am), and maybe it's just the lingering disappointment from the failure of FirefoxOS, but AFAIK Mozilla is also known for epic C-level mismanagement.

PostOnce 7y ago

I predict almost no sales. Imagine trying to make a dent in $500M selling a browser you can also largely download for free, with arguably better (to the average consumer) competing browsers, which are also free. Mozilla keeps building stuff nobody wants and employing a thousand or more people to affect that pointless effort. What Mozilla needs is not a new, paid product; what Mozilla needs is new management that understands what the point of Mozilla is.

hardwaresofton 7y ago
The idea isn't to sell a browser you can download for free, it's to sell value added services that they can cheaply produce/maintain to those who want to purchase it. I might agree that Mozilla might need some new management, but this seems like a good move not a bad one so...

tannhaeuser 7y ago

I've been using FF forever (never bought into the idea of using a browser from an ad company, or from the party running the web; checks and balances and all), and have recommended it many times here and elsewhere. But what's disturbing with only Chrome and FF left and Google financing both, is that this self-referential, self-sustaining situation can't develop the web into directions not benefitting the powers that be at this point. Imagine a political situation where you have only two parties to choose, with this binary choice having a qualitative rather than merely quantitative effect on democracy ;) It's most disturbing that those responsible for developing web standards are financially dependent on Google as well, and are thus incapable to drive material change, or even see a problem with the ever-expanding complexity of browsers.

akdor1154 7y ago

Half a billion US dollars of revenue per year!? I would have hoped you could just bank that and pay for Firefox development with the interest. What is Mozilla spending that amount of money on?

reubenmorais 7y ago
Mostly salaries, offices, and hardware for employees.
hardwaresofton 7y ago
Someone correct me if I'm wrong (I sure hope I am), and maybe it's just the lingering disappointment from the failure of FirefoxOS, but AFAIK Mozilla is also known for epic C-level mismanagement.