4 ms·

Judging by the numerous projects Mozilla has launched and then abandoned in recent years, it seems the people running it are searching for new hit products, ins

by cs702 6y ago

Judging by the numerous projects Mozilla has launched and then abandoned in recent years, it seems the people running it are searching for new hit products, instead of investing for the long term on development of services and infrastructure that will benefit humankind for years and decades to come. Quoting from the OP: "In recent years Mozilla has created: * a mobile app for making websites * a federated identity system * a large file transfer service * a password manager * an internet-of-things framework/standard * an email relay service * a completely new phone operating system * an AI division (but of course) * and spent $25 million buying the reading list management startup, Pocket Many of the above are now abandoned."

TheRealPomax 6y ago
On the internet, "recent" is not an very useful word. Even 5 years ago is literally a different era of the web already, so holding someone to account for shuttering things that for all the world seemed a great idea 5 years ago after only a few years because the web itself stopped being interested in those things is kind of missing the point. All those things are attempts at doing exactly what you're accusing them of not doing - all of these started in the expectation that they'd finally be something that could be sustained long term to either generate income or drive up user numbers (which indirectly generates income). What you're actually looking at is how fucking hard it is for a company that's already established on some corner of the web to come up with even a single way to sustain itself by moving into a different corner. There's no money in making a browser, and even the things that look promising enough for a company that can't just throw 100 million at it because that's not even a dent in their budget almost always turn out to not be promising after even a year or two. When keeping those things running costs you more than you'll ever make back on them, you shut them down. That's what a company has to do. That list is not "What did Mozilla kill", it's "What did Mozilla unsuccessfully try in order to not go under". It reads as a testament to the reality of how hard it is to make a buck on the web: everyone wants everything for free, and if it's not available for free, hundreds of bunches of folks will make a competing thing that is, and of those hundreds, usually at least one succeeds (and you never hear about the hundreds of failures).
- cs702 6y ago
  Please don't attack a straw-man. I agree with you: they are "searching for new hit products" -- that's in fact what I wrote above. But that's what profit-seeking businesses do. Is Mozilla a profit-seeking business, or is it a non-profit, or is it neither, or is it both? Is Mozilla truly trying to "put people before profit," as its website currently claims?[a] The answer today, I think, is no. "Sustainability" (i.e., profit under a different guise) is the overriding goal. [a] https://web.archive.org/web/20200916125550/https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200916125550/https://www.mozil...
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    Sustainability means having the resources to compete with Google and not relying on Google for funding.
  - TheRealPomax 6y ago
    > But that's what profit-seeking businesses do No, it isn't: it's what everyone has to do, because you need to make enough money to at the very least cover your expenses. Mozilla may be a non-profit, but being a non-profit does NOT mean "doesn't need to make money": they still have 750 employees that need to be paid, offices around the world that need rent paid (despite COVID), global infrastructure that needs to be paid for, SaaS for employees and contractors that collectively runs in the tens (if not more) of thousands of dollars a month, etc. etc. and that needs a sustainable revenue stream that isn't "hoping google will foot the bill". Right now they're losing 7-8 digits a year. Mozilla absolutely puts people before profit, but they sure as hell aren't going to put people before surviving. That would be idiotic: you can't further a mission by going bankrupt.
arduinomancer 6y ago
Yeah but "investing for the long term on development of services and infrastructure that will benefit humankind" doesn't keep your company afloat. Trying all these product ideas is exactly what I'd expect them to do if they're struggling with revenue.

by cs702 6y ago

TheRealPomax 6y ago

On the internet, "recent" is not an very useful word. Even 5 years ago is literally a different era of the web already, so holding someone to account for shuttering things that for all the world seemed a great idea 5 years ago after only a few years because the web itself stopped being interested in those things is kind of missing the point. All those things are attempts at doing exactly what you're accusing them of not doing - all of these started in the expectation that they'd finally be something that could be sustained long term to either generate income or drive up user numbers (which indirectly generates income). What you're actually looking at is how fucking hard it is for a company that's already established on some corner of the web to come up with even a single way to sustain itself by moving into a different corner. There's no money in making a browser, and even the things that look promising enough for a company that can't just throw 100 million at it because that's not even a dent in their budget almost always turn out to not be promising after even a year or two. When keeping those things running costs you more than you'll ever make back on them, you shut them down. That's what a company has to do. That list is not "What did Mozilla kill", it's "What did Mozilla unsuccessfully try in order to not go under". It reads as a testament to the reality of how hard it is to make a buck on the web: everyone wants everything for free, and if it's not available for free, hundreds of bunches of folks will make a competing thing that is, and of those hundreds, usually at least one succeeds (and you never hear about the hundreds of failures).

cs702 6y ago
Please don't attack a straw-man. I agree with you: they are "searching for new hit products" -- that's in fact what I wrote above. But that's what profit-seeking businesses do. Is Mozilla a profit-seeking business, or is it a non-profit, or is it neither, or is it both? Is Mozilla truly trying to "put people before profit," as its website currently claims?[a] The answer today, I think, is no. "Sustainability" (i.e., profit under a different guise) is the overriding goal. [a] https://web.archive.org/web/20200916125550/https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/ https://web.archive.org/web/20200916125550/https://www.mozil...
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  Sustainability means having the resources to compete with Google and not relying on Google for funding.
- TheRealPomax 6y ago
  > But that's what profit-seeking businesses do No, it isn't: it's what everyone has to do, because you need to make enough money to at the very least cover your expenses. Mozilla may be a non-profit, but being a non-profit does NOT mean "doesn't need to make money": they still have 750 employees that need to be paid, offices around the world that need rent paid (despite COVID), global infrastructure that needs to be paid for, SaaS for employees and contractors that collectively runs in the tens (if not more) of thousands of dollars a month, etc. etc. and that needs a sustainable revenue stream that isn't "hoping google will foot the bill". Right now they're losing 7-8 digits a year. Mozilla absolutely puts people before profit, but they sure as hell aren't going to put people before surviving. That would be idiotic: you can't further a mission by going bankrupt.

arduinomancer 6y ago

Yeah but "investing for the long term on development of services and infrastructure that will benefit humankind" doesn't keep your company afloat. Trying all these product ideas is exactly what I'd expect them to do if they're struggling with revenue.