4 ms·

And what browser would that be? Mozilla keeps doing these things because they're desperately searching for a revenue stream that doesn't make them beholden to t

by seoaeu 5y ago

And what browser would that be? Mozilla keeps doing these things because they're desperately searching for a revenue stream that doesn't make them beholden to their biggest competitor. There aren't any other viable options because no one else knows of any better revenue streams for web browsers either

goalieca 5y ago
Of Wikipedia can survive on donation, why not Firefox and MDN?
- contravariant 5y ago
  Firefox might survive, but the salaries of the people in charge of that decision might not.
  - dandotway 5y ago
    Boom. "Mozilla Firefox Usage Down 85% but why are Exec’s Salary Up 400%?" https://itdm.com/mozilla-firefox-usage-down-85-but-why-are-execs-salary-up-400/2050/ https://itdm.com/mozilla-firefox-usage-down-85-but-why-are-e...
- kbelder 5y ago
  Firefox could, I think. I don't think the Mozilla Foundation could. And that's the rub, at least to those in charge at the Mozilla Foundation.
  - seoaeu 5y ago
    To avoid significant layoffs they'd something like 10% of their user base to donate $20/year. I'm far from an expert on nonprofit finances, but that strikes me as a tough but potentially doable goal
    - mulmen 5y ago
      There is no single piece of software I use more than Firefox. At $20.00/month it would be a bargain. Assuming it wasn’t a dumpster fire.
    - prepend 5y ago
      Their cost base is too bloated. The reason I stopped donating to Mozilla is because they have too many people not doing things I think are important and are paying their executives too much.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
kjaftaedi 5y ago
Opera / Vivaldi
- poulpy123 5y ago
  That's another chromium browser.
  - kjaftaedi 5y ago
    yes, but with a completely separate set of features, options, defaults, revenue stream, incentives, etc.
c80e74f077 5y ago
what about Firefox's forks such as Waterfox[1], Pale Moon[2], IceCat[3], SeaMonkey[4]...? Genuinely asking. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Moon_(web_browser) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Moon_(web_browser) [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_IceCat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_IceCat [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaMonkey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaMonkey
- revolvingocelot 5y ago
  Waterfox is owned by an ad company, which IMO is enough to disqualify it. Sure it's probably fine now, but it'll assuredly have problems soon.
- uniqueid 5y ago
  Of the four, I've only ever heard of SeaMonkey before. I'll definitely check them out though.
- thayne 5y ago
  None of these projects have enough resources to keep up with web standards, and patch security bugs on their own. So forks are either almost the same as Firefox, or may be less secure and/or doesn't work for as many websites and addons as Firefox.

by seoaeu 5y ago

goalieca 5y ago

Of Wikipedia can survive on donation, why not Firefox and MDN?

contravariant 5y ago
Firefox might survive, but the salaries of the people in charge of that decision might not.
- dandotway 5y ago
  Boom. "Mozilla Firefox Usage Down 85% but why are Exec’s Salary Up 400%?" https://itdm.com/mozilla-firefox-usage-down-85-but-why-are-execs-salary-up-400/2050/ https://itdm.com/mozilla-firefox-usage-down-85-but-why-are-e...
kbelder 5y ago
Firefox could, I think. I don't think the Mozilla Foundation could. And that's the rub, at least to those in charge at the Mozilla Foundation.
- seoaeu 5y ago
  To avoid significant layoffs they'd something like 10% of their user base to donate $20/year. I'm far from an expert on nonprofit finances, but that strikes me as a tough but potentially doable goal
  - mulmen 5y ago
    There is no single piece of software I use more than Firefox. At $20.00/month it would be a bargain. Assuming it wasn’t a dumpster fire.
  - prepend 5y ago
    Their cost base is too bloated. The reason I stopped donating to Mozilla is because they have too many people not doing things I think are important and are paying their executives too much.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

kjaftaedi 5y ago

Opera / Vivaldi

poulpy123 5y ago
That's another chromium browser.
- kjaftaedi 5y ago
  yes, but with a completely separate set of features, options, defaults, revenue stream, incentives, etc.

c80e74f077 5y ago

what about Firefox's forks such as Waterfox[1], Pale Moon[2], IceCat[3], SeaMonkey[4]...? Genuinely asking. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterfox [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Moon_(web_browser) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Moon_(web_browser) [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_IceCat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_IceCat [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaMonkey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaMonkey

revolvingocelot 5y ago
Waterfox is owned by an ad company, which IMO is enough to disqualify it. Sure it's probably fine now, but it'll assuredly have problems soon.
uniqueid 5y ago
Of the four, I've only ever heard of SeaMonkey before. I'll definitely check them out though.
thayne 5y ago
None of these projects have enough resources to keep up with web standards, and patch security bugs on their own. So forks are either almost the same as Firefox, or may be less secure and/or doesn't work for as many websites and addons as Firefox.