5 ms·

Maybe it has to do with its competitors being a 1.7 trillion dollar company and a 2.5 trillion dollar company! Winning against those requires not only better t

Maybe it has to do with its competitors being a 1.7 trillion dollar company and a 2.5 trillion dollar company! Winning against those requires not only better technology AND marketing AND consumer favor, but also leverage in the legal processes that enable/disable network effects. So anti-trust is unfortunately one of Mozilla's biggest hopes.

account42 5y ago
With Google giving them new golden handcuffs every year Mozilla is unlikely to do anything to upset the status quo, including lobbying for anti-trust enforcement.
kazinator 5y ago
Maybe it also has to do with depending heavily on their money, too.
ErikCorry 5y ago
You think they don't have enough cash to save FF, when they get $400m a year from Google?
- bzbarsky 5y ago
  $400m/year is in the ballpark for estimates of Chrome's _advertising_ spend, at various points.
- dylan604 5y ago
  Googs just gave them $400m which means they have soooo much more than $400m. FF has to pay all of its budget with that, so hiring lawyers to take on Googs with that same bucket of money will never work. Googs will continue to give Moz $400m, but then turn right around and spend $401m on their lawyers to fight off whatever Moz can afford.
  - ErikCorry 5y ago
    OK I was imagining them competing with a better browser, not with lawyers.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      You can have the best product and still receive little traction because the competitor is a megaCorp with huge marketing budgets and able use its size to make it harder for the little guy with the better product to compete. At that point, legal recourse tends to be the only action left. Googs isn't afraid of this, because they know Moz can't compete financially.
mbreese 5y ago
> Winning against those requires I think the point here isn’t winning, it’s surviving. They need to maintain enough market share to keep going, but they don’t need to be the dominant browser. The goal of avoiding a monoculture can be achieved with a smaller marketshare.
dralley 5y ago
I'm not sure which two of Google, Apple or Microsoft you're referring to, but you're missing a third trillion+ dollar company.

account42 5y ago

With Google giving them new golden handcuffs every year Mozilla is unlikely to do anything to upset the status quo, including lobbying for anti-trust enforcement.

kazinator 5y ago

Maybe it also has to do with depending heavily on their money, too.

ErikCorry 5y ago

You think they don't have enough cash to save FF, when they get $400m a year from Google?

bzbarsky 5y ago
$400m/year is in the ballpark for estimates of Chrome's _advertising_ spend, at various points.
dylan604 5y ago
Googs just gave them $400m which means they have soooo much more than $400m. FF has to pay all of its budget with that, so hiring lawyers to take on Googs with that same bucket of money will never work. Googs will continue to give Moz $400m, but then turn right around and spend $401m on their lawyers to fight off whatever Moz can afford.
- ErikCorry 5y ago
  OK I was imagining them competing with a better browser, not with lawyers.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    You can have the best product and still receive little traction because the competitor is a megaCorp with huge marketing budgets and able use its size to make it harder for the little guy with the better product to compete. At that point, legal recourse tends to be the only action left. Googs isn't afraid of this, because they know Moz can't compete financially.

mbreese 5y ago

> Winning against those requires I think the point here isn’t winning, it’s surviving. They need to maintain enough market share to keep going, but they don’t need to be the dominant browser. The goal of avoiding a monoculture can be achieved with a smaller marketshare.

dralley 5y ago

I'm not sure which two of Google, Apple or Microsoft you're referring to, but you're missing a third trillion+ dollar company.