This is the correct answer here. The CEO blood-boilingly doesn't make sense, if looking at the organization as a technological steward of Firefox and maybe rela

This is the correct answer here. The CEO blood-boilingly doesn't make sense, if looking at the organization as a technological steward of Firefox and maybe related technologies. But the CEO and Firefox are just there, year after year. So maybe it's not the organization that's wrong, but rather the way of looking at them. So, as you say, if one shifts the perspective, to look at Google, using what's pocket change to them to keep a competitor alive, in order to keep them out of anti-trust and continue to let them dictate how the web is shaped, it suddenly makes sense.